Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Revving Up the Latest Reciprocating Engine Technologies
Garrett MeyerPerformance Engineer
March 7, 2018
Reciprocating engine power plants appear in surprising places.
2
What is the technology?
3
A reciprocating internal combustion engine (recip or RICE) in a power plant operates much like in your car.
4
This presentation focuses on large (7+ MW) gas recips and large (50+ MW) recip power plants in the US.
• Many more uses and vendors for smaller scales, listed below for reference.
5
Some Recip ApplicationsCombined Heat and PowerRemote PowerBackup PowerChilled Water with Absorption ChillerBlack-Start CapabilityMechanical Drive
Some OEMs of Smaller RecipsWärtsiläGE/JenbacherCumminsHyundaiSiemens/Dresser-RandMANRolls-RoyceMitsubishi Power SystemsGE/Waukesha
Recips pair well with newer intermittent power sources.
6
• Fast start times
• Fast load ramping
• Low wear from cycling
• Good engine part-load efficiency
• Short minimum offline periods
ERCOT Wind Integration Report 2/12/18Reprinted with permission from ERCOT
Recips can work almost anywhere there is fuel.
• Performance independent of ambient conditions
• Low water consumption
• Low gas pressure required
• Low black start energy required
• Good energy density
• Light industrial design buildings with low profile
• Exhaust heat available for hot water demand
• Weaker in NOx and PM10 emissions
7
Their smaller size and modularity give several advantages.
• Blocks scale with power demand
• Quicker and simpler shipping and construction
• Good facility-level part-load efficiency
• Good facility-level forced outage rate
8
Wärtsilä 18V50SGs, Port Westward 2 PGE
The standard scope of supply allows plug and play.
9
Item NoteGas Engine with TurbochargerGenerator & Flexible CouplingBase Frame for Engine and GeneratorExcitation SystemEngine Maintenance PlatformEngine Lube Oil System
Exhaust Gas System silencers, ducting, bellows, rupture discs, AQC equipment (as applicable)
Gas Regulating UnitStarting Air System
Cooling System typically air-cooled radiators, sometimes intermediate heat exchangers with open loop by others
Charge Air System for inlet airEngine Controls
OEMs looking into packaging units to reduce construction time and cost.
Why not combustion turbines?
10
Today’s simple cycle market
Recips are the clear leader in simple cycle efficiency.11
Today’s combined cycle market
Recips lose out in combined cycle power and efficiency. 12
Recips take no derate for most ambient temperatures.
13
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
0.95
1.00
1.05
1.10
1.15
1.20
1.25
0 20 40 60 80 100
Correction Factor
Ambient Temperature, deg F
OutputHeat Rate
Combustion turbines suffer at higher temperatures.
14
Recip part-load performance is strong compared to simple cycle combustion turbines.
15
8,000
9,000
10,000
11,000
12,000
13,000
14,000
25% 50% 75% 100%
Gross Heat Rate, Btu/kWh (HHV)
Load
Frame CTGRecip
Recips can be more capitally intensive than simple cycle combustion turbines.
16
Recips can recover in the levelized cost of electricity.
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
0 100 200 300 400 500
Simple Cycle Plant EPC Overnight
Capital Cost, $/kW
Plant MW
RecipCTG
How is the market?
17
Recips are growing more prevalent.
18
Some units are still in service after 67 years.
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Operating/Planned Capacity, MW
Today’s large recip product line
19
RECIP MODEL MW Engine Efficiency (LHV) lb-CO2/MWh-gross
Hyundai H46/60V 13.7-22.9 NA NAWärtsilä 18V50SG 18.8 48.6% 821MAN 18V51/60G TS 18.5 49.6% 803MAN 18V51/60G 18.5 48.8% 818MAN 20V35/44G TS 11.6 NA NAWärtsilä 20V31SG 11.4 50.0% 796Rolls-Royce B36:45V20A 11.2 49.8% 800MAN 20V35/44G 10.2 47.2% 846Caterpillar G20CM34 9.75 46.5% 859GE Jenbacher J920 Flextra 9.35 49.9% 798Wärtsilä 20V34SG 9.34 46.3% 862Rolls-Royce B35:40V20AG2 9.00 47.9% 833Kawasaki KG-18-V 7.50 49.0% 815Wärtsilä 16V34SG 7.43 46.0% 868
Large recip plants in the US are increasingly common.
20
2+ GW of large recip power plants operating
Power Plant Cap MW Status COD State OEM ModelNew Orleans Power Station 128 Planned 2020 LA Wärtsilä 18V50SGSundt Gen. Modernization 100 Planned 2019 AZ Wärtsilä 18V50SGDenton Energy Center 113 Planned 2018 TX Wärtsilä 18V50SGCoffeyville Power Plant 56 Operating 2017 KS Wärtsilä 18V50SGMarquette Energy Center 50 Operating 2017 MI Wärtsilä 18V50DFRed Gate Peaker Power Plant 225 Operating 2017 TX Wärtsilä 18V50SGPioneer Generating Station IC 112 Operating 2016 ND Wärtsilä 20V34SGStillwater IC Plant 56 Operating 2016 OK Wärtsilä 18V50SGD.G. Hunter Expansion 60 Operating 2016 LA Wärtsilä 20V34SGSky Global Power One 52 Operating 2016 TX Jenbacher J920 FleXtraEklutna Generating Station 170 Operating 2014 AK Wärtsilä 18V50DFPort Westward Unit 2 224 Operating 2014 OR Wärtsilä 18V50SGRubart Station 108 Operating 2014 KS Caterpillar G20CM34Antelope Station 167 Operating 2011 TX Wärtsilä 20V34SGHumboldt Bay Repower 163 Operating 2010 CA Wärtsilä 18V50DFPearsall IC 202 Operating 2009 TX Wärtsilä 20V34SGGoodman Energy Center 101 Operating 2008 KS Wärtsilä 20V34SGPlains End Expansion Facility 116 Operating 2008 CO Wärtsilä 18V34SGBasin Creek 52 Operating 2006 MT Caterpillar G16CM34Western 102 GS 118 Operating 2005 NV Wärtsilä 20V34SGPlains End 57 Operating 2002 CO Wärtsilä 18V50SG
Among the major OEMs, Wärtsilä has a clear lead in operating and planned gas capacity in the US.
Waiting to see other OEMs enter the market.21
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
Wärtsilä Caterpillar Jenbacher
MW
Large Plant Models• W 18V50SG• W 18V50DF• W 18V34SG• W 20V34SG• C G20CM34• C G16CM34• J J920• J J624
What are the trends?
22
More aggressive technical characteristics
23
Characteristic Past Present/Future
Maximum Spark-Ignited Size < 10 MW > 18 MW
Ramp Rate 2 MW/min-engine < 1 min (min-to-full)
Start Time < 10 min 2 – 5 min
Minimum Load 40 – 50% 20 – 30%
Controlled NOx 8 ppm <= 5 ppm
Controlled CO 25 ppm 8+ ppm
Efficiency 42 – 46% 46 – 50%
Improved fuel flexibility
24
Recip
Other gas fuels (bio gas, coal seam, coke oven, propane)Natural Gas
Diesel
Recip
Natural Gas
Diesel
Recip
Natural Gas
Diesel
Blending
Dual Fuel Capability
Battery storage is a potential substitute or complement to a recip power plant.
25
Recip
Battery Storage
Battery Storage
• Scaleable• Starts in milliseconds• Expensive (~$575/kWh), though coming down• Time-limited
• Batteries (or ultracapacitors) dispatch immediately• Engines load firm when batteries deplete or demand grows• Jenbacher and Wärtsilä have their own battery integrators• Advantages over hybrid storage/combustion turbine plants in
fuel-side startup time, ramp rate, and efficiency
Garrett Meyer4555 Lake Forest Drive, Suite 310, Cincinnati, OH 45242+1 [email protected]
March 7, 2018
Backup Slides
27
Stack emissions and water consumption are competitive.
28
Constituent ppmvd@15%O2 lb/MMBtu (LHV)
NOx 2.5 – 5.5 0.01 – 0.022
CO 8 - 49 0.02 – 0.12
VOC 8 – 54 0.01 – 0.07PM10 (total, 0.2 gr/100cf S) n/a 0.023 – 0.036
Cooling System Makeup, Gals/MWh
ACHX (Radiators, STD) Negligible
Wet Cooling Tower (5 COCs) 40 - 70
Choosing a Technology
Maximize owner value with technology competition.
Best lifecycle cost is application-dependent.
Capital costs vary significantly job-to-job.
Maintenance costs vary significantly from machine-to-machine.
Construction costs are based on level of modularization.
Low capacity factors erode value of efficiency.
Market drivers influence capital and operation costs.
Best lifecycle cost is not always most efficient.
29
Donald Von Raesfeld Plant
Recip Example Project
30
PGE Port Westward Unit 2
Successful COD in December 2014
• Wind chaser facility
• Black & Veatch involved from start to finish.
• Feasibility studies
• Technology selection
• Public RFP development
• PGE’s preferred EPC
• PGE self-build option selected in competitive public bid process with award to B&V as EPCM w/ Mechanical S/C
31
PGE Port Westward Unit 2
• Public RFP maximized:
• Owner control over final plant details
• Self-build competitiveness
• Shortlisted technologies:
• Final selection dependent on PUC’s load profile basis
32
GE LMS100s
Wärtsilä 18V50SGs, Port Westward 2 PGE
Technology Capital Cost Operating Cost
GE LMS100 Low High
Wärtsilä 18V50SG High Low
PGE Port Westward Unit 2 Highlights
• Project next to the Columbia River – Very environmentally sensitive site with corresponding local and governmental interest – finished with great relations with all stakeholders
• Project next to an operating plant with numerous tie ins – no incidents or impacts to PW1 operations
• Over 2600 stone columns driven in 4+ months before starting major undergrounds• Very constricted site• High seismic area• Very demanding air permit and noise requirements• Rigorous performance testing requirements• Finished the project 30 days early
33
