5th International Freiberg Conference on IGCC & XtL Technologies

Transcription

1 5th International Freiberg Conference on IGCC & XtL Technologies MODELING AND ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF CCS TECHNOLOGIES INTEGRATED INTO COAL TO LIQUIDS PLANTS, Paolo Deiana, Giuseppe Girardi ENEA Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy And Sustainable Economic Development Casaccia Research Center - Rome

2 Agenda Introduction Process description System modelling Mass and energy balance Efficiency Economic evaluation Assumptions Results Sensitivity analysis Conclusions

3 What is ENEA? ENEA is the Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (Law n. 99 of July 23rd, 2009) ENEA activities are targeted to research, innovation technology and advanced services in the fields of energy. ENEA performs research activities and provides agency services in support to public administrations, public and private enterprises, and citizens. 12 Research centres 18 Controlled Companies 11 Consortia

4 Introduction Evaluate the technical and economic feasibility of a CTL plant and its implementation with Carbon Capture and Storage Technologies Configuration plant has been chosen by integration of various process block (improve the thermal efficiency) using Aspen Plus Economic study: CTL plant configurations are compared in order to assess the economic impact of the addition of CCS (ROI, NPV, payback period) Legal framework European Directives: geological storage of carbon dioxide (Directive 2009/31/EC) revised emission trading Directive (Directive 2009/29/EC

5 Introduction Technical and economic feasibility of CTL polygeneration plant Mine mouth plant Sulcis Coal Mine South-West Sardinia Italy Plant size plant location Coal mine availability 1 Mtons/y Site to test CCS Throught ECBM acquifers tecniques Sulcis Basin

6 System modeling The simulations were carried out using a commercial software ApenPlus Two different plant configurations have been developed: 1.Base case 2. CCS case

7 Process description: base case AS U air c o2 oxyg en c o2 G S F AG R F T S P OW c oal ra w g as s weet g as tail g as po wer s team AXB as h s ulfur liqu id fue ls c oal c o2

8 Process description: ccs case AS U C MP air c o2 to s torag e oxyg en for ccs only c o2 G S F AG R F T S P OW c oal ra w g as s weet g as tail g as po wer s team AXB as h s ulfur liqu id fue ls c oal c o2 1

9 System modeling: assumptions Gasifier AGR section Fixed Bed Dry Bottom O2:coal= 0.5 kg/kg (daf); Steam: coal 2.5 kg/kg (daf); conversion = 90.18%; Heat loss = 1% Pressure = 30 bar ASU section: 175 kwhe/to2 O2 purity of 94.3% Auxiliary boiler Dual stage Selexol p design 30 bar Gas clean H2S= 1 ppm CO2 capture 85 % Lean solvent 1 ppm H2S CO2 compression Three compressor stages-inter-coolers CO2 liquid purity CO2 = 95 % H2S<200 ppm FT section Reactor Ryeld: yield base on ASF 50 % recycle of unconverted gas to ATR before Fischer-Tropsch synthesis reactor vapore FT prodotti grezzi syngas Power section Gas turbine and Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) Steam turbine

10 System modelling: AGR section MAKE-UP Semi lean GAS CLEAN H2S =1ppm CO2 =1.5 % vol. H2/CO =2.2 Stage CO2 Absorber AB2 CO2 HP CO2 rich CO2 MP CO2 LP Stage 1 H2S Absorber AB1 GAS IN ST1 H2S Stripping Q 4MJ/kg H2S lean

11 System modeling: CO2 compression section CO2 HP IMPURITIES CO2 MP CO2 BP K-203 K-204 K-205 P-204 CO2 LIQUID CO2 compression/liquefaction Three compressor stages 4.3 bar-18.6 bar, 80 bar inter-coolers T=28 C CO2 liquid 95 % in CO2, H2S<200 ppm, H2O< 300 ppm ( CO2 stream quality requirements transport) H2O

12 System modeling: FT section O2 IN ATR STEAM TO ATR R-302 R-301 R-202 ATR Recycle 50% tailgas GIBBS reactor steam/ch4=1.6 molar fraction O2 p=25 bar, T=300 C STEAM TO TURBINE TAIL TO POWER GAS CLEAN Refining LIQUID PRODUCT H2O R-201 Reacto Fischer Trospch RYELD p=25 bar T=250 C, yeld based on ASF distribution with double Alfa value 1= 0.85 C1-C12 carbon class and 2= 0.92 C12-C32.

13 % weight System modeling: FT section 0,18 SC 5+ =0.88 0,16 0,14 0,12 0,1 0,08 0,06 0,04 0,02 0

14 System modeling: main results BASE CASE BASE CASE h 0,52 0,50 Coal 4447 t/d Coal gasification Coal gasification Coal FT Liquids FT Liquids 4500 t/d Production Production Ash Ash 388 t/d 388 t/d CO2 CO2 out out t/d t/d FT liquids FT liquids bbl/d bbl/d Export Power Export Power 60 MWe 89 MWe CCS CASEBASE CASE CO2 captured 5054 t/d h 0,50 Coal 4447 t/d Coal gasification Coal gasification Coal FT LiquidsFT 4500 t/d Production Liquids Production Ash 388 t/d Ash 388 t/d CO2 out CO2 out 2578 t/d 7632 t/d FT liquids FT liquids 8530 bbl/d 8700 bbl/d Export Power Export 60 Power MWe 74 MWe

15 System modeling: main results Base case CCS Auxiliary load MWe Net Plant Power MWe Electric production MWhe/y Net Plant Power MWe Electric production MWhe/y Total Efficiency LHV basis FT Efficiency LHV basis CO2 capture % 66 Specific energy kwhe/tco2 88

16 Economic analysis comparison of two CTL plant configuration in order to assess the economic impact of the CCS addition Method: cash flow analysis estimation BEC (Bare Erected Cost) cost by factored method (CEPCI $2010) data source by literature estimation TOC (Total Overnight Capital) Includes: other overnight costs, Engineering, Procurement and Construction Cost, project and process contingencies. estimation NPV (Net Present Value)

17 Economic analysis: assumptions Parameter / Assumption Value Construction Period 3 years Incurred capital in: year 1 10% year 2 60% year 3 30% Debt Equity Ratio 55:45 Capacity factor 85% Plant lifetime 30 years Interest rate 8% Tax Rate 28% Loan interest rate 8% Annual O&M expenses 5.2 % TCP Mix coal ratio Sulcis % 60% Sulcis Coal Price $50/ton Bituminous Coal Price $100/ton CO2 storage cost $5 /ton FT product price $123/bbl Electricity price $115/MWh

18 Economic analysis: results Base Scenario ROI NPV, Payback time, Liquid production Cost $/bbl Estimation of the minimum required Crude Oil price which yields a ROI of almost 20 % Sensitivity analysis To determine the influence of assumed parameters price of a CO2 allowance $/tco2 crude oil price 20%

19 Economic analysis: results base Scenario Base case CCS Case Liquid product bbl/d TOC, M$ crude oil price (20%ROI), $/bbl ROI (oil price 98/bbl), % 20 16,5 NPV, M$ pay back period, years Capital cost per bbl/d $95214/bbl/d $97134/bbl/d Mitigation cost - $7/tCO2

20 Economic analysis: results sensitivity analysis cost of liquid product $/barrel CO2 allowance price $/tco2 base case CCS case Oil price $98/bbl

21 Economic analysis: results sensitivity analysis ROI (%) base case CCS case CO2 allowance price $/tco2 Oil price $98/bbl

22 ROI (%) Economic analysis: results sensitivity analysis oil price $/bbl base case CCS case CO2 allowance price= 0/tCO2 Liquid product selling price + 25 % oil price

23 Economic analysis: results sensitivity analysis %delta NPV=(NPV base case NPV CCS case )/NPV base case 30% 20% 10% 0% % delta NPV -10% $0/tCO2 $10/tCO2 $20/tCO2 $30/tCO3-20% -30% -40% $98/bbl $120/bbl oil price $/bbl $130/bbl

24 Conclusions The analysis evaluates different scenarios in order to underline CTL potential benefits in Italian energy market. 1) System modeling This analysis indicates a powerful synergism among polygeneration CTL systems and CO2 capture systems. The introduction of CCS in polygeneration plant shows a modest decrease in efficiency 2) Economic results The CTL investment option results in good economic performance in the case of growing crude oil prices $98/bbl ROI base case 20% $107/bbl ROI CCS case 20%

25 Conclusions 3) Sensitivity analysis In the case ofco2 allowances > 25$/ton CCS option become the most competitive CCS mine mouth plant installation best solution from the economic point leads to reduction of CO2 transport cost and reduction of coal supply cost Polygeneration of power and liquid can improve flexibility Future work will expand technical and economic feasibility analysis by varying: - the specific ratio of polygeneration capabilities of the plant - plant size scaleup - CO2 capture

26 Thank you for your attention! Acknowledgments This work was developed into the RdS Research Program on Electrical Grid funded by the Italian Ministry of Economic Sustainable Development.