technologies for carbon capture and storage tee 11.05.09

8/14/2019 Technologies for Carbon Capture and Storage TEE 11.05.09

1/35

Centre for Research and Technology Hellas/ Institu te for Solid Fuels Technology and Applications

CERTH/ISFTA

Technologies for Carbon Capture and

Storage

Pre-convention of the Technical Chamber of Greeceon the Optimization of lignite exploration in the

electricity production

Prof. Em. Kakaras and Dr. . Koukouzas

Kozani, 11 May 2009


2/35

Table of Contents

1. Carbon dioxide capture options

2. CCS implementation and projects

3. CCS in the European energy market

4. Greek CO2 Capture PP

5. CCS in the Greek energy market

6. Carbon dioxide storage options


3/35

Carbon dioxide capture options (1)


4/35


Post-

Combustion

Capture

Pre-

Combustion

Capture

Oxyfuel

Coal CO2 Capture

NGCC

Flue gasO2production CO2 Capture

IGCC

Cleaning StorageIRCC

CompressionTransport

O2production Oxyfuel

Technology availability / Industrial Maturity Storage location selection

Environmental Commitments Security of storage

Strategic Planning Monitoring / Verification


5/35

CO2 scrubbing from flue gas using amine solution

European Technology Platform, Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants (ZEP), Working Group 1,Power Plant and Carbon Dioxide Capture



6/35

Oxyfuel combustion

Vattenfall



7/35

European Technology Platform, Zero Emission Fossil Fuel Power Plants (ZEP), Working Group 1,

Power Plant and Carbon Dioxide Capture

Production of a carbon free fuel

ASU

Gasifier Acid gasremoval

Powerisland

Sulphur

recovery

Gas cooling/dedusting

AirAir

AirAir

NN22

OO22

SteamSteam

RawRaw gasgas

CoalCoal

SourSour gasgas

ASU

Gasifier Acid gasremoval

Powerisland

Sulphur

recovery

Gas cooling/dedusting

AirAir

AirAir

NN22

OO22

SteamSteam

RawRaw gasgas

CoalCoal

SourSour gasgas



8/35

Timeline for CO2 capture technologies


Timeline for CO2 capture technologies


9/35

, CO2 Capture and Storage : A Key Carbon Abatement Option (2008)

Scenarios of CCS implementation


10/35


11/35

CCS technologies in thermal PPs will contribute significantly in themitigation of the GHG effect since thermal PPs account for ca. 1/3 of

the total CO2 atmospheric emissions. This fact explains the intenseresearch activities aiming at the achievement of viable solutions in themedium term.

The following are a number of important EC CCS projects with Greekpartnership (CERTH NTUA - PPC):

ENCAP (Pre-combustion and oxyfuel technologies for solid fuels)

CASTOR (Post-combustion CO2 capture)

CACHET (Post-combustion CO2 capture for gaseous fuels) ISSC (Production of a carbon-free gaseous fuel from solid fuels

using CaO and pre-combustion CO2 capture)

C2H (Production of a H2-rich from solid fuels using CaO)

Research projects on the ZEPP


12/35


Natural

Gas

Hard coal

plant

Lignite

plant

Economic life time years 25 25 25

Depreatiation years 25 25 25

Fuel price EUR/GJ (LHV) 5,8 2,3 1,1Fuel price escalation % per year 1,5% 1,5% 1,5%

Operating hours per year hours per year 7500 7500 7500

Standard Emission factor t/MWh th 0,210 0,344 0,402

Common Inputs

O&M cost escalation

Debt /Equitiy ratio %

Loan interest rate %

Interest during construction %

Return on Equity %

Tax rate %

WACC 8%Discount rate % 9,0%

6%

12%

35%

Financial and other

Boundary Conditions

50%

6%

2%

CoalReference

Unit

Unit with pre-

combustion capture

Unit with post-

Combustion capturexyfuel

Power output MW 556 737 460 470Efficiency % 46 36 36 36

CO2 capture % - 92 85 91

EPC Capital cost Euro/kW 918 1577 1446 1447

Lignite

MW 920 717 731 760% 43 41 39 41

% - 85 85 90

Euro/kW 1065 1556 1683 1671

Natural Gas

MW 420 755 662 325% 58 41 47 48

% - 93 85 100

Euro/kW 410 763 742 1124

Power output

Efficiency

CO2 capture

EPC Capital cost

Power outputEfficiency

CO2 capture

EPC Capital cost

Reference

Unit

Unit with pre-

combustion capture

Unit with post-

Combustion capture xyfuel

Reference

Unit

Unit with pre-

combustion capture

Unit with post-

Combustion capturexyfuel

CCS in the European energy market (1)


13/35

Estimated electricity generation cost from largecoal, lignite and natural gas PPs in 2020, withoutand with CO2 capture


Estimated CO2 capture cost from large coal, ligniteand natural gas PPs in 2020, without and with CO2capture



14/35

At the left of the point of intersection of the cost curves without and with CO2 capture,investment in CCS technologies becomes economically viable

CO2 pentalty (Euros/tn) Coal Lignite Natural gas

100 23.5 14.2 56.9

40 58.8 35.6 >100

Break-even point where CCS

technologies become viable

(% emmissions)

30

40

50

60

70

80

90100

110

120

130

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

% of emissions with 100 Euros/tn CO2 penaltyElect

ricitygenerationcost(Eu

ros/MWh)

Coal Unit

Coal Unit

with CO2capture

Lignite Unit

Lignite Unit

Natural gas

Unit

30

35

40

45

50

55

6065

70

75

80

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

% of emissions with 40 Euros/tn CO2 penalty

Electricitygenerationcost(E

uros/MWh)

with CO2capture

Natural gas

Unitwith CO2capture

Coal Unit

Coal Unit

with CO2capture

Lignite Unit

Lignite Unit

Natural gas

Unit

with CO2capture

Natural gas

Unitwith CO2capture

Electricity generation costs of large PPs with and without CO2 capture/with CO2 penalty in 2020



15/35

In order to demonstrate the potential of CO2 capture technologies for ligniteapplications, the simulation of a typical new 330 MWel Greek PP was performed,including the retrofit options of amine scrubbing and Oxyfuel fuel firing. The PP hasa supercritical boiler, a three pressure stage steam turbine and 8 regenerative feedwater preheaters.

ConventionalPP

OxyFuelAmine

Fuel Thermal Input MWth 830.0

Thermal Consumptionfor Solvent Regeneration

MWth - - 256.5

ASU Consumption MWel - 58.1 -

CO2 CompressionConsumption

MWel - 22.4 20.5

Cooling PumpsConsumption MWel - 1.5 0.7

Power Consumptionfrom Amine ScrubbingUnit

MWel - - 8.7

Net Power Output MWel 293.7 211.0 200.5

Efficiency % 35.74 25.42 24.16

CO2 Capture Retrofit in Greek PPs


16/35

New 360 MWel Lignite PP with Oxyfuel combustion (typical Greek lignite)

Feedwaterheatin

g

LPH1toLPH3

Feedwaterheating

LPH1toLPH3

I1I2

G7

G10

G11

G3

A7

G4

A8

A2

Air leakage

Ash

Air leakage

A5

A6

A9A10

I1 I3I2 I4

I5

G5

G6

G8G9

G1

G2

Lignite Dryer Waste waterDriedlignite

F3

DCAC

ASU

Wet ESP FGCSeparation of non-

condensables

TEG

N2

tomolecular

shieves

ESP

A1 A3 A4

A11A

12

F1 F2

F

3

Rawlignite

F3

D1

D2

D3

D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10

D11

D12

D13

D14

D15

G12G13

G14

G15

G16

G17

G18

G19

S1

S2

S3

S4S5

S6

S7

S8S9

S10

S11

S13

S12

S14

S15

S20

S16S17

S21

S22

S18

S19

S23

S24

S25

I6I7I8

Oxygen Flow

I3I4

G20 G21

G22

G23

Green-field PPs with CO2 capture


17/35

The electricity generation cost has been assessed for the following technologies:

Conventional lignite PP

Conventional lignite PP with CO2 capture with amine scrubbing

Conventional lignite PP with CO2 capture with oxyfuel combustion

State of the art super-critical lignite PP (CCT)

Natural gas Combined Cycle (NGCC)

Lignite Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)

The general and case-specific assumptions for the calculations are the following:

Discount factor: 8%, Inflation: 3%

Lignite cost: 1.8 / GJ, Natural gas cost: 5.5 /GJ

Depreciation for Solid fuel units: 25 years, for NG and IGCC units: 15 years

O&M costs: 3% of capital costs per annually, variable cost 0.01 /kWh for a lignite

unit and 0.005 /kWh for a natural gas unit. 7500 h of operation per year at full load

CO2 market cost: 18 /tnConv.

lignite PP

Conventional

lignite PP with

amine scrubbing

Conventional

lignite oxyfuel PP

State of the art

super-critical

lignite PP

NGCC. IGCC

Net power output MWel 294 201 211 300 380 766

Efficiency % 35.7 24.2 25.4 44.0 56.5 43.0

Capital cost /kW 1100 1900 1570 1150 600 1370

Specific CO2 emissions kg/kWh 1.075 0.17 0.34 0.865 0.37 0.76

CCS in the Greek energy market (1)


18/35

Fixed cost includes depreciation and O&M costs, variable cost includes fuel.

The units have been grouped in two categories: current technologies andtechnologies that will be commercially available in the future. The differencein specific emissions from the reference unit for each category multiplied bythe CO2 cost is an estimation of the price risk due to the emitted CO2.

Electricity generation costs

0

12

3

45

6

7

8

9

Conventional PP State of the artSupercritical PP

Natural gasCombined Cycle

cent/kWh

CO2 risk (vsNGCC)

Rick due to NGprice volatility

Variable cost

Fixed cost

Electricity generation costs

0

12

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

AminescrubbingOxyfuelState of theart Super-

critical PP

NGCC IGCC

cent/kW

hCO2 risk (vs(amine/oxyfuel)

Risk due toNG price

Variable cost

Fixed cost

Electricity generation costs for current

technologies

Electricity generation costs for future

technologies

CCS in the Greek energy market (2)


19/35

Capture Transport Geological

Storage

Carbon dioxide storage options (1)


20/35

Potential CO2 storage sites :

Oceans

Depleted oil and gas reservoirs

Deep unmineable coal seams

Deep saline aquifers.

Mineralization of CO2.



21/35



22/35

CO2 disposal methods in the oceans

Oceans



23/35

Depleted oil and gas reservoirs

Enhanced oil recovery with thehelp of CO2



24/35

Deep saline aquifers (>800m).



25/35

Examples of storage projects:

Sleipner, North Sea saline reservoir

In-Salah, Algeria gas reservoir

K12B, North Sea gas reservoir

Weyburn, Canada oil reservoir

Enhanced Coal Bed Methane projects

Alisson (New Mexico)

Recopol (Poland)



26/35

Locations of CO2 storage activities



27/35

Storage potential

The estimated range of the economic potential for CCS varies between 220-2200 GtCO2, which would mean that 15-55% of the world-wide mitigation effort by 2100could be achieved through the implementation of CCS.

Gton CO2 20501 Gton CO2

2

Depleted oil fields 126-400 150-700

Depleted gas fields 800 500-1100

Enhanced oil recovery 61-65

Unminable coal seams >15 >73

Saline aquifers 400-10,000 320-10,000

1Source: (IEA GHG, 2001)2Source: (Edmonds, 2000)



28/35


29/35

CO2 point sources in relation

with the sedimentary basinswith storage potential(Koukouzas et al., 2009 Int. J. of GHG



30/35

Prinos basin geological cross - section

Prinos basin stratigraphic column (Koukouzas et al., 2009 Int. J. of GHG)



31/35

Geological cross section of Mesohellenic Trough

Cap rock

CO2 potential storage site

(Koukouzas et al., 2009 Int. J. of GHG)



32/35

CO2 storage capacity in saline aquifers -Greece

Aquifer Position Storage capacity (Mt CO 2)

Prinos offshore 1343

W. Thessaloniki onshore 459

W. Thessaloniki

sandstone

onshore 145

Alexandria onshore 34

Mesohellenic basin onshore 360

Total 2345

(GESTCO PROJECT)



33/35

2323 SiOMCOCOMSiO ++

Mineral carbonation: reaction of CO2 with metal oxide bearing

materials to form insoluble carbonates, with calcium and magnesium

being the most attractive metals.

The general reaction is:

M: divalent ion. Here, M corresponds

to Ca or Mg



34/35

Pyroxenite

Dunite

Dunite

Hartzburgite

Hartzburgite


In collaboration with

Los Alamos National

Laboratory


35/35

technologies for carbon capture and storage tee 11.05.09

Documents