Coal Usage in a Carbon Constrained World?bcura.org/csl09.pdf · IGCC with CCS projects Solar,...
Transcript of Coal Usage in a Carbon Constrained World?bcura.org/csl09.pdf · IGCC with CCS projects Solar,...
Coal Usage in a Carbon Constrained World?
BCURA Coal Science Lecture
October 12, 2009
Neville HoltTechnical Fellow – Advanced Fossil Generation Technology EPRI
2© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Coal Usage in a Carbon constrained World?
• CO2 Emissions. Coal contribution.
• International Challenge. Potential Pathways to Stabilization
• CO2 Capture & Sequestration (CCS) and its role in Stabilization.
• CCS technologies, development status, key projects in development and development needs
• The China challenge and key role of US in climate policy and CCS demonstration
• Summary - Additional legislative & financial support vitally needed (ASAP) for large integrated CCS demonstrations in multiple geologies
3© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Kaya Identity
• Derived by Japanese energy economist Yoichi Kaya as a formula for calculating human-based CO2 emissions:
F = P * (GDP/P) * (E/GDP) * (F/E)
• where
– F is global CO2 emissions from human sources,
– P is global population,
– GDP is world GDP and (GDP/P) is global per-capita GDP,
– E is global primary energy consumption and (E/GDP) is the energy intensity of world GDP,
– and (F/E) is the carbon intensity of energy.
4© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Options from Decreasing Human-Based CO2
Emissions
• CO2 = P * (GDP/P) * (E/GDP) * (F/E)
• Options to decrease emissions by 30% by 2050 from 2010 levels
– 0.7 = .91 x .91 x .91 x .91
– 0.7 = 1.5 x .78 x .78 x .78 (1%/yr population growth)
– 0.7 = 1.5 x 1.5 x .56 x .56 (1%/yr GDP/P growth)
– 0.7 = 1.5 x 1.5 x 1 x .31 (no efficiency improvement)
5© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
What is the International Challenge?Coalition Countries: Ready to Participate Now
Annex B OECD
USA
Greater EU
Japan
Canada
Aus/NZ
Korea
Mexico
Turkey
Russia
Ukraine
6© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
2007 Total CO2 Emissions (Energy/Cement)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
USA
Rest of
Coalition
Brazil
Russia
India
China
“BRIC” Group
KoreaIranMexicoSouth AfricaSaudi ArabiaIndonesia
Rest of
World
Billion tons CO2
7© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
CO2 Emissions – World, China and US Billions metric tons/year by Source (EIA IEO 2009)
Country Year Petroleum Natural Gas
Coal Total
World 2008 11.4 6.1 12.9 30.4
2020 12.6 7.5 15.3 35.4
2030 14.0 8.4 18.0 40.4
US 2006 2.6 1.2 2.1 (91% power)
5.9
2030 2.6 1.3 2.5 6.4
China 2006 0.93 0.12 4.95 (50% power)
6.0
8© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
International Challenge. Potential Pathways to Stabilization
10© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Projected Radiative Forcing in 2010
CO2 CH4
N2O
F-gases (0.02 W/m2)
Watts per square meter: Change in heat balance relative to pre-industrial
350278 450 550 650400 500 600300
CO2-equivalent concentration in ppmv CO2-e
Target
Levels
+3ºC
+2.5ºC
+2ºC
11© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
What is possible, if…
• Coalition countries begin abatement immediately
• BRIC Group (Brazil, Russia, India, China) begins abatement after 2030
• Rest of world (ROW) begins abatement after 2050
• MERGE model used to find least-cost stabilization pathway under these constraints
12© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Stabilization Targets
CO2 limits implied by ―residual‖ emissions from non-CO2
gasesCO2-e
concentration (ppmv)
Radiative Forcing (W/m2)
RF from non-CO2 gases
(W/m2)
RF from CO2
CO2-only concentration
(ppmv)
2010 Levels 448 2.55 0.72 1.83 392
Target 0 450 2.6 0.95 (minimum)
1.65 380
Target 1 550 3.7 0.95 (minimum)
2.75 465
Target 2 650 4.5 0.95 (minimum)
3.55 540
13© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Global CO2 in the Optimistic Baseline
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Coalition
BRIC
ROW
Billio
n t
on
s C
O2
14© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Optimal Global Stabilization Pathways
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
540 ppmv CO2
465 ppmv CO2
Optimistic Baseline
Coalition
BRIC
ROW
Billio
n t
on
s C
O2
+3ºC
+2.5ºC
15© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
“Locked-in” Emissions from Non-Participants
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
540 ppmv CO2
465 ppmv CO2
Optimistic Baseline
InfeasibleCoalition
BRIC
ROW
Billio
n t
on
s C
O2
16© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
650 CO2-e Target is Possible with BRIC Delay
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
540 ppmv CO2
Optimistic Baseline
Coalition
BRIC
ROW
Billio
n t
on
s C
O2
$30 / ton CO2 in 2020
1% of Gross World Product by 2050
17© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
550 CO2-e Target Requires Drastic Action in Coalition – Even if Recession Is Long-Lasting
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050
Coalition
BRIC
ROW
Billio
n t
on
s C
O2
540 ppmv CO2
465 ppmv CO2
Pessimistic Baseline
$300 / ton CO2 in 2020
4% of Gross World Product by 2050
7% max
18© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
International Negotiations: Conclusions
• Recession has an impact but does not change fundamental realities of the stabilization challenge
• With delayed participation by developing countries, achieving stabilization at:
– 650 CO2-e is reasonably possible
– 550 CO2-e is extremely difficult
– 450 CO2-e is in the rearview mirror
• Coalition benefits from incentives for earlier participation and technology adoption in developing world
• State Department and Administration have been briefed on this analysis
• U.S. is re-engaged in international negotiations – but pragmatic
19© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
CO2 Capture and Sequestration (CCS) and its role in Stabilization
20© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
EPRI’s “PRISM” Analysis for US Electric Sector
22© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
+80%
EPRI MERGE Analysis Increase in Real
Electricity Prices…2000 to 2050
+210%
23© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Contribution of Energy Technologies to reduce CO2
emissions by 50 percent by 2050 Source: IEA Energy Technology Perspective (ETP), 2008
24© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
CCS in Context
• In July 2009 the G8 Leaders affirm their support for the launch of 20 large scale CCS demonstration projects globally by 2010 with a view to beginning broad deployment of CCS by 2020.
• Without CCS cost of decarbonisation of the global economy could be 70% higher (also IPCC 2005, IEA 2008)
• IEA Energy Technology Perspective (ETP), 2008 Blue Map Scenario (reduce GHG by 50% in 2050) concludes CCS will need to contribute 20% of necessary emission reductions to achieve stabilization in the most cost –effective manner.
• The key major CCS technical issue for public and political acceptance is multiyear demonstration of valid Sequestration in various geologies. However the major cost of CCS is in the capture and the associated power loss.
25© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Demonstration Projects
Energy efficiency projects
Smart grids
DER and energy storage projects
Nuclear projects
PC with CCS projects
IGCC with CCS projects
Solar, geothermal, and other projects
EPRI’s Priority…Analysis to Action
Technology Challenges
1. Enabling energy efficiency with efficient end-use technologies and smart grids
2. Enabling intermittent renewables with advanced transmission and energy storage
3. Deploying advanced light water reactors
4. Deploying CCS by 2020
5. Renewables
One of EPRI’s goal is to help develop large-scale demonstration projects in
multiple areas required to meet the PRISM / MERGE analyses goals for a low-
carbon future
26© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
EPRI CCS Demo Projects
Three project groups comprise six projects:
Description Size
Post-Combustion (PC) with Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS): American Electric Power (AEP)
20 MWe
PC with CCS: Southern Company Services (SCS) 25 MWe
Ion Transport Membrane (ITM) for Low-Cost Oxygen Production 150 tons O2/day
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) with CCS Project 1
TBD
IGCC with CCS Project 21,000,000+ tons
CO2/year
IGCC with CCS Project 33,500,000 tons
CO2/year
27© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
A Roadmap for CO2 Capture and Storage
2005 2010 2015 2020
Source: DOE-NETL Carbon Sequestration R&D Roadmap
Modified to add Chilled Ammonia example
Start multiple full
scale demos
Start larger scale demos
– capture and storage
Bench-scale – post-
combustion capture
Now Objective
Needs: Multiple large-scale CAPTURE and STORAGE demos
Timing: 2020 objective start today, parallel paths
Realistic? A challenge – need technical, policy, funding alignment
“Small” demos
(1.7 MW Ammonia, etc.)Complete larger scale
capture demos
Commercial
availability CCS
28© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
CO2 StorageInjection Into Geological Formations
• Saline reservoirs
– 100’s yrs capacity
– Little experience
• Economical, but lesser capacity options
– Depleted oil and gas reservoirs/enhanced oil recovery
– Unmineable coal beds/enhanced coal-bed methane recovery
• Deep ocean injection not acceptable today
Courtesy of Peter Cook, CO2CRC
29© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
What Is the Experience Basefor CO2 Storage?
• British Petroleum – In Salah, Algeria (Krechba)
• Statoil – Sleipner, Norway
• Permian Basin (West TX and NM)
– Used in about 35 Permian Basin oil fields for 35 years; also in 10 other states
– 20% of total Permian Basin output—more than 1 billion barrels of incremental oil to date
– About 400 Mt of CO2 are currently sequestered in the Permian Basin
• Frio CO2 Brine Pilot Test (TX)
• Natural gas storage analogs
30© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
CCS technologies, Development status, Key Projects in Development and Development needs
• Efficiency and CO2 Reduction
• Post Combustion Capture from PC and CFB
• Pre Combustion Capture via IGCC
• Oxy Combustion via PC and CFB
31© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
CO2 Capture in Coal Power Systems
32© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
PC Plant Efficiency and CO2 Reduction
Su
bc
riti
cal P
lan
t R
an
ge
Co
mm
erc
ial
Su
pe
rcri
tica
l
Pla
nt
Ra
ng
e
Ad
va
nc
ed
Ult
ra-
Su
pe
rcri
tica
l
Pla
nt
Ra
ng
e
2 Percentage Point Efficiency Gain = 5% CO2 Reduction
33© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
CO2 Capture = $, Space, Ultra-Low SO2, and Lots of Energy
Fresh Water
PC
BoilerSCR
Steam
Turbine
ESP FGDCO2
Removal
e.g., MEA
CO2 to use or
Sequestration
Flue Gas
to Stack
Fly Ash Gypsum/Waste
Coal
AirOutput Penalty:
Up to 30%
• Amine processes commercially available at relatively small
scale; considerable re-engineering and scale-up needed
(ultra-low inlet SO2 and NO2 also required)
• Steam extraction for solvent regeneration reduces flow to low-pressure turbine; significant operational impact
• Maximizing output and efficiency requires optimal heat integration
• Plot space requirements significant; back-end at existing plants often already crowded by other emission controls
CO2 to Cleanup
and Compression
Cleaned Flue Gas
to Atmosphere
Absorber
Tower
CO2
Stripper
Reboiler
Flue Gas
from Plant
CO2
Stripper
Pulverized Coal With CO2 Capture –Integration Issues
34© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
PC Operating Units w/ CO2 Capture (Today)
• Three U.S. small plants in operation today:
– Monoethanolamine (MEA) based
– Scale ~ 330 mt/day (15 MWe)
– CO2 sold as food grade ~140$/ton
• Many pilots planned and in development:
– 5 MWth Chilled Ammonia Pilot (Alstom, EPRI) Operations begin 1st Q 2008, AEP 30 MWth at Mountaineer, WV and further scale-up at OK site. Other Projects planned in Europe with EoN and Statoil.
– Many other processes under development
Only Demonstrated on a Small Scale to Date
AES Cumberland ~ 10 MW
Assessment of Post-
Combustion Carbon
Capture Technology
EPRI
CO2
(Report 1012796)
35© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
SCPC Plant – PRB Coal (basis EPRI Report 1014924)
100 MW
15.1 MW
84.9 MW
41.7 MW
43.2 MW
38.4 % Efficiency (HHV basis)
3.3 MW own use
38.4
MW
36© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
SCPC Plant – PRB Coal with 90% CCS using Generic MEA Capture Process(basis EPRI Report 1014924)
100 MW
15.1 MW
84.9 MW
33.4 MW
20.8 MW
25.2 % Efficiency (HHV basis)
8.2 MW own use
25.2
MW
30.7 MW LP
steam to CCSDoes not include
CCS CW duty
37© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Major PC Post Combustion Capture Projects in Development Worldwide
Country Project Location MW Technology Notes
US AEP Mountaineer West Virginia 30 MWth Chilled Ammonia
AEP Oklahoma 200 MWe Chilled Ammonia
Southern Co Alabama 25 MHI
Basin Electric N. Dakota 120 PowerSpan?
Tenaska Sweetwater, Texas
600 MEA Fluor
NRG Parish, Texas 60 MEA Fluor
Canada SaskPower Boundary Dam 100 MEA Fluor
TransAlta Wabamun, Alberta 125 Chilled Ammonia
UK EoN Kingsnorth 300 MHI
RWE Tilbury 300 Cansolv?
Scottish Power Longannet 300 Aker
Poland Belchatow 20 MWth/ 250 MWe Advanced Amine
Netherlands EoN Maasvlakte TBD TBD
Rotterdam
38© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Advanced PC & Post-Combustion Capture R&D Needs
• Materials and designs for high temperature superheaters, reheaters and steam turbines
• Cost-effective means of recovering low level heat and incorporating it in the power cycle
• More cost-effective gas-liquid contacting devices for CO2
absorbers
• Improved solvents for CO2 capture which have smaller heats of regeneration and/or release CO2 at higher pressures
• Cost-effective means of incorporating the heat of compression into the power cycle (or CO2 regeneration process)
39© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
IGCC with CO2 Removal
O2 N2
Air
BFW
BFWSteam
Steam
Turbine
HRSG
Coal
PrepGas Cooling
Gasification
C + H2O =
CO + H2
Sulfur
Removal
Air
Separation
Unit
Clean Syngas
Air
Hydrogen
CO2 to use or sequestrationSulfur
Shift
CO+ H2O =
CO2 + H2
Steam
Gas
Turbine
―Sour‖ Syngas
& CO2
40© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
15MW 76MW
27MW49MW
46MW
18.1MW
7.5MW
Net Coal to Power:
27 + 18.1 – 7.5 =
37.6% (HHV basis)
18MW
100MW
IGCC schematic from US DOE27.9 MW
PRB Coal
41© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
7MW 74MW
26.2MW48MW
37MW
14.5MW
10.7MW
Net Coal to Power:
26.2 + 14.5 – 10.7 =
30.2% (HHV basis)
18MW
100MW
IGCC schematic from US DOE22.5 MW
PRB Coal
With 90% CCS
42© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Coal Gasification Plants w/CO2 Capture (Today)
• IGCC and CO2 removal offered commercially
– Have not operated in an integrated manner
• Three U.S. non-power facilities and many plants in China recover CO2
– Coffeyville
– Eastman
– Great Plains
• Great Plains recovered CO2 used for EOR
– ~3 million tons CO2 per year
The Great Plains Synfuels Planthttp://www.dakotagas.com/Companyinfo/index.html
Weyburn Pipelinehttp://www.ptrc.ca/access/DesktopDefault.aspx
IGCC + CO2 Capture – Ready for
Demonstration but need to decrease costs
43© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Dakota Gasification Pre-Combustion Capture in Commercial-Scale Operation
CO2 to
Enhanced Oil
Recovery
SNG to
pipeline
Gasification & Heat
Recovery
CO2
Production &
RemovalMethanation
―Syngas‖
H2-rich
syngas
CO2 Pipeline
Supplies natural gas power
plants (approx 1000 MW)
connected to NG pipeline gridOwned by Dakota
Gasification
Lignite
~3 million tons CO2/yr
44© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Major IGCC + CCS Projects in Development Worldwide
Country Project Location MW Net
Technology Coal Notes
US FutureGen Illinois 250 TBD Illinois
HECA California 250 GE Quench Western Bit & Pet coke CO2 to EOR
Duke Indiana 630 GE Radiant Indiana DOE Proposal
So. California Edison Utah 500 TBD Western Saline aquifer
Southern Mississippi 500 KBR Air blown Lignite
Tenaska Taylorville, Illinois 500 GE Quench Illinois Coal to SNG + NGCC
Summit Power Texas 300 Siemens Lignite or PRB
FutureFuels Pennsylvania 250 TPRI (China) Anthracite
UK Hatfield Yorkshire 800 Shell Various CO2 to EOR
Centrica Teesside 800 TBD Various CO2 to EOR
Netherlands Essent Rotterdam 800 Shell Various CO2 to gas fields
Nuon Magnum Eemshaven 800 Shell Various CO2 to gas fields
Germany RWE Goldenburg 350 TBD Brown coal Saline aquifer
Australia ZeroGen Queensland 400 MHI Air blown Queensland Saline aquifer
Wandoan Queensland 350 GE Radiant Queensland
Canada Capital Power Alberta 250 Siemens Alberta sub bit CO2 to EOR
China GreenGen Tianjin 250 TPRI China
45© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
IGCC + CCS RD&D Needs
• Better availability
• Lower Capital Cost
• Higher Efficiency
• Improved refractory and injector life, Gas turbine availability, reduced SGC fouling, shorter start ups
• Improved coal drying and feeding. Larger gasifiers and gas turbines provide economies of scale.(50 Hz GT ~40% larger than 60 Hz – China is 50 Hz US 60 Hz). Lower cost ASU (e.g. ITM). Lower auxiliary power usage
• Higher firing temperature gas turbines with Hydrogen fuel, Lower auxiliary power usage. GT air extraction. Separation process for CO2 at higher pressure. Advanced cycles.
46© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Oxy-Fired PC Boiler
ESP or
baghouseFGD
Boiler
Flue gas
heater
Coal
prep
Coal
Oxygen
plant
Air
Dryer
Water
To CO2 purification and compression
Oxygen
Primary flow
Secondary flow
Nitrogen
Wet recycled flue gas (RFG)
Dried RFG
47© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Oxy-Combustion Capture Status
Source: Vattenfall
No Commercial Power Plants use
Oxy-Combustion today, but:
• Several pilot scale (~1 MW) test units
operating
• Vattenfall 30 MWth pilot plant in Germany
• B&W 30 MWth test facility in Ohio
48© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Major Coal OxyCombustion projects in Development Worldwide
Country Project Location MW Technology Notes
Germany Vattenfall Schwarze Pumpe
30 MWt Alstom, Linde SU 2008
Vattenfall Janeschwalde 250 MWe Alstom, Linde SU 2015
UK Doosan Babcock Oxy-Coal
Renfrew 80 MWt Doosan Babcock, Air Products
SU 2009
US Babcock & Wilcox
Ohio 30 MWt B&W, Air Liquide
SU 2007
Jamestown New York 50 MWe F-W, Praxair DOE proposal
Pearl Peru, Illinois 66 MWth Jupiter Oxygen
SU 2009
Spain Endesa Compostella ? ?
Australia CS Energy Callide 90 MWt IHI, Air Liquide SU 2010
South Korea Youngdong 400 MWe Est. SU 2016
49© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Oxy-Combustion R&D Needs
• Decreasing amount of flue gas required for attemperation increases adiabatic flame temperature, raising in-furnace heat transfer and allows
– Smaller recycle duct and FD fan, smaller boiler cross-section (capital cost savings)
– Higher heat flux will require waterwall materials upgrade
• Integration of boiler, ASU, purification and compression stages to maximize energy utilization
– Avoid compromising operation of unit
• Use nitrogen from ASU to dry coal, especially for low-rank fuels
• Use of low-energy oxygen plant to replace cryogenic ASU
• Effect of oxy-combustion on ash properties and ESP performance
• Operational characteristics: startup, turndown, load following
50© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
With Current Technology CO2 Capture is CostlyNo Clear Winners in Current Designs(EPRI PC and IGCC COE with and without CO2 Capture - Illinois #6 Coal, All IGCC and CCS cases have +10% TPC contingency for FOAK)
EPRI 600 MW (net) PC and IGCC Cost of Electricity
With and Without CO2 Capture (Illinois #6 Coal)
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Supercritical
PC
GE Radiant
Quench
GE Total
Quench
Shell Gas
Quench
E-Gas FSQ
30-Y
r le
veli
ze
d C
OE
, $/M
Wh
(C
on
sta
nt
2007$)
.
No Capture
Retrofit Capture
New Capture
COE Includes $10/tonne for CO2 Transportation and Sequestration
51© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
No “Silver Bullet”
• At the current state-of-the art, there is no ―silver bullet‖ technology for CO2 Capture for coal power plants.
– Technology selection depends on location, coal, and application.
• IGCC/Shift is often least cost for bituminous coals
• IGCC/Shift and PC plants with amine scrubbing usually have similar COE for high-moisture subbituminous coals
• PC with amine scrubbing may be least cost for lignite
• Oxy-Combustion is at developmental stage so its cost is more difficult to estimate but overall cost of power probably similar to PC + post combustion capture
“Silver Buckshot”
52© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
The China challenge and key role of US in climate policy and CCS demonstration
53© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
History of Power Generation Capacity in China
66
138
319
713
792.5
1207
56
110
239
554
601.3
760
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1980 1990 2000 2007 2008 2020
GW
Total Capacity
Coal-based Capacity
54© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
China’s Rapidly increasing Coal based Power Generation
• Total coal consumption 2.65 Billion mt in 2008. 50% for Power Generation.
• 50% of coal usage in small industrial boilers, chemicals etc. How can this be reduced? Not much public discussion of this issue!!
• From 2000-2007 China installed 107 SCPC units. At end of 2007 ~100 GW in operation and >100 GW under construction.
• As part of 11th 5 year plan 7467 small old coal units were closed representing 54 GW.
• By end 2008 379 GW out of 574 GW of coal plants had FGD (exceeded National goal of 60% by 2010.)
• By June 2009 59% of the coal GW was >300MW in size.
• These larger plants are likely to continue running for decades
55© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
The China Challenge
• China’s coal use likely to continue to grow
• The 400 GW of coal installed in the past decade will continue to run for many decades.
• ―CCS, particularly for China is not one of the priorities –the cost is an issue. If we spent the money for CCS on energy efficiency and renewables development it would generate larger climate change benefits‖ Su Wei, Director General of the Climate Change Unit at China’s NDRC
• Another Chinese source ―The US should cut its emissions 40% below its 1990 emissions‖
• China has targeted 15% of its energy from Renewables by 2020 and aims to reduce its E/GDP.
• China’s sequestration potential needs further definition
56© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Organizations Attitudes to CCS
• Greenpeace Report ― Why CCS won’t save the Planet‖ ―CCS is a Scam and a Pipedream‖
• NRDC ―CCS Deployment must begin now‖
• The Economist ―CCS is expensive at best and at worst it may not work.‖
• IEA Exec.Dir. N.Tanaka – ―We need to build at least 20 CCS demos by 2020 at a cost of ~1.5 Billion $ each. Such a construction program should be viewed as a litmus test of our seriousness towards combating climate change‖.
• G8 – Launch 20 CCS demos by 2010
• MIT– Need 3-5 Integrated CCS demonstration projects in the US ASAP with Federal assistance at >1 million mt/yr. In the absence of a CO2 charge there is no incentive for private firms to undertake such projects. Regulatory framework required to cover Institutional and Legal issues (property rights, government liability etc).
• EPRI –Similar to MIT.
57© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Some Financial Support for CCS Demos is available, but more is needed to close the Financing and o
• Europe – Flagship projects listed, Selection process to be defined. 1.05 Billion Euros from European Economic Recovery Plan (EERP) and 300 million EAUs available until EOY 2015. However the variable value of EAU’s may complicate the financing of CCS demos. Needs additional legislation and clarity to close funding. Public acceptance is probably still barrier #1. e.g. public opposition in Rotterdam, North Germany
• UK – Support for PCC CCS demos. How many? What expenses are covered?
• Australia – 2 Billion $ (Au) for Flagship projects, GCCSI 100 Million $ (Au)/yr for CCS Demo support
• Canada – Alberta 2 Billion $ (Can), Federal 640 Million $ (Can)
• China – Greengen, Shidongkou
• US – DOE support CCP1 3, Future Gen, ARRA, but needs additional legislation (following slides)
58© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Project Name/
Location
Envisaged
Community
contribution
(EUR million)
Fuel Capacity Capture
Technique
Storage Concept
Huerth Germany 250 Coal 450 MW IGCC Saline Aquifer
Jaenschwalde Coal 500 MW Oxy-fuel Oil/Gas fields
Eemshaven Netherlands 250 Coal 1200 MW IGCC Oil/Gas fields
Rotterdam Coal 1080 MW PC Oil/Gas fields
Rotterdam Coal 800 MW PC Oil/Gas fields
Belchatow Poland 250 Coal 858 MW PC Saline Aquifer
Compostella Spain (with
Portugal)
250 Coal 500 MW Oxy-fuel Saline Aquifer
Kingsnorth UK 250 Coal 800 MW PC Oil/Gas fields
Longannet Coal 3390 MW PC Saline Aquifer
Tilbury Coal 1600 MW PC Oil/Gas fields
Hatfield
(Yorkshire)
Coal 900 MW IGCC Oil/Gas fields
TOTAL 1250
EU Candidate Carbon Capture and Storage Projects
59© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
CCS Deployment is Crucial to attain the CO2
goals of all US proposed Climate Legislation
• Without the rapid initiation of large scale CCS demonstration projects the US/OECD (Coalition) has markedly diminished leverage in GHG reduction negotiations with China.
• Multiple Storage (preferably Integrated CCS) demonstrations needed ASAP at large scale (> 1 million mt/year of CO2) in various geographic and geological locations.
• Many CCS projects in development (IGCC, Post Combustion Capture (PCC) and Oxy) have submitted proposals for DOE funding under DOE CCPI 3. Two awards have been made (both EOR).
• CCPI 3 awards will not cover the full CCS costs for larger projects (> 500,000 mtpy CO2).
• Legislation must be enacted to provide liability coverage and funding for CCS Demos (either rate base, wires charge or ?) to enable them to be completed as soon as possible.
• Broad company participation is necessary for timely technology transfer (EPRI role being defined).
60© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
US Climate Legislation challenge (in the absence of CO2 regulations coal plants cannot proceed)
• Coal continues to have a bad press (Mountain top, Health and Safety). Climate concern is only # 19 in a US poll of top 20 issues
• Waxman Markey Act (ACES) with cap & trade narrowly passes House in June 2009. EPA to address liability. Establishes funding for CCS Demos and sets performance standards for new coal power plants
• Concerns from coal states over loss of jobs and cost increases during a deep recession with wide unemployment.
• Uncertain when the Senate will take up the bill. Seems unlikely that legislation will be in place prior to the December 2009 meeting in Copenhagen.
• If Senate does not act EPA is ready to enact CO2 regulation. Directive on CO2 measurement recently issued. Plans for emissions requirements for sources >25,000 tpy CO2 emissions.
• A more recent challenge is the currently low price of natural gas (Henry Hub ~ 3.30 $/GJ)
61© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Summary Notes
• All generation options (Coal, Natural Gas, Nuclear, Renewables) will still be needed in a Carbon Constrained World
• Capital costs for new coal plants have increased markedly
• CO2 Capture is costly for both IGCC and PC plants but feasible –Integrated CCS costs uncertain until demos operate
• Existing coal plants are valuable and will continue to run until the rules change. New coal plants with capture would need a large carbon tax to be competitive with existing coal plants that vent CO2and just pay the tax.
• Adding CCS to existing large PC plants is worth consideration if space, sequestration and remaining life are available
• Multiple Storage (preferably Integrated CCS) demonstrations needed ASAP at large scale. Funding, Regulatory Framework and Liability for the CO2 needs resolution.
• In 2007 China used 2.5 Billion tons of Coal (only 50% for power!). How can reductions of these emissions be best addressed?
62© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Summary : Coal Usage in a Carbon Constrained World?
• Without the completion of multiple successful CCS demonstration projects in the next decade - it is unlikely that new coal plants will be built in Coalition countries - there will be markedly diminished capability to persuade China etc to curb their coal based CO2 emissions (and worldwide CO2 emissions will further increase)
• For Coal usage to continue as a viable Energy Supply in a Carbon constrained World the Coal and Power industries must : - continue to urge passage of responsible legislation that provides funding of multiple CCS demos, establishes a CO2 monetized value and addresses key liability issues. - redouble efforts to portray coal with CCS as part of a balanced portfolio of power supply that includes Natural gas, Nuclear and Renewables and that advocates continuous end use efficiency improvements.
63© 2009 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Together…Shaping the Future of Electricity