powerpoint presentation: integrated modeling of … · management technologies for electric power...
TRANSCRIPT
Integrated Modeling of CarbonIntegrated Modeling of CarbonManagement Technologies forManagement Technologies for
Electric Power SystemsElectric Power Systems
Edward S. Rubin and Anand B. RaoDepartment of Engineering & Public Policy
Carnegie Mellon University
Aspen Global Change InstituteJuly 24, 2000
Some Questions to be AddressedSome Questions to be Addressed
What carbon management technologies may be used ina particular application (e.g., existing vs. new plants)?
What are the key parameters that affect theperformance, emissions, and cost of a given option?
How do the alternative options compare in terms ofperformance, reliability, and cost?
What are the uncertainties and technological risks ofdifferent carbon management options?
What are the priorities and benefits of R&D to reducekey uncertainties in new process designs?
Scope and ObjectivesScope and Objectives Identify potential options for power generation with carbon
capture and sequestration, suitable for, (a) existing plants,and (b) new plants
Develop a model to quantify performance, emissions, andcost of alternative options, and their dependency on keyplant and technology design parameters, operatingparameters, and carbon management methods
Characterize uncertainty in key parameters of the carbonmanagement system
Integrate carbon management technologies with other plantenvironmental control systems
Conduct case studies to illustrate model applications
Current ApplicationsCurrent Applications
Enhanced oil recovery (EOR) Dow MEA (Some plants in TX
and NM, now shut down) Common in 1970s and 1980s
(100-1200 tons CO2/d) Fertilizer industry
H2 and CO2 separation ⇒ Ureaproduction
Dow MEA (Indo GulfFertilizer Co.) - 150 tons CO2/d
Carbonation of brine (soda ash) Kerr-McGee MEA (North
American Chemical Co.,operational since 1978) - 800tons CO2/d
Food-grade Fluor Daniel / Dow MEA
(Northeast Energy Associates,MA) - 320 tons CO2/d
Commercial CO2 capture andsequestration facility Injection into deep saline
aquifer (Sleipner West gasfield, Norway, installed in1996) - ~3000 tons CO2/d
Power Generation Options UsingPower Generation Options UsingFossil FuelsFossil Fuels
Combustion-basedGasification-based
Coal
Direct CombustionGas Reforming
Gas
Fuel
Air
Pure Oxygen
Oxidant
Pulverized CoalGas Turbines
Simple Cycle
Gas TurbinesCoal GasificationFuel CellsOther
Combined Cycle
Technology
Power Generation Technologies
COCO22 Capture Technologies Capture Technologies
MEACausticOther
Chemical
SelexolRectisolOther
Physical
Absorption
AluminaZeoliteActivated C
Adsorber Beds
Pressure SwingTemperature SwingWashing
Regeneration Method
Adsorption Cryogenics
PolyphenyleneoxidePolydimethylsiloxane
Gas Separation
Polypropelene
Gas Absorption
Ceramic BasedSystems
Membranes Microbial/AlgalSystems
CO2 Separation and Capture
COCO22 Sequestration Options Sequestration Options
Deep SalineReservoirs
ExhaustedOil and Gas Wells
AbandonedCoal Seams
GeologicalSequestration
Very Deep OceanInjection
Unconfined Release(@ ~ 1000 m)
Dense Plume Formation(shallow)
Dry Ice Injection
OceanSequestration
Forests andTerrestrial Systems
Marine Alga
BiologicalSequestration
Storage as a solid in anInsulated Repository
Utilization Schemes(e.g. Polymerization)
OtherMethods
CO2 Disposal / Storage Options
Modeling Framework for CarbonModeling Framework for CarbonManagement OptionsManagement Options
Power Generation
CO2 Capture
CO2 Storageor Disposal
CO2Transport
AbsorptionAdsorptionCryogenicsMembranes
PipelineOther
Deep Saline ReservoirsOil and Gas WellsDeep Coal Seams
OceansByproduct Utilization
Air orPure O2
Coal orNatural Gas
Simple CycleCombined Cycle
Energy ConsiderationsEnergy Considerations
ProcessHeat
Capture Process
Compression
Transport
Storage/Disposal
Electricity
Total Energy Requirement
Important Factors•Gas Stream Flow and Composition•Choice of CO2 Capture Technology•Desired CO2 Capture Efficiency•Process Parameters•Desired CO2 Product Specifications•Mode of Transport•Transportation Distance•Choice of Disposal Method
~ 60-80% cost ofseparation & capture
Current StatusCurrent Status
Developed preliminary models (performance,emissions, and cost) for several CO2 captureoptions, CO2 transport options, and CO2 storageoptions
Initial focus on modeling of current commercialtechnologies (amine scrubbing systems) forcombustion-based power systems
Integrated the new CO2 module with the IECMcombustion-based power plant model developedfor the USDOE
Integrated EnvironmentalIntegrated EnvironmentalControl Model (IECM)Control Model (IECM)
CoalCleaning
CombustionControls
Flue Gas Cleanup & Waste Management
NOxRemoval
ParticulateRemoval
CombinedSOx/NOxRemoval
AdvancedParticulateRemoval
SO2Removal
ObjectivesObjectives
Develop a comprehensive modelingframework to estimate the performance,environmental emissions, and cost of coal-based power generation technologies
Develop a method for comparingalternative options on a systematic basis,including the effects of uncertainty
Probabilistic Software CapabilityProbabilistic Software Capability
Allows you to specify parameter values asdistribution functions, as well as conventionaldeterministic (point) estimates
Allows you to explicitly quantify the effectsof uncertainty in performance, emissions, andcost, yielding confidence intervals foruncertain results
Conventional Process ModelingConventional Process Modeling(Deterministic Simulation)(Deterministic Simulation)
ProcessModel
ParameterValues
ResultsResults
Parameter UncertaintyParameter UncertaintyDistributionsDistributions
NORMAL UNIFORM LOGNORMAL
FRACTILETRIANGULAR BETA
Stochastic SimulationStochastic Simulation
StochasticModeler
SAMPLINGLOOP
ProcessModel
ParameterUncertainty
DistributionsResultsResults
SorbentSulfur
Loading
GasifierFines
Carryover
CarbonRetention inBottom Ash
353025201510500.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
Sorbent Sulfur Loading, wt-%20151050
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
Carbon Retention in Bottom Ash% of coal feed carbon
3025201510500.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
Fines Carryover, % of coal feed
Expert Judgments onExpert Judgments onKey Model ParametersKey Model Parameters
Calculated Plant EfficiencyCalculated Plant Efficiency
444342414039380.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
ProbabilisticDeterministic
Net Plant Efficiency (%, HHV basis)
Cu
mu
lati
ve P
rob
abil
ity
Total Plant Capital CostTotal Plant Capital CostC
um
ula
tive
Pro
bab
ilit
y
Total Capital Requirement ($1994/kW)1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500
DOE (1989)Probabilistic
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
524 MW net
Value of Targeted ResearchValue of Targeted Research
1201101009080706050400.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
Base Case UncertaintiesReduced Uncertainties inSelected Performanceand Cost Parameters
Levelized Cost of Electricity, Constant 1989 mills/kWh
Input Uncertainty Assumptions
Cu
mu
lati
ve P
rob
abil
ity
Probabilistic Comparison ofProbabilistic Comparison ofCompeting TechnologiesCompeting Technologies
IECM Software PackageIECM Software Package
Fuel PropertiesFuel Properties Heating Value Heating Value Composition Composition Delivered Cost Delivered Cost
Plant DesignPlant Design Furnace Type Furnace Type Emission Controls Emission Controls Solid Waste Mgmt Solid Waste Mgmt Chemical Inputs Chemical Inputs
Cost DataCost Data O&M Costs O&M Costs Capital Costs Capital Costs Financial Factors Financial Factors
PowerPowerPlantPlantModelModel
GraphicalGraphicalUserUser
InterfaceInterface
SessionSession& Fuel& Fuel
DatabasesDatabases
Plant & ProcessPlant & Process Performance Performance
EnvironmentalEnvironmental Emissions Emissions
Plant & ProcessPlant & Process Costs Costs
The IECM is Available forThe IECM is Available forDownloadingDownloading
Web Access:
ftp://ftp.netl.doe.gov/pub/IECM
Preliminary IECM User GroupPreliminary IECM User Group
ABB Power Plant Control American Electric Power Consol, Inc. Energy & Env. Research Corp. Exportech Company, Inc. FirstEnergy Corp. FLS Miljo A/S Foster Wheeler Development Corp. Lehigh University Lower Colorado River Authority McDermott Technology, Inc. Mitsui Babcock Energy LTD.
National Power Plc. Niksa Energy Associates Pacific Corp. Pennsylvania Electric Association Potomac Electric Power Co. Savvy Engineering Sierra Pacific Power Co. Southern Company Services, Inc. Stone & Webster Engineering Corp. Tampa Electric Co. University of California, Berkeley US Environmental Protection Agency
COCO22 Module Results Module Results
Flue gas (out) composition CO2 emission level
(kg CO2/hr) Amount of CO2 product
(ton/hr) Purity of CO2 product (%) Solvent circulation rate
(m3/hr) Make-up solvent rate
(kg MEA/hr) Make-up rate relative to
the circulation rate (%)
Waste generation rate(kg/hr)
Energy penalty (% ofMWg)
Net power generation Cost of CO2 captured
($/ tonCO2 captured) Cost increase in electricity
(cents/kWh) Cost of CO2 avoided
($/ tonCO2 avoided)
Additional Technology OptionsAdditional Technology Options
Just Completed Combustion NOx Controls
– Selective Non-CatalyticReduction (SNCR)
– Low NOx Burners (LNB)– LNB + Overfire air– LNB + SNCR– Natural Gas Reburn– Tangential, Wall &
Cyclone Firing
Just Started Post-Combustion
Controls– Air Toxics (mercury)
Other Fossil Fuels Alternative Power
Generation Systems CO2 Sequestration
Options
Future Developments:Future Developments:A Menu of Technology OptionsA Menu of Technology Options
SelectSelect Gasification Gasification Combined CombinedCycle (IGCC) OptionsCycle (IGCC) Options
ASPEN Model of anASPEN Model of anIGCC SystemIGCC System
CoalHandling
Gasification,Particulate &Ash Removal,Fines Recycle
GasTurbines
BoilerFeedwaterTreatment
SteamTurbine
SteamCycle
& SCR
SteamCycle
& SCR
ZincFerriteProcess
ZincFerriteProcess
SulfuricAcid PlantSulfuric
Acid Plant
SulfuricAcid
Rawwater
Coal Coal
CleanSyngas
Exhaust Gas
Gasifier Steam
Boiler Feedwater
Exhaust Gas
Shift & Regen.Steam
Cyclone
RawSyngas
Cyclone
Blowdown
Return Water
CoolingWater
Makeup
CoolingWaterBlowdown
Air
NetElectricityOutput
InternalElectricLoads
Ash Gasifier Air
AirTailgas
Off-GasCaptured Fines
Response Surface ModelResponse Surface Modelfor an IGCC Systemfor an IGCC System
0.39
0.4
0.41
0.42
0.43
0.39 0.4 0.41 0.42 0.43
Actual Efficiency
Pred
icted
Effi
cienc
y
Desktop Model of an IGCC SystemDesktop Model of an IGCC System
Model ApplicationsModel Applications
Process design Technology
evaluation Cost estimation R&D management
Risk analysis Environmental
compliance Marketing studies Strategic planning
Com
mun
icat
ion
A Hierarchy of Process ModelsA Hierarchy of Process Models
EnterpriseEnterpriseEnterprise
System ModelsSystem ModelsSystem Models
Integrated ModelsIntegrated ModelsIntegrated Models
Component ModelsComponent ModelsComponent Models
Mechanistic/Empirical ModelsMechanistic/Empirical ModelsMechanistic/Empirical Models
Val
idat
ion