integration of ccgt plant and lng terminal

Author Biography

YOU CAN PLACE YOUR

PHOTO HERE

Forum Title: F18 - Monetizing Under-utilized Gas Resources (GTL, LNG)

Poster Title: Integration of CCGT Plant and LNG Terminal

Author: Augusto BulteProposal Manager - LNG & Power Projects

Block: 3 – Natural Gas & Renewables

Augusto Bulte has a MSc degree in Marine Engineering and a PhD in Chemical Engineering. He has 12 years’ experience in power and LNG projects and has been proposal manager of Foster Wheeler Iberia’s commercial department since 2003. He has previously held the positions of mechanical engineer and project engineer at Foster Wheeler. Augustohas experience in gas turbines for CCPP with Alstom Power, and gas engines for cogeneration services with Jenbacher.

Abstract

A recent Foster Wheeler study indicated that process integration of cold energy recovery from an LNG terminal has the potential to provide a highly reliable and operable combined cycle gas turbine facility with enhanced economics.

This presentation covers integration opportunities targeting thermal processes, particularly, the utilization of cold process fluids from LNG regasification to increase the electrical energy production of a CCGT plant.

As the chiller system will be in operation 7,000 hours per year, the economic analysis shows a gain of around US$40 million per year in the case study, indicating a simple pay back of the installation in one year.

Forum Title: F18 - Monetizing Under-utilized Gas Resources (GTL, LNG)

Poster Title: Integration of CCGT Plant and LNG Terminal

Introduction

• A recent Foster Wheeler study indicated that process integration of cold energy recovery from an LNG terminal has the potential to provide a highly reliable and operable combined cycle gas turbine facility with enhanced economics

• This presentation covers integration opportunities targeting thermal processes, particularly, the utilization of cold process fluids from LNG regasification to increase the electrical energy production of a CCGT plant

Gas Turbine Power Augmentation

• Gas turbines are air-based engines, with operating efficiencies directly sensitive to ambient conditions

• An evaporative cooler, fogging systems or chillers/coolers, can provide an increase in system power

• All these system modifications have inherently low installation and operational costs and provide a high return on investment especially for locations with relatively high ambient temperatures

Turbine

Combustor

Compressor

Steam Expansion Effect Intercooling Effect

Air I t k

FilterHouse

EvaporativeCooling Effect

Water Injection Plane

airin

Turbine

Combustor

Compressor

FilterHouse

Evaporative CoolerDroplet Separator

airin

Gas Turbine Power AugmentationEvaporative Cooler

• The major components of an evaporative cooler are– The evaporative cooler media (cellulose or fibreglass)– A water distribution manifold– A water sump tank with low pressure recycle pump– A droplet separator

• Water evaporates before entering the compressor and air is cooled down before inlet

• The cooler media and the droplet separator produce a pressure drop between 1.5 and 3 mbar, and require an axial extension of the filter house

Turbine

Combustor

Compressor

FilterHouse

Fogging Nozzles

airin

Gas Turbine Power AugmentationFogging System

• Fogging systems increase gas turbine power similar to an evaporative cooler

• The major components of a fogging unit are– The nozzle rack with nozzles– The high pressure pump skid including a control unit and a valve skid– A water drain system for the air intake and the intake manifold

Turbine

Combustor

Compressor

FilterHouse

ChillerDroplet Separator

airin

Gas Turbine Power AugmentationChiller

• An air intake chiller system consists of a heat exchanger, which is located in the air intake downstream of the filter

• The chillers are usually installed in the gas turbine air intake, downstream of the air filter, together with a droplet separator to take out water droplets from condensation of humid air due to the temperature drop. The heat exchanger and the droplet separator produce a pressure drop of about 5 mbar, and require an axial extension of the filter-house

LNG Terminal Integration

• S&T vaporizers have been considered to integrate the LNG Plant with the CCGT plant

• In the estimate study, the Chicago Power & Process Vaporizer and the ReliVaporizer (next slide) were considered


Reli Vaporizer


• The proposed integration scheme is based upon generation of heat for the LNG process from a water/glycol solution in special vaporizers (shell & tube type). Consequently, a chilled water/glycol solution stream can be circulated to the power plant

• LNG terminal disturbances must be minimized. Regasification heat is used mostly in the CCGT plant, but if ambient conditions will not permit, two options are available:

– Use of conventional seawater vaporizers instead of the shell & tube type– Use of shell & tube type vaporizer, and use of plate heat exchangers to heat the water/glycol

GAS TURBINE

Compressor

AIR FILTER& CHILLER

GAS TURBINE

Compressor

AIR FILTER& CHILLER

(SIMILAR FOR EACH GAS TURBINE. EIGHT IN TOTAL)

LNG VAPORIZER

2ºC

12ºC

LNG GAS

WATER/GLYCOLSOLUTION PUMPS

EXPANSIONVESSEL

SEAWATEROUTLET

SEAWATERINLET

2ºC

12ºC

WATER/GLYCOLSOLUTIONHEATER

BYPASS(ONLY TO COMPENSATE DIFFERENCES)

12ºC

Daily Mean Dry Temperature

Yearly Temperature Profile

0.05.0

10.015.020.025.030.035.040.045.0

Jan-

05

Feb-

05

Mar

-05

Apr

-05

May

-05

Jun-

05

Jul-0

5

Aug

-05

Sep

-05

Oct

-05

Nov

-05

Dec

-05

T [ºC

]

Historical Relative Humidity

Yearly Relative Humidity Profile

0.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.0

100.0

Jan-

05

Feb-

05

Mar

-05

Apr

-05

May

-05

Jun-

05

Jul-0

5

Aug

-05

Sep

-05

Oct

-05

Nov

-05

Dec

-05

Rel

ativ

e H

umid

ity [%

Yearly Wet Bulb Temperature

Yearly Wet Bulb Temperature Profile

0.05.0

10.015.020.025.030.035.040.0

Jan-

05

Feb-

05

Mar

-05

Apr

-05

May

-05

Jun-

05

Jul-0

5

Aug

-05

Sep

-05

Oct

-05

Nov

-05

Dec

-05

T [ºC

]

Yearly Air Dew Point Profile

0.05.0

10.015.020.025.030.035.040.0

Jan-

05

Feb-

05

Mar

-05

Apr

-05

May

-05

Jun-

05

Jul-0

5

Aug-

05

Sep

-05

Oct

-05

Nov

-05

Dec

-05

T [ºC

]

Yearly Air Dew Point

Power AugmentationGT Power vs Inlet Pressure Drop

Power vs Air Inlet Pressure Drop

y = -1.532E-03x + 1.000E+00

0.980

0.985

0.990

0.995

1.000

1.005

0 2 4 6 8 10

Pressure Drop [mbar]

Pow

er C

orre

ctio

n Fa

ctor

The correction curves have been adjusted by linear correlation for pressure drop variations and non-linear correlation for temperature changes. These formulae are used in the later calculations.

Power AugmentationHeat Rate vs Inlet Pressure Drop

Heat Rate vs Air Inlet Pressure Drop

y = 5.444E-04x + 1.000E+00

0.9991.0001.0011.0021.0031.0041.0051.006

0 2 4 6 8 10

Pressure Drop [mbar]

Fact

orHe

at R

ate

Corr

ectio

n

Power AugmentationGT Power vs Air Inlet Temperature

Power vs Air Inlet Temperature

y = 6.124E-07x3 + 1.252E-06x2 - 7.214E-03x + 1.106E+00

0.800

0.850

0.900

0.950

1.000

1.050

1.100

0 10 20 30 40 50

Inlet Temperature [ºC]

Pow

er C

orre

ctio

n Fa

ctor

Power AugmentationHeat Rate vs Air Inlet Temperature

Heat Rate vs Air Inlet Temperaturey = -3.519E-08x3 + 6.392E-06x2 + 1.646E-03x + 9.741E-01

0.9700.9800.9901.0001.0101.0201.0301.0401.0501.060

0 10 20 30 40 50

Inlet Temperature [ºC]

Hea

t Rat

e C

orre

ctio

n Fa

ctor

Power Production

The gas turbine power production varies according to the ambient conditions.The power production of the eight gas turbines is shown below:

Yearly Gas Turbines Power(without chiller)

1500.01550.01600.01650.01700.01750.01800.01850.01900.0

Jan-

05

Feb-

05

Mar

-05

Apr

-05

May

-05

Jun-

05

Jul-0

5

Aug

-05

Sep-

05

Oct

-05

Nov

-05

Dec

-05

POW

ER [M

W]

Power Production

If the chiller is installed in each gas turbine air inlet, the power will be modified as shown below:

Yearly Gas Turbines Power(with chiller)

1770.0

1790.0

1810.0

1830.0

1850.0

1870.0

Jan-

05

Feb-

05

Mar

-05

Apr

-05

May

-05

Jun-

05

Jul-0

5

Aug

-05

Sep

-05

Oct

-05

Nov

-05

Dec

-05

POW

ER [M

W]

-20.0

30.0

80.0

130.0

180.0

230.0

DEL

TA P

OW

ER [M

W]

ΔPower

Power

Indicated power considers the gas turbine power production minus electric consumption because of water/glycol solution pumping.

Power Production

On the other hand, the heat rate is affected as shown below:

Overall gas turbine power production would increase, largely during hot weather, while during cold weather it would decrease as no significant air inlet temperature drop could be obtained and a chiller would act as an air restriction (pressure drop at air inlet).

Yearly Gas Turbine Heat Rate(with chiller)

10200.0

10220.0

10240.0

10260.0

10280.0

10300.0

10320.0Ja

n-05

Feb-

05M

ar-0

5

Apr

-05

May

-05

Jun-

05

Jul-0

5

Aug

-05

Sep

-05

Oct

-05

Nov

-05

Dec

-05

HEA

T R

AT E

[kJ/

kW·h

]

-500.0

-400.0

-300.0

-200.0

-100.0

0.0

100.0

DEL

TA H

EAT

RA

TE[k

J/kW

·h]

Δheat Rate

Heat Rate

Operating Hours per year

Overall Profit due to Power

Augmentation[MM $/year]:

Overall Expense due to Heat Rate


Net Profit[MM $/year]:

8,760 104.92 37.14 67.78

7,000 83.84 29.68 54.16

7,500 89.83 31.80 58.03

7,000 83.84 29.68 54.16

6,500 77.85 27.56 50.29

6,000 71.86 25.44 46.42

Economics

Heat rate effect has been evaluated in comparison with power augmentation. Net profit (margin) considers income from power augmentation and expense because of fuel consumption increase.







8,760 92.90 33.36 59.54

7,000 74.24 26.66 47.58

7,500 79.54 28.56 50.97

7,000 74.24 26.66 47.58

6,500 68.93 24.76 44.18

6,000 63.63 22.85 40.78

EconomicsChiller Pressure Drop Sensitivity

The economic evaluation has been performed for a pressure drop of 10 mbar







8,760 80.88 29.55 51.33

7,000 64.63 23.62 41.02

7,500 69.25 25.30 43.95

7,000 64.63 23.62 41.02

6,500 60.02 21.93 38.09

6,000 55.40 20.24 35.16

EconomicsChiller Pressure Drop Sensitivity

Similarly to before, the economic evaluation has been performed for a pressure drop of 15 mbar







8,760 125.62 44.57 81.05

7,000 100.38 35.62 64.76

7,500 107.55 38.16 69.39

7,000 100.38 35.62 64.76

6,500 93.21 33.07 60.14

6,000 86.04 30.53 55.51

EconomicsWet Bulb Temperature Sensitivity

An economic evaluation has been performed for a wet bulb temperature of 8ºC







8,760 84.80 29.91 54.89

7,000 67.76 23.90 43.86

7,500 72.60 25.61 46.99

7,000 67.76 23.90 43.86

6,500 62.92 22.19 40.73

6,000 58.08 20.49 37.59

EconomicsWet Bulb Temperature Sensitivity

Similarly, an economic evaluation has been performed for a wet bulb temperature of 12ºC

Conclusions

• Study results indicate that process integration of cold energy recovery from an LNG terminal in a power plant has the potential to provide a highly reliable and operable facility with enhanced economics

• Utilizing a very conservative assessment for a retrofit with known and unknown elements of constructability risk (additional structural support, piping, pump costs, etc) a CAPEX deduct of $10.5 MM was estimated, allowing a conservative potential investment gain ranging from $30 MM to $43 MM

• This potential profit margin projects a simple pay back of the installation in the range of 1 to 1.5 years

Thank you. Any questions?

Augusto BulteProposal Manager - LNG & Power ProjectsFoster Wheeler [email protected]

integration of ccgt plant and lng terminal

Documents