Ibrahim Gulyurtlu

Ibrahim Gulyurtlu

Clean Coal Technologies - What roadmap for R&D

SIXTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ONCLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGIES

CCT2013

12-16 MAY 2013, THESSALONIKI GREECE

1. Introduction

2. CO2 considerations

3. Coal utilisation technologies and Research areas for further development

4. CO2 sequestration options in the long-term

5. Some examples

6. Programmes of US, Japan , and Europe

7. Future concepts of power plants

9. Conclusions



Introduction


Coal continues to be the most abundant fossil fuel in the world

but its wider use, particularly in developed countries heavily

relies on technological developments for clean coal utilization in

the energy market.

Clean coal technologies (CCTs) developed in the last 40 years

have been developed with the objective being deployed reduce

the environmental consequences of the use of coal with

particular attention on SO2, NOx, particulate matter and very

recently on mercury.


Clean coal technologies (CCTs) developed in the last 40 years

have been developed with the objective being deployed reduce

the environmental consequences of the use of coal with

particular attention on SO2, NOx, particulate matter and very

recently on mercury.

Short-term objective is basically to ensure that the existing fleet

of power plants respect with the present and emerging

regulations through cost-effective measures to have the most

adequate environmental control.

Roadmap objectives, scope and structure, in IEA document on technology

roadmap, were summarised in three principle ways with the aims to reduce

emissions of CO2 from coal-fired power plants, in addition to improved demand-

side energy efficiency:

•Deploy and further develop high efficiency and low emissions (HELE) coal

technologies, i.e. use more efficient technology and continue to develop higher-

efficiency conversion processes.

•Deploy CCS; recent demonstration projects show that CCS is technically viable

and, in fact, essential to achieving long-term CO2 reduction targets.

•Switch to lower-carbon fuels or to non-fossil technologies as a means of

reducing generation from coal.


However, facts about the present situation could be summed up as:

− Technologies presently in operation for clean coal utilisation do really not

meet the requirements for near-zero emissions or carbon management

− The strategy employed by far for incremental improvements are not

adequate to meet future requirements

− Based on the strategy mentioned above, the policy applied up to now has

involved adding on new equipment to existing plants to meet incremental

improvements but this is generally a complex & costly procedure.


It is required to implement policies to make the transition to new technologies

most effective and successful because

− 60% of available U.S. capacity 20-40 years old while in Europe, it is even

higher for older fleet of power stations fired with coal and the situation in

Japan is not much different. In countries with large consumption of coal for

power like China, India new fleet is getting in operation but the technologies

used are not suitable for efficient carbon management.

− It is essential to get new technologies on the commercial stage in the next

10-15 years to be able to substitute retiring power stations. − This transition

must be accompanied without any disruptions in meeting the demand for

power.


232 124

108

17 55

E . E urope - Eu rasia

309

33

N orth Am erica (30.7)

Europe (10.4)

(18.2)

30 0 76

Africa (2.6)

9 5

Asia - Pacific

Latin Am erica (3.3)

(20.6)

H ard coal B row n coa l

N o te s : N u m b e r s in p a re n th e s e s re p re s e n t the ratio of total coal re s o u rc e s - to - re s e r v e s for each re g io n . Coal re s e r ve s in g ig a to n n e s (G t).


Coal reserves by region and type

Elec

tric

ity g

ener

atio

n fro

m n

on-fo

ssil

fuel

s (T

Wh)

7 000 45%

6 000

5 000

4 000

3 000

2 000

1 000

40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5%

0 0%

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

N uclear Hydro N on-hydro renew ables S hare of electric ity from coal S hare of non-fossil electricity

S o u rc e : U n le s s o th e r w is e indicated, all ta b le s and f ig u re s in th is chapter derive from IE A data and a n a ly s is .

Electricity generation from different sources


One aspect that is also highly important for the future is that any new

technology developed should be able to deal with any type of coal and

not specific to the nature of coal used. The current technologies are

very much dependent on the nature of coal.

It is clear that the future of coal utilisation depends on the issue of

CO2 is resolved in a cost effective manner for coal to be a vaible

alternative.



CO2 considerations

With human-related activities currently producing about 27

billion tonnes of CO2 emissions each year world-wide, it’s

important to know not just how much CO2 can be captured

using CCS, but for how long it will remain in storage.

While any CO2 captured will remain stored indefinitely (?),

estimates indicate CCS could capture and store the equivalent

of between 70 and 450 years of man’s current global annual

CO2 emissions.

European Technology Platform for Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants (ZEP)

CO2




Source: IPCC (2007)

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/syr/en/spm.html

Source: IPCC (2007)



Source: National CO2 Emissions from Fossil-Fuel Burning, Cement Manufacture, and Gas Flaring: 1751-2008.Emissions by Country

Low carbonenergy

CO2To the electricitygrid

Coalfiredplant

Oil fieldEnhanced Oil Recovery

Gas field

Salineaquifer

Gas

Oilto

Industry

Coal andbiomass

Gasfiredplant

Industrye.g. cement

Carboncapture

and compression

Otherindustrialprocessese.g. fuels,chemicals,plastics, etc


Imperial College London/ Grantham Institute forClimate Change

Sequetration -Capture

Storage

Transport

Injection

Options that include CO2-enhanced oil recovery and CO2-

enhanced coal bed methane production, are particularly

attractive because injection costs are offset by increased fossil

fuel production.


Geological Storage Option

Global Capacity

Gtonne†CO2

As a proportion

of total emissions

2000 to2050

Depleted oil and gas fields

920

45%

Unminable coal seams

>15

>1%

Deep saline reservoirs

400-10,000

20-500%

IEA publication


The issue is that not all storage locations are close to the

sources of CO2 emissions

In the global transition desired to have a fully low-carbon economy, the

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology has emerged, in recent

years, the key way to achieve a desirable equilibrium between rising

demand for fossil fuels for energy and the objective of reducing the

greenhouse gas emissions. There is a great doubt that this aim to control

the global temperature can be achieved. This is because the use of CCS as

a large scale technology that could be employed commercially feasible for

large scale deployment is put in question by many report. EU has already

considered CCS not of the first priorities of further R,D &D.


The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states that “Retrofitting

existing plants with CO2 capture is expected to lead to higher costs and

significantly reduced overall efficiencies than for newly built power plants

with capture. The cost disadvantage of retrofitting may be reduced in the

case of some relatively new and highly efficient existing plants or where a

plant is substantially upgraded and built.” Most other studies agree with

these conclusions. The main reasons are:

Higher investments

Shorter lifespan

Efficiency penalty

Standstill cost


For EU, the aim for the future is low carbon energy mix. EU has encouraged

projects that could advance CCS from research projects to commercial

demonstration projects with the objective of reducing cost, showing the safe

geological storage of CO2, build on the knowledge and then pass this

information with low-risk to investors. There have been considerable efforts

to take the leading role on CCS development, all the demonstration projects

funded by EU with complete CCS are located outside EU and even the

promising suffer delays because of:

Lack of business case

Public awareness and acceptance

Legal framework

CO2 storage and infrastructure

International cooperation


Sou

rce:

Eur

opea

n Co

mm

issi

on

Additiona l cost fo r CC S , pe r ton C02

50

2013 2015 2020 Time

C ertifica te price

Average avo idance costs

L ike ly CC S price without demonstration

At present, CCS-equipped power plants could not produce electricity at costs that would make them profitable. This is because the cost of avoiding CO2 emissions using the current CCS technology is higher than the price paid for emitting CO2. The first CCS demonstration projects would operate in the red oval in the chart (right) and face a ‘financing gap’ of at least € 25 - € 55 per tonne CO2.It is estimated that with continuous technological improvements, the costs can be halved by 2020. This should ensure that CCS plants can in the future operate within commercially feasible parameters in an environment governed by a robust CO2 price (blue oval in the chart).

EU publication



Coal utilisation Technologies and Research areas

for further development

Issues

What are the next steps with existing technologies

What are the new technologies that could offer the optimised

carbon management as performance capabilities could vary

depending on application


Technologies presently utilised are not the most suited to face

the future for our energy needs. They are based on up to 100

year-old concept improved over the years with add-on

equipment and retrofitting to mostly address the environmental

issues as they emerged. The existing technology was conceived

to produce power to satisfy the rapidly industralisation of the

Western world without too much concern to be ultra clean and to

minimise greenhouse gas emissions such as CO2. new

integrated system designs.


There are several potential paths to satisfy the long-term need for

near-zero emission coal plants. Advanced combustion technology can

use pure oxygen instead of air, thus making it easier to capture CO2.

Gasification could lead to producing several end products such as

electricity and transportation fuels and could handle flexibility in the

fuel available. There are also for exploration the hybrid concepts

combining combustion and gasification or making simultaneous use

of power generation options such as fuel cells and combustion

turbines, thus achieving high system efficiencies with very much

reduced greenhouse gas emissions..


Emissions Control - Existing Plants

Current technology could handle

− Meeting existing regulations for NOx, PM, Hg, and by-product, however targets for using fresh water use my need to be re-evaluated

Further technology requirements for improvement

− Low-NOx combustion, low-cost catalysts, improved gas filtration and electrostatic separation, sorbent systems, multi-pollutant controls, dry cooling


Projects are underway for advanced environmental control technology

and ancillary systems in the following areas: A) advanced NOx

emissions control, B) mercury emissions control, C) particulate-matter

emission control, D) coal utilization by-products, E) air quality research,

and F) energy-water interface. Field demonstrations (utilizing up to 600

MW scale plants) are being carried out in the areas of innovative NOx,

mercury and particulate control technologies as well as exploring

opportunities for by-product utilization.



(USA roadmap for existing plants)

x

2.5

Boiler

Coal Flue gas

D e-N O x

E lectrosta tic precipitator

FG D

Stack

NO (mg/Nm3)

3

<500 - 1 000

<50 - 100

C urrent perfo rmance at stack <50 - 100 (<0.16 - 0 .42 g/kWh) <20 - 100

SO 2 (mg/Nm )

PM (mg/Nm3)

<1 000 - 5 000

<20 000

< 20 - 100 < 50 < 10

(<0.06 - 0 .42 g/kWh ) <10 (<0.032 - 0 .042 g/kWh)

Current situation regarding emissions

Roadmap technology publication of IEA


Technology Needs for which further R&D required

- Cofiring,

-CFB (circulating fluid-bed) scale-up,

-Advanced boiler tube & steam turbine materials,

-Coal-oxygen combustion,

-Oxygen “carriers,

-Sensors & controls

Advanced Combustion


Combustion technology needs are focused on three areas: advances that

allow the effective use of existing plant assets (e.g., use of expert system

techniques to improve emissions control; repowering technology to

increase plant capacity, increase efficiency, and meet environmental

requirements), advances to current plant concepts that will bridge to

future plants, (e.g., ultra-supercritical steam to achieve higher efficiency),

and future plant designs that have near-zero emissions including CO2.


Fuel flexibility and ultra-low NOx combustion are near-term objectives to

enhance existing plant capability and performance. The capability to

achieve operation with ultra-supercritical steam allows for increased

plant efficiency. This capability will benefit plants built in 2010 and be

available for integration in future near-zero emission plant concepts.

Nitrogen-free combustion includes innovative concepts that include

oxygen combustion and concepts that utilize chemical oxygen carriers.


≥380 g /k W h

C O 2 in ten sity factor 1

(Ef f icien cy [LH V, net]) Coal con sum ption

A -US C (700°C2) IG CC (1 500°C3) 670-740 g CO 2/kW h

(45 -50 %)

U ltra -sup ercr it ica l 740-800 g CO CO 2/kW h

(up to 45%)

Supercritical 800-880 g CO CO 2/kW h

290-320 g/kW h

320-340 g/kW h

(up to 45%) 340-380 g/kW h

Subcritical ≥880 g CO C O 2/kW h

(up to 45% )


CO2 intensity factors and fuel consumption values

Shar

e of

SC

and

USC

(%

)

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014

India China R ussia Germany Japan Australia

South Africa Indonesia Un ited States Po land S outh Korea World

Note: F o r India, achieving 25% S C and U S C by 2014 is an ambition, with p e rh a p s up to 10% likely to be achieved in p r a c t ic e .

S o u rc e : A n a ly s is b a s e d on data from P la t t s , 2 011.


The share of supercritical and ultrasupercritical capacity in major coalconsuming countries

Glo

bal e

lect

ricity

gen

erat

ion

from

coa

l (TW

h)

Increase genera tion from p lan ts deploying H igh e ffic iency and Low Em issions technology

Actions for reducing C O 2

D ecrease generation from subcritica l plants

Ins ta ll C C S on p lants dep loying H igh eff & Low em is technology

10 000

9 000

8 000

7 000

6 000

5 000

4 000

3 000

2 000

1 000

0

2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

2040

2045

2050

Subcritica l

Supercritica l

U SC

IG C C

H igh E ffe & Low Em is technolog ies + C C S



-

E m is s io n s Max. un it

C a p a c it y

C C S e n e rg y

F u e l t yp e

P la n t t yp e

C O 2 NOX S O 2 PM ca p a c it y (M W e)

fa c to r (%)

p e n a lt y (% -p o in t s)

(g/k W h) (m g/N m 3)

PC (USC) 740 <50 to 100

(by SCR)

<20 to 100

(by FGD) <10 1 100

80 7 to 10

Coal

CFBC 880 to 900 <200 <50 to 100

(in situ)

<20 to 100

<50 460 80

(post- combustion

and oxy-

PC (A-USC)

670 (700°C)

<50 to 100 (by SCR)

(by FGD)

<10 <1 000

(possible)

fuel)

IGCC 670 to 740 <30 <20 <1 335 70 7

IGFC1 500 to 550 <30 <20 <1 <500 -


Future emissions levels expected with more advanced system



-More efficient, lower cost gasifier designs (transport & others),

-Improved refractory materials,

-Air separation,

-More efficient & reliable feed systems

Advanced Gasification


Integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) plants are the cleanest

coal-based power systems available today and represents an effective

means of capturing carbon dioxide for sequestration. The capital cost

and reliability, availability and maintainability (RAM) of gasification

processes are two key drivers in determining the commercial

deployment of gasification technology.


IGCC could become a dominant technology in the power industry because of the

following advantages:

• Ability to handle almost any carbonaceous feedstock;

• Ability to efficiently clean up product gas to achieve near-zero emissions of

criteria pollutants, particulates, and mercury at substantially lower costs and

higher efficiencies;

• Flexibility to divert some syngas to uses other than turbine fuel for load

following applications;

• High efficiency because of the use of both gas turbine and steam turbine cycles;

• Ability to cost effectively recover CO2 for sequestration, if required;

• Ability to produce pure H2, if desired;

• Greater than 50% reduction in the production of solid by-products; and,• Substantial reduction in water usage and consumption.


Gary J. Stiegel, et. Al. NETL

Air

Coal

O xygen

Coal

gasifie r

Raw fuel gas

G as cleaning

Clean

By-products and wastes

H eat recovery steam genera to r

Stack

Air separation unit

S lag fue l gas

Air

C om pressor G as turbine

G enerator

Steam tu rb ine



Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)

USA USASpain Holland

JAPAN 250 MWNakoso DEMO PLANT

The major IGCC projects in the world


Presentation by Yoshikazu IKAI, Japan Coal Energy Centre

Fuel gas

Coal gasifier

Fue l ce lls (S O F C or M C FC ) G as turbine

Heat steam

Steam tu rb ine

Electricity Electricity Electricity



Integrated Gasification Fuel Cell

Gasifier concepts are being investigated to lower the plant capital cost.

Higher throughput designs; improved refractory life; the development of

low-cost, reliable dry feed technology; and increased carbon conversion

(98% target) are projected to contribute approximately 10% reduction in

plant cost and approximately 5 percentage point increase in plant efficiency.

Advanced air separation technology is projected to contribute a 5-7%

reduction in the capital cost. The next generation air separation

technologies require efficient thermal integration with the gasifier and the

energy conversion technology (e.g., gas turbine).


Gas Cleaning


•Multi-pollutant control,

•Filter materials & systems,

•Regenerable sorbents,

•Sensors & instrumentation


Gas cleaning basically removes gas-phase contaminants and particulates

to avoid corrosion, erosion or deposition in downstream energy

conversion equipment and involves both environmental and process

considerations. They are particularly stringent for coal-fired power plants.

In future coal-fired systems, equipment can include combustion turbines,

fuel cells, catalytic reactors to convert syngas to fuels, separations

technologies for capturing CO2 or separating H2, and heat transfer

equipment.


Gas cleaning involves many pollutants and any cleaning process has to

be specific for the downstream unit operations to be employed. The

requirements will differ for reliable operation of membrane separation

technology, fuel cells, turbines, and other component designs.

Representative requirements for fuels or chemicals production include

total sulfur <60 ppb, total halide < 10 ppb, NOx < 100 ppb as well as

specifications for other trace chemicals.


The approach for gaseous contaminant control is usually to employ

sorbents. Sorbent performance, cost, regenerability and attrition

resistance are common barriers. One of the challenges is how to

design a system to meet the multi-pollutant control needs that is

simple, low cost and reliable.

The design of the gas cleaning system have to integrate well both

process control and operation procedures – e.g. compatibility in

operating temperature and pressure transients during turndown, start-

up or shut-down.


Syngas Utilization for Power and Fuels


•Fuels synthesis reactors,

•Syngas combustion,

•Fuel cells,

•Fuel-flexible turbines,

•Hybrid fuel cell-turbine systems,

•Hydrogen combustion,

•Air separation,

•Hydrogen separation


Gasification is used as part of the process in a new concept of coal-

based power plants in which the syngas produced can be employed

for power generation, for the production of liquid fuels, hydrogen,

and chemicals as well as processing heat.

In order to develop this concept to be one of the future options to

generate energy it is imperative that the overall energy plant

efficiency and costs meet competetive targets in comparison with

other alternative energy production methods.


For this reason, progress over existing technology is

needed to develop innovative processes for obtaining

these products. It is required to define R,D &D programs:

to develop gas separation technologies (e.g. hydrogen)

and

power generation technologies (e.g. solid oxide fuel

cells, hydrogen turbines, oxygen-fired gas turbines).


Some examples



Oxy-combustion is one of the most promising near-term technologies

enabling carbon capture and storage (CCS) because it is based on

proven, reliable, commercially available technologies that reduce risk

and, hence, allow near-term (2015-2016) commercialization.


T-fired boiler

F igure 6 – S im p lified O xy P rocess D iagram

T-fired boiler “air” heater

particulate control

sulfur control

flue gas cooler

gas processing unit

3 2 1

5 4 CO 2

coal secondary recirc primary recirc

pulverizer

1 … The flue gas recircu la tion rate (FG R ) is the ra tio be tw een the am ounts o f re -circu lated flue gas and tota l am ount

Oxy-combustion system of pulverised coal combustion plant

Circulating Fluidised Bed Systems are particularly well suited to

oxy-combustion because of the fuel flexibility and better

temperature control through particle recycling which can then

reduce the flue gas recycling



In an oxygen-fired CFB system, with the proper amount of recirculated

gas, the furnace conditions could be very similar to air firing using the

appropriate systems that can be designed to have the same flue gas

flow to coal flow ratio as with air firing and the same volumetric

fraction of oxygen in the flue gas leaving the bed as that of the air-fired

case.


Furthermore, a critical advantage for oxygen-fired CFB type

furnaces is the capability to reduce flue gas flow for a given coal

input, by minimizing the recirculated flue gas flow, while

maintaining the furnace temperature.


With an oxygen-fired CFB, a recycling loop of solid

materials is used, by adjusting the heat pick up, to control

the furnace temperature at an optimum operation level for

combustion efficiency without any potential risk of

agglomeration.



One of the principal drivers for oxy-fuel technology is near zero

emissions primarily in terms of CO2, but also other pollutants like

oxides of nitrogen (NOx), oxides of sulphur (SOx), and particulates.

The oxy-fuel process in the form examined here is based on the

familiar steam power cycle. The combustion takes place in an O2–

CO2–H2O atmosphere, moderating the furnace temperatures by flue

gas recycling, leading to similar furnace and boiler designs

compared with existing air-fired PF units. However, the subsequent

flue gas treatment requires adaptations.

Some aspects of this technology remain to be addressed such as:

( in the next 10-15 years)

The part load behavior

Safety aspects related to O2/CO2 containing enclosure

Material risks concerning the heating of almost pure oxygen

coming from ASU before being mixed to recycle stream

The implementation of a 700ºC steam cycle

Demonstration projects with fully integrated CO2 sequestration

ENCAP project


One of the most immediate solutions to implement to reduce CO2 levels

in power plants could involve the application of co-combustion of coal

with biomass as biomass fuels are considered zero-CO2. A project

entitled as “COPOWER” was funded by the Commission was undertaken

to identify the synergy between coal of different origins and several

biomass material. This is also a way of achieving clean coal application

by ensuring that the two or more fuels could combine favourably during

the combustion to reduce emissions and minimise problems associated

with ashes. This then leads to more efficient and less costly plant

operation


- Relatively stable fuel feed rates were achieved.- Combustion of MBM, OC and SP => bed agglomeration problems.- Dense bed zone T < 800ºC (700-770ºC) => Preventing Bed agglomeration for MBM, OC and SP mono-combustion (Na, K). - Wood pellets temperature and pressure profiles were very stable during combustion.

Pressure and Temperature Fluctuations Observed with Biofuels


Vertical profiles of local mean temperature in Duisburg boiler


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

coal coal +sludge +

MBM

coal coal +sludge

coal +sludge +

wood

coal coal +sludge

coal +sludge +

wood

2004 2005 2006

gas

co

nc.

[m

g/N

m3 a

t 6%

O2]

Average CO emissions at Chalmers boiler


NOx Emissions

0100200300400500600

100/0 95/5 85/15 75/25 0/100Fuel Blend (Coal/Other%)

mg

/Nm

3 (

6%O

2)

Cerejon/Wood Pellets Cerejon/MBMCerejon/Olive Cerejon/Straw Pellets

- Ex: fuel-N conversion decreased from 8 to 2 % increasing MBM from 0 to 25 %wt in the fuel mixture.

- During monocombustion of biomass fuels the fuel-N conversion to NO seems to increase probably due to higher air excess used and lower char inventory to promote NO heterogeneous reduction.

- NOX decrease during co-combustion of all biomass materials, independently of biomass N content.

- During co-combustion the fuel-N conversion to NOX decreased with the increase of biomass share in the mixture up to 25% wt.

- Biomass fuels released higher fractions of fuel-N as NH3 in the riser that possibly react with NO formed, reducing it to N2 through the known DeNOX mechanism.

NOX Emissions - INETI


coal + sludge

coal

coal + sludge + wood

Comparison of captured sulphur and limestone dosing

(Ca dosing in the form of CaCO3 in excess

of the Ca input with the fuel)


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0.0830.0920.1010.105

Hg in Fuel blends (mg/kg)

Rete

nti

on

in

Ash

es (

%)

Hg retention in ashes 0

%

5%

15%

25%

Co-Firing Ratio % SP

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 5 15 25

Co-Firing Ratio % SP

C (

% w

t)

1st Cyc 2nd Cyc

Unburned carbon in ashes

Hg in Polish coal is 0.11 mg/kg whilst that of straw pellet is 0.018 mg/kg

Cl was high in both fuels = 0.3 %

Small addition of straw, decreased Hg entered with fuel, adsorption on ashes

was significant (SP – Straw Pellets)

Amounts of Hg, S content and levels of unburned carbon in ashes influence the Hg retention

Hg retention in ashes


KCl (g) is liable to induce deposition and subsequent corrosion of super heaters. Co-firing of a chlorine rich bituminous coal with straw pellets gives rise to a KCl(g)-level of 20-25 ppm. This should be compared with the theoratical level of 65 ppm, which would be the case if all potassium in the fuel formed KCl.

Adding sewage sludges to the fuel-mix brings the KCl(g)-level further down to practically zero.

The deposition rate is lowered by co-firing with sewage sludge.

Ash properties such as sulphur and alumino silicate content of coal and sludge have a dramatic effect on KCl-formation.

The effect of co-firing coal and sewage sludges on alkali related deposits in a 12 MW CFB



CO2 sequestration options in the long-term


The use of CO2 for synthetic fuel production or as feedstock in chemical

processes and biotechnological applications or for the manufacture of other

products is an area of R&D for the next 30-40 years for an effective CO2

sequestration. This is an area in which most effort should be devoted to

effectively deal with CO2 issue.


・A-USC(700℃)

GGGll ooo bbb aaall eee nnn vvvii rrr ooo nnn mmm eee nnn ttt aaall ppp rrr ooo ttt eee ccc tttii ooo nnn

SSSeeecccuuurrr iiinnnggg cccooo aaalll rrr eeesss ooo uuu rrr ccc eeesss

DD oo mm ee ss tt iicc cc ii rrcc uu mm ss ttaa nn cc ee ss ooff ccoo aa ll ttee cc hh nn oo lloo gg yy RR && DD

JCOAL/CCT Roadmap 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

CO2 R eduction ratio：25% CO2 Reduction ratio：80 %

Tightness of coking coa l→ Tightness of b itum inous coal→An era of low rank coal

T igh tness of oil and natural gas

Changes of Electric power dem and

Replacement of ex isting coal fired power station

Co-com bustion of biomass and coal

Com m ercia lization of CCS High e ffic ient and hybrid generation

Combustion & Gasification

Low carbon generation

Zero-em ission

・Lignite Drying

Low rank coal ・ G asifica tion (TIGAR,ECOPRO）

＊ HW T

＊Post Com bustion

・UA-USC(760℃) ・CO2 Capture IGCC ・Poly-Generation ・Lignite Coal G asification

＋CCS

generation

・IGFC+CCS ・A-IGCC+CCS ・Hydrogen Production

S usta inab ility generation

・A-IGFC+CCS

・Carbon R ecycling System

CCS ＊Oxyfuel (C a llide) ＊Pre-Com bustion

・CMM

・Ad-Post Com bustion ・ Ad-Pre-Com bustion ・Ad-Oxyfuel (Ad: M em brane

Separation)

＜ Technology

Inte rnationa l Markets for Japan’s CCT

Coal gas ・ E CB M ・ECMM

・COURSE50

・Chemical loop ing

・ ECBM

D iffusion＞・USA－USC, IGCC ・ C anada－ C C S

・EU－USC, IG C C ・China－Eco-Coal Town, EC B M ・ Indonesia－ U B C

Steel making (Hydrogen Reduction, Coke treatm ent) ・Vietnam－USC(SC), C FB C

・India－High Ash Coal Use, Coal Ash Use ・ M ongo lia－ Lign ite G asifica tion , Coke M ak ing

Step up for developm ent in 2010-2020

①Demo Test： A-USC, COURSE50 TIGAR, ＥＣＯＰＲＯ ②PP Test： ECBM, Lignite Drying ③Element Test： Chemical Looping

＜Demo for Int. ・ Austra lia－ L ign ite G as ifica tion + CCS Coop.＞・Indonesia－TIGAR, HWT, Coke Making from L ign ite

＜ M od ifica tion＞・India－High Ash Coal Use

・ T he point of allow means commercialization

・＊ means government support projects 3

JAPANESE VISION


(USA roadmap for the future)

De

fin e

EU

in

fras

tru

ctu

re

De

fi ne

EU

fla

g-

ship

pro

gra

mm

e

Pro

duc

e

EU

i n

fras

truc

tu re

pl a

n

Demo plants with storage

Commercial plants

Implement pro- gram

Include CCS under ETS

Change legislation Design, develop & get local permits

Construction and/ or

retrofitting of the

com m ercia lly viable dem o

plants (4 y rs)

N ew p lants could

be m ade “cap - tu re

read y”

Learning period

Design of new plan ts

Loca l perm itting

process

Fin ish des ign

and s tart construc-

tion

I nfrastructure Permitting of pipe line infrastructure ( + / - 5

yrs)

Construction of m ain pipe line in frastructu re

(3 to 5 years )

2007 2010 2012 2015 2020 2025


EU concept for the future

Future concepts of power plants


Products/By-Products (Electricity, Hydrogen, Liquid Fuels, Sulfur, Processed Ash)

Fuel

Fuel Handling /

Conditioning

Fuel Processing

Gas Stream Purification

Energy Conversion

Product Conditioning

Air

Air Separation/

Compression

Environmental Controls (cooling water, CO2 sequestration)

Instrumentation / Process Control


The future concept of integration of power generation and

synthetic fuel production and utilisation in other applications

The Integrated power plant concept for the future that could be modified to include the use of CO2 as feedstock for many potential applications like synthetic fuel production, in chemical processs, etc.


Presentation by Yoshikazu IKAI, Japan Coal Energy Centre (JCEC)


Conclusions

• Coal will continue to be a valued resource to significantly contributing to

energy production provided that clean coal technologies address to

environmental challenges,

• Existing technologies make incremental improvements to emissions of

most pollutants but are not equipped to meet the requirement near zero

emissions and carbon management,

• Advanced technologies critical for coal utilisation with effective carbon

management have been identified but their full introduction in major coal

using countries will be over a period of 40 years provided outstanding

technical issues are resolved in the next 20 years. This depends on the level

of funding R&DD activities


• Achieving cost and environmental goals requires maintaining significant

investments in coal R & D in the next 20 years,

• The future CO2 sequestration should be based more on the utilisation of

CO2 as feedstock for many different applications as alternative to

underground storage,

• Demonstration projects are required before fully commercialisation of

new technologies with CO2 sequestration,

• Coal is at a crossroad to be able to remain a viable energy source in the

next 40 years. It has to consolidate its position in the next 30 years to

meet challenges from other resources.


Do not be put off by what President Obama said“So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted

Thank you for your attention

Do not be afraid of pressure. Remember that pressure is what turns a

lump of coal into diamond

Documents

Ibrahim Gulyurtlu