Innovation in Global Power - Parsons Brinckerhoff

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Thermal – Achieving New Efficiencies, Reducing Carbon Emissions http://www.pbworld.com/news_events/publications/network/ and sulphur dioxide, and to reduce nitrogen oxides before entering the carbon capture process. The carbon dioxide is absorbed into a chemical solution 1 to remove it from the flue gas, which is then emitted to atmosphere. The carbon dioxide gas is removed from the absorbent, compressed and transported for long-term sequestration. The challenge with this technology is the need to scale up to utility-size capture. Oxyfuel. An oxyfuel plant is one in which the fuel is combusted in oxygen supplied by an air separation plant rather than air. The resulting flue gases are purified to remove particulate matter and sulphur dioxide, and to reduce nitrogen oxides. Some of the captured carbon dioxide is recycled and mixed with the oxygen feed to the boiler plant to control combustion temperature. The remaining carbon dioxide is then purified, compressed and transported to long-term storage. The aim of oxyfuel development is to use as much of the existing and proven equipment as possible; although some issues remain relating to the control of combustion temperatures within the boiler and the scaling up of air separation plant to the size necessary for use in power plant applications. Carbon Dioxide Transport and Storage Transport. Captured carbon dioxide is transported to a longterm storage location by either pipeline, truck, train, or boat, although only pipeline would be feasible for the quantities resulting from large-scale power generation—millions of tonnes per year. The pipeline could transport carbon dioxide in the gaseous phase, at pressures below 71 bar, or at higher pressures where the carbon dioxide is present as a supercritical fluid giving benefits from lower frictional losses. The scale is such that a new pipeline infrastructure would be needed. Storage. Storage of carbon dioxide is assumed to be in geological formations, such as depleted oil and gas reservoirs, deep saline aquifers and unmineable coal seams. These formations need to provide storage with negligible leakage to ensure that the carbon is sequestered over geological timescales—thousands, if not tens of thousands of years. The estimated global potential for the storage of CO2 in these various sinks is detailed in Table 1. As would be expected, the capacities for the oil/gas and coal storage options are considerably smaller than those for the saline aquifers. Even with the present global carbon dioxide emissions of about 25 billion tonnes per year, the available storage capacity extends for about 55 years to about 435 years. Whilst this is not a solution, it does provide us with a temporary breathing space in which to find and implement alternative means of energy provision to satisfy human, social and economic aspirations. Technology Analysis and Lifetime Cost of Generation For the purposes of reviewing the position of gas turbine technology within a carbon constrained world, it was necessary to identify those power generation technologies where gas turbines will continue to have a use and, importantly, the competitor technologies. The technologies reviewed included: • Coal supercritical pulverised fuel plant with flue gas desulphurisation with and without carbon capture • Coal integrated gasification combined cycle plant (IGCC) with and without carbon capture • Gas fired combined cycle plant with low NOx burner technology with and without carbon capture • New generation nuclear power plant. Table 1: Estimated Capacity of CO 2 Storage Options. (Source: IEA-GHG, 2004) Our analysis considered the impact of carbon and capital on the lifetime cost of electricity generation. The extent to which carbon pricing ‘feeds through’ to the cost of electricity generation depends on the amount of free allocations provided by government to individual plants. Given that different allocation methodologies will be adopted in different countries globally, it was considered to be of more value to assume no allocations and that the full cost of carbon flows through to the end electricity generation cost. The level of carbon captured within the carbon capture options will be specific to each plant’s detailed design. The costs associated with the transport and storage of carbon were based on various reference sources—an indicative value of $10/ton CO2 sequestered was used. 2 The Capital costs and operation and maintenance costs were based on those observed in the market and included adjustments for the recent increases in the underlying materials costs, such as: • Steel: 35 percent increase since 2002 • Copper: 400 percent increase since 2002 • Nickel: 400 percent increase since 2002. The analysis showed that the addition of carbon capture and associated transport and storage charges added about 35 percent to 63 percent to the lifetime cost of electricity generation. Introducing a carbon cost payable by the generation plants for all CO2 emitted increased the electricity costs across the board, as would be expected. For example, if a $25/ton charge were placed on all CO2 emissions, the gap between non-carbon capture and carbon capture would be narrowed to 6 percent to 22 percent due to the proportionately larger impact the carbon cost has on the non-CCS plant. 1 A number of possible chemicals can be used. Amine, ammonia, and potassium bicarbonate are just a few. 2 Imperial College, Potential for Synergy between renewables and Carbon Capture and Storage. PB Network #68 / August 2008 6
Thermal – Achieving New Efficiencies, Reducing Carbon Emissions http://www.pbworld.com/news_events/publications/network/ across the board, as would be expected. For example, if a €25/ton charge were placed on all CO2 emissions, the gap between non-carbon capture and carbon capture would be narrowed to 6 percent to 22 percent due to the proportionately larger impact the carbon cost has on the non-CCS plant. Figure 3 shows that the carbon costs incurred by unabated generation increase the cost of generation significantly whilst maintaining the mix of generation technologies to coal, gas and nuclear. There did not appear to be a clear winner. Figure 3: Relative costs of plant with and without carbon capture. Where Are We Now? A number of CCS projects of varying sizes are underway around the world. The European Union (EU) projects are shown in Figure 4. As can be seen, only three are identified as being operational with the bulk being in the ‘planned’ stage. Figure 4: Carbon Capture projects in the European Union. These projects will be implemented at various times up to 2015, with the majority scheduled for delivery around 2010. The fact that these development projects are moving forward is a step in right direction; however, there is a need to accelerate this if we wish to contain the global concentrations of atmospheric CO2 below the 450 ppmv level that is presently given as our target. Other Opportunities A carbon capture plant had been considered to date as being inflexible in its operation and less able to respond to short-term changes in electricity demand. This view is changing, however, with recent studies considering the specific capabilities of the power generation plant and the carbon capture plant separately. With this new view comes the potential to include additional carbon storage on post-combustion capture plants, a change that will allow additional power to be provided from the generator in response to system events, such as transmission system faults, power station forced outages, or spikes in demand. This change could provide valuable flexibility services to the transmission system operator when rapid response to system events is required. In the case of pre-combustion plant, whether the fuel is coal or gas, the hydrogen fraction of the syngas could provide the beginning for establishing a hydrogen economy. This would be prior to the commercial realisation of nuclear fission. It would also be applicable in countries that do not have sufficient insolation (incident solar radiation) or available land area to drive large solar plant that could be used to generate hydrogen. Summary The technology relating to carbon capture is progressing and reaching a point where it is at a pre-commercial stage. The mechanisms to allow the costs associated with carbon emissions to incentivise investment in carbon capture plant are beginning to emerge, but they will need a strong political will to ensure that the costs associated with carbon emissions become sufficient to tip the balance in favour of carbon capture. This political decision will need to take into account the extent to which the end customer incurs additional charges and the rate at which any additional costs are introduced into the economy. This is a balancing act and it will have a time constant associated with it. It must be remembered, however, that: CCS IS NOT A SOLUTION — IT’S A STOP GAP! Dominic Cook has 20+ years of utility and consultancy experience in the power industry. He has been involved in regulatory audits and the development of power generation plant, and in providing advice to financial institutions. His publications included “Powering the Nation” in June 2006 and he is presently involved with the UK government on the carbon capture competition. Note: This article was adapted from a paper presented at the annual conference of the Institute of Diesel and Gas Turbine Engineers (IDGTE) in November 2007. 7 PB Network #68 / August 2008
Page 1 and 2: A technical journal by Parsons Brin
Page 3 and 4: http://www.pbworld.com/news_events/
Page 5: Thermal - Achieving New Efficiencie
Page 9 and 10: Thermal - Achieving New Efficiencie
Page 21 and 22: GENERATION: Hydropower - New Techno
Page 23 and 24: Hydropower - New Technologies, New
Page 47 and 48: Renewables - The Risks, Concerns an
Page 57 and 58:
Renewables - The Risks, Concerns an
Page 59 and 60:
Transporting Power Across the Grid
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Distributing Power to Users Researc
Page 71 and 72:
Distributing Power to Users The fin
Page 73 and 74:
Distributing Power to Users initial
Page 75 and 76:
Distributing Power to Users A Surve
Page 77 and 78:
http://www.pbworld.com/news_events/
Page 79 and 80:
Distributing Power to Users http://
Page 81 and 82:
Planning and the Role of Regulators
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
DEPARTMENTS PB’s power specialist
Page 93 and 94:
Networking • What CPUs and PLCs w
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Networking 8. Dash Style. You can u
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Going Green: Walking the Walk!! By
Page 103 and 104:
show all

Innovation in Global Power - Parsons Brinckerhoff

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?