IGCC: Coal s Pathway to the Future

Transcription

1 IGCC: Coal s Pathway to the Future Gasification Technologies Council Conference October 4, 2006 Julianne M. Klara Senior Analyst Office of Systems Analysis and Planning National Energy Technology Laboratory

2 Disclaimer This presentation was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference therein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed therein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. All results provided in this presentation are preliminary. Technical and economic revisions resulting from an extensive industry and academia peer review are underway, and although they may have some impact on the costs and efficiencies, they are not expected to alter the trends or conclusions. A final report will be made publicly available when completed (target date of early 2007).

3 Outline What is IGCC cost and performance today? Baseline analysis Where can IGCC go in the future? and when? R&D roadmap Why is IGCC important? Benefits projected to 2030

4 2,500 O F IGCC Baseline Analysis 1,100 O F

5 Fuel Illinois #6 Bituminous Coal Environmental BACT for SO 2, NO x, PM Economic Design Basis Startup 2010 Dollars (Constant) 2006 Coal ($/MM Btu) 1.34 Natural Gas ($/MM Btu) 7.46 Capital Charge Factor (%) 13.8 Greenfield, Midwestern USA, 0 ft Elevation

6 Study Matrix Plant Type ST Cond. (psig/ F/ F) GT Gasifier/ Boiler Acid Gas Removal/ CO 2 Separation / Sulfur Recovery CO 2 Cap GE Selexol / - / Claus Selexol / Selexol / Claus 90% IGCC 1800/1050/1050 F Class CoP E-Gas MDEA / - / Claus Selexol / Selexol / Claus 90% Shell Sulfinol-M / - / Claus Selexol / Selexol / Claus 90% PC 2400/1050/1050 Subcritical 3500/1100/1100 Supercritical Wet FGD / - / Gypsum Wet FGD / Econamine / Gypsum 90% Wet FGD / - / Gypsum Wet FGD / Econamine / Gypsum 90% NGCC 2400/1050/950 F Class HRSG - / Econamine / - 90% GEE GE Energy CoP Conoco Phillips

7 IGCC Design Gasifier Technology No CO2 Capture 2 Trains Oxygen/Bituminous With CO2 Capture 2 Trains Oxygen/Bituminous Water Gas Shift no yes H2S removal (99+%) Selexol/MDEA/Sulfinol-M Selexol 1 st Stage Sulfur Recovery Claus Plant - Sulfur Claus Plant - Sulfur Particulate Control Filter/ Cyclone/ Scrubbing / AGR Filter/ Cyclone/ Scrubbing / AGR Mercury Control Carbon Bed Carbon Bed NOx Control LNB and N2 dilution LNB and N2 dilution Gas Turbine 2 x advanced F-class 2 x advanced F-class Steam Cycle 1800 psig/1050 F/1050 F 1800 psig/1000 F/1000 F CO2 Removal no Selexol 2 nd Stage* CO2 Compression no 2200 psig * Target is >90% removal of CO2 from syngas

8 IGCC Performance Comparison GE Energy GE Energy E-Gas E-Gas Shell Shell CO2 Capture CO2 Capture CO2 Capture Gross Power (MW) Auxiliary Power (MW) Net Power (MW) Efficiency (HHV) TCR 1 ($/kw) COE 2 (cents/kwh) Average increase in in COE COE for for CO2 CO2 Capture = 30% 30% 1 Total Capital Requirement (Includes equipment, materials, labor, indirect construction costs, engineering, contingencies, cost of money, real estate, royalty allowance, preproduction costs, and initial inventories. 2 January 2006 Dollars, 13.8% Levelization Factor, Coal cost $1.34/106Btu, 80%capacity factor

9 How Does IGCC Compare to Alternatives? PC and NGCC

10 Capital Cost Comparison TCR, $/kw (2006 dollars) Avg IGCC Avg IGCC with CO2 PC Sub PC Sub with CO2 PC Super PC Super with CO2 NGCC NGCC with CO2 TCR = Total Capital Requirement (Includes equipment, materials, labor, indirect construction costs, engineering, contingencies, cost of money, real estate, royalty allowance, preproduction costs, and initial inventories.)

11 Efficiency Comparison HHV Efficiency (%) Avg IGCC Avg IGCC w/ CO2 Capture PC-Sub PC-Sub w/ CO2 Capture PC- Super PC- Super w/ CO2 Capture NGCC NGCC w/ CO2 Capture

12 Cost of Electricity Comparison cents/kwh (2006 dollars) Avg IGCC Avg IGCC with CO2 PC Sub PC Sub with CO2 PC Super PC Super with CO2 NGCC NGCC with CO2 January 2006 Dollars 13.8% Levelization Factor Coal cost $1.34/10 6 Btu Gas cost $7.46/10 6 Btu IGCC capacity factor 80% PC capacity factor 85% NGCC capacity factor 65%

13 R&D Roadmap for IGCC

14 DOE IGCC R&D Program Challenges R&D Pathways Targets By 2010 By 2010 Advanced Gasification Efficiency 45-50% (HHV) Transport/Compact gasifiers Advanced materials & Capital* $1000/kW ($2002) instrumentation Dry feed pump Electric power Fuels Chemicals Hydrogen Increased CF, RAM, CC Warm gas cleaning Advanced low-nox syngas turbines ITM oxygen Optimization of Coal Use with: Zero Emissions High Efficiency Low Cost Plants Reduction of Pollutant Emissions (NOx, SOx, Hg, As, Cd, Se, PM) Reduction of CO 2 Emissions Maintain Low Cost of Electricity to the Public through diversified mix of indigenous fuels By 2015 Advanced Gasification Chemical Looping Increased CF, RAM Multi-control warm gas cleaning Hydrogen gas turbines Coal-Based SECA Fuel Cell By 2015 Efficiency 50-60% (HHV) Capital* $1000/kW ($2002) Targets for plants w/o carbon capture Near-zero emissions *TPC=total plant cost (equipment, materials, labor, indirect constructon costs, engineering and contingencies)

15 Technology Time Sequence for Deployment Year of Pre-Commercial Demonstration 85% Capacity Factor 98% Carbon Conversion Base 40% (HHV) $1700/kW Dry Feed Warm Gas Cleanup -ITM - F Class Turbine w/low NOx Burner - Chemical Looping: H 2 - Adv. Gas Cleanup: Multi-Control Advanced H 2 Membranes -SOFC -Advanced Syngas Turbine -O 2 Fired Turbine -Chemical Looping: Gasification Timeline TARGET: 45-50% Efficiency (HHV) $ /kW* ($2006) *TCR (equivalent to TPC of $1000/kW in 2002 dollars) TARGET: 50-60% Efficiency (HHV) $ /kW ($2006)

16 Capital Cost Timeline Capital Cost Change from Non-capture Baseline ($/kw) Baseline Dry Feed Baseline Dry Feed Warm Gas Cleaning; 85% CF Warm Gas Cleaning; 85% CF Refractories ITM Refractories 7FB with SCR ITM Without CO 2 Capture With CO 2 Capture Advanced Syngas Turbine; 90% CF Advanced 90% CF Syngas Turbine SOFC Year of Pre-Commercial Demonstration

17 Efficiency Change from Non-capture Baseline (% points, HHV) Efficiency Timeline Warm Gas Cleaning Dry Feed Baseline Baseline Dry Feed Without CO 2 Capture Refractories ITM 7FB with SCR Warm Gas Cleaning ITM Refractories Advanced Syngas Turbine Year of Pre-Commercial Demonstration 90% CF SOFC Advanced Syngas Turbine; 90% CF With CO 2 Capture

18 COE Timeline 20 COE Change from Non-capture Baseline ($/MWh) Baseline Baseline Dry Feed Refractories Dry Feed Warm Gas Cleaning With CO 2 Capture Warm Gas Cleaning ITM Refractories 7FB w/ SCR ITM Without CO 2 Capture Advanced Syngas Turbine; 90% CF Advanced Syngas Turbine 90% CF SOFC Year of Pre-Commercial Demonstration

19 Benefits Projection to 2030

20 Considering Future Scenarios in National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) Business as Usual (BAU) The Current Regulatory Framework is considered as a business as usual scenario and is based on EIA s AEO Reference Case Carbon Constraint CC Equivalent to stabilizing U.S. carbon emissions at 2001 levels by Scenarios High Fuel Prices (HFP) Assumes higher world oil prices and constrained natural gas supplies, resulting in higher natural gas prices

21 Translating R&D to Commercial Application Year of Pre-Commercial Demonstration 85% Capacity Factor 98% Carbon Conversion Base 40% (HHV) $1700/kW* Dry Feed Warm Gas Cleanup -ITM - F Class Turbine w/low NOx Burner - Chemical Looping: H 2 - Adv. Gas Cleanup: Multi-Control Advanced H 2 Membranes -SOFC -Advanced Syngas Turbine -O 2 Fired Turbine -Chemical Looping: Gasification Timeline Online Year TARGET: 45-50% Efficiency (HHV) $ /kW* TARGET: 50-60% Efficiency (HHV) $ /kW* *TCR in $2006

22 Advanced IGCC Provides Economic Benefits Additional 100 GW of advanced coal plants are built by 2030 IGCC performance follows R&D roadmap GW Cumulative Builds of Advanced Coal Plants BAU no R&D BAU with IGCC R&D HFP no R&D HFP with IGCC R&D HCC no R&D HCC w ith IGCC* R&D GW GW $20 - $63 billion (NPV) in consumer energy cost savings by 2030 Advanced IGCC technologies reduce average COE in all scenarios by about 5% Average Annual COE in 2030, cents/kwh Business-As-Usual (BAU) High Fuel Price (HFP) High Carbon Cap (HCC) Without FE R&D With FE IGCC* R&D *Cumulative builds under the HCC represent Advanced Coal equipped with Sequestration builds.

23 Advanced IGCC Keeps Coal in the Mix in a Carbon Constrained Future Without FE R&D in 2030 Carbon constraint shifts power production to more expensive renewable and nuclear options <1%Fuel Cells 40% Renewables 2% PC 20% Nuclear 6% IGCC w/seq 28% NGCC 4% Comb. Turb./Diesel Avg COE = 10.4 /kwh IGCC equipped with carbon capture allows coal to play a key role Lower cost option reduces electricity prices With FE R&D in % Renewables 1% PC 20% IGCC w/seq 26% NGCC Avg COE = 9.9 /kwh >100 GW of advanced coal with sequestration plants are built by % Nuclear 3% Comb. Turb./Diesel

24 Advanced IGCC Plants Reduce CO 2 Intensity 950 CO2 Emissions per Capacity of Electric Generation Metric tons CO2/MWh While While fossil fossil fuel fuel electric electric generation generation increases increases with with FE FE R&D, R&D, CO2 CO2 emissions emissions per per capacity capacity continue continue to to decrease decrease annually annually By By 2030, 2030, CO2 CO2 reductions reductions range range from from to156 to156 metric metric tons/mwh, tons/mwh, compared compared to to cases cases without without FE FE R&D R&D BAU no R&D BAU with IGCC R&D HFP no R&D HFP with IGCC R&D HCC no R&D HCC with IGCC* R&D

25 Advanced Technologies for IGCC Significant Benefits for U.S. Consumers and the Economy Environment and the Economy Provides competitive coal options to adjust to growing domestic energy demand and new environmental challenges Consumer Cost Savings Provides clean energy from fossil fuel at an affordable price Energy Independence Provides diversity to fuel mix, flexibility in end-product options, and a pathway to a hydrogen economy

26 IGCC: Coal s Pathway to the Future Today s IGCC Technology As efficient as PC-supercritical Very clean BUT. Continued Need Need for for R&D R&D Capital cost ~20% higher than PC Lower availability than PC Higher COE than PC Advanced IGCC Technologies Significant improvements possible Efficiency, reliability, cost Carbon constrained world IGCC is cost-effective option to keep coal in mix Only option with feedstock flexibility to meet variety of future energy needs Fuels, chemicals, hydrogen economy

27 Acknowledgements NETL Juli Klara, Jared Ciferno, Mike Reed, John Wimer, Gary Stiegel, Sean Plasynski RDS Team Ron Schoff, Pam Capicotto, Mike Rutkowski, Vlad Vaysman, Tom Buchanan, Massood Ramezan, Mark Woods, John Haslbeck, Lindsay Green, Jay Ratafia-Brown Mitretek Team David Gray, Glen Tomlinson, John Plunkett, Sal Salerno, Charles White

28 Thank You!

29

30 Business as Usual (BAU) Assumes current regulatory structure as defined in EIA s AEO2005

31 High Fuel Price (HFP) Natural gas supply in the U.S. is restricted. Construction of an Alaska natural gas pipeline beyond 2025 delayed. Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin gas supplies by 25 percent reduced. Mackenzie Delta development delayed. No new LNG facilities in U.S. Non-U.S. LNG facilities do not expand. LNG supply prices increase. Oil prices are set according to the method used in the EIA s AEO 2005 High World Oil Price Case adjusted to achieve price targets.

32 Carbon Constraint Considers all sectors of the economy Uses cap-and-trade for entire energy sector Not tied to a regulatory proposal U.S. carbon emissions were reduced to approximately 5793 MMT CO2 per year by 2017 After 2017, cap was held constant Equivalent to stabilizing U.S. carbon emissions at about 2001 levels

33 Current Technology IGCC Power Plant * Sulfur Cryogenic ASU Oxygen Coal Gasifier *GE/Texaco *CoP/E-Gas *Shell Steam Syngas Cooler/ Quench Particulate Removal Steam Water Gas Shift Syngas Cooler 2-Stage Selexol Sulfur Recovery Emission Controls: PM: Water scrubbing to to get get lb/mmbtu NOx: N 2 dilution 2 to to Btu/scf LHV to to get O 2 2 SOx: AGR removal of of sulfur to to 30ppmv in in syngas Claus plant with with tail tail gas gas recycle to to Selexol for for >99% S recovery Hg: Hg: Activated Carbon beds for for ~90% removal Advanced F-Class CC CC Turbine --232MWe (42% LHV) Steam Conditions psig/1050 F/1050 F psig/1000 F/1000 F with CO2 capture Fuel Gas 450 Psia 200 Btu/scf Reheat/ Humid. Combined Cycle Power Island CO2 CO2 Comp. CO2 2,200 Psia * Orange Blocks Indicate Unit Operations Added forco2 Capture Case

34 Syngas Composition Affects Relative Performance Pressure (Psia) GE 800 E-Gas 560 Shell 560 Design: Haldor Topsoe SSK Sulfur Tolerant Catalyst Up to 99% CO Conversion H 2 O/CO = 2.3 (Project Assumption) Overall ΔP = ~30 psia H 2 O/CO Ratio Steam Steam GE 1.3 E-Gas 0.4 Shell o F 450 o F 500 o F 450 o F 455 o F Cooling Relative HP* Steam Flow Steam Turbine Output (MW) H 2 O + CO CO 2 + H 2 GE E-Gas Shell *High Pressure Steam

35 Current Technology Pulverized Coal Power Plant* * Orange Blocks Indicate Unit Operations Added for CO2 Capture Case Steam to Econamine FG+ Power Flue Gas CO 2 2,200 Psig Steam Air Coal PC Boiler (With SCR) Bag Filter ID Fans Wet Limestone FGD Steam Ash PM Control: SOx Control: FGD to to get get lb/mmbtu (98% removal) NOx Control: LNB + OFA + SCR to to maintain 0.07 lb/mmbtu Mercury Control: Co-removal in in SCR and and FGD with with activated Bag Bag House to to get get lb/mmbtu (99.8% removal) carbon beds for for polishing if if needed (~90% removal) Steam Conditions (PC) psig/1050 F/1050 F Steam Conditions (SCPC) psig/1100 F/1100 F

36 Current Technology Natural Gas Combined Cycle* * Orange Blocks Indicate Unit Operations Added for CO2 Capture Case Natural Gas Direct Contact Cooler HRSG Air Combustion Turbine Blower Cooling Water Stack Gas Reboiler Steam Condensate Return MEA Stack CO2 Compressor CO psig NOx Control: Steam Conditions psig/1050 F/950 F LNB + SCR to to maintain % O2 O2