Powergen Asia Supercritical and Ultra-Supercritical Power Plants SEA s Vision or Reality?

Transcription

1 Supercritical and Ultra-Supercritical Power Plants SEA s Vision or Reality? Miro R. Susta Power Consulting Engineers Switzerland Khoo Bo Seong Tronoh Consolidated (M) Bhd Malaysia Bangkok

2 Fuel Share of World Electricity Generation Nuclear 17% Renew ables 15% Oil 11% Natural Gas 16% Renewables 23% Nuclear 6% Oil 6% Natural Gas 15% Coal 41% Coal 50% 2

3 World Energy Supply by Fuel Mio Tons Oil Equivalent *1970 *1975 *1980 *1985 *1990 *1995 *2000 *2005 *2010 *2015 *2020 Renewables Nuclear Fossil 3

4 World Energy Supply by Fuel Mio Tons Oil Equivalent %/Year 0 *1970 *1975 *1980 *1985 *1990 *1995 *2000 *2005 *2010 *2015 *2020 Renewables Nuclear Fossil 4

5 Fuel Cost for Coal and NG based Power Plants US Cents/kWh *1980 *1984 *1988 *1992 *1996 *2000 *2004 *2008 *2012 *2016 *2020 Year Coal Natural Gas 5

6 Fuel Cost for Coal and NG based Power Plants US Cents/kWh % *1980 *1984 *1988 *1992 *1996 *2000 *2004 *2008 *2012 *2016 *2020 Year Coal Natural Gas 6

7 Fuel Cost for Coal and NG based Power Plants 4.5 US Cents/kWh % 35% 0 *1980 *1984 *1988 *1992 *1996 *2000 *2004 *2008 *2012 *2016 *2020 Year Coal Natural Gas 7

8 Fuel Cost for Coal and NG based Power Plants 4.5 US Cents/kWh % 35% 65% 0 *1980 *1984 *1988 *1992 *1996 *2000 *2004 *2008 *2012 *2016 *2020 Year Coal Natural Gas 8

9 World Recoverable Coal Reserves Other Former Yugoslavia Poland South Africa Lignite Anthracite Germany Australia India China Former Soviet Union United States Billions Short Tones 9

10 World Coal Consumption Billions Short Metric Tons Projections Average 'Reference' Low Growth High Growth 10

11 Coal Share of World Energy % Electricity Non-Electricity Total

12 Critical Point 22.1MPa-373ºC 12

13

14 Conventional vs. SC & USC Conventional, SC and USC technology is commercially available in wide range of size. 14

15 Conventional vs. SC & USC SC & USC technology offers higher efficiency and consequently lower specific flue gas throughput resulting in much cleaner electricity generation. 15

16 Conventional vs. SC & USC Conventional technology provides greater coal flexibility 16

17 Conventional vs. SC & USC Higher temperatures encountered in SC & USC units makes corrosion more critical, thus coals with slugging or corrosion potential are less suitable for SC & USC plants. 17

18 Conventional vs. SC & USC State-of-the-art SC power plants have an efficiency of about 46% and satisfy current emission standards worldwide. 18

19 Capacity of SC & USC Power Plants Worldwide Units GW E.Europe & Russia USA Japan W.Europe Other Counties Total Worldwide 0 Number of Units Total Power Output 19

20 Comparison SC - USC vs. Conventional Plant Type Price US$/ kw Steam Pres. MPa Steam Temp. C Auxiliary Cons. % Eff. % CO 2 g/kwh SO 2 g/kwh) Conventional / < C - SC / 580 / > C - USC / 700 / >

21 Efficiency (%) MPa 538 C 538 C 25.0MPa 540 C 560 C 27.0MPa 585 C 600 C 30.0MPa 600 C 620 C Potential Increase in Efficiency 31.5MPa 620 C 620 C 35.0MPa 700 C 720 C F12 F12 P91 NF616 Super 304H Inconel 740 Material 21

22 Steam Pressure - Temperature & Material Development Pressure MPa <25.0 Live steam Temperature C <520 When Since early 60 s What X20 <30.0 <593 Since late 80 s P91 9%Cr <33.0 <620 Start 2000 P92 NF Start 2010 Super Alloys 22

23 Materials for SC-ST ST Applications Steam temperature >600 C 538 C Rotor Inner HP casing New 12 Cr forging No 1 Cr-Mo-V-B cast steel Cr-Mo-V forging 1 ¼ Cr ½ Mo cast steel Inner IP casing 12 Cr cast steel 1 ¼ Cr ½ Mo cast steel Outer casing 2 ¼ Cr 1Mo cast steel 1 ¼ Cr ½ Mo cast steel Rotating blade Main steam stop valve Refractory alloy (R-26) 9 Cr - 1 Mo forging 12 Cr forging 2 ¼ Cr 1Mo forging Main steam governing valve 9 Cr 1 Mo forging 2 ¼ Cr 1Mo forging 23

24 Selected SC & USC Power Plants No Power Plant Name Country Output (MW) Live Steam (MPa / C / C) Efficiency (%) Fuel Commercial Operation Matsuura Japan / 598 / 596 PC 1997 Haramashi Japan / 604 / 602 PC 1998 Tachibana-Wan-2 Japan / 605 / PC 2001 Isogo 1 & 2 Japan 2 x / 600 / PC 2001 Hitachinaka Japan / 600 / 600 PC 2003 Torrevaldaliga Italy 6 x / 600 / PC 2006 Yuhuan PR China 2x / 600 / 600 PC 2008 Niederaussem Germany / 580 / L 2002 Nordjyllaend 3 Denmark / 582 / PC 1998 Misumi 1 Japan / 605 / PC 2001 Tomato Atsuma 4 Japan / 600 / 600 PC Skaerbaek 3 Denmark / 582 / NG Nanaoota 2 Japan / 597 / 595 PC Tsuruga 2 Japan / 597 / 595 PC Avedore 2 Denmark / 580 / /48.2/ 45.0 NG/PC/BS

25 USC Power Plant Avedore - Denmark 25

26 SC Power Plant Misumi - Japan 26

27 Niederaussem 27

28 28

29 Tachibana-Wan Power Station 29

30 Isogo Power Station 30

31 SEA Power Generation Fuel Split 2004 Hydro 19% Oil 5% Geothermal 4% NG 33% Coal 39% 31

32 SEA Power Generation Capacity 2004 Laos 1.0 GW Myanmar 1.2 GW Cambodia 0.2 GW Malaysia 14 GW Vietnam 8 GW Brunei 1 GW Thailand 26 GW Indonesia 22.0 GW Singapore 1.5 GW Philippines 13 GW 32

33 SEA Power Generation Capacity Cambodia Brunei Laos Myanmar Singapore Vietnam Philippines Malaysia Indonesia % Thailand

34 Hard Coal Management in Asia Million Short Tons *2002 Production Imports Consumption 34

35 Coal Savings Mio Tons / Year GW 6GW 9GW 12GW 15GW Power Generation Capacity 3% 6% 35

36 Operational Costs savings Mio USD / Year GW 6GW 9GW 12GW 15GW Power Generation Capacity 3% 6% 30 USD/Ton 36

37 SC & USC Power Generation Capacity Units GW >2000 Year 0.0 Number of Units GW 37

38 SC & USC Power Generation Capacity Units GW Japan Korea China Germany Russia Others Number of Units GW 38

39 Conclusions Advanced SC & USC technology has substantial potential to improve the efficiency of PC power plant and to reduce the harmful impacts on the environment. Many Asian countries have already large capacity for SC & USC components manufacturing. SC power plants have already attained similar or even higher availability as conventional power plants. Cost patterns indicate a rapid decline in the average cost of power generation from SC & USC power plants. Higher construction costs are well balanced by lower fuel costs. SC & USC technology offers better operational dynamics at all loads and higher thermal efficiency at low loads. 39

40 Constraints SC & USC technology has to become economic against the alternative technologies such as conventional and NG-fired CCGT power plants. Ni base super-alloys are needed for higher temperatures. Higher strength materials are needed for upper water walls of boilers. Better understanding of maintenance needs of the USC boiler & ST and related auxiliary systems is essential for long-term, reliable operation. 40

41 Coal based SC power generation technology is matured and advanced technique that can be favorably compared with well proven conventional power generation technology. USC takes all advantages of well proven SC technology and is continuously build-up up on this strong SC foundation. 41

42 In the medium to long term, as NG and fuel oil become a more scarce fuel and prices increase, and in conjunction with further economic improvements in clean coal technologies, SC & USC technology can expect to receive a renaissance as a feasible option for new large scale coal fueled power generation plants. 42

43 There is no solution capable meeting of our all future energy requirements. Instead the answer will come from a family of diverse New Technologies which will have an impact on everything from environmental quality to costs that consumers will ultimately have to pay. Thank You.