Clean Coal Technology Research Indiana CCTR Advisory Panel Meeting Vincennes University September 6, 2007 University of Kentucky Center for Applied Energy Research Don Challman Associate Director & General Mgr Email: challman@caer.uky.edu Tel: 859/ 257-0222 Photo art: A. Benlow
Agenda Part 1 CAER Overview History Mission Resources Research Emphasis Photo art: A. Benlow
Agenda Part 2 Coal-to-Liquids Why CTL? Coal Input, Products Environ. Performance EASTERN AND WESTERN KENTUCKY COALS (With and without Carbon Capture) Photo art: A. Benlow
History Center opened 1977 30 th Anniversary Advertisement Originally supported synthetic transport fuels industry Expanded: electric power & emissions control, carbon materials, biofuels, electrochemical devices
Research and Development (R&D) Our Mission Service to Industry Teaching and Instruction
Resources Funding: 7-8 Million USD - 38% grants and contracts Research Staff Staff of about 100 (1/3 PhDs) Additional 25 students and faculty
Research Emphasis Applied engineering pilot/demo scale Resources - coal, oil shale, bio-fuels, H2 End-use - Electricity, fuels and chemicals, carbon materials At the plant mines, utilities, refineries, mill
Applied Research Mining - Coal Prep/Cleaning - Coal Slurry Ponds** - Mine Mapping Center Electric Power - Generation - Emissions Control** - Carbon Management - Beneficial Re-use of By-products (ash, slag, FGD, etc.)**
Applied Research Fuels, Chemicals & Materials - Coal-to-Liquids (CTL) Technologies** - Catalyst Research and Testing Center - Oil Shale Retorting - Carbon Materials** - Environmental Catalysis - Agricultural Bio-fuels** - Fuel Cells, Batteries and Devices
Coal Slurry Ponds Coarse waste shale/ rock Fine coal waste 508 KY Sites 650M tons potentially recoverable
Coal Fuel Briquettes Product Coal-equivalent fuel for power stations made of coal fines and saw dust Briquettes - 14,000 Btu/lb
Power Generation Cost Availability of Supply Reliability Environmental Compatibility - Carbon management at top of list Photo art: A. Benlow
Research directed to Lowering Energy Penalty of CO 2 Capture Options Post-Combustion Capture: PC + MEA (28-34%) Steam consumption for stripper: 20% of gross power output Booster fan and agent pump for MEA scrubber: 3-4% of gross power output Pre-combustion Capture: IGCC (total 15-24%) ASU + oxygen compression: 8-12% of gross power output Selexol CO 2 separation: 2% of gross power output In-situ Capture: Oxy-Fuel Combustion (total 22-32%) ASU: 15-20% of gross power output Flue gas recirculation: 2% of gross power output Possible CO2 further enrichment (unknown) ** Compression Train: 5-10% of gross power output
By-Products - Power Generation (Ash, Slag, FBC & FGD Materials) Large volume fly ash produced Ohio River Valley Area around Kentucky - 32 PCC plants - >7M tpy (1/2 from KY) 60% beneficial re-use some states/ky 20% Fly ash quality lower/declines due to pollution control (low-nox burners) and co-firing Requires upgrade to increase quality and use Additional by-products from scrubbers, FBC, IGCC require other handling
Current Uses for By-Products A $500,000,000 Kentucky Industry Roofing Granules from Cyclone Combustors 500,000 Tons From Kentucky Sources, $14,000,000 value $2.4 million in wages Concrete Additive from PCC Fly Ash Wallboard from Flue Gas Scrubbers 450,000 Tons From Two Kentucky Wallboard Plants $60,000,000 in Wages $190,000,000 Product Value 100,000 Tons From Kentucky Sources, $1.6 million value
Clean Fuels and Chemicals Started w/ direct coal liquefaction, oil shale retorting, product upgrading Emphasis on CTL and GTL catalysis - internationally-recognized catalyst center Shift to hydrogen optimization Bio-fuels Environmental catalysis
Coal Fuel Alliance Obama-Luger Amendment - Section 417, 2005 EPAct Improve research capabilities (6 slurry bubble column FT reactor/refinery for wax upgrading to fuels Focus on producing test fuels Labor force development - training engineers / operators *$9M capital/$1.5m annual operating.
Biomass Process Scheme Radius of Feasibility Current CAER Research Activities Briquetting and Agglomeration Resolution of technical obstacles impeding commercial production of briquetted fuels from coal and biomass wastes; Production of biomass briquettes as an alternative fuel Biomass gasification/ pyrolysis Biomass fast pyrolysis with in-situ catalyst to yield high-btu oils Biomass liquefaction On-Site Thermochemical Densification of Biomass Integrated biomass gasification to PC for green electricity generation Biochar as soil amendment and Hg sorbent
Graphite Carbon Materials R&D Pitch & Coke Fiber and Composites Nanotubes Active Carbons
Agenda Part 2 Coal-to-Liquids Why CTL? Coal Input, Products Environ. Performance EASTERN AND WESTERN KENTUCKY COALS (With and without Carbon Capture) Photo art: A. Benlow
Why CTL? Energy independence National security Improved balance of trade New industries/economic development Stabilize domestic fuel prices at pump Improved economic environment
U.S. Supply, Consumption & Imports Liquid Fuels/Other Petroleum (MBD) 30 History Projections 25 20 Consumption Net Imports 61% 15 60% 10 Domestic Supply 5 0 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Annual Energy Outlook 2007
Not Our Most Favored Trading Partners World Proved Oil Reserves (bil. barrels) Middle East 739 North America 213 Africa Central & South America Eurasia Asia Europe 33 16 114 103 99 World Total = 1,317 billion barrels 0 200 400 600 800 Oil & Gas Journal (Dec. 18, 2006)
Demand for CTL
Agenda Part 2 Coal-to-Liquids Why CTL? Coal Input, Products Environ. Performance EASTERN AND WESTERN KENTUCKY COALS (With and without Carbon Capture) Photo art: A. Benlow
Coal or FT Products
KY CTL Case Studies Case No. Capacity Configuration Coal Type BPD 1 10,000 No Carbon Capture 3 10,000 No Carbon Capture 5 10,000 With Carbon Capture E KY W KY E KY Source: Mitretek
Go to: Advertisement http://www.caer.uk y.edu/newsroom/n ews2007/hb299- Report-CTL- SNGTechnologies 2007.pdf
Capital Equip Cost (MM$) Case 1 Case 3 Case 5 10,000 BPD E KY w/o CC 10,000 BPD W KY w/o CC 10,000 BPD E KY w/ CC Gasifier 153 153 153 Syngas Cleaning 127 128 127 Air Separation 85 88 85 Fischer-Tropsch 97 97 97 Power/Heat Recovery 87 88 87 Balance of Plant 196 209 211 Total 745 763 760 Source: Mitretek
Total Capital Cost (MM$) Case 1 Case 3 Case 5 10,000 BPD E KY w/o CC 10,000 BPD W KY w/o CC 10,000 BPD E KY w/ CC Home Office 63 65 65 Process Contingency 34 34 36 Project Contingency 42 42 43 License Fees 25 25 25 Financing/Legal 25 25 25 Non-depreciable Capital 32 32 32 Capital Equip 745 763 760 Total 966 988 986 Source: Mitretek
Capital Cost ($) w/ Size 10,000 BPD $1 Billion 30,000 BPD $2.5 Billion 60,000 BPD $4 Billion 100,000 BPD $5-6 Billion
Operating Cost/Yr (MM$) Case 1 Case 3 Case 5 10,000 BPD E KY w/o CC 10,000 BPD W KY w/o CC 10,000 BPD E KY w/ CC Royalties 4 4 4 Coal Feed 56 54 56 Catalyst/Chemicals, Materials/Maintenance 19 19 19 Labor/Overhead 18 18 18 Adm., Tax, Insurance 21 22 21 Gross Operating 118 117 118 Byproduct Credit 1 5 1 Net 117 112 117 Source: Mitretek
Coal Input and Products Case 1 Case 3 Case 5 10,000 BPD E KY w/o CC 10,000 BPD W KY w/o CC 10,000 BPD E KY w/ CC Coal Feed (TPD) 4,844 5,438 4,844 Naptha (BPD) 3,507 3,507 3,507 Diesel (BPD) 7,495 7,495 7,495 Parasitic Power (MWe) 132 143 148 Power Sales (MWe) 52 44 37 Sulfur (TPD) 37 180 37 Source: Mitretek
Coal Feed (TPD) w/ SIZE 10,000 BPD 5000 TPD 30,000 BPD 15,000 TPD 60,000 BPD 30,000 TPD 100,000 BPD 50,000 TPD
Economic Summary Case 1 Case 3 Case 5 10,000 BPD E KY w/o CC 10,000 BPD W KY w/o CC 10,000 BPD E KY w/ CC Capital ($/DB) 87,814 89,733 89,623 Capital 36.06 36.84 36.80 O&M 18.57 17.66 18.57 Coal 16.95 16.31 16.95 Power Credit 4.44 3.76 3.16 Total 67.13 67.05 69.16 RSP ($/B COE) 51.64 51.58 53.20 Source: Mitretek
$100 World Oil Price, 1980-2030 (2005 dollars per barrel) History Projections $80 High Price $60 Reference $40 Low Price $20 $0 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 Annual Energy Outlook 2007
Coal Input vs. Emissions Coal Feed (TPD) CO2 Captured (TPD) CO2 Released (TPD) SOx Released (TPD) NOx Released (TPD) Case 1 Case 3 Case 5 10,000 BPD E KY w/o CC 10,000 BPD W KY w/o CC 10,000 BPD E KY w/ CC 4,844 5,438 4,844 0 0 7,249 7,990 8,272 744.007.0031.007.4622.463.462 Source: Mitretek
Fuel Quality
CTL Carbon Footprint
Questions?