Www.ieagreen.org.uk Co-Production of Hydrogen and Electricity (GHG/07/42) Hydrogen may be used in...
11
www.ieagreen.org.u k Co-Production of Hydrogen and Co-Production of Hydrogen and Electricity Electricity (GHG/07/42) (GHG/07/42) • Hydrogen may be used in future as an energy carrier • In the long term it is expected that hydrogen will be made using renewable energy • In the medium term fossil fuels with CO 2 capture are expected to be the lowest cost option • A study was undertaken to assess production of hydrogen and electricity by coal gasification with CO 2 capture • Study undertaken by Foster Wheeler Italiana • Report 2007/13, September 2007
-
Upload
benjamin-booker -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of Www.ieagreen.org.uk Co-Production of Hydrogen and Electricity (GHG/07/42) Hydrogen may be used in...
www.ieagreen.org.uk
Co-Production of Hydrogen and Electricity Co-Production of Hydrogen and Electricity (GHG/07/42)(GHG/07/42)
• Hydrogen may be used in future as an energy carrier
• In the long term it is expected that hydrogen will be made using renewable energy
• In the medium term fossil fuels with CO2 capture are
expected to be the lowest cost option
• A study was undertaken to assess production of hydrogen and electricity by coal gasification with CO2 capture
• Study undertaken by Foster Wheeler Italiana
• Report 2007/13, September 2007
www.ieagreen.org.uk
Hydrogen and Electricity Co-ProductionHydrogen and Electricity Co-Production
Coal
Air
PowerAir
separationAir
separationCombined
cycleCombined
cycleNitrogen
Air Air
Gasification
Gasification
Acid gas removalAcid gas removal
Shift conversion
Shift conversion
HydrogenOxygen
CO2CO2
compression
CO2 compression
Sulphur
H2S Sulphur recoverySulphur recovery
Hydrogen separationHydrogen separation
www.ieagreen.org.uk
Plant Performance and Costs Plant Performance and Costs
• Screening assessment of gasifiers and acid gas removal processes• Shell, Siemens and GE gasifiers
• Little difference in overall costs
• Selexol and Rectisol acid gas removal• Shell gasifier and Selexol were selected
• Estimates of performance and costs of plants• Electricity, without CO2 capture
• Electricity, with capture• Hydrogen, with capture (+ electricity for internal consumption)• Electricity and hydrogen co-production (fixed ratio), with capture• Electricity and hydrogen co-production (variable ratio), with capture
www.ieagreen.org.uk
Plant Performance and CostsPlant Performance and Costs• Electricity-only IGCCs
• Capital cost of plant with CO2 capture is €2380/kW
• Cost of electricity with capture is €0.072/kWh
• Cost of avoiding emissions is €31/tonne CO2
• Costs are higher than in the past (higher materials costs etc)
• Hydrogen-only plant• Cost of hydrogen is € 9.45/GJ
www.ieagreen.org.uk
Plant Performance and CostsPlant Performance and Costs• Co-production plants (fixed H2: electricity ratio)
• Co-production reduces costs compared to electricity-only and hydrogen-only plants
• About 4% overall
• Flexible co-production plants
• H2:electricity ratio can be varied from 1.3 to 3.1:1
• Coal gasifiers and gas turbine remain fully loaded• Flexibility increases the capital cost by 1%
www.ieagreen.org.uk
Scenario Modelling Scenario Modelling • The aim of the scenario modelling was to quantify benefits
of flexible co-production• Hydrogen and electricity demands were specified
• Based on current Netherlands and USA energy consumptions
• Hydrogen was assumed to be used to replace vehicle fuels and a fraction of natural gas used by small consumers
• Current nuclear and renewable electricity supply was assumed to be retained
• Monthly net electricity and hydrogen demands were calculated (also daily for the Netherlands)
• Emphasise that these are hypothetical scenarios• Predicting future energy systems is very complicated
www.ieagreen.org.uk
Electricity and Hydrogen Demands Electricity and Hydrogen Demands
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Re
lativ
e e
ne
rgy
de
ma
nd
(J
an
hyd
rog
en
de
ma
nd
= 1
00
) .
NetherlandsHydrogen
NetherlandsElectricity
USA Hydrogen
USA Electricity
www.ieagreen.org.uk
Scenario Modelling Scenario Modelling
• Five plant scenarios were modelled• Without hydrogen storage
• Electricity-only and hydrogen-only plants
• Including non-flexible co-production plants
• Including flexible co-production plants
• With underground buffer storage of hydrogen• Non-flexible co-production plants
• Flexible co-production plants
www.ieagreen.org.uk
Scenario ResultsScenario Results
60
70
80
90
100
Electricity andhydrogen-only
Non-flexibleco-production
no storage
Non-flexibleco-productionw ith storage
Flexible co-production no storage
Flexible co-production
w ith storage
Rel
ativ
e co
st o
f el
ectr
icity
.
Netherlands
USA
www.ieagreen.org.uk
ConclusionsConclusions
• Hydrogen can be co-produced in IGCC plants with CO2
capture
• The electricity : hydrogen output ratio can be adjusted• Varying hydrogen and electricity demands can be satisfied
• Gasifiers can be operated at full load
• Practical advantage: fewer operating problems
• Economic advantage: better utilisation of capital investment
• The lowest cost option is to use flexible co-production plants with underground buffer storage of hydrogen
www.ieagreen.org.uk
RecommendationsRecommendations
• Costs of abating CO2 emissions from small stationary
sources by CCS or by using energy carriers (hydrogen or electricity) from large plants with CCS should be compared
• Proposal 32-11 was submitted but received insufficient votes
