CO 2 Capture from Fossil Energy Power Plants

Transcription

1 CO 2 Capture from Fossil Energy Power Plants Neville Holt- EPRI Technical Fellow (nholt@epri.com) University of Utah Future of coal in a Carbon-Constrained World Main Library, Salt Lake City, Utah May 23, 2008

2 Clean Coal Technologies (CCT) and CO 2 Capture and Storage (CCS) - Presentation Outline Overview Options for Response to Global Climate concerns CCS crucial to meet Goals of proposed Climate Legislation CCS Options for Coal Power Plants PC Post Combustion CO 2 Removal Status, Chilled Ammonia Oxyfuel Status, B&W, Vattenfall IGCC Status, Capture Technology, EPRI CoalFleet Program Planned CCS Demonstrations DOE CCS Programs & Initiatives Effect of Capital Cost increases on COE and CO 2 cost Retrofit of CCS to existing coal plants Summary 2

3 Options for CO 2 Response (The Stabilization Wedge & Slices) Conservation (Yes - but Rest of the World?) Renewables (Yes - but not enough) Nuclear (Ultimately Yes but implies wide Proliferation) Adaptation (Probably Yes we always do) Switch from Coal to Natural Gas (Maybe but not enough NG) CO 2 Capture & Sequestration (CCS) (Maybe but site specific & costly - Liability for the Sequestered CO 2?) Notes : US Coal Power Plants emit > 2 billion metric tons of CO 2 /yr (~36% of US and 8% of World CO 2 emissions). 1 billion metric tons/yr = ~25 million bpd of supercritical CO 2 3

4 Regulatory Uncertainty on CO 2 Emissions Kyoto Signatory Countries post US proposed Federal legislation - McCain/Lieberman, Bingaman, Sanders/Boxer, Feinstein/Carper, Kerry/Snowe, Lieberman/Warner US Regional Initiatives Western Regional lclimate Action (WAORCAAZ (WA,OR,CA,AZ, and dnm) RGGI East Coast Regional GHG Initiative (10 NE States) Powering the Plains (ND,SD,IA,MN,WI, Manitoba) California: Governor s Executive Order GHG targets 2010 cut to 2000 (-11%), 2020 cut to 1990 (-30%), % below New long term base load power or renewal (>5years) commitments shall have CO 2 emissions no greater than NGCC (established as <1100 lbs/mwh or 500 kg/mwh). Oregon & Washington have enacted similar legislation Liability of CO 2 injection into geological formations? 4

5 Power Company Carbon Management Options IGCC Energy Storage PHEV 5

6 New Coal Plants increasingly Challenged 13 GW SCPC & 2 GW IGCC cancelled in Common themes contributing to these cancellations were limiting CO 2 emissions through energy conservation, increased use of Renewables, and a move away from coal. Environmental groups are pushing for inclusion of CCS in coal plant designs. Some plants are being designed to include CCS from the start, but the unresolved key issues of CO 2 storage acceptance and liability seem to prevent a move forward on this basis unless the CO 2 is used for EOR. Citigroup Inc., J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. and Morgan Stanley adopt Carbon Principles that require utilities seeking financing for coal plants to: - Look at energy-efficiency options - Look at renewable-energy options - Assess whether the plant design and nearby geology would allow emissions i to be captured and stored underground d - Use conservative assumptions about how many emission allowances the plant would get from the government under a greenhouse-gas cap - Ensure the plant will be allowed to charge electricity rates that are high enough to cover the cost of buying emission allowances 6

7 7

8 CCS Deployment is Crucial to attain the CO 2 goals of all proposed p Climate Legislation Multiple Storage (preferably Integrated CCS) demonstrations needed ASAP at large scale (> 1 million mt/year of CO 2 ) in various geographic and geological locations. Liability for the CO 2 needs resolution (Federal and State governments?). Because of the national importance of the issue a system for financing these Demonstrations must be established with broad company participation p to enable the necessary timely technology transfer. There is a need for these demonstration costs to be covered either in the rate bases or from some yet to be established national pool funded by either a wires charge, coal charge or by? If funded from the proceeds from a potential cap & trade program or carbon tax would probably delay the needed CCS demonstrations 8

9 Organization Attitudes to CCS Greenpeace Report Why CCS won t save the Planet CCS is a Scam and a Pipedream NRDC CCS Deployment must begin now IEA Exec.Dir. N.Tanaka We need to build at least 20 CCS demos by 2020, at a cost of ~1.5 Billion $ each. Such a construction program should be viewed as a litmus test of our seriousness towards combating climate change. MIT Need 3-5 Integrated CCS demonstration projects in the US ASAP with Federal assistance at >1 million mt/yr. In the absence of a CO 2 charge there is no incentive for private firms to undertake such projects. Regulatory framework required to cover Institutional and Legal issues (property rights, government liability etc). EPRI Similar to MIT. 9

10 A Roadmap for CO 2 Capture and Storage Now Small demos (1.7 MW Ammonia, etc.) Complete larger scale capture demos Objective Commercial availability CCS Bench-scale post- Start larger scale demos Start multiple full combustion capture capture and storage scale demos Needs: Multiple large-scale CAPTURE and STORAGE demos Timing: 2020 objective start today, parallel paths Realistic? A challenge need technical, policy, funding alignment Source: DOE-NETL Carbon Sequestration R&D Roadmap Modified to add Chilled Ammonia example 10

11 CO 2 Storage Injection Into Geological Formations Saline reservoirs 100 s yrs capacity Little experience Economical, but lesser capacity options Depleted oil and gas reservoirs/enhanced oil recovery Unmineable coal beds/enhanced coal- bed methane recovery Deep ocean injection not acceptable today Courtesy of Peter Cook, CO2CRC 11

12 Saline Reservoirs Inject into deep, high salinity reservoirs Large volume potential for storage Reasonably well distributed across country CO 2 Capacity Estimates by Partnership Saline Formations Low High (Billion Tons of CO 2 ) (Billion Tons of CO 2 ) Big Sky 299 1,196 MGSC MRCSP PCOR SECARB ,587 Southwest WESTCARB Total 1,014 3,724 This map displays saline formation data which were obtained from the RCSPs and other external sources and compiled by NATCARB 12

13 CO 2 Capture in Coal Power Systems 13

14 New Technology Deployment Curve for Coal Antic cipated Cost of Full-Scale Ap pplication Research Development Demonstration Deployment Mature Technology Advanced USCPC Plants 1400 F CO F+ Capture Oxyfuel CO 2 Storage IGCC Plants USCPC Plants 1150 F F <1100 F 1050 F SCPC Plants Time Not All Technologies at the Same Level of Maturity. 14

15 PC Plant Efficiency and CO 2 Reduction 2 Percentage Point Efficiency Gain = 5% CO 2 Reduction Subcritical Plant Range Commercial Supercritica l Plant Range Advanced Ultra- Supercritical Plant Range 15

16 Pulverized Coal with CO 2 Capture (Today) Coal Air Fresh Water PC Boiler SCR ESP FGD CO 2 to Use or Sequestration CO 2 Removal e.g., MEA Flue Gas to Stack Energy Penalty ~29% Steam Fly Ash Gypsum/Waste Turbine Amine commercially available (multiple suppliers) 3 U.S. plants in operation: MEA, <15 MWe, >90% ΔCO 2 Key requirements: ~5 6 acres for 600 MW plant Near-zero SO 2 and NO 2 Large reboiler steam (MEA>KS-1>Ammonia) Many new process options being explored Flue Gas from Plant Cleaned Flue Gas to Atmosphere Absorber Tower CO 2 to Cleanup and Compression CO 2 Stripper CO 2 Stripper Reboiler Needs Space, Integration and Energy 16

17 PC Operating Units w/ CO 2 Capture (Today) Three U.S. small plants in operation today: Monoethanolamine (MEA) based Scale ~ 330 mt/day (15 MWe) CO 2 sold as food grade ~140$/ton Many pilots planned and in development: 5 MWth Chilled Ammonia Pilot (Alstom, EPRI) Operations begin 1 st Q 2008, AEP plans 30 MWth at Mountaineer, WV and further scale-up at OK site. Other Projects planned in Europe with EoN and Statoil. Many other processes under development Only Demonstrated on a Small Scale to Date AES Cumberland ~ 10 MW CO 2 EPRI (Report ) Assessment of Post- Combustion Carbon Capture Technology 17

18 CO 2 Capture Retrofits Require a Lot of Space (and very clean flue gas) CO 2 capture plant for 500-MW unit occupies 6 acres, i.e. 510 ft x 510 ft 18

19 CO 2 Capture by O 2 /CO 2 Combustion O 2 /CO 2 Combustion Test facilities at Canmet, B&W, Alstom, Vattenfall, CSIRO Potential reuse of existing boiler equipment» Pulverizers, air heaters, etc.» Potential retrofit kit CO 2 recycled for temp. control SO 2 removed from purge stream» If higher purity CO 2 required Requires large oxygen plant Large auxiliary power requirement» Large net output reduction» Make-up power source for Retrofit of existing plant? 19

20 Oxyfuel Combustion in a PC Boiler Source: Vattenfall (GHGT7 2004) Other potential CO2 recycle take-off points 20

21 Oxy-Combustion Activities SaskPower 300-MW oxy-combustion plant decision delayed until Design review in progress to lower costs B&W 30-MW th oxy-combustion pilot plant started testing Construction of Vattenfall 30-MW th pilot plant progressing; startup mid Alstom providing down-fired PC boiler AEP and B&W conducting retrofit feasibility study at one plant. Study to be completed by mid-2008 at cost of up to $3M. Subcritical plants at MW being considered CS Energy planning to retrofit a 30-MW PC boiler in central Queensland, Australia, firing bituminous coal. Construction to start in 2008 with operation scheduled 2010 Foster Wheeler & Praxair, to build a 50-MW oxy-combustion CFB near Buffalo, NY 21

22 Coal Gasification Plants w/co 2 Capture (Today) IGCC and CO 2 removal offered commercially: Have not operated in an integrated manner Three U.S. non-power facilities capture CO 2 - Coffeyville Eastman Great Plains The Great Plains Synfuels Plant Many Coal Gasification plants in China recover CO 2 Great Plains recovered CO 2 used for EOR: 2.7 million tons CO 2 per year ~340 MWe if it were an IGCC p No Coal IGCC Currently Recovers CO 2 Weyburn Pipeline 22

23 Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) With CO 2 Removal 2 Coal Sulfur CO 2 Air ASU O 2 Gasifier Shift Gas Clean Up CC Power Block Power Slag H 2 Sulfur Product CO 2 IGCC with CO 2 Capture Steam CO 2 Compressor Shift Reactor Sulfur Recovery CO 2 Recovery (e.g., Selexol 2nd stage) Needs Space, Energy and Integration 23

24 EPRI s CoalFleet for Tomorrow Program An industry-led program to accelerate the deployment of advanced coal-based power plants; use lessons learned to minimize risk: address Capture Readiness and Capture Design Further information available Employ learning by doing approach; at generalize actual deployment projects (50 & 60 Hz) to create design guides Augment ongoing RD&D to speed market introduction of improved designs and materials; lead industry collaborative projects Deliver benefits of standardization to IGCC (integration gasification combined cycle), USC PC (ultra-supercritical pulverized coal), and SC CFBC (supercritical circulating fluidized-bed combustion) Lower costs, especially with CO 2 capture Higher reliability Near-zero SO X, NO X, PM, and Hg emissions Shorter project schedule 24

25 EPRI CO 2 PRISM Demonstration Projects 1. Smart Grids 2. Compressed Air Energy Storage 3. CCS using Chilled Ammonia Advanced Coal 4. CCS using a Different Generation Technology Carbon Capture and Storage 5. Advanced Pulverized Coal Plant UltraGen I 6. IGCC with CCS 7. Low-cost O 2 Production

26 DOE CCS Programs and Initiatives DOE proposes FutureGen Restructuring to fund the addition of CCS (only) to multiple commercial scale IGCC plants rather than the single project planned for Mattoon, IL. Scale to demonstrate ~90% capture on a >300 MW gross train to sequester >1 million mtpy in a saline aquifer by Draft FOA issued with comments due back May % cost share proposed. What CCS costs are covered?. DOE awards of ~66 Million $ each to 6 of the 7 Regional Sequestration Partnerships under Phase 3 Deployment (>1 million mt of CO 2 over the project life) DOE FOE CCS Development for Existing PC Plants Issued February 15, Lists seven areas of interest covering both Oxyfuel and post combustion capture CCPI 3 was planned for 1 st Q 2008 with emphasis on CCS. Timing? 26

27 Addition of CCS to PC and IGCC Added capital costs for Capture are significant but it is the reduced power that is the greatest economic impact on COE- particularly when retrofitted to SCPC Capital Cost Escalation has continued. IHS CERA DCCI suggests 15% from 3 rd Q 2006 to 3 rd Q

28 IHS/CERA Power Capital Costs Index North American Power Construction Costs Rise 27% in 12 Months Continuing Cost Pressures Likely to Bring Delays and Postponements Source: IHS/CERA Press Release 2/14/08 28

29 EPRI PC and IGCC Net Power Output with and without CO 2 Capture (PRB Coal) No Capture Retrofit Capture New Capture Net Power Output, MWe Supercritical PC Ultrasupercritical PC Shell Gas Quench E-Gas FSQ 29

30 EPRI PC and IGCC Cost of Electricity with and without CO 2 Capture (Illinois #6 Coal) (All IGCC and CCS cases have +10% TPC contingency for FOAK) lized COE, $/MWh (Cons stant 2007$) No Capture Retrofit Capture New Capture COE Includes $10/tonne for CO 2 Transportation and Sequestration 30-Yr level Supercritical PC GE Radiant Quench GE Total Quench Shell Gas Quench E-Gas FSQ 30

31 Actual Capital Costs, COE and Required C Tax for CCS? Actual Capital Costs, COE and required C Tax for CCS to be effective are, in most cases likely to be higher than EPRI or DOE estimates. Today LSTK estimates would have to include much larger contingencies than the 2003 period. Alternative risk sharing approaches are being considered. EPRI and DOE estimates typically assume a level site with access to natural gas, rail access for coal supply, transmission access and a ready supply ppy of cooling water. Most actual sites will probably need additional infrastructure investments for these fuel and commodity supplies and transmission. Costs of CO 2 transportation, storage and monitoring are very site specific, however recent estimates suggest that the 10$/mt of CO 2 that EPRI has used (DOE even lower) is likely to be too low. 31

32 Capital Cost Estimates in Press Announcements and Submissions to PUCs in All costs are higher, more than would be predicted from indices (e.g., CEPCI) Owner AEP/ Swepco Southern Co. Name/ Location Hempstead, AK Kemper County, MS Net MW Technology/ Coal Estimate Date Reported Capital $ Million Reported Capital $/kw Notes/ Status 600 SCPC/PRB Dec CPCN issued 560 Air IGCC/ Lignite Dec FEED in progress Duke Cliffside, NC 800 SCPC/ Bit May Permitted Duke Edwardsport, IN 630 IGCC/ Bit May 2007 May Serv Constr. Initiated AEP Mountaineer, WV 630 IGCC/Bit June Permit in Review Tampa Electric Polk County, FL 630 IGCC/Bit July TPC? 2013 Serv 2554/ 3185 Shelved Now NGCC Sunflower Holcomb, KS 2 x 700 SCPC/PRB Sept Permit denied Am. Muni. Power Meigs County, OH 1000 SCPC/Bit & PRB Jan / /3300 Tenaska Sweetwater County, TX 600 SCPC + CCS/PRB Feb

33 Existing Coal Plants Options in a Carbon Constrained World Keep running and pay for CO 2 allowances or CO 2 tax. Keep running but at reduce Capacity Factor (CF) and pay the CO 2 allowances/taxes Shut down but need to replace power with new build Since New Coal plant costs are so high CCS Retrofit to some Existing PC plants may be considered Consider adding CCS if: - Space available - FGD and SCR in place - Suitable Sequestration site identified - Remaining life of existing plant is years 33

34 DOE CO 2 Capture Market Analysis U.S CO 2 emissions = 5.9 Billion mtpy; 40% from electricity, 33% from coal power(323 GW installed capacity) AEO 2008 BAU forecast for 2030 today s existing coal plants will produce 64% of U.S. power sector CO 2 emissions and 71% of all U.S. coal power CO 2 emissions Which h of today s units are most likely l to adopt CO 2 capture under a regulatory environment? Existing boilers >300 MW and <35 years old represent 184 GW. If 90% CO 2 capture was applied to these units, this would provide a 50% reduction in coal power CO 2 emissions. Q: How many of these have the space for capture and reasonable proximity to a Sequestration site? What is the cost of adding capture to these existing plants and the cost and source of replacement power? 34

35 CCS Retrofit Potential. How much? Where? Existing boilers >300 MW and <35 years old represent 184 GW. 90% CO 2 capture applied to these units would provide a 50% reduction in US coal power CO 2 emissions (~1 Billion mt/year). Criteria i for CCS Retrofit Candidates - Space available - Sequestration site identified - Sufficient remaining plant life - Probably with FGD & SCR in place Preliminary analysis for 600 MW SCPC suggests LCOE of retrofitted plant lower than new coal plant even with the cost of the replacement power, and while dispatch cost higher than for new coal it is still lower than NGCC at NG >5$/Mbtu 35

36 EPRI Illustrative Power Cost and Replacement Power Costs when applying Retrofit to PC plants Power Technology 30 year LCOE $/MWh Dispatch Cost $/MWh 600 MW net SCPC (Capital paid off) Above 600 MW net SCPC Retrofit with CCS - now 425 MW net 600 net MW SCPC with CCS 90% capture 80% CF 550 MW NGCC with NG 10$/Mbtu HHV and 80% CF 550 MW NGCC with NG 10$/Mbtu HHV and 40% CF MW NGCC with CCS % capture, NG 10$/Mbtu and 80% CF 36

37 Summary All generation options (Coal, Natural Gas, Nuclear, Renewables) will probably still be needed in a Carbon Constrained World Capital costs for new coal plants have increased markedly CO 2 Capture is costly for both IGCC and PC plants but feasible Integrated CCS costs uncertain Existing coal plants are valuable and will continue to run until the rules change. New coal plants with capture would need a large carbon tax to be competitive with existing coal plants that vent CO 2 and just pay the tax. Adding CCS to existing large PC plants is worth consideration if space, sequestration and remaining life are available Multiple Storage (preferably Integrated CCS) demonstrations needed ASAP at large scale. Funding, Regulatory Framework and Liability for the CO 2 needs resolution. In 2007 China used 2.5 Billion tons of Coal. How can this be best addressed? d? 37