Technologies for Next Generation Turbine Systems for Next Generation Turbine ... Trent LM 6000 PD LM...
Transcript of Technologies for Next Generation Turbine Systems for Next Generation Turbine ... Trent LM 6000 PD LM...
aw02-004 / Page 1
Technologies for NextGeneration Turbine
Systems
Turbine Power Systems Conference andCondition Monitoring Workshop
February 25-27, 2002Galveston, Texas
Alfonso (Al) Wei
aw02-004 / Page 2
Combined Cycle Performanceat
Simple Cycle Cost andFlexibility
aw02-004 / Page 3
Approach to “economically viable” NGT
Low 50’s % eff’y. Large development; highrecuperator durability risk; difficult to control.
Wet I.C. Wet Recuperated (WIWR)
SpiralRecuperator
Inlet
Modified Trent Engine
IntercoolerHumidifier
RecuperatorHumidifier
WaterRecovery
UnitWater Tank
~
Low 50’s % eff’y. Largebut lower risk
development (integrationof known technologies);
slight compromise inperformance vs. WIWR.
Super Steam Injection
Exhaust
Inlet
Water Tank
OTSG
~
WaterRecoveryUnit
Modified Trent Engine
Low 40’s % eff’y. Higher PR & tempto improve - risky technologies; very
difficult fuel flexible DLE.
High P.R. Simple Cycle
52 MWIndustrial
Trent
ICR
Mid 40’s % eff’y Only small additionalimprovements in efficiency possible.
25 MWWR-21
Less development butcompromised performance;complicated arrangement;increased unit cost.
Parallel Shaft WIWR
WetRecuperated
RB211 + 501-KPower Section
aw02-004 / Page 4
R-R NGT Concept #1 -Wet Intercooled Wet Recuperated
Exhaust
Spiral Recuperator
Inlet
Modified TrentEngine
IntercoolerHumidifier
RecuperatorHumidifier
WaterRecovery
UnitWaterTank
~Power: 50-80 MWe
Elect’l Efficiency: >50%
Turnkey Price: $400-450/kW
Emissions: <10 ppm NOx<10 ppm CO
Start-up Time: <15 min
Water System: Closed loop
aw02-004 / Page 5
R-R NGT Concept #2 - Super Steam Injection
Power: 50-80 MWe
Elect’l Efficiency: >50%
Turnkey Price: $400-450/kW
Emissions: <10 ppm NOx<10 ppm CO
Start-up Time: <15 min
Water System: Closed loop
Exhaust
HRSG
Inlet
LPT IPT
HPTHPC IPC
Modified R-RTrent Engine
WaterRecovery
Unit
Water Tank
~
aw02-004 / Page 6
1 Generator Skid 2 Gas Turbine Skid 3 GTG Auxiliary
Module 4 Control Room
Similar Plant Layouts
9 Water Recovery Sys10 Once Thru Steam Generator11 Fin Fan Cooler
5 High VoltageModule
6 Utility Tie 7 Gas Compressor 8 Water Recovery
Tank
12 Demin waterstorage
13 Polishing Unit14 Demin Unit15 Make up water
aw02-004 / Page 7
R-R’s NGT - Comparison to Current Products
GE LM6000
PD (DLE)
R-R Trent DLE
GE Fr6FA
GELM6000 Sprint
R-RNGT#1-SI (Super Stm
Inj)
R-RNGT#2-WIWR
(Wet IntrCool / Wet Recup)
GELM6000
C.C.
R-RTrent C.C.
GEFr6FAC.C.
GEFr7EAC.C.
Power (MW) 43.1 51.2 70.1 47.3 50-80 50-80 56.4 66 107.4 130.2
Efficiency (%) 41.4% 41.6% 34.2% 41.4% >50% >50% 52.5% 54.3% 53.2% 50.2%
Turbogenerator Price ($/kW) $366 $303 $285 $298
Turnkey Price ($/kW) ~ $560 ~$500 ~$480
~$430(no water
recov)
$400-450 (incl water
recov)
$400-450 (incl water
recov)$658 $650 $730 $514
Flexibility High High High High High - High - Med/Lo Med/Lo Low Low
Simple Cycle Combined CycleWet Cycle
R-R’s NGT Solution:
• ~ 25% improvement in efficiency of simple cycle machines
• ~ 30% improvement in capital cost ($/kW) of combined cycle plants
• Maintains operational flexibility of simple cycle machines
Source: Gas Turbine World Handbook
aw02-004 / Page 8
R-R’s NGT Concept Meets The DOE Goals
Determine the feasibility of developing flexible gas turbine systems with a greaterthan 30 MW power rating. Compared to 1999 state-of-the-art systems, theproposed systems shall include:
– 15% or higher improvement in net system efficiency;
– improvement in turndown ratios;
– 15% or higher reduction in COE;
– improved service life;
– reduction of emissions (carbon and NOx);
– 15% or higher reduction in operations & maintenance costs;
– 15% or higher reduction in and capital costs;
– increased flexibility (min. 400 starts/year);
– improvement in RAM; and
– capability to use multiple fuels.
R-R’s NGT
√√√
√√
Achievable
Achievable
Achievable
Achievable
Achievable
aw02-004 / Page 9
The Market Opportunity Appears to Exist
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Uni
ts O
rder
ed
180 MW & above
120 - 180 MW
60 - 120 MW60 MW & above
30 - 60 MW
Source: Diesel & Gas Turbine Worldwide Annual Power Gen Survey
NGT
}
aw02-004 / Page 10
Customer Survey: R-R Solution Seems AppropriateDistributed Generation Growth?
Yes
No
Peaking Market Growth? Continued Growth -Same Rate
Continued Growth -Reduced Rate
No Growth
Don't Know
Future Mid-Merit Market?
AgreeDisagreeDon't Know
Market Perceived for R-R's NGT?
Yes
No
70-80 MW Size?
SatisfactoryToo LargeToo small
How Fast Should Start Time Be?
<10 Min10-15 min15-20 min20-30 min>30 min
aw02-004 / Page 11
R-R’s NGT - Economic Benefits to Operators
IRR Comparison - Spot Market TradingExample
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
New England PJM Calif ornia UK Pool
Inte
rnal
Rat
e o
f R
etu
rn (
%
Trent
LM 6000 PD
LM 6000 ES
6FA
7EA
NGT 1
NGT 2
COE Comparison - Mid-Merit OperationNGT vs. Simple Cycle Machines
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Bas e c as e Sc en ar io 1 Sc en ar io 3 Sc en ar io 4
CO
E (c
ents
/kW
h)
Trent LM 600 0 PD LM 600 0 ES 6FA 7EA NGT 1 NGT 2
Scenario 1High gas price(2 x base case)
Scenario 3Gas price 1.5 xbase case, CO2tax in later years
Scenario 4Low longer-termgas prices, highCO2 taxation
Base caseReference Case inEIA Annual EnergyOutlook - 2001
aw02-004 / Page 12
Public Benefits of R-R’s NGT
• Assuming 34 NGT units (2550 MWs) per year installed in U.S.:
– CO2 Emissions - Cumulative 15 Year Savings• Compared to Simple Cycle GT, 150 million tonnes savings
• Compared to Coal Plant, 630 million tonnes savings
• $3B savings in CO2 trading credits (assumed @ $20/tonne) cf simple cycle GT
• $12.6B savings in CO2 trading credits (assumed @ $20/tonne) cf coal plant
– Fuel (natural gas) Consumption - Cumulative 15 Year Savings• Compared to Simple Cycle GT, 2.6 trillion cubic feet savings
• $8.3B fuel cost savings compared to Simple Cycle GT
• $2.1 billion/yr potential export sales from 2006 (assumed 54 units/yr)
• Lower risk approach allows earlier availability to market
• Flexible characteristics allow for viable and efficient operations even inchanging market conditions
aw02-004 / Page 13
Summary
• R-R’s NGT concepts have been approached from an “economic viability” perspective:
– Leveraging available hardware and technologies to lower risk, investment, and time tomarket; and
– Applying these in innovative ways to develop a solution that will provide customers withimproved return on investment (ensure deployment) while providing extensive publicbenefits.
• R-R’s NGT concepts (Wet Intercooled/Wet Recuperated; Super Steam Injection):
– Meet DOE NGT goals;
– Seem to be appropriate for the future marketplace;
– Provide substantial economic benefits to operators; and
– Provide substantial public benefits.
• R-R is encouraged by the results of this study. However, the significant technical &market risks and the large investments required make launching an NGT product verydifficult in today’s business environment.