8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
1/35
Gasification - Versatile Solutions
Gary J. Stiegel - Gasification Technology ManagerNational Energy Technology Laboratory
Gasification TechnologiesOverview
NASEO 2006 Annual MeetingSeattle, WA
September 10-13, 2006
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
2/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Why the Interest in Gasification?
Continuing high price of fuelsNatural gas for home heating and industrial uses
Highway transportation fuels (gasoline and diesel)
Excellent environmental performance of IGCCs forpower generation
Growing environmental community view of IGCCs asbest technology option for coal systems
Gasification is baseline technology for H2, SNG, fuels
from coal and capture of CO2 for sequestration Consolidation of IGCC development companies
Uncertainty of carbon management requirements and
potential suitability of IGCC for CO2 controls
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
3/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
History of GasificationTown Gas
First practical use of town gas in modern times was for
street lighting The first public street lighting with gas took place in Pall
Mall, London on January 28, 1807
Town gas, a gaseous product manufactured from coal,supplies lighting and heating for America and Europe.
Town gas is approximately 50% hydrogen, with the rest
comprised of mostly methane and carbon dioxide, with3% to 6% carbon monoxide.
Baltimore, Maryland beganthe first commercial gaslighting of residences,streets, and businesses in
1816
http://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpghttp://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpg8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
4/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
What is Gasification?
Coal
Water
Oxygen Extreme Conditions: 1,000 psig or more 2,600 Deg F
Corrosive slag and H2S gas
Products (syngas)CO (Carbon Monoxide)
H2 (Hydrogen)[CO/H2 ratio can be adjusted]
By-productsH2S (Hydrogen Sulfide)
CO2 (Carbon Dioxide)Slag (Minerals from Coal)
Gas
Clean-UpBefore
ProductUse
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
5/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
So what can you do with CO and H2 ?
Clean
Electricity
Transportation Fuels(Hydrogen)
Building Blocks forChemical Industry
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
6/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Chemicals from Coal - Final Products
Coal
Acetic Anhydride
Acetic Acid
It is likely you have recently used a productbased on coal gasification.
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
7/35
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
8/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Fundamental Comparison of
IGCC with Advanced PC-Fired Plant
IGCC PC
Operating Principles Partial oxidation Full Oxidation Fuel Oxidant Oxygen or Air Air
Pressure 400-1000 psi Atmospheric
Sulfur Control Concentrate gas Dilute gas
Nitrogen Control Not needed Pre/post combustion Ash Control Low Vol slag Fly/bottom ash
Trace Elements Slag Capture ESP/Stack
Wastes/Byproducts Several Markets Limited Markets Performance -- eff. (%) 40-44 35-41
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
9/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Gasification Chemistry
Gasification with Oxygen
C + 1/2 O2 CO
Combustion with Oxygen
C + O2 CO2
Gasification with Carbon Dioxide
C + CO2 2CO
Gasification with SteamC + H2O CO + H2
Gasification with Hydrogen
C + 2H2 CH4
Water-Gas Shift
CO + H2O H2 + CO2
Methanation
CO + 3H2 CH4 + H2O
Coal
Oxygen
Steam
Gasifier Gas
Composition
(Vol %)
H2 25 - 30
CO 30 - 60
CO2 5 - 15
H2O 2 - 30
CH4 0 - 5
H2S 0.2 - 1
COS 0 - 0.1
N2 0.5 - 4
Ar 0.2 - 1NH3 + HCN 0 -0.3
Ash/Slag/PM
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
10/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Combustion Chemistry
Combustion with Oxygen
C + O2 CO2
1/2 O2 + H2 H2O
Coal
Air
Combustion Gas
Composition(Vol %)
CO2 13.5
H2O 9.8SO2 0.4
N2 73.2
O2 3.2
Ash/Slag/PM
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
11/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Gasification Phase Diagram
An Example
CO
C CO2
H2H2O
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0.1 0.7 1.3 1.9 2.5 3.1
O2/MAF Coal Feed
Mo
le%
Gasification Zone
Complete
Combustion
O2
H2SCH4 SO2
Coal: Illinois #6, Dry Feed
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
12/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle(IGCC)
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
13/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Gasification-Based Energy ProductionSystem Concepts
Sulfur
By-Product
Sulfur
By-Product
Fly AshBy-Product
Fly AshBy-Product
SlagBy-Product
SlagBy-Product
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
14/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Conventional Coal Plant(Illustration only)
100 MW
15 MW
85 MW
40 MW
45 MW
40 % Efficiency
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
15/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Combined Cycle(Illustration only)
100 MW
Fuel
38 MW19 MW
62 MW
22 MW
21 MW to
condenser
40 MW
19 + 38 = 57 MW57% Efficiency!
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
16/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Coal-Based IGCC Power Plant
Gasification Island
Converts coal to synthesis gas
Synthesis gas cleaned and conditioned
Natural gas is replacedby coal-based fuel gas
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
17/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Coal-Based IGCC Power Plant(Illustration only)
15MW
80MW
30MW50MW
47MW
22MW
9MW
Net Coal to Power:30 + 22 9 = 43%
18MW
100MW
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
18/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Gasification
A Commercial Reality Sarlux
Polk Wabash
Buggenum
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
19/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Commercial-Scale Coal IGCC Power Plants
U.S.Southern California Edison's 100 MWe Cool Water
Coal Gasification Plant (1984-1988)
Dow Chemical's 160 MWe Louisiana GasificationTechnology Inc (LGTI) Project (1987-1995)
PSI Energy's (now Cinergy) 262 MWe WabashRiver Generating Station (1995 - present)
Tampa Electric's 250 MWe Polk Power Station(1996-present)
Foreign
NUON/Demkolecs 253 MWe Buggenum Plant(1994-present)
ELCOGAS 298 MWe Puertollano Plant (1998-present)
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
20/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Cumulative Worldwide GasificationCapacity and Growth
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Planned
Operating
MWth Syngas
Planned
Operating
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
21/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Gasification by Primary Feedstock
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
MWthSyngas
Coal Petroleum Gas Petcoke Biomass/Waste
Planned
Operating
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
22/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Gasification by Product
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
MWth
Syngas
FT liquids Chemicals Power Gaseous
fuels
Not specified
Planned
Operating
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
23/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Summary of Gasification Projects
160 commercial projects -- in operation/constructions/design
450 gasifier vessels in 28 countries
68,000 MW thermal energy
430 million normal cubic meter per day ofsyngas
770,000 barrels of oil equivalent energy perday
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
24/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Environmental Benefits
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=www.macdevcenter.com/mac/2002/10/22/graphics/fig-7b-water.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/mac/2002/10/22/digi_photo_tips.html&h=232&w=320&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dwater%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DGhttp://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=www.holymtn.com/fountain/water.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.holymtn.com/fountain/water.htm&h=338&w=222&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dwater%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DG8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
25/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Wabash River Clean Coal ProjectA Case Study for Cleaner Air
0
1
2
33.1
0.1
0.8
E
missions,Poundsp
er
MillionBTUs
BEFORE
CCT
BEFORE
CCT
AFTER
CCT
SO2
NOx
AFTER
CCT
0.15
The Wabash River Plant in Terre Haute, Indiana,
was repowered with gasification technology
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
26/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Tampa Electric (TECO) Clean Coal ProjectA Case Study for Cleaner Air
OlderCoal
Plant
SO2
NOx
0.5
0
1.0Emis
sions
(P
oundsperMillionBtu
s)
1.5
2.0
2.5
OlderCoal
Plant
FleetAvg.
FleetAvg.
TECOCCT
Plant
TECOCCT
Plant
2.07
0.6 to 1.21.2
0.47
0.07(15ppm)0.1
TECOs coal-to-gas plant in Polk County, FL,
is the pioneer of a new type of clean coal plant.
Comparison of Environmental Factors
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
27/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Comparison of Environmental FactorsPulverized Coal-Fired, NGCC, and IGCC Plants
Without CO2
Capture
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
SO2
(lb/MWh)
NOx
(lb/MWh)
Particulates
(lb/MWh)
CO2
(lb/1000 MWh)
= GEE Radiant IGCC
= E-Gas IGCC
= Shell IGCC
* Based on Study for DOE : Cost and Performance Comparison of Fossil Energy Power Plants
= SubCritical PC
= SuperCritical PC
= NGCC
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
28/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Comparison of Water Consumption forVarious Fossil Plants
Note: Cooling water requirements areestimated for generic eastern site
E-Gas Shell GE R-C GEQuench PC Sub PCSuper
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
Gallo
nsperMW
h
NGCC
Process Losses
Flue Gas Losses
Cooling Tower Losses
C l Fi d P Pl t E i i
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
29/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Coal-Fired Power Plant Emissions Recent Permits
1. WePower SCPC and IGCC information from April 2003 Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Elm Road Generating Station, Volume1, Public Service Commission of Wisconsin & Department of Natural Resources, Table 7-11, p. 157 (Pittsburgh 8 coal)
2. Wabash River Repowering Project, 1997 and 1998 average reported to IDNR, including fuel oil (Illinois 6 coal)3. Wabash River has demonstrated 0.03 lb/MMBtu SOx, but operates nearer the 0.20 lb/MMBtu permit for economic reasons
4. Electric Utility Steam Generating Unit Mercury Test Program, USEPA, October 1999 (no controls)
5. Project Summary for a Construction Permit Application from the Prairie State Generating Company, LLC, Illinois EnvironmentalProtection Agency. BOILER STACK ONLY
6. Supplemental Information for Air Permit Application, March 25, 2003,EarthtechInc.
7. Analysis and Preliminary Determination for the construction and Operation Permits for the proposed Construction of an ElectricGeneration Facility for Elm Road Generating Station, October 2, 2003, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
(lb/106Btu)
SCPC7
WePowerPC5
PrairieState
CFB6
IndeckIGCC1
WePowerIGCC2
Wabash
SO2 0.15 0.18 0.15 0.03 0.1333
NOx 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.03 0.103
VOC 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.002
CO 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.03 0.045
PM/PM10 0.018 0.015 0.015 0.011 0.011
Hg(lb/1012Btu)
1.12 ~ 2 4.0 0.5 3.244
Source: ConocoPhillips
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
30/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
IGCC without Mercury Removal and with itIGCC with Mercury Removal
COAL SLURRY
OXYGEN
BFW
SLAG
FINES
PARTICULATEREMOVAL
HPSTEAM
SYNGAS
COOLER
COSHYDROLYSIS
WATER
AIR
STEAM TURBINE
BFW
HRSG
GASTUBINE
ACID GASREMOVAL
CONDENSER
MERCURYREMOVAL
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
31/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Mercury Removal SystemPerformance and Cost
Remove greater than 90% of mercury
Stable adsorption of mercury in carbon beds as
mercury sulfide Incremental capital costs of $3.34 / kW for carbon-
bed removal system
Incremental cost of electricity of $0.254 / MWh forO&M and capital repayment
Estimates for IGCCreference plant based on
Tampa ElectricGasification Plant withGE Energy gasifier andsized to 287-MWe net
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
32/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Gasification Technology WorkshopsState Economic/Environmental Regulators
DOE in cooperation with the Gasification Technologies Council(GTC), NARUC, and SSEB conducts Workshops to:
Educate federal, state, and local environmental/economic
regulators on the environmental benefits of gasification Expanding to include state legislators/energy officials
Improve communication between the industry and regulators
Eight workshops have already been held throughout the country Next workshops scheduled for March 2007 (Denver) and June 2007
(Indianapolis)
Last workshop in Bismarck, ND (June 2006)
150 attendees; 50% of states represented; 8 state legislators All travel expenses for State and Local Officials are reimbursed
in entirety
NASEO is invited to participate
h B fi
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
33/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
the Benefits
GASIFICATION
Stable, affordable, high-efficiency energy supply with aminimal environmental impact
Feedstock Flexibility/Product Flexibility Flexible applications for new power generation, as well as
for repowering older coal-fired plants
BIG PICTURE
Energy Security - -Maintain coal as a significantcomponent in the US energy mix
A Cleaner Environment (reduced emissions of pollutants)
The most economical technology for CO2 capture
Ultra-clean Liquids from Coal -- Early Source of Hydrogen
Visit NETL G sifi ti W bsit
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
34/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Visit NETL Gasification Websitewww.netl.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/gasification/index.html
Comparison of Environmental Factors
8/14/2019 Gasification - Versatile Solutions
35/35
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
pPulverized Coal-Fired, NGCC, and IGCC Plants
With CO2
Capture
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
SO2
(lb/MWh)
NOx
(lb/MWh)
Particulates
(lb/MWh)
CO2
(lb/1000 MWh)
= GEE Radiant IGCC
= E-Gas IGCC
= Shell IGCC
* Based on 2006 Parson study for DOE : Cost and Performance Comparison of Fossil Energy Power Plants
= SubCritical PC
= SuperCritical PC
= NGCC