Capture 3 Post-Combustion Capture IEA GHG Summer School Perth, Western Australia, December 6-12 2015 Martin Oettinger 1
Outline Need for a retrofit option Post-combustion capture (PCC) Principles (of first generation PCC technologies) PCC Advantages Large PCC demonstration projects examples PCC Challenges/Issues 2 nd and 3 rd generation PCC technologies definitions and examples Technology Status Technical and Commercial maturity The challenge of timely scale-up for cost-effective PCC technology Achieving PCC maturity Technology Demonstration Pathways Summary 2 The presenter would like to specifically thank Prof Dianne Wiley (University of NSW), Glencore and ACALET for access to resources and feedback
Need For A Retrofit Option 471 GW of recently installed coal-fired generation capacity exists Installed total coal fired power capacity in all countries and breakdown by age and capacity 3 Source: IEA CCS Retrofit Analysis of the Globally Installed Coal-Fired Power Plant Fleet, 2012
Need For A Retrofit Option 1188 GW of conventional coal-fired generation in-construction or planned (much of it HELE technology) Top 10 Countries - GW Capacity of Coal-fired Units In Construction and Planned Total Top 10 = 1033 GW Total Top 10 = 87% of Global In Construction and Planned Global = 1188 GW 500.0 400.0 300.0 200.0 100.0 0.0 China India Indonesia Vietnam Turkey South Korea South Africa Philippines Pakistan Bangladesh CON (GW) 4 PLN (GW) Source: Platt s UDI WEPP database 2014 & Glencore
Need For A Retrofit Option 396 GW of conventional gas-fired generation in-construction or planned 80.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 Top 10 Countries - GW Capacity of Combined Cycle Gas-fired Units In Construction and Planned Total Top 10 = 234 GW Total Top 10 = 59% of Global In Construction and Planned Global = 396 GW 0.0 USA India China Turkey Egypt England & Wales Mexico Thailand Nigeria Indonesia CON (GW) PLN (GW) Source: Platt s UDI WEPP database 2014 & Glencore 5
Need For A Retrofit Option The recently installed conventional fossil fuel generation plant capacity is large The planned and in construction conventional fossil fuel generation plant capacity is even larger There is a need for carbon capture retrofit options to be applicable to this type of generation plant Post-combustion carbon capture technology has the capability to provide a retrofit option to this type of generation plant 6
Post-combustion Capture Absorption (First Generation) and Adsorption Processes Where the flue gases exiting a combustion plant are treated using chemical or physical sorbents to selectively remove CO 2 from the gas mixture The sorbents are then regenerated, using for example steam, to produce a concentrated CO 2 stream 7
2 x 660MW Supercritical PF Boiler Conventional Coal-fired No Capture 43% efficiency (HHV) 8 Source - Alstom
Generic PF Boiler PCC Target Stream for Treatment PCC Focus of treatment on combustion gases exiting boiler 9 Source Climate and Fuel
Post-combustion Capture from Power Generation Boiler Chemical Absorption Process 10 Source - ZEP
Post-combustion CO 2 Capture First Generation Technology Chemical Absorption Process 11
Post-combustion Capture First Generation Technology Chemical Absorption Process The chemical absorption process using amine chemical solvent for separating CO 2 from natural gas or flue gas was originally developed to be used by the gas processing industry or the food industry Reaction Mechanism (CO2 and Amine) CO2 + 2RR NH RR NH2 + + RR NCOO - CO2 + RR NH + H2O RR NH2 + + HCO 3 - CO2 + RR NCOO- + 2H2O RR NH2 + + 2HCO 3 - Upon heating the product, the bond between the absorbent and the CO 2 can be broken, yielding a stream enriched in CO 2 and a regenerated solvent ready to absorb more CO 2 The heat for the regeneration of the solvent is normally provided by low pressure steam which can be drawn from the steam cycle of the power generation plant, but at an energy penalty (to power produced) 12
Post-combustion Capture First Generation Technology Chemical Absorption Process The most commonly used solvent in the gas processing industry for scrubbing of CO 2 is Monoethanol Amine (MEA) MEA is a relatively low-cost solvent MEA has a high energy penalty for solvent regeneration MEA (without additives) has a high corrosion potential MEA is used as the benchmark for comparison of solvents A key performance measure for amine solvents is the regeneration energy requirement MEA (primary amine; 30%wt aqueous solution) ~4 GJ/t CO 2 State-of-the-art (proprietary amine solutions) ~2.5 GJ/t CO 2 13 Source: CSIRO, vendor data
Post-combustion Capture Advantages General Can be retrofitted to existing Pulverized Coal (PF) plants and Combined Cycle Gas Turbine (CCGT) plants allowing the continued operation of valuable resources Can be configured to treat only part of the flue gas stream In either new build or retrofit application it enables the continued deployment of the well established PF and CCGT technologies familiar to power industries worldwide The continued development of improved materials for Ultra Supercritical (USC) PF plants and Gas Turbines will increase the efficiency and reduce the CO 2 emissions of future PF and CCGT plants 14
Post-combustion Capture Advantages First Generation Technologies The widespread R&D on improved sorbents and capture equipment should reduce the energy penalty of PCC capture Near-commercial-scale demonstration of 1 st Gen PCC is proceeding The 110 MW / 1 MTPA CO 2 Boundary Dam large scale integrated project (LSIP) of Saskatchewan Power with PCC using the Shell Cansolv process commenced operation in 2014 Larger-scale demonstration of 1 st Gen PCC is under construction The 250 MW / 1.4 MTPA CO 2 Petra Nova large scale integrated project (LSIP) of NRG Power with PCC using the MHI KS-1 process commences operation in 2016 15
LSIP with Post-combustion CC(U)S Boundary Dam, Estevan, Saskatchewan, Canada Project type Industry Project focus Project status Commencing date Technical Details Storage/Utilisation Commercial Power Generation Capture, Transport, Storage Operational 2014 (operations) Post-combustion capture using Shell Cansolv amine technology Enhanced Oil Recovery Scale, CO 2 tpa 1,000,000 Scale, MWe Net 110 Cost ($ 2013) Partners CN$1.3B (CN$800M for CCS) Canadian Federal & Saskatchewan Government, Shell, Cenovus 16 Source: GCCSI, MIT
LSIP with Post-combustion CC(U)S Boundary Dam, Estevan, Saskatchewan, Canada CO 2 Capture Boundary Dam is using Shell Cansolv postcombustion capture technology (SO 2 capture then CO 2 capture using amines) 139MWe gross conventional pulverised coal power plant 110MWe Net (at 90% capture) 29MWe (21%) auxiliary load 85% plant availability CO 2 Storage 1 million tpa supercritical CO 2 transported by 66km pipeline Storage location: Enhanced oil recovery in the Weyburn Oil Field Some CO 2 is to be used at the Aquistore project 2 km away from power plant Estimated amount of CO 2 captured is 1 million tonnes per year (90% capture) 17 Source: GCCSI, MIT
LSIP with Post-combustion CC(U)S Petra Nova, Thompsons, Texas, USA Project type Industry Project focus Project status Commencing date Technical Details Storage/Utilisation Commercial Power Generation Capture, Transport, Storage Under construction 2016 (operations) Post-combustion capture using MHI KS-1 amine technology Enhanced Oil Recovery Scale, CO 2 tpa 1,400,000 Scale, MWe Net Cost ($ 2013) Partners 240 (equivalent as slipstream) US$1B US DoE, NRG, JX Nippon, MHI 18 Source: GCCSI, MIT
LSIP with Post-combustion CC(U)S Petra Nova, Thompsons, Texas, USA CO 2 Capture Petra Nova is using MHI KS-1 postcombustion capture technology 610MWe gross conventional pulverised coal power plant 240MWe (90% capture from slipstream) CO 2 Storage 1.4 million tpa supercritical CO 2 transported by 132km pipeline Storage location: Enhanced oil recovery in the West Ranch Oil Field, Jacksons County An external supply of heat and power for CCS (no heat / power from host plant) Capture unit has own utilities supply facility 85% plant availability Estimated amount of CO 2 captured is 1.4 million tonnes per year (90% capture) 19 Source: GCCSI, MIT
PCC Challenges 1 First Generation Technology Chemical Absorption Process Capital Cost Reduction Absorber equipment is key part of capital cost reduction challenge; improved absorbers and absorber internals technology are required for significant capital cost reduction outcomes Solvents and solvent degradation products can be corrosive; materials of construction selection needs to be carefully targeted for capital cost reduction (but not at the expense of unacceptably high maintenance costs) Scale-up Some amine processes are commercially available only at relatively small scale and considerable re-engineering and scale-up is needed Scaling up demonstration; development should go toward 5000 TPD CO 2 captured Absorber equipment is key part of scale-up challenge Operating Cost Reduction (Parasitic Energy and Solvent) The addition of capture with current amine technologies results in a loss of net power output of about 20-30% and a reduction of about 7-11 percentage points in efficiency; in the case of retrofit this would imply the need for replacement power to make up for the power loss Many sorbents need very pure flue gas to minimize sorbent usage and cost; typically < 10 ppmv or as low as 1 ppmv of SO 2 plus NOx is required depending on the particular sorbent (not Shell Cansolv first-stage solvent for SO 2 ) 20
PCC Challenges 2 First Generation Technology Chemical Absorption Process Environmental Water use is increased significantly with the addition of PCC particularly for water cooled plants where the water consumption with capture is nearly doubled per net MWh For air cooling the water consumption is also increased with capture by about 35% per net MWh Some solvents suffer degradation over time with management of solvent quality and plant operation important to appropriately control emissions of solvents and solvent degradation products in treated flue gas Plant Operation and Maintenance Steam extraction for solvent regeneration reduces flow to low-pressure turbine with significant operational impact on its efficiency and turn down capability Solvents and solvent degradation products can be corrosive; materials of construction selection needs to be carefully targeted for maintenance cost optimisation (but not at the expense of unacceptably high capital costs) Capture Plant Physical Footprint Plot space requirements are significant; the back-end at existing plants is often already crowded by other emission control equipment Extra costs may be required to accommodate PCC at some more remote location 21
Challenge Cost of Electricity Lessons from First Generation Technology Chemical Absorption Process With the addition of currently available carbon capture technology, the Levelised Cost Of Electricity (LCOE) produced is impacted in the following way: For coal-fired electricity, LCOE increases by 140%* For gas-fired electricity, LCOE increases by 60%* A key focus for post-combustion carbon capture technology development is to reduce the impact on LCOE of adding carbon capture This provides the opportunity to consider improved and alternative PCC Next Generation technology * Basis Australian Energy Technology Assessment 2012 BREE; carbon price effect removed 22
PCC Technology Generations Definitions Needed for Current (First) and Next Generation Technologies Currently available PCC technology at large scale (first generation technology) is based on chemical solvent absorption processes This technology requires further development to overcome challenges including reducing the impact on LCOE of adding carbon capture There are a range of other technology options that have been identified as alternatives to currently available solvent absorption PCC technology These technologies are at various stages of development, and can be categorised into different technology generations 23
Next Generation PCC Technologies Definitions Next Generation Technologies * Second Generation Technologies Technology components currently in research and development that: Will be validated and ready for demonstration in the 2020-2025 timeframe Result in a captured cost of CO 2 less than $40/tonne in the 2020-2025 timeframe Third Generation Technologies Transformational technologies include technology components in early development (including conceptual stages) that: Offer the potential for significant improvements in technology cost and performance Will be ready for scale-up in the 2016-2030 timeframe Will be ready for demonstration in the 2030-2035 timeframe 24 * Source: CSLF (2015) and US DoE (2015)
Next Generation PCC Technologies Examples of 2 nd and 3 rd Generation Technologies Post-combustion solvents Advanced conventional solvents Precipitating solvents Two liquid phase solvents Enzymes Ionic liquids Post-combustion sorbents Calcium looping systems Other sorbent looping systems Vacuum pressure swing adsorption (VPSA) Temperature swing adsorption (TSA) Post-combustion membranes and membrane-like processes Membranes (general) Polymeric membranes combined with low temperature separation Fuel cells Useful sources describing 2 nd and 3 rd generation PCC technologies IEA GHG have produced interim report 2014/TR4 Emerging CO 2 capture technologies and their cost reduction potential US DoE NETL Carbon Capture Program 25
Challenge Time & PCC Technology Variety Enhancements for or Alternatives to First Generation PCC An issue with PCC technology is that there are such a range of technologies and technology variants that have potential application for PCC: As improvements to first generation technologies Directly as second and third generation technologies With so many technology options that potentially could be applied to PCC, there is a risk of dilution of effort IEA GHG interim report 2014/TR4 mentions 16 technological approaches to improving post-combustion capture Too many choices and not enough money to drive the right PCC technology to required maturity..and then there is the time needed to drive the right PCC technology to required development maturity 26
Technologies Status Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) These steps are individually very expensive 27 Source: US DoE
Technology Status Commercial Readiness Levels (CRL) These steps are individually very expensive 28
Challenge Time To Achieve Required Technology Maturity, It Takes Time Technology demonstration in the 2030-2035 timeframe will require technology to have developed sufficient technical and commercial maturity In order to control development risk, there is a maximum realistic scale up (typically one order of magnitude) between successive demonstrations There will likely be insufficient time available to take a standalone immature technology to technical and commercial maturity in the 2030-2035 timeframe To achieve CRL-2 by 2030-2035 technology has to be at least at a TRL-6 level now 29
Challenge PCC Development Time Time to Develop New Technologies Actual example MHI KS-1 1990 bench scale 1991 2 TPD CO 2 pilot 1999 160 TPD CO 2 (nat gas flue gas) 2006 10 TPD CO 2 (coal flue gas) 2011 500 TPD CO 2 (coal flue gas) 2016 4700 TPD CO 2 (coal flue gas) 10 years from TRL-6 to start of TRL-9 trial on coal flue gas 30 Source: MHI
Achieving PCC Technology Maturity To Achieve Required Maturity, Need Large Scale Integrated Projects Demonstration of technical and commercial readiness of PCC technologies in full chain (e.g. capture, transport and storage) is crucial to confirm maturity to stakeholders before wide-scale deployment can occur Difficult to conceive of full-scale PCC projects able to be funded without inclusion of a sink for CO 2 (saline storage or EOR); activities associated with CO 2 sink often dominate overall schedule for project Individual demonstration projects typically require approximately ten years from inception to operational proving, which includes approximately five elapsed years to undertake the works from FID to operation 31
Achieving PCC Technology Maturity To Achieve Required Maturity, Establish Active Technology Demonstration Pathways To facilitate achievement of required PCC maturity, establishment of active Technology Demonstration Pathways (a coordinated succession of individual demonstration projects) could assist in the development process for PCC technologies to leverage their timely development Enhancements for first generation technologies need to have fit with one or more first generation Technology Demonstration Pathways to have leverage for gaining funding and development opportunity Second and third generation technologies either require their own Technology Demonstration Pathways or have fit with established first generation Technology Demonstration Pathways Key challenges to allow achievement of technical and commercial maturity of cost-effective PCC technologies (using Technology Demonstration Pathways) are a combination of: Time to achieve scale up Significant capex reduction of the technology, and Parasitic load reduction (increased efficiency) 32
Technology Demonstration Pathways Project Status Identification Some Terminology Project status is defined by colour-coded icon, which reflects the project maturity Construction is funded or project operational Large Scale Smaller Scale FEED is funded Concept under development Required project to meet 2030-2035 timeline 33
1-Gen NAM conventional coal 1-Gen NAM CCGT gas 1-Gen NAM "next of kind" coal 1-Gen NAM "Chinese facility" coal 1-Gen NAM "low cost capture"coal 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 Technology Demonstration Pathways Example - 1-Gen NAM Amine Solvent PCC Technology Development (with example development objectives) 1-Gen NAM Conventional coal power capture facility funded Operational 2014; 1 MTPA CO 2 capture (Nth American jurisdiction) 1-Gen NAM CCGT capture facility (gas) Operational 2019; use conventional coal lessons; lower cost 1-Gen NAM next-of-kind (coal) Operational ~2020; low capex absorber; larger scale; lower opex 1-Gen NAM Chinese capture facility (coal) Operational ~2025; Chinese (low cost) manufacturing; larger scale 1-Gen NAM low cost capture facility (coal) Operational ~2030; low cost manufacture; large scale; outcome <50% capex of 1-Gen conventional coal capex ($/kw) in Nth American jurisdiction 1-Gen NAM conventional coal 1-Gen NAM CCGT gas 1-Gen NAM "next of kind" coal 1-Gen NAM "Chinese facility" coal 1-Gen NAM "low cost capture"coal 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
Technology Demonstration Pathways Example - 1-Gen China Amine Solvent PCC Technology Development (with example development objectives) 1-Gen China capture facility (coal) funded Operational 2011; 0.12 MTPA CO 2 capture 1-Gen China next-of-kind (coal) Operational ~2020; coal facility lessons; larger scale 1-Gen China low cost capture facility (coal) Operational ~2025; low cost manufacture; large scale (>1 MTPA) Potential for smaller scale demonstration outside China ~2025 1-Gen China outside China facility (coal) Operational ~2030; low cost manufacture; large scale 1-Gen China conventional coal 1-Gen China "next of kind" coal 1-Gen China "Chinese facility" coal 1-Gen China "low cost capture"coal 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
Technology Demonstration Pathways Example - 2/3-Gen Adsorption PCC Technology Development (with example development objectives) 2/3-Gen Pilot capture facility (coal or gas) Operational 2016; 50 TPD CO 2 capture 2/3-Gen sub-commercial scale facility (coal or gas) Operational ~2020; Pilot lessons; >1000 TPD scale (equiv 0.3 MTPA) 2/3-Gen commercial scale facility (coal) Operational ~2025; sub-commercial lessons; ~1 MTPA 2/3-Gen Chinese capture facility (coal) Operational ~2030; Chinese (low cost) manufacturing; larger scale 2/3-Gen low cost capture facility (coal) Operational ~2035; low cost manufacture; large scale; outcome <40% cost of Pilot capture ($/T CO 2 ) in Pilot jurisdiction 2/3-Gen Pilot 2/3-Gen "sub-commercial" 2/3-Gen "commercial" coal 2/3-Gen "Chinese facility" coal 2/3-Gen "low cost capture"coal 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035
Summary Retrofit options for the substantial fleet of recent and planned coal and gas fired generators are required PCC provides such an option Current (first) generation PCC technology based on chemical (amine) absorption processes Large-scale demonstration of 1 st Gen PCC is in operation and under construction as integrated CC(U)S projects A large number of different next generation PCC technologies are under some form of development With so many technology options (at least 16) that potentially could be applied to PCC, there is a risk of dilution of effort Technology Demonstration Pathways (a coordinated succession of individual demonstration projects) could assist in the development process for costeffective PCC technologies to leverage their timely development Key challenges to allow achievement of technical and commercial maturity of PCC technologies (using Technology Demonstration Pathways) are a combination of: Time to achieve scale up Significant capex reduction of the technology, and Parasitic load reduction (increased efficiency) 37
Thank You Questions welcomed 38