netl modeling of ccs - iea-etsap energy technology systems ... · netl modeling of ccs etsap...

NETL Modeling of CCSETSAP Workshop session: ‘CCS IN ENERGY SCENARIOS’

July 11, 2017Presented by Chris Nichols, Energy Markets Analysis Team, Systems Engineering and Analysis

2

• Introduction of the Systems Engineering and Analysis (SEA) Directorate at NETL and how we integrate engineering analysis to market modeling

• Discussion of data available and translation into model inputs

• Review some relevant model run results

• Conclusions and on-going work

Overview

3

NETL Enduring Core Competencies

Computational Engineering

High Performance Computing

Data Analytics

Materials Engineering & Manufacturing

Structural & Functional

Design, Synthesis & Performance

Geological & Environmental Systems

Air, Water & Geology

Understanding & Mitigation

EnergyConversion

Engineering

Component & Device

Design & Validation

Systems Engineering & Analysis

Process & System

Optimization, Validation & Economics

Effective Resource Development~

Efficient Energy Conversion~

Environmental Sustainability

4

Energy Systems Analysis

Systems Engineering & Analysis (SEA)Teams and Scope

Process Systems Engineering Research

Energy Process Analysis

Energy Markets Analysis

Energy Economy Modeling and Impact Assessment• Enhanced fossil energy representation• Multi-model scenario/policy analysis• Infrastructure, energy-water

Resource Availability and Cost Modeling• CO2 storage (saline and EOR)• Fossil fuel extraction• Rare earth elements• General subsurface technology

evaluation and supportGrid modeling and analysis

Environmental Life Cycle Analysis

Energy Process Design, Analysis, and Cost Estimation• Plant-level modeling, performance assessment• Cost estimation for

plant-level systems• General plant-level

technology evaluation and support

• Economic impact assessment• General regulatory, market and

financial expertise

• Process synthesis, design, optimization, intensification

• Steady state and dynamic process model development

• Uncertainty quantification• Advanced process control

Design, optimization, and modeling framework to be expanded to all SEA “systems”

5

Assessing Program Portfolio Impacts: Coal Program Example

Baseline Data & Model

Development

Set R&D Goals and Evaluate Progress

Project deployment of Technologies

Estimate Potential Benefits of RD&D

NETL Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants

NETL CO2 Capture, Transport, Storage and Utilization - National Energy Modeling System (CTUS-NEMS)

• Detailed, transparent account of plant information

• Key resource for government, academia and industry

• Adopted by EIA; used in AEO’s 2014/15/16

• Facilitates and encourages EPSA interactions

NETL CO2 Saline Storage Cost Model (onshore and offshore)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0 10 20 30 40

Mcf

/STB

Years

CO2 Utilization Factor

ver 1 ver 2

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0 10 20 30 40

Frac

tio

n

Years

CO2 Retention Factor

ver 1 ver 2

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

0 10 20 30 40M

STB

Years

Annual Oil Production

ver 1 ver 2

Borehole bottom locations mapped by play name

NETL CO2 Prophet Model

NetPay

GrossPay

Oil Bearing Formation

Gas Cap

Aquifer/ ROZ

Oil Zone

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

No RD&D RD&D No RD&D RD&D

Gig

awat

ts

NG Retrofits

New Gas CCS

Coal Retrofits

New Coal CCS

Assessing Program Portfolio Impacts:Baseline Data &

Model Development

Set and Evaluate

Progress to R&D Goals

Project Deployment of Technologies

Estimate Potential Benefits of CCRP RD&D

Estimate Potential Benefits of RD&D

New CCS Capacity and Associated Captured CO2

2025 2040

No Captured CO2

New NG CCS

New NG CCS

Coal Retrofits

New Coal CCS

57 MM tonnes/yearCO2 Captured



NG Retrofits

New NG CCS

Coal Retrofits

U.S. Benefits of the Program, Cumulative through 2040

Benefit Area Metric

Economic Growth Total Electricity Expenditure Savings

Employment

Income

Gross Domestic Product (GDP)

Environmental

Sustainability

CO2 Captured at Coal and Gas CCS Facilities

Energy Security Additional Domestic Oil Production via EOR

$

7

• With state-of-the-art technology, adding 90% CO2 capture and storage (CCS) significantly increases the cost of electricity (COE)• 45-65% for NGCC• ~75% for pulverized coal (PC)

• Lower capture rates for PC plants decrease the COE penalty, but result in a higher cost of capture • e.g., $87/tonne versus $58/tonne

for 35% and 90% capture, respectively

• Due in part to diseconomies of scale

• RD&D is needed to reduce the costs of advanced coal power with CCS

NETL Cost and Performance BaselineSummary Results

1 T&S = transport (100 km) and storage in a Midwest saline formation 2 +30%/-15% uncertainty range; different finance structure utilized for non-capture and capture plants3 Fully-loaded design rates; does not account for start-up, shutdown, performance degradation between maintenance, part-load operation, etc.4 Excludes CO2 T&S; relative to non-capture NGCC and non-capture supercritical PC design for NGCC and PC capture designs, respectively

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

CO

E, $

/MW

h (

20

11

$)

CO₂ T&S

Fuel

Variable

Fixed

Capital

$143

$127

$99

$82$87

$58

$101

$70

$43

$71$6.13 MMBTU

$4 MMBTU

$8MMBTU

1

2

Plant Type NGCC Supercritical PC PlantCapture Rate 0% 90% 0% 16% 35% 90%

CO2 Emissions3 (lb/MWh-gross) 773 82 1,618 1,400 1,100 183Efficiency (HHV) 51.5% 45.7% 40.7% 39.2% 37.4% 32.5%

Cost of Capture4 ($/tonne) $71 $124 $87 $58

Source: NETL

8

Fossil Energy – Coal Research Program GoalsDriving Down the Cost of Electricity of Coal Power with CCS

0% Reduction

20% Reduction

30% Reduction

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

State-of-the-Art 2025 Demo 2030 Demo

Goals are for greenfield plants. Costs include compression to 2,215 psia, but exclude CO2 transport and storage costs.

Cost of Electricity Reduction Targets

Transformational Technology

IGCC orSupercritical PC

2nd-Generation Technology

CO

E R

ela

tive

to

To

day

’s

Co

al w

ith

Cap

ture

(%

)

9

Driving Down the Cost of Electricity of Coal Power with CCS

Ad

van

ced

Inte

gra

ted

G

asi

fica

tio

n F

uel

Cel

l

Ad

van

ced

O

xy-C

om

bu

stio

n

Ad

van

ced

IGC

CP

ost

-Co

mb

ust

ion

C

ap

ture

70

90

110

130

150

170

Bas

elin

e A

min

e

Ad

v. C

aptu

re

AU

SC S

team

Ad

v. C

O2

Co

mp

ress

ion

Co

nve

nti

on

alFi

nan

cin

g

COE (2011$/MWh)

Sorbent

Membrane

70

90

110

130

150

170

Bas

elin

e

Ad

v. H

ydro

gen

Turb

ine IT

M

War

m G

asC

lean

up

H2

Me

mb

ran

e

85

% A

vaila

bili

ty

Co

nve

nti

on

alFi

nan

cin

g

COE (2011$/MWh)

70

90

110

130

150

170

Re

fere

nce

IGFC

←D

egra

dat

ion

←O

verp

ote

nti

al

85

% A

vaila

bili

ty

Enh

ance

d…

←SO

FC C

ost

→ In

vert

er E

ff.

Cat

alyt

ic G

asif

ier

COE (2011$/MWh)

70

90

110

130

150

170

Bas

e

Bas

e+A

dv.

Rec

ycle

Bas

e+A

dv.

Co

mp

r.

Bas

e+A

dv.

Cry

o…

Bas

e+A

USC

Ste

am

Bas

e+O

xy B

oile

r

Bas

e+O

2 M

em

b.

2n

d G

en

Tran

sfo

rmat

ion

al

COE (2011$/MWh)

“Current and Future Power Generation Technologies: Pathways to Reducing the Cost of Carbon Capture for Coal-fueled Power Plants” (October 2014) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876610214026058.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1876610214026058

10

• The AEO2016 Reference case includes a 30% capture coal CCS technology.

• The Starting Point case uses AEO2017 assumptions for a 90% capture technology but modified to reflect the absence of Federal R&D.• The first on-line year is assumed to

be 2025 and the learning rate is half the rate in the AEO2017

• The Program Goal case assumes success of the CCS R&D program goals that lead to lower capital costs, an early start year, as well as greater efficiency.

Coal with CCS Capital Costs

11

Co

al C

CS

Pow

er P

lan

t C

apit

al C

ost

y = 45159x-0.282

R² = 0.9749LR=18%

y = 163428x-0.426

R² = 0.9942LR=26%

y = 33660x-0.271

R² = 0.9934LR=17%

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

- 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000

20

05 U

S M

illio

n d

olla

rs/G

igaw

atts

PJ

R3.1.3.0+ EOR, PG, 45Q,H2O

R3.1.6.0+ PG

R3.1.6.0+ EOR, PG, 45Q,H2O

Integration of learning curves with the program goal assumptions. Learning rates for CCS coal power plants in the scenarios with strong CO2 constraints are 17%-26% and are consistent with literature review

Cumulative Coal CCS Electricity Production

Integrating “learning by doing” with CCS cost goals

12

CCS Retrofits of Existing Plants in U.S.

• Options for an existing plant in a

carbon mitigation scenario

1. Business as usual + pay CO2

emissions penalties

2. Retrofit for CCS with potential

to sell CO2

3. Retire and replace with new

capacity

• CO2 revenue required to incentivize

#2 over #1 in the absence of a CO2

tax evaluated • Rapid deployment of 2nd Generation capture technology needed to impact current coal fleet

• Transformational capture technology has a role in NGCC CCS retrofits, international coal CCS retrofits

30-year economic life, 75% capacity factor, $75/MWh power price (NEMS 2030 est); nth-of-a-kind cost and performance

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Cu

mu

lati

ve C

oal

Ret

rofi

ts In

cen

tivi

zed

[GW

pre

-ret

rofi

t]

Minimum Plant Gate CO2 Revenue Required to Incentivize CCS [$/tonne]

State-of-the-Art

2nd Generation

2nd Gen technology reduces coal CO2

capture cost by ~25%

13

• Using EPA 9R database with MARKAL, we modeled a variety of CO2 control regimes based on EMF 32 scenarios with and without DOE R&D goals susccess:• Rated based CPP

• Mass based CPP with high NG price

• $25/mt CO2 tax with 5% escalation rate

• 80% economy-wide CO2 reduction by 2050

• Meaningful deployments of CCS do not appear in most non-R&D cases, while R&D success does drive large scale deployments

Overview of relevant model results

14

Deployment (G W) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

New NGC C with C C S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NGC C C C S retrofits 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

New coal with ccs 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

C oal C C S retrofits 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

B iomas s with C C S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

• Sources: MARKAL NETL

Power Sector Technological ChangesElectricity Generation Mix: CPP Rate Based with CO2 Trading without and with CCS RD&D Goals Scenarios

Deployment (G W) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050






15

Electricity Generation Mix: CPP Mass Based with high natural gas prices, without and with CCS RD&D Goals Scenarios

Deployment (GW) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

New NGCC with CCS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NGCC CCS retrofits 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

New coal with ccs 0 0 0 0 0 0.02 0.1

Coal CCS retrofits 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Biomass with CCS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Deployment (GW) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

New NGCC with CCS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

NGCC CCS retrofits 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


Coal CCS retrofits 0 0 3 3 3 0 0

Biomass with CCS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

16


Power Sector Technological ChangesElectricity Generation Mix: CO2 Taxes at $25/tCO2 and 5% with and without CCS RD&D Goals Scenarios

Deployment (G W) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050






Deployment (G W) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

New NGC C with C C S 0 0 0 17 34 39 39





17


Power Sector Technological ChangesElectricity Generation Mix: 80% CO2 Reduction by 2050 and 80% CO2 Reduction by 2050 with CCS RD&D Goals Scenarios

Deployment (G W) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050





B iomas s with C C S 0 27 62 74 75 75 75

Deployment (G W) 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

New NGC C with C C S 0 0 0 11 11 45 45


New coal with ccs 0 0 0 0 14 142 280


B iomas s with C C S 0 0 0 1 47 53 59

18

• Currently investigating cases of CCS deployment without a CO2 price• EOR integration and tax credits

• Examining issues related to existing and new coal units:• Heat rate improvements for existing units

• Impact of cycling operations

• Economic growth assumptions

• Integration of water usage and consumption

Continuing work

19

• CO2 capture, transport and storage are represented in several sectors: oil & gas, electricity, liquid fuels, and the CTUS module allowing for a complete and integrated assessment CCUS

Translating theCO2 CTUS-NEMS Model Structure into MARKAL/TIMES

OGSM: Oil and Gas Supply ModuleLFMM: Liquid Fuels Market ModuleEMM: Electricity Market ModuleCTUS: Carbon, Transport, Utilization

and Storage Module

•Competing Prices for CO2 By Source

•Available CO2 By Source

•Demand for CO2 By EOR

OGSM

•Potential Revenue Stream from EOR

•CO2 Supplied by GenUnits to each OGSM Region

•Price of CO2 From Gen Units to each OGSM Region

•Pipeline Infrastructure to Support CO2 Flows

•Cost of transport from source to sinks (EOR and/or Saline Storage)

•Cost of Saline Storage

CTUSEMM

•Potential Revenue Stream from EOR

•CO2 Supplied by CTL to each OGSM Region

•Price of CO2 From CTL to each OGSM Region

LFMMCost of transport Cost of Storage

Cost of transport Cost of Storage

Competitive Market for CO2

Competitive Market for CO2

CO2 captured for EOR and/or StorageP and Q CO2 for EOR

Industrial CO2 Capture- by individual site

aggregated into quantity and price

bins for each OGSM region

20

• NETL developed inputs currently used in both CTUS-NEMS and EIA NEMS• Saline Storage Cost: NETL CO2 Saline Storage Cost Model• CO2 Pipeline Transport Cost: NETL CO2 Transport Cost Model • Other Industrial Sources of CO2 for EOR: NETL Carbon Capture Retrofit Database (CCRD)

• NETL developed inputs currently used in only CTUS-NEMS • Existing Coal and NGCC Plant CCS Retrofit Cost and Performance: NETL Carbon Capture Retrofit Database (CCRD)

• NETL inputs currently being incorporated into only CTUS-NEMS• Offshore Storage: NETL Offshore Saline Storage Cost Model• EOR Type Curves: NETL PROPHET Model• Revised EOR Site Cost: NETL Onshore EOR Cost Model• EOR Offshore Site Cost: NETL Offshore EOR Cost Model• Residual Oil Zone Resources: NETL ROZ Resource Assessments

• Default EIA data used elsewhere

Data SourcesData Used in FE/NETL CO2 CTUS-NEMS

Solutions for Today | Options for Tomorrow

I have seen the future and it is very much like the present, only longer. --Kehlog Albran

For more information…

Chris Nichols

[email protected]

304 285-4172

mailto:[email protected]

22

Cost of Capturing CO2 from Industrial SourcesCost Breakdown

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

$140

Ethanol Ammonia Natural GasProcessing

EthyleneOxide

Coal-to-Liquids

Gas-to-Liquids

RefineryHydrogen

Steel/Iron Cement

Firs

t-ye

ar "

Bre

akev

en"

Req

uir

ed C

O2

Selli

ng

Pri

ce

(Co

nst

ant

20

11

USD

)Purchased Natural Gas

Purchased Power

Consumables

Variable O&M

Fixed O&M

CAPEX

High Purity CO2 Low Purity CO2

netl modeling of ccs - iea-etsap energy technology systems ... · netl modeling of ccs etsap...

Documents