Eastman Gasification Overview. March 22, 2005

Similar documents
The Cost of Mercury Removal in an IGCC Plant

Pre-Commercial Demonstration of High Efficiency, Low Cost Syngas Cleanup Technology for Chemical, Fuel, and Power Applications

Gasification Combined Cycles 101. Dr. Jeff Phillips EPRI

Comparison of a New Warm-Gas Desulfurization Process versus Traditional Scrubbers for a Commercial IGCC Power Plant

The ARK Reformer. Animal Litter. Synthetic Crude Oil Synthesis Gas (SynGas) Fertilizer Biomass. Solid Waste. Waste to Fuel

CO 2 Capture: Impacts on IGCC Plant Performance in a High Elevation Application using Western Sub-Bituminous Coal

Gasification & Water Nexus

Fossil Energy. Fossil Energy Technologies. Chapter 12, #1. Access (clean HH fuel) Coal. Air quality (outdoor)

Focus on Gasification in the Western U.S.

Repowering Conventional Coal Plants with Texaco Gasification: The Environmental and Economic Solution

Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants

GE Energy. IGCC vs. Carbon

Advanced Coal Power Plant Water Usage

Pre-Combustion Technology for Coal-fired Power Plants

Geothermic Fuel Cell Applications in Coal Coal Gasification---Coal to Liquids (Summary Highlights)

Ronald L. Schoff Parsons Corporation George Booras Electric Power Research Institute

Production of Electricity and/or Fuels from Biomass by Thermochemical Conversion

Syntroleum Coal to Liquids Integrating Gasification, Fischer-Tropsch and Refining Technology. CTL Forum, Beijing China June 15-16, 2006

Co-Production of Fuel Alcohols & Electricity via Refinery Coke Gasification Ravi Ravikumar & Paul Shepard

Perspective on Coal Utilization Technology

IGCC & Gasification for a Changing Marketplace

UPDATE ON THE KEMPER COUNTY IGCC PROJECT Gasification Technologies Conference

APPLICATION OF BGL GASIFICATION OF SOLID HYDROCARBONS FOR IGCC POWER GENERATION

Transforming American Industry through Alternative Materials. MARK COSTA Senior Vice President Corporate Strategy and Marketing

Customizing Syngas Specifications with E-Gas Technology Gasifier

PRECOMBUSTION TECHNOLOGY for Coal Fired Power Plant

COAL POWER PLANTS WITH CO 2 CAPTURE: THE IGCC OPTION

Improving Flexibility of IGCC for Harmonizing with Renewable Energy - Osaki CoolGen s Efforts -

2014 Gasification Technologies Conference Washington, DC Oct UOP LLC. All rights reserved.

Workshop on Gasification Technologies March 2-3, 2006 Tampa, Florida

THE FUTURE OF INDIANA COAL

Polk Power Key Lessons for IGCC Gasification Technologies Conference October 15, 2015

Gasification Incentives

GTC Tour. Coffeyville Resources Nitrogen Fertilizer. June 17, 2008

COAL-FIRED POWER PLANT PLANNING ASSUMPTIONS

1. Process Description:

Mr. Daniel has authored a gasification patent and represents GE on the Gasification Technologies Council.

Production of Electric Power and Chemicals in a Carbon Constrained Environment

CALCIUM LOOPING PROCESS FOR CLEAN FOSSIL FUEL CONVERSION. Shwetha Ramkumar, Robert M. Statnick, Liang-Shih Fan. Daniel P. Connell

Available online at Energy Procedia 1 (2009) (2008) GHGT-9. Sandra Heimel a *, Cliff Lowe a

Engineers India Limited Multi product generation from Coal via gasification

EASTMAN CHEMICAL COMPANY KINGSPORT PLANT CHEMICALS FROM COAL OPERATIONS. Presented at the Gasification Technologies Conference

Addressing Tomorrow s Challenges Today

Status and Outlook for CO 2 Capture Systems

GE Energy. Advancements in Gasification Technology Allan Connolly, General Manager of Gasification Technology October 12, 2005

NOx CONTROL FOR IGCC FACILITIES STEAM vs. NITROGEN

Advanced Coal Technology 101

Evaluation of Hydrogen Production at Refineries in China. The new UOP SeparALL TM Process. Bart Beuckels, UOP NV

RTI/Eastman Warm Syngas Clean-up Technology: Integration with Carbon Capture

The Role of Engineering Simulation in Clean Coal Technologies

THE WABASH RIVER IGCC PROJECT REPOWERING COAL FIRED POWER PLANTS

Development status of the EAGLE Gasification Pilot Plant

WITH CO2 SEQUESTRATION

- The Osaki CoolGen Project -

FT-GTL UNLOCKS VALUE FROM NATURAL GAS

Fischer Tropsch Catalyst Test on Coal-Derived Synthesis Gas

Coal Gasification. Sankar Bhattacharya. Energy Technology Collaboration Division International Energy Agency, Paris INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY

RTI Warm Syngas Cleanup Technology Demonstration

Performance Evaluation of a Supercritical CO 2 Power Cycle Coal Gasification Plant

The Progress of Osaki CoolGen Project

U.S. Liquid Transport Fuels

2013 Instituto Petroquímico Argentino (IPA) Conference 09 October 2013 Buenos Aires, Argentina

ConocoPhillips Gasification Outlook. Gasification Technology and IGCC Programs & Progress

Highlights of CO 2 Capture. Robert Williams CMI Annual Meeting 10 February 2008

GreatPoint Energy International Advanced Coal Technologies Conference June 2010

Tony Alderson & Steve Mabey Jacobs Consultancy

Carson Hydrogen Power

GASIFICATION TECHNOLOGIES 2003

IMPROVED PERFORMANCE OF THE DESTEC GASIFIER Gasification Technologies Conference

Enabling a Brighter Tomorrow: E-Gas TM Gasification

Thermodynamic performance of IGCC with oxycombustion

Efficient and Environmentally Sound Use of Our Domestic Coal and Natural Gas Resources

Carson Hydrogen Power

Lurgi s MPG Gasification plus Rectisol Gas Purification Advanced Process Combination for Reliable Syngas Production

A LEADING PROVIDER OF CLEAN ENERGY SOLUTIONS

ENABLING SYNTHESIS OF BIOBASED CHEMICALS & FUELS

Sweeny Gasification Project February 8, 2010

Canadian Clean Power Coalition: Clean Coal Technologies & Future Projects Presented to. David Butler Executive Director

Waste Minimization Branch U.S. EPA Office of Solid Waste

Nuclear Hydrogen for Production of Liquid Hydrocarbon Transport Fuels

The Hydrogen Energy California (HECA) Project

A Parametric Investigation of Integrated Gasification Combined Cycles with Carbon Capture

Technical Aspects of Clean Hydrogen Production

GTL. and Edited and Revised 2016 by H M Fahmy

Research and Development Initiatives of WRI

with Physical Absorption

GASIFICATION for COMBINED PRODUCTION OF ELECTRIC POWER AND CHEMICALS

Abstract Process Economics Program Report 180B CARBON CAPTURE FROM COAL FIRED POWER GENERATION (DECEMBER 2008 REPUBLISHED MARCH 2009)

Case Study Development Experience with the Mesaba Energy Project: Permitting and Environmental Review

The Enerjetik RJ2 Gasifier. Do we finally have the right gasifying system for the Ceramic Industry?

Capture-Ready Coal Plants - Options, Technologies and Economics

Pressurized Oxy-Combustion An Advancement in in Thermal and Operating Efficiency for Clean Coal Power Plants. Jan, 2013

The CCG Technology of CHOREN

UOP Selexol TM Technology Applications for CO 2 Capture

An Opportunity for Methanol; the Production Starting from Coal

Carbon To X. Processes

Oxy-Fuel Combustion Using OTM For CO 2 Capture from Coal Power Plants

Coal to Liquids at Sasol Kentucky Energy Security Summit CAER s 30 th Anniversary 11 October P Gibson Sasol Technology R&D

Energy Procedia 4 (2011) Energy Procedia 00 (2010) GHGT-10

Testing and Feasibility Study of an Indirectly Heated Fluidized-Bed Coal Gasifier

Transcription:

Eastman Gasification Overview March 22, 2005

hfounded in 1920 as part of Eastman Kodak - wood to methanol plant hspun off from Kodak - January 1, 1994 happroximately $6 B in annual sales hheadquarters - Kingsport, TN hmanufacturing sites around the world

Gasification 101 Just the Basics C + O 2 + H 2 O CO + H 2 Carbon + Oxygen + Water Carbon Monoxide + Hydrogen The partial oxidation of carbon to produce a "synthesis" gas Gasification is not combustion!

Gasification Basics Slurry Prep Coal/Petcoke Water Coal/Petcoke Slurry 55% - 70% Solids

Gasification Basics Air Separation Oxygen Oxygen feed to gasifier 95% to 99+% purity Cryogenic distillation -180 Deg C ASU Nitrogen Argon Air Compressor Co-production of N 2 and Ar for liquid sales, NO X control, general inerting

What is Gasification? Oxygen Controlled Chemical Reaction Up to 1,000 psig or more Nominal 2,600 Deg F Coal or Petcoke Water Products (syngas): CO (Carbon Monoxide) H 2 (Hydrogen) [CO/H 2 ratio can be adjusted] By-products: H 2 S (Hydrogen Sulfide) Gas Clean-Up Before Product Use! CO 2 (Carbon Dioxide) Slag (Minerals from coal)

What is Gasification? Oxygen Coal or Petcoke Water Controlled Chemical Reaction Up to 1,000 psig or more Nominal 2,600 Deg F Advantages of GE Gasification: Lowest capital cost and COE (Quench) Straight forward design (Quench) Products (syngas): Gas ready for shifting (Chemicals/H 2 /CO 2 Seq.) CO (Carbon Monoxide) High pressure operation (up to 1200 psig) H 2 (Hydrogen) High temp. gasification/vitrified slag [CO/H 2 ratio can be adjusted] More experience (60 installed sites) For higher efficiency, HP Steam By-products: Quench/Radiant or Radiant + Convective H 2 S (Hydrogen Sulfide) Gas Clean-Up Before Product Use! CO 2 (Carbon Dioxide) Slag (Minerals from coal)

Gasification Basics Gas Cooling Hot Syngas Steam Steam Turbine or process heating Cool Syngas BFW Water/Gas Separator Water, recycled

AGR Technologies Can Provide Near 100% Sulfur Removal If Required "Clean Syngas" CO, H 2 Clean Solvent (AGR = Acid Gas Removal) Three Main Technologies: MDEA (methyldiethanolamine) Chemical absorption, 98% to 99+% S removal, large CO 2 slip (unless use a second stage for CO 2 recovery), moderate operating temperature, lowest AGR capital cost Dirty Solvent "Dirty Syngas" CO,H 2,CO 2,H 2 S Selexol tm (primarily dimethyl ethers of polyethylene glycol, DEPE) Physical absorption, 99+% S removal, variable CO 2 slip (based on design), higher AGR cost than MDEA but overall AGR/SRU system costs are similar Rectisol tm (methanol) - Physical absorption, 99.5% to 99.9+% S removal, complete CO 2 removal possible, highest AGR cost, coldest operating temperatures

Air Air Separation Gasification Basics Oxygen N2 Steam Compressor Ar Cooling/Stm Gen Petcoke or Coal Water Slurry Prep CO H 2 H 2 S Clean, Dry Syngas Solvent/ Absorbent CO 2 Gasification Vitrified Slag Gas Clean-up

So what can you do with CO and H2? Syngas Building Blocks for Chemical Industry Transportation Fuels Clean Electricity

NGCC: Natural Gas Combined-Cycle Plant Natural Gas Air Combustion Turbine Steam CO 2 Most new power plants in the United States in the last 10 to 15 years have been natural gas based SteamTurbine Electricity

Integrated Gasification Combined-Cycle (IGCC): Replace NG Feed With Syngas Natural Gas X Air Combustion Turbine Steam CO 2 SteamTurbine Electricity Syngas from Coal/Petcoke Gasification (adjacent or via pipeline)

Integrated Gasification Combined-Cycle (IGCC) Air Separation Unit (ASU) Oxygen Gasification Block Air Slag Crude Syngas Volatile Mercury Pure Sulfur 90+% 98+% Removal Removal Gas Clean-Up Block Clean Syngas Eastman Coal Gas Facility Combined- Cycle Power Block Coal (or other Carbon Source) Water CO 2 Capture (ready for sequestration) Electricity Contaminants Removed Pre-Combustion!!!

What is IGCC? Air Separation Unit (ASU) CO2 Coal + Low Temp Gas Cooling Slurry O2 Flexibility for CO2 Sequestration (Concentrated Stream) Hg Removal 90+% Removal Shift Rx (option) CO/H2 H2O Acid Gas Removal Particulate Scrubber GE "Quench" Gasifier Sulfur Recovery Claus/Scot 98+% Removal Sulfur Steam Turbine Electricity Air Fines/Char HRSG PRE-COMBUSTION Treatment of Pollutants High pressure Low Volume Concentrated stream (easier to treat) Slag/Frit Combustion Turbine Compressed Air to ASU Electricity

Gasification-Based Polygeneration: Replace NG and/or Oil With Coal/Petcoke Natural Gas and/or Oil X Syngas from Coal/Petcoke Gasification (adjacent or via pipeline) Combined-Cycle Power Plant Chemical Facilities Electricity + Chemicals, Synfuels, Fertilizers, and/or Hydrogen

Air Separation Unit Gasification-Based Polygeneration (Ultimate Flexibility) CO2 Coal + Low Temp Gas Cooling Slurry O2 Mercury Removal Shift Reactor CO/H2 H2O Acid Gas Removal Particulate Scrubber Texaco "Quench" Gasifier Sulfur CO/H2 to chemical plant Tail Gas Recycle to C.T. Fines/Char CO2 Chemical Plant Steam Turbine Electricity Air HRSG Peak or backup fuel to C.T. Slag/Frit Sales Combustion Turbine Electricity

Polygeneration Potential of Gasification Naphtha Power & Steam Waxes Fischer- Tropsch Liquids Coal/Petcoke Gasification Synthesis Gas H 2 Iron Reduction Fuel/Town Gas Ammonia & Urea FT Diesel Car Fuel Methanol Dimethyl Ether VAM Acetic Acid Ketene Acetate Esters Methyl Acetate Ethylene & Propylene PVA Diketene & Derivatives Acetic Anhydride Oxo Chemicals Polyolefins

Benefits of Polygeneration Higher overall value creation Higher overall thermal efficiency and feedstock utilization Synergistic usage of low grade steam and waste streams Enhanced ability to load follow (intermediate vs. baseload operation) Higher employment for the community Enhanced reliability, with potential to store syngas as a liquid fuel

Trends Driving the Gasification Industry Steady Growing Demand for Electricity U.S. Energy Security/Diversity (Coal vs. NG) Growing Natural Gas (NG) Crisis Environmental Drivers (Cleanest Technology for Coal/Petcoke and Wastes) Growing Environmental and Financial Acceptance Flexibility to Face an Uncertain Future and to Open New Coal Markets

Growing Demand for Electricity Electric Power Demand - U.S. and China Steady demand growth of 1.5% to 2.0% still projected thru 2025 in U.S.; ~ 4.3% China demand growth. Demand (billion kwh's) 6000 5000 U.S. 4000 3000 China 2000 1000 0 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Source: EIA International Energy Outlook 2003 Year Historical average reserve margin ~20% Source: NERC 2004 Long-Term Reliability Assessment

Why Coal? The U.S. has lots of it U.S. recoverable reserves of 268 Billion tons = 250+ years of supply We can distribute it Existing infrastructure in rail, barge, mine mouth It costs less and is less volatile in price $0.75-1.75/MMBtu vs. > $4.00-6.00/MMBtu for NG We re familiar with it 50% of current U.S. power is from coal It broadens our national fuel portfolio Insulates against price and availability shock of oil and natural gas IGCC Delivers Fuel Diversity and Energy Security Slide provided by ChevronTexaco

Power Generation in the U.S. Coal is still dominant! Source: DOE Energy Information Administration

U.S. Natural Gas Supply How Much is Left? U.S. Nat gas reserves: Proven: 186.9 trillion cubic feet Unproven: 1150.5 trillion cubic feet Nat gas consumption: 27 trillion cubic feet/year (avg. over next 25 years) Years remaining at current usage: Proven reserves: 8.0 years Unproven reserves: 42.6 years Source: DOE Energy Information Administration 2005 Annual Energy Outlook http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/trend_4.pdf

NG Prices for the Past Year Approximate Gasification Breakeven NG Price

7 Drivers of Natural Gas Crisis Return to more normal winters after unusually mild recent winters Steep drop in U.S. natural gas production since early 2001 Continuing rapid growth in use of NG to produce electricity Rapid growth in number of gas-heated homes Declining imports from Canada Increasing exports to Mexico Andrew D. Weissman, Energy Ventures Group

Vast New NG Construction Program More than 184 GW of gas-fired capacity brought into service since 2000 Enough new generation to serve more than ½ of Europe!!! Average capacity factor of NGCC plants in 2003 was 32%, leaving over 3.3 Tcf/yr of overhang capacity for NG demand William Rosenberg, National Gasification Strategy

More drilling, but less production; More reliance on imported LNG

U.S. Coal Supply How Much Coal is Left? Coal Reserves: Demonstrated Reserve Base: 508 billion tons Estimated % Recoverable: 54% Estimated recoverable: 268 billion tons 2003 Production: 1.072 billion tons Source: DOE Energy Information Administration US Coal Reserves 1997 and 2003 Updates http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/reserves/chapter3p1.html Years remaining at current levels: 250 years Other source: National Mining Association http://www.nma.org/pdf/c_most_requested.pdf

Coal needs to return as a key feedstock and energy source in the U.S.!!! Gasification is the technology of choice for converting coal to clean and efficient power, chemicals, fertilizers, and fuels.

Why Gasification? It is the cleanest coal/petcoke technology Inherently lower SO X, NO X, and PM Lowest collateral solid wastes and wastewater Potential for lowest cost removal of mercury and CO 2 It is proven technology 21+ years of successful commercial operation at Eastman Multiple commercial IGCC s (e.g., TECO Polk, Wabash) It is becoming increasingly competitive Capital cost at parity with other clean coal and dropping Lowest dispatch cost of all fossil fuel technologies It is gaining acceptance Gaining support of environmental groups (e.g., NRDC, CATF) Numerous state and federal initiatives and incentives It provides great promise for the future Flexible feedstocks, process options, and products Opens new markets for coal (synfuels, chemicals, fertilizers) It provides the only feasible bridge from coal to hydrogen (directly converts coal/petcoke to hydrogen)

Why Gasification? Lowest Air Emissions (approaching NGCC) Power Plant Typical Emissions by Technology Type 0.5 lb/mmbtu 0.45 0.4 0.35 0.3 0.25 0.2 0.15 0.41 0.31 0.15 0.17 0.165 IGCC Upside Potential: Mercury Removal CO Sequestration 2 (at fraction of cost for PC) NOx SO2 Particulates 0.1 0.05 0 0.027 Traditional PC Retrofit Older PC's w/scrubbers & SCR (using low-s Coal) 0.085 0.02 0.018 Advanced PC/SCPC/CFB 0.057 0.053 0.019 0.013 0.015 0.007 0.004 0.01 0.002 IGCC w/mdea Absorber Type of Power Plant IGCC w/rectisol & SCR NGCC w/scr New NPRC/JGC IGCC is achieving < 2 ppm NO X and < 1 ppm SO 2!!! Basis: ChevronTexaco White Paper (3/03), DOE Report (5/99), and Recent EPA Permit Data

IGCC: Lowest Collateral Wastes CaCO 3 + SO 2 + ½O 2 => CaSO 4 +CO 2 [~ 2-4% add'l CO 2 ] 700 Lb/MW-hr (Dry Basis) 600 500 400 300 200 100 Sludge ~ 5X Sulfur Byproducts Sludge Useful Sulfur Leachable Leachable Vitrified 0 Pulverized Coal Circulating Fluid Bed IGCC Slag/ Ash Sludge Sulfur CO2 No No Add l CO CO 2 Associated 2 with with Sulfur Removal for for IGCC Slide provided by G.E. Power Systems

~ 30% - 40% Less Water Usage with IGCC DOE Report "Major Environmental Aspects of Gasification-Based Power Generation Technologies", December 2002

Vapor-Phase Mercury Removal Demonstrated for 21 years at Eastman!

IGCC: Low-Cost Option for Mercury Control An order of magnitude less expensive for IGCC (COE = Cost of Electricity) Technology Mercury (Hg) removal location Relative volumetric gas flow Cost of Hg removal, $/MWh Fraction of COE Cost of removal, $/pound Hg IGCC Syngas (ahead of AGR) 1.0 $0.254/MWh < 1% $3,412/pound PC Stack gas 160 $3.10/MWh ~ 9% $37,800/pound DOE Report, "The Cost of Mercury Removal in an IGCC Plant", September, 2002

IGCC: Low-Risk Option for Carbon Capture IGCC Minimizes Capital Cost Penalty of CO 2 Capture DOE Report "Major Environmental Aspects of Gasification-Based Power Generation Technologies", December 2002

Proven Technology First U.S. commercial coal gasification facility in 1983 at Eastman Chemical Company First IGCC plant demonstrated in 1984 at Cool Water site in California. 14 current IGCC plants globally, including TECO s Polk Plant and Global Energy s Wabash Plant. (~ 130 total global gasifiers) Eastman has achieved world-class success in coal gasification for over 21 years.

Economic Drivers for IGCC IGCC Economic Project Drivers 560 MW Plant Elec. Price (+/- 20%) Critical Drivers Capex (+/- 20%) Reliability (+/- 10%) Coal Price (+/- 20%) Heat Rate (+/- 20%) O & M (+/- 20%) -250-200 -150-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 NPV Change from Baseline, $M

IGCC Economics are Increasingly Competitive EPC Capital Costs Near Parity with PC Plants: Capital costs of pulverized coal plants have been increasing to ~ $1100-1400/KW as emissions requirements have tightened. Capital costs of IGCC have been falling (currently projected as ~ $1200-1400/KW) as multiple plants are built and improved, with considerable additional downward potential. Lowest Dispatch Costs: IGCC Dispatch Costs (fuel + variable O&M + environmental costs + consumables) are the lowest of all fossil fuel technologies.

IGCC Capital Cost Breakdown Combined Cycle Plant CT/HRSG/ST 43% AGR 7% Coal Prep 10% Gasifier Block 25% ASU 15% Potential to reduce total capital cost by re-fueling existing idle NGCC turbines

IGCC Capital Cost Improvement Recent Clean Coal PC Plants Target Range For IGCC x x Source: GE Power Systems, Power-Gen 2002 Presentation

Key Advantages of IGCC vs. PC Boilers Environmental: Inherently lower air, water, and solids emissions Pre-combustion treatment vs. post-combustion treatment enables easier and lower removal of pollutants Low-cost effective volatile mercury removal Much lower costs for CO 2 capture than with PC Efficiency: Combined cycle turbines or fuel cells vs. only steam turbines IGCC capital costs falling while efficiency increases; PC/SCPC capital costs increasing while efficiency falls Flexibility: Upgrade later at minimum cost for CO 2 sequestration, mercury removal, or to increase sulfur and NO x removal Ability to co-produce chemicals, fertilizers, fuels, or hydrogen Can handle variety of feedstocks including petcoke and biomass

Gasification Ready for Prime Time!! Competitive cost of electricity (superior dispatch cost - lowest for all fossil fuels) Exceptional environmental performance, including cost effective volatile mercury removal and potential for lowest-cost CO2 capture and sequestration Refueling of NGCC plants (replacing NG with coal) Production of hydrogen to fuel the coming economy (FutureGen Initiative) Promise of new markets for coal - potential for transformation of the chemical, fuels, and fertilizer industries Gasification is the future for coal!!!

Eastman s Experience with Gasification We were a pioneer in coal gasification First commercial U.S. coal gasification facility in 1983 Designated as ACS National Historic Chemical Landmark Industry leading operating performance > 98% on-stream time since 1984 < 1-2% forced outage rate Highest production rate per unit of capacity Single-train reliability of ~88-90% (~94% excl. refractory change) Excellent safety record Plantwide OSHA recordable rate of ~1.0 No lost time in gasification area in over 12 yrs Exceptional environmental performance Remove >99.9% of sulfur Patented sulfur-free start-up process Volatile mercury removal for over 21 years Continual process improvement Reduced maintenance costs 20-30% in past 6 years Patented feed injector designs for longer run life

ASU Air Products Steam Clean Syngas Syngas Conversion Air Compressor Hg Removal H 2 CO Coal N 2 /Ar Oxygen Shift Reactor Gas Clean-up (Rectisol) Acid Gases Water Grinding Rod Mill GE Gasifier (1 + Spare) Particulate Scrubber Sulfur Recovery CO/H 2 Separation (Cryogenic) Chemicals Acetic Anhydride Acetic Acid Methyl Acetate Methanol Flash drum CO 2 Lock Hopper Water recycle Sulfur Slurry Pump Solids Filtration Gasification at Eastman Basic Flow Diagram

Chemicals from Coal The Chemistry Syn Gas (CO + H2) Methanol Methyl Acetate Plant Methanol Plant Methyl Acetate Carbon Monoxide (CO) Carbonylation Plant Primary Reactions: CO + H 2 CH 3 OH (methanol) CH 3 OH + CO CH 3 COOH (acetic acid) CH 3 OH+ CH 3 COOH CH 3 CO 2 CH 3 (methyl acetate) CO + CH 3 CO 2 CH 3 (CH 3 CO) 2 O (acetic anhydride) Acetic Anhydride Acetic Acid

Eastman Chemicals from Coal The Big Picture It s likely you have used a product based on coal gasification from Eastman s facility! Coal Acetic Anhydride Acetic Acid Methanol Methyl Acetate Several major products are single-sourced from Eastman's coal gasification process!! Thus, reliability is critical!!!

Reliable Gasification Operation Yes, it can be done! The Devil is in the details.

On-Stream 98.0 % Eastman Operating Statistics Three-Year Cycle (09/01 09/04) including planned shutdown Unplanned 1.2% Not Needed 0.0% Planned 0.8% Industry-Leading Performance!!!

Eastman Operating Statistics One-Year Cycle (Sept 2002 - Sept 2003) On-Stream 98.9 % Planned 0.0% Unplanned 1.1% Not Needed 0.0%

Sustained Low Forced Outage Rate 10 Eastman Gasification Plant Historical Forced Outage Rate 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 Forced Outage Rate has Averaged < 2% since 1984!!! 2 1 0 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 % Forced Outage Rate

Industry Leading Gasifier Productivity!!! Continual Process Improvement Historical Syngas Production Rate 29 27 Annual loading factor = 127% 25 23 21 19 17 15 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Syngas Production BSCF Annual Capacity Loading Factor = annual production/(design at full rates x 365 days/yr)

Safety Plantwide OSHA recordable injury rate ~ 1.0 [Equates to one injury in over 15 years for a family of four!] [OSHA injuries = injuries that require more than minor 1 st aid] Last gasification area work day out case was over 12 years ago (sprained ankle stepping off a curb) Plant site received Tennessee OSHA Volunteer Star safety certification in 2001

Eastman Environmental Performance Cleanest U.S. coal gasification facility. Sulfur removal is > 99.9% (with Rectisol); <0.1 ppm sulfur in our syngas. Eastman has a patented sulfur-free start-up process (no SO 2 from flare). Eastman has practiced essentially complete vapor-phase mercury removal from syngas since our initial plant start-up. Excellent environmental record and reputation.

Market Needs/Concerns for Gasification High Capital Costs: need capital costs similar to other coal-based technologies Unfamiliarity to Utilities: gasifiers are more like chemical processes than boilers Time to Capacity: previous IGCC plants have taken too long (several years) to get to full design capacity Reliability Concerns: need acceptable reliabilities and availabilities for facilities (90+%) Financing of Projects: bankers need guarantees or assurances that gasifiers will perform well Economic and Environmental Uncertainties: uncertainties regarding economic recovery, Enron fall-out, natural gas price forecasts, energy bill tax incentives, and multi-pollutant legislation

Eastman s Value Proposition Market Need High Capital Costs Unfamiliarity to Utilities Time to Capacity Reliability Concerns Financing of Projects Economic & Environmental Uncertainties Eastman Value Creation Eastman helps owners make intelligent design choices Eastman knows gasification (21 yrs experience); O&M services Eastman's 21-yrs experience can enable faster start-ups Eastman has the best operating performance in the industry; offering O&M services Eastman can help offer adequate warranties Eastman works with industry and government to understand & plan for uncertainties

How Important is Reliability IGCC Economic Project Drivers 560 MW Plant Elec. Price (+/- 20%) Capex (+/- 20%) Reliability (+/- 10%) Coal Price (+/- 20%) Heat Rate (+/- 20%) O & M (+/- 20%) -250-200 -150-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 NPV Change from Baseline, $M

Eastman will help gasifier owners get more out of their plants, including faster start-ups and improved long-term availability and reliability World-class operational performance Intelligent design choices to limit capital costs Patented technology improvements Exceptional safety and environmental records Best partner for polygeneration options

Eastman s Value to Gasifier Owners Gasification Plant Start-up Schedule 120.0 $$$ 100.0 Capacity Factor (% of Design) 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 $$$ = --- Eastman Potential --- Min. Required for Project --- Industry Past History 0.0 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 2.50 Time from Mechanical Completion

Building on Past Success Eastman Gasification Services Company Service Offerings: h h h h h h A subsidiary of Eastman Chemical Company Operations, maintenance, and management contracts Technical services Critical spare parts fabrication Specific technology licensing Cooperative services agreement with ChevronTexaco/GE Project development

Don't leave your success to chance! Use Eastman Gasification Services!

Together we can realize the full potential of gasification!

QUESTIONS? www.gasificationservices.eastman.com