From a pilot solar reactor to an industrial plant, Process analysis and cost issues SOLHYCARB Event, Odeillo, 28 September, 2009
Overview CSP Options How to achieve very high temperatures SOLHYCARB Pilot Reactor as basis for Scale-up Preliminary Economic Analysis Invest O&M Revenues Hydrogen Production Summary and Outlook Slide 2
CSP - Concentrating Solar Power Parabolic Trough & Linear Fresnel Solartower Central Receiver Dish (Stirling) Slide 3
Achievable Temperature 390 C Parabolic Trough - State of the art: SEGS-Plants Heat transfer medium: Thermal oil (Therminol VP1) Live steam parameter 370 C bar Cycle efficiency 37% Backup Options: Thermal energy storage Auxilliary vessel Fuels Natural gas Oil Status 354 MW in operation in Mojave desert (USA) 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 [ C] Component supplier: Abengoa, Bechtel, Centrosolar Glas, Solel, Schott Rohrglas 0 Slide 4
565 C Turmkraftwerke Central Receiver Plants: Molten salt receiver 800 [ C] Receiver heat transfer fluid: Molten nitrate salt 700 Maximum live steam parameter: 535 C bar 600 Backup Options: Thermal storage is an integral part of the concept 500 400 Hot Salt Storage Tank 565 o C Cold Salt Storage Tank 290 o C Technology Status 10 MW e System demonstration at Solar 2 (USA) Operated from1996 to 1999 300 200 Conventional EPGS Steam Generator Companies: Bechtel, Boing, Ghersa 0 Slide 5
750 C Central Receiver Plants: Atmospheric air receiver 800 [ C] Receiver heat transfer fluid: Air (1 bar) Maximum live steam parameter: 565 C 110 bar Backup Options: Thermal storage filled with ceramics Duct burner 700 600 500 400 Technology Status 3 MW th air loop demonstration at Plataforma Solar de Almeria still in operation 300 200 Companies: KAM, DLR 0 Slide 6
960 C Central Receiver Plants: Pressurized air receiver 800 [ C] Receiver heat transfer fluid: Air (10-16 bar) 700 600 Hybrid system: The maximum temperature acievable in solar operation is currently limited to 0 C. Therefore natural gas firing is always needed for operation Technology Status 250 kwe (6.5 bar) demonstration at Plataforma Solar de Almeria 500 400 300 200 Companies: DLR 0 Slide 7
Secondary Optics T > 1600 C must be proven! Slide 8
Scale-up Study Design point determination Component lay out Flow-sheet optimisation Economic calculation Investment O&M Economic evaluation Slide 9
Scale-up Starting point 50 kw solar reactor operating up to 2K Source: S. Rodat et al., CNRS, France Slide 10
Reference Flow Sheet (N-GHY) 25 10,0 0 1,2 Postcombustion POSTCOM 60 2,0 17232 12-1 11 Fue l Cell FCELL Q=-10666 25 10,0 291 10 PSA Q=-0 25 10,0 391 9 COOL2 Q=-95 25 7,0 985 0 Feed EXP1 W=-40022 Exhaust -18 3,0 985 15 EXP2 W=-42495 10439 13 1-64 985 HEATX Q=84 18 25 985 SOLAR receiv er REAC Q=6203 Electricity 1400 985 14 1600 985 COOL1 200 985 3-1 AIR 25 2,0 16941 BAGFIL1 Q=8384 150 397 5 BAGFIL2 Q=-65 0,9 391 7 10,0 391 8 Compre ssor COMP2 W=636067 Q=-3114 Eff. 99,99% Temperature (C) Pressure (bar) 4 150 0,5 588 Eff. 99,99% 6 6 Temperature (C) Mass Flow Rate (kg/hr) C C Pressure (bar) Q Duty (kw) Mass Flow Rate (kg/hr) W Power(Watt) Q W Duty (kw) Power(Watt) Slide 11
Flow Sheet with Preheating Exhaust 0 1,2 10223 13 Postcombustion POSTCOM Electricity 60 2,0 98 12 11 25 25 10,0 126 Fue l Cell FCELL Q=-13851 25 2,0 16941 10,0 372 10 PSA Q=-0 25 10,0 497 9 COOL2 Q=-121 10,0 497 8 25 7,0 EXP1 W=-51507-18 3,0 1239 15 EXP2 W=-54659-65 905 1239 3 900 COOL1 Q=-2346 200 1239 3-1 AIR BAGFIL1 Q=10474 150 505 BAGFIL2 Q=-83 0,9 497 Compre ssor COMP2 W=811186 1239 0 Feed 1239 1 HEATX1 Q=1586 1600 1239 2 1239 18 SOLAR receiv er REAC Q=6326 Eff. 99,99% 4 Temperature (C) C Pressure (bar) 5 150 0,5 734 Eff. 99,99% 6 C 7 7 Temperature (C) Pressure (bar) Mass Flow Rate (kg/hr) Q W Mass Flow Rate (kg/hr) Duty (kw) Power(Watt) Q W Duty (kw) Power(Watt) Slide 12
Economical approach Investment (1) Solar System Heliostats 137 á 121m² = 16.400m² Investment: 200 /m² Land area: 12ha [Abengoa] Tower Hight: 40m Investment: 1 M [Abengoa] Receiver Non modular: 4 M Modular: 5.6 M [CNRS] Slide 13
Preliminary Economic Evaluation Boundary Conditions Site Assuan Egypt Operation life time 20 yrs Load factor 80 % Discount rate 0.08 Operation time 2,938 h/yr Interest factor 1.12 Revenues Electricity 320 /MWh Carbon black 800 /t Slide 14
Preliminary Economical Approach O&M Fix O&M Fix (non modular) Fuel Cell 62% Preheat non modular Personnel 22% Insurance 5% Maintenance 11% Slide 15
Preliminary Economical Approach O&M Variable Electricity 30% O&M Variable (non modular) Preheat non modular Water 5% Hydrogen 16% Methane 49% Slide 16
Preliminary Economical Approach O&M O&M overall (non modular) Fuel Cell 44% Preheat non modular Water 1% Methane 14% Hydrogen 5% Electricity 8% Maintenance 8% Insurance 4% Personnel 16% Slide 17
HPC [ /kg] Investment [T ] Preliminary Economic Evaluation (2) Summary Investment 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 HPC 35,000 30,000 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 non modular 5,000modular non modular modular Standard0 Investment Preheat non modular modular non modular modular Hydrogen Production Cost Standard Preheat Slide 18
Electricity [MWh/a] Poduction [t/a] Preliminary Economic Evaluation (3) Summary Carbon and Hydrogen Production Electricity Production and Consumption 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 00 0 Standard 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 00 800 600 400 200 0 Standard Preheat Preheat Production Consumption H2 production C production Slide 19
Summary and Outlook SOLHYCARB is an interesting alternative to produce hydrogen with low CO 2 emission Additionally carbon is produced which has a high value itself Within the project reactor concepts have been realised up to 50 kw pilot scale A study for a 10 MW th plant is in progress, components are presently fine tuned Hydrogen production cost are comparable to those of other renewable processes like thermochemical cycles or high temperature electrolysis, if the carbon can be sold Acknowledgemet We thank the European Commission for funding of the SOLHYCARB project under the 6 th Research Framework Programme Slide 20
Thank you very much for your attention! Slide 21