CO 2 free Fossil Power Plant From Vision to Reality

Transcription

1 CO 2 free Fossil Power Plant From Vision to Reality Deutsche Physichalische Gesellshaft Arbeitskreis Energi March 26, 2007, Regensburg Lars Strömberg Vattenfall AB Berlin/Stockholm

2 The Vattenfall Group Vattenfall is one of the major Energy companies in Europe Vattenfall sells almost 200 TWh electricity The main part is produced by hydropower, nuclear power, coal and natural gas. A smaller part is produced by biofuels and wind power About 20 TWh is produced in combined heat and power plants Vattenfall also sell about 40 TWh heat The main part is produced by biofuels, coal and gas in cogeneration plants Vattenfall emits about 90 million tons of CO 2 per annum 2

3 The Climate Change European Council and the Energy package has recently declared that we have to reduce the emissions to maintain a reasonable CO 2 concentration in atmosphere (+2 o C) 30 % until % until 2050 Vattenfall has declared in the 3C initiative that it can be done, and at a reasonable cost. (Reducing the emission from the European energy sector to half, costs the same as the cost for catalytic cleaning of car exhaust) A radical solution is necessary. We cannot wait 3

4 CO 2 free power plant The CO 2 roadmap to realization Global Mapping of Greenhouse Gas Abatement Opportunities January,

5 Fossil fuels are needed The Problem Analysis show that fossil fuels will remain as major energy source in 2030 The top priority is to introduce renewable energy sources in the energy system All analysis show that renewable energy sources will play a large role, but not large enough and soon enough In several countries nuclear power is decommissioned No renewable energy source not known today can play a significant role in 25 years from now, i.e Emissions from fossil fuels must be reduced 5

6 Capture and storage of CO 2 Capture and storage 6

7 One solution is the CCS Carbon Capture and Storage, CCS can offer one solution with the largest potential so far. CCS can give an almost zero emission technology CCS is less expensive than most renewable energies today CCS is not the ultimate solution, it is a bridging technology to the sustainable solutions which have to be found 7

8 The CO 2 free Power Plant principle The principle of capture and storage of the CO 2 under ground The CO 2 can be captured either from the flue gases, or is the carbon captured from the fuel before the combustion process. The CO2 is cleaned and compressed. Then it is pumped as a liquid down into a porous rock formation for permanent storage. 8

9 CO 2 free power plant Storage and transport 9

10 Storage of CO 2 in a Saline Aquifer under the North Sea CO 2 -injection into the saline aquifer Utsira. (Source:STATOIL) The Sleipner field. Oil and gas production facilities. (Source: STATOIL ) 10

11 Storage Capacity, saline aquifers There exists more storage capacity within Eorope (and in the world) than the remaining fossil fuels Source: Franz May, Peter Gerling, Paul Krull Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe, Hannover 11

12 CO 2 Transport and storage Schweinrich structure Berlin h h h Two pipeline transport routes are possible Both routes can be designed to follow existing pipeline corridors >90% Structure can contain 1,4 billion ton of CO2, equivalent to about emissions from 6000 MW their whole lifetime 12

13 Reservoir simulation 40 year model h Due to buoyancy, the CO 2 strive against the top of the formation h The CO 2 spreads in the whole reservoir h Conclusion: It is possible to inject 400 Mt CO 2 Injection at flanks 13

14 Storage cost estimates Storage in aquifer traps (GESTCO Figures) n n n n Costs depend strongly on the depth of subsurface layers used for storage The strongest subsurface uncertainty in storage costs lies in the time it takes to fill the trap The second important uncertainty parameter is the exploration success ratio of finding a suitable trap Dutch case: CO2 source of 5.7 Mton/year stored in one megatrap or a conglomerate of traps. Total sequestration cost: Euro/ton CO2 av. Källa: Christian Bernestone Vattenfall Utveckling 14

15 CO 2 pipelines in operation in the USA 15

16 Transportation with water carriers 16

17 Transport costs for CO2 Cost and capacity ranges Source: Odenberger M, Svensson R, Analysis of Transportation Systems for CO2, Chalmers,

18 CO 2 free power plant Capture technologies 18

19 Key points - Technology Options Three technologies seems capable to fulfil the primary target to No new technology can do that. All three largely contain known technology and components All need optimization, scale up and process integration 19

20 Post-combustion capture This technology is already commercially available in large scale. It is at present the most expensive 20

21 Amine Absorption process principle Nitrogen Rich MEA Fuel Air Boiler Flue Gas cleaning Ash, contaminants Energy Lean MEA CO2 to compression HP turbine LP turbine Low pressure steam is used for energy supply to stripping and regeneration. This design leads to reduced output from turbine (400 MW instead of 500) 21

22 O 2 /CO 2 combustion is the preferred option at present At present the most competitive and preferred technology for coal. It needs development, pilot and demo plants to get design data 22

23 Energy flow diagram for a lignite fired Power Plant Energy input Fuel 2026 MW 100 % Net electricity output 865 MW 42,7 % Auxilliaries 68 MW 3,4 % Cooling 1093 MW 53,9% 23

24 Energy flow diagram for lignite fired plant with O 2 /CO 2 combustion Energy input Fuel 2026 MW 100 % Original electricity output 865 MW 42,7 % CO2 compression 71 MW - 3,5 % Air separation 137 MW - 6,8 % Net electricity output 689 MW 34,0 % Auxilliaries 45 MW 2,2 % Cooling 1084 MW 53,5 % 24

25 Pre-combustion capture This technology might be competitive. The IGCC without capture exists in several demo plants. An optimized turbine is in the lab stage. Produces Hydrogen as an intermediary product 25

26 Air ASU IGCC Process Development Coal IGCC with CO 2 -capture Air (70%) N 2 25 bar H 2-80 % vol CO % vol CO % vol N 2-10 % vol CH % vol Power island O 2 Steam Raw gas HTW gasifier Gas cooling/ dedusting Acid gas removal HT & LT CO shift CO 2 removal Sour gas CO 2 Lignite WTA lignite drying Sulphur recovery CO 2 compression LT-Shift necessary for carbon recovery of 85 % 26

27 CO 2 free power plant- Pre combustion capture 27

28 Chemical Looping Metal oxides oxygen carriers a type of oxy-fuel firing shown here in connected CFB s N2,O2 CO2,H2O Fe2O3 Combustor Reductor Fe3O4 Air Fuel Chalmers U., ALSTOM, others Chemical Looping is a potential 28 breakthrough technology

29 CO 2 free power plant Benchmarking of the technology options 29

30 Technology Platform Benchmarking The European Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants (ZEP) 30

31 Benchmarking for Benchmark large power plants in operation by 2020 (ZEP WG1) Financial and other Boundary Conditions Financial and other boundary conditions Natural Gas Hard coal plant Lignite plant Economic life time years Depreatiation years gas Fuel price EUR/GJ (LHV) 5,8 2,3 1,1 Fuel price escalation % per year 1,5% 1,5% 1,5% Operating hours per year hours per year /GJ (LHV) Standard Emission factor t/mwh th 5,8 2,3 1,1 0,210 0,344 0,402 Fuel price Common Inputs O&M cost escalation MWe (Ref) 420 2% Debt /Equitiy ratio % 50% Loan interest rate % 6% Interest during /MWe construction (Ref) % 471 6% Return on Equity % 12% Tax rate % 35% WACC 8% Discount rate % 9,0% Plant size Specific investment Common input Life time Wacc Years % Natural Hard coal Lignite

32 Benchmarking for Benchmark large power plants in operation by 2020 (ZEP WG1) EUR/MWh Electricity Financial generation and other cost for large power plants Natural Hard coal Lignite in operation Boundary Conditions by 2020 (ZEP Gas WG1) plant plant Economic life time years Depreatiation years Fuel price EUR/GJ (LHV) 5,8 2,3 1,1 Fuel price escalation % per No yearcapture Note: 1,5% 1,5% 1,5% Operating hours per year hours Pre-combustion per year Power generation cost Standard Emission factor t/mwh without CO2 transport Post-combustion th 0,210 0,344 0,402 Common Inputs and storage cost O&M cost escalation Debt /Equitiy ratio % Loan interest rate % Interest during construction % Return on Equity % Tax rate % Oxyfuel 2% 50% 6% 6% 12% 35% WACC 8% Discount rate % 9,0% Hard coal Lignite Natural Gas 32 15

33 Benchmarking for Benchmark large power plants in operation by 2020 (ZEP WG1) EUR /t CO Avoidance Financial and cost other for large power plants in Natural Hard coal Lignite Boundary Conditions Gas plant plant operation by 2020 (ZEP WG1) Economic life time years Depreatiation years Fuel price EUR/GJ (LHV) 5,8 2,3 1,1 Fuel price escalation % per year 1,5% 1,5% 1,5% Pre-combustion Operating hours per year hours per year Standard Emission factor t/mwh Post-combustion th 0,210 0,344 0,402 Note: CO 2 Avoidance cost without transport and storage cost Oxyfuel Common Inputs O&M cost escalation Debt /Equitiy ratio % 2% 50% Loan interest rate % 6% Interest during construction % 6% Return on Equity Power % pla nt an d 12% Tax rate CCS % techn ology 35% WACC improvem ent 8% Discount rate po tential % 9,0% 20 0 Hard coal Lignite Natural Gas 33 16

34 Technology Platform The European Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants (ZEP) 34

35 Why Oxy-fuel technology? Boxberg IV We work with all three (four) technologies, but: Oxyfuel technology is the technology giving lowest costs at present It is suitable for coal and have relatively little development work left We can build on our good experience with present PF technology 35

36 CO 2 free power plant The CO 2 free Power Plant project 36

37 The Goal To show that coal can be used in a responsible manner It is possible to create a coal fired power plant with zero emissions There are commercially available primary technology options in 2020 The cost for carbon dioxide reduction is lower than 20 /ton of CO2 There are even better technologies available after 2020 This will allow us to reduce the carbon emissions with % within 35 years from our generation portfolio 37

38 Parallel R&D routes needed Development of the three main technologies for the 2020 target Several large scale pilot and demonstration plants, optimized, with full process integration Supporting R&D to reach lower costs, increase process efficiency and achieve better availability R&D for new and emerging technologies for deployment after 2020 Many routes to examine Assessment to prioritize the technologies capable to overtake the leading role from any of the three main candidates. 38

39 The Logics of the R&D portfolio R&D path Technology Targets R&D efforts Basic development for 2020 target - Post combustion - Pre combustion - Oxyfuel Ready 2020, 45 /MWh, 20 /ton ++++ CO Use of process losses CHP processes Fuel utilization > 85 % Lower cost +++ Fuel flexibility and plant versatility Circulating fluidized beds Total fuel flexibility, cocombustion, lower cost + Chemical looping No energy losses for separation ++ Post 2020 IGWC Hybrid technologies Higher efficiency, lower cost, hydrogen adaptive + 39

40 Roadmap to realization Conceptual investigations Laboratory Test Pilot Plant Demo- Plant Commercial Plant Theoretical Research Research Basic principles Combustion characteristics Demonstration of the process chain Interaction of components Validation of basic principles and scale-up criteria Long term characteristics Noncommercial Verification and optimization of the component choice, the process and reduction of risks Commercially viable incl. subsidies Competitive in the market at that time No subsidies 40

41 CO 2 free power plant The CO 2 free Power Plant project 41

42 CO 2 free power plant Pilot Plant 42

43 Preliminary Pilot Plant layout Desulfurization Coal silo Ash silo CO 2 condensation Flue gas cooler ESP Boiler ASU CO2-Process Plant 43

44 Schwarze Pumpe power plant 44

45 Location of the pilot plant at Schwarze Pumpe Power station 45

46 CO 2 free power plant Present status 46

47 Pilot Plant component packages Oxyfuel - Pilot Plant CO 2 Liqu. Boiler Cooling tower ASU FGD FGC 47

48 1 Erarbeitung Unterlagen zur Feststellung UVP-Pflicht 1 Monat / E-KT-KU, Planer 2 Prüfung der UVP-Pflicht durch Behörde 1 Monat / Behörde 3 Genehmigungsverfahren nach 19 BImSchG Permission process Erarbeitung der technischen- und Genehmigungsunterlagen 3 Monate / Planer, E-KU 8 Submission permission application, Completeness check Authority / 1 month 9 Processing persission application 3 months / Authority 4 UVP im Einzelfall nach 3c UVPG 5 Erarbeitung Unterlagen für Einzelfallprüfung 3 Monate / Planer 6 Prüfung Behörde, ob Vorhaben umweltverträglich 1 Monat / Behörde Einstellung des Verfahrens nein ja 48 Subsequent demands Statement to authority Today Receipt of permission Check of the side conditions VE-G / 1 month Application for the technical changes VE-G / 2 months Acceptance of the technical changes Authoroty / 1 month

49 Permit achieved 21 st Nov 2006 Time Schedule Planning for tender procedure Permit planning Detailed engineering Erection Ground Breaking Commissioning Operation 49

50 Pilot Plant The Pilot Plant s groundbreaking took place in May The plant will be in operation in July

51 Building site New year

52 Building site New year

53 Present status CO 2 storage The plant produces CO 2 of a very high quality It can be stored anywhere, or sold as a commercial product It is a product, not a waste Several storage options are examined at present We anticipate to have a storage ready, when considerable amounts of CO 2 start to be produced 53

54 Storage Capacity, saline aquifers There exists more storage capacity within Eorope (and in the world) than the remaining fossil fuels Source: Franz May, Peter Gerling, Paul Krull Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe, Hannover 54

55 Pilot Plant Budget Present total budget is estimated at close to 70 million for the investment in the plant and 23 million for operating costs during the test period Vattenfall has taken decision to finance the Pilot Plant fully. There is presently no public funding at all We have invited partners to join us, utilizing the facility and contribute to the funding. Several have indicated participation. We seek partners for the storage option 55

56 Oxyfuel Pilot Plant 56

57 CO 2 free power plant The Demonstration Plant 57

58 The demonstration project time line: Capture & Storage 01/ / / / / /2006 Pre-feasibility study ¾ years 6 Scenarios Feasibility study 1 ½ years 1(3) Scenarios A,B Preplanning 1¼ years C, D Bidding phase ½ years E Approval procedure Detailed engineering 1½ years 3 years of construction Order Investment decision Capture plant permit 3¼ years (pipeline), 4 ½ years probably needed 2 years (storage), Actual time needed uncertain 1½ years (capture) Pre-feasibility phase Site-screening ¾ years Feasibility phase Initial site charact. 1 ½ years Investigation phase: Site characterisation Long-term risk ass. Baseline-monitoring 1¾ years Planning phase Site design & Planning consent 1½ years 3 years of construction (production drilling, surface facilities) A = Early Consultations B = Pipeline permit application submitted C = Capture plant tenders sent out D = Storage permit application submitted E = Capture permit application submitted0 Bidding phase Order Investment decision CO2 storage permit 58

59 Computer simulation of the new units in Hamburg (Moorburg) 2 x 835 MW hard coal 59

60 Oxyfuel projects Characteristics Pre combustion Characteristics Callide, Qld, Australia 30 MW hard coal Victoria, Australia 350 MW lignite BP, Chevron, Carson Field, Ventura Ca, USA CO 2 free power plant Projects 400 MW. Pet Coke. EOR H2 feed to refinery MW hard coal Sask power, Canada 350 MW hard coal BP, GE, Peterhead, UK Gas 350 MW, for EOR Schwarze Pumpe 30 MWth Pilot RWE, Germany 450 MW, Hard coal Jupiter Oxygen, Tx, USA SEQ and ONS Energy, Drachten Holland Post combustion 45 MW Demo Total, Lacq, France 30 MW, heavy oil RWE npower, Tilbury, UK 800 MW. Hard coal MW Hard coal. EOR Characteristics Alliance FutureGen, Tx, USA E.on UK, Southern UK Progressive Energy, Teeside UK Powerful, Hatfield, UK Nuon, Limburg, Holland 350 MW, Hard Coal. EOR MW, hard coal. EOR MW. Hard coal Storage???? 1200 MW, Hard coal Storage??? Shell, Statoil, Tjellbergsodden, Norge Statoil, Kårstö, Norge 860 MW, Gas for EOR MW, Gas for EOR. Pilot Full

61 Examples of planned CO 2 capture plants, coal SEQ International, ONS Energy 50 MWe Oxyfuel Killingholm, E.ON UK 450 MWe IGCC with precombustion In operation by 2011 Teeside, Progressive energy 800 MWe IGCC with precombustion Start construction 2009 DF2 Carson, BP 500 MWe IGCC with precombustion and H2 SaskPower Pet coke MWe Oxyfuel Lacq, Total 100 MWth? Pet coke, Oxyfuel retrofit In operation by 2008? Tillbury, RWE npower 450 MWe Technology not specified, retrofit? In operation 2016 RWE 450 MWe IGCC with Callide A, CS precombustion Energy In operation 30 MWe by 2014 Oxyfuel retrofit 61 In operation by 2009 FutureGen (US DOE and partners) Orville, Orville 400 MWe utilities IGCC with 25 MWe precombustion Oxyfuel and H2 retrofit production In operation by 2008 In operation by??

62 Computer simulation of the new Boxberg R unit 660 MW- lignite 62

63 CO 2 free power plant Back up 63

64 In one scenario, the world s emissions peak in 2040, according to the model CO2 Emissions from fuel combustion, Gton China (People's Rep. + Hong Kong) Asia Latin America 20 Former USSR Non-OECD Europe 15 Middle East 10 Africa OECD Pacific 5 OECD North America OECD Europe 0 Year

65 Vattenfall s adaptive global burden-sharing model: Emission path scenarios, % change relative to

66 Oxy-CFB CO 2 -RICH PRODUCT CFB Steam Generator Unit INDUCED DRAFT FAN TO GAS PROCESSING SYSTEM Cyclone AIR INFILTRATION COMBUSTOR BACKPASS HEAT EXCHANGERS CONDNESATE Gas Cooler PFWH COAL LIMESTONE External Heat Exchanger OXYGEN HEATER PARTICULATE REMOVAL SYSTEM GAS RECIRCULATION FAN ASH COOLER FLUIDIZING GAS BLOWER AIR OXYGEN AIR SEAPARATION UNIT NITROGEN Reduced recycle FGR and resultant smaller boiler & APC 3 MWt pilot CFB 66

67 Chemical Looping CaS - CaSO4 loop in CFB reactors CO 2 N 2 To Steam Cycle Coal CaCO 3 Steam Reducer CaSO 4 Combustion with CO2 Capture Oxidizer Air CaS Ash, CaSO 4 to Disposal Calcium-based oxygen carrier process 67 is suited to coal