Abstract Booklet 2006 - Swanson School of Engineering - University ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

and natural gas which should be partly replaced by using the available lignite. It was the intention of the government in the former GDR to build up several gasification plants in the area of Central Germany to supply major chemical companies through long-distance pipelines with syngas from lignite. Because of the low rank of lignite and the high salt content in the ash of this coal the process had special demands to the feeding system and to the gasifier itself. Passing a period of several owners after the privatization in 1991 the FUTURE ENERGY GmbH belongs to SIEMENS Power Generation since the 1st January 2006. The first test facility with a thermal capacity of 3 MW, built in 1979, was used to examine the technical concept and to test the planned lignite and saliferous lignite for the erection of the large scale demonstration facility in 1984 in the Gaskombinat Schwarze Pumpe /Germany, where the name of the process “GSP” comes from. In the period 1994 to 1998 further test facilities were erected at FUTURE ENERGY site in Freiberg, among this a 5 MW th cooling screen reactor. Up to now these facilities have been used to gasify more than 90 candidate gasification feeds - among others 35 different coals, 25 sewage sludge’s of municipal or industrial provenance, petroleum coke, waste oils, bio-oils, bio-slurries and 20 liquid residues, in order to investigate their gasification behavior and to analyze the quality and the characteristics of the gasification products. By this systematic research and development the field of application of the GSP Technology was enlarged from conventional fuels, such as coals and oils, through residual and waste materials and biomass. 7-3 Orlando Gasification Project: Demonstration of a Nominal 285 MW Coal-Based Transport Gasifier Frank Morton, Tim Pinkston, Southern Company, USA Nicola Salazar, KBR, USA Denise Stalls, Orlando Utilities Commission, USA Southern Company, the Orlando Utilities Commission (OUC), and KBR are building an advanced 285-megawatt coal gasification facility near Orlando, Florida with the support of the Department of Energy (DOE) under the Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI). The CCPI is a cost-sharing partnership between the government and industry designed to accelerate commercial deployment of advanced technologies to ensure that the United States has clean, reliable, affordable coal-based electricity, which is essential for a strong U.S. economy and domestic energy security. The proposed plant will demonstrate an Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) using an air-blown Transport Gasifier. Southern Company and KBR are developing the Transport Gasifier and related systems for commercial application in the power industry in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). The Power Systems Development Facility (PSDF) is an engineering scale demonstration of the KBR Transport Gasifier, a high-temperature, high-pressure syngas filtration system, and gas cleanup. Built at a sufficient scale to test advanced power systems and components in an integrated fashion, the PSDF provides data necessary for commercial scale-up of these technologies. The Transport Gasifier is an advanced circulating fluidized bed system designed to operate at higher circulation rates, velocities, and riser densities than a conventional circulating bed unit. The high circulation rates result in higher throughput, better mixing, and higher mass and heat transfer rates. Since the gasifier uses a dry feed and does not slag its ash, it is particularly well-suited for high moisture fuels such as sub-bituminous coal and lignite. 7-4 Energy investment of the future - Nuon Magnum IGCC Power Plant Leon Pulles, Nuon, NETHERLANDS Natalie van der Burg, Capgemini, NETHERLANDS The 21st century is in need of investments in the power generation sector. This article describes the economic view on investing in this sector. In addition it entails the project development approach of a current investment project, as illustrated by the Nuon Magnum IGCC Power Plant project with a generation capacity of 1200 MWe. Capgemini is working together with Nuon and delivers project management capabilities. 7-5 The Exergy UCG Technology and its Commercial Applications Michael S. Blinderman, Ergo Exergy Technologies, Inc., CANADA Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) is a gasification process carried on in non-mined coal seams using injection and production wells drilled from the surface, converting coal in situ into a product gas usable for chemical processes and power generation. The UCG process developed, refined and practiced by Ergo Exergy Technologies is called the Exergy UCG Technology or UCG Technology. The UCG technology is being applied in numerous power generation and chemical projects worldwide. These include power projects in South Africa (1,200 MWe), India (750 MWe), Pakistan, and Canada, as well as chemical projects in Australia and Canada. A number of UCG based industrial projects are now at a feasibility stage in New Zealand, USA, and Europe. An example of UCG application is the Chinchilla Project in Australia where the technology demonstrated continuous, consistent production of commercial quantities of quality fuel gas for over 30 months. The project is currently targeting a 24,000 barrel per day synthetic diesel plant based on UCG syngas supply. The UCG technology has demonstrated exceptional environmental performance. The UCG methods and techniques of environmental management are an effective tool to ensure environmental protection during 6 an industrial application. A UCG -IGCC power plant will generate electricity at a much lower cost than existing or proposed fossil fuel power plants. CO 2 emissions of the plant can be reduced to a level 55% less than those of a supercritical coal-fired plant and 25% less than the emissions of NG CC. 8-1 SESSION 8 SYNTHESIS OF LIQUID FUELS, CHEMICALS, MATERIALS AND OTHER NON-FUEL USES OF COAL: APPLIED FT/CTL Coal Conversion - A Rising Star C. Lowell Miller, DOE, USA Daniel Cicero, NETL, USA Mark Ackiewicz, John Anderson, Technology & Management, USA Edward Schmetz, John Winslow, Leonardo Technologies, Inc., USA Coal’s primary use has been for electric power production but it can also be used for other purposes, such as for producing liquid fuels, hydrogen, or chemical intermediates. Coal s versatility and flexibility as a feedstock is becoming increasingly recognized, with government and industry, jointly and independently, pursuing opportunities to maximize coal s potential as a feedstock for purposes other than power generation. For example, the jointly sponsored, government-industry FutureGen project will develop the world s first electric power and hydrogen co-production plant that produces near-zero emissions and captures and stores the carbon dioxide that is produced. This paper will review current coal conversion activities that are being pursued by the federal government and industry and the key fundamentals that may be driving these activities. Representative coal to liquid (CTL) concepts and capital and product costs will be reviewed including discussion of potential activities which could reduce the uncertainties in cost estimation. Recent legislation may be playing a role in the increased interest in coal conversion technologies. For example, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT 2005) contained provisions related to coal-to-liquid (CTL) technologies or co-production of power and fuels or chemicals from coal. Additionally, Section 1090 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 required the Department of Energy to prepare a development plan for coal-to-liquid fuels and the Department of Defense to develop a report on how it would potentially use these fuels. Efforts are also underway by state governments, primarily in major coal-producing states, to increase the conversion of coal into fuels and chemicals. Expanded use of coal to produce liquid fuels, hydrogen and chemical intermediates can increase the security and stability of the nation s liquid fuel supplies, and provide economic and employment benefits. 8-2 Review of Competitive and Environmental Challenges to US Coal-to-Liquids (CTL) Industry Development Tim Cornitius, Syngas Refiner, USA New construction and expansion of Canadian oilsands projects to increase output of bitumen-derived synthetic crude oil (SCO) has surpassed the promising potential of producing transportation fuels from coal as the United States continues to neglect the timely and vital development of this vast resource. Unlike other oilsands projects, Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. appears to be staying ahead of budget and it said one move recently “avoided millions of dollars in additional costs.” The first staged of its Horizon project is proceeding well and predicted construction will be 44% completed by the end of the September. Its preplanning is paying off on work for the first stage, budgeted at $6.8 billion with expansion plans of more than $20 billion over the next dozen years. International oil companies (IOCs) usually increase production when oil prices are expected to remain high, but a lack of access to acreage in some key oil-rich countries has forced them to turn to the Canadian oilsands to increase reserves. The IOCs are using various technologies including gasification to process bitumen economically that will mean an increased supply of SCO to US refineries. Alternative fuels production is highly sensitive to crude oil price levels. The US Energy Information Administration’s Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) 2006 reference case prices increase from $40.49/bbl in 2004 to $54.08/bbl in 2025 ($21/bbl higher than AEO2005) and to $56.97/bbl in 2030. Higher prices increase demand for unconventional transportation-fuel sources and stimulate coal-to-liquids (CTL) production. With even higher oil prices, US gasto-liquids (GTL) production is also stimulated. 8-3 Use of Cobalt Fischer-Tropsch Catalysts with Coal Derived Synthesis Gas Steve LeViness, Fischer Tropsch Reactor Technology, USA Heinz Robota, Syntroleum Corporation, USA Rafael Espinoza, Rafael Espinoza Consulting, USA The production of hydrocarbons by the hydro-polymerization of carbon monoxide was discovered by Fischer and Tropsch in 1923, and – with the exception of 1945-1955 – has been in commercial use continuously since 1933. The first commercial Fischer-Tropsch process, practiced in Germany from 1933-1945, employed cobalt based catalysts in fixed bed reactors using coal derived synthesis gases. Since 1955 Sasol has practiced FT from coal
derived synthesis gases employing iron based catalysts in a variety of different reactors, including fixed, fluidized, and slurry bed variations. Since the late 1980’s and early 1990’s Mossgas and Shell have practiced FT synthesis from natural gas derived synthesis gases employing iron catalysts in fluidized bed reactors, and cobalt catalysts in fixed bed reactors, respectively. Also since the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, FT synthesis processes from natural gas (“gas to liquids”, or “GTL”) have been developed by BP, ConocoPhillips, ENI/IFP/Agip, ExxonMobil, Rentech, Sasol and Sasol Chevron, Shell, Statoil-PetroSA, and Syntroleum, among other. All of these technologies are based upon cobalt catalyst slurry phase reactors, with the exceptions of BP and Shell (cobalt catalyst fixed bed reactors) and Rentech (iron catalyst slurry reactors). The recent dramatic escalation in world-wide petroleum prices, coupled with the passage of a $21/bbl tax credit in the US, has caused a sharp increase in interest in production of FT products from coal derived synthesis gases. Current conventional wisdom appears to be that only iron based FT catalysts are appropriate for this application, ignoring the fact that the entire German commercial FT industry was in fact based on cobalt catalysts and coal derived synthesis gases. The FT reaction consumes H 2 and CO in a ratio slightly higher than 2/1, typically about 2.15. Depending on the synthesis gas source (especially coal vs. natural gas) and the syngas generation technology, the raw synthesis gas H 2 /CO ratio can be anywhere in the range of 0.6 to 3.0, or higher. Typical coal gasification raw synthesis gas ratios range from about 0.6 to as high as 2.3, again depending on coal source and composition and gasification technology. For raw syngas H 2 /CO ratios below the required FT stoichiometric usage ratio of about 2.15, it is necessary to increase the ratio through the use of the water gas shift (WGS) reaction, either in a separate WGS reactor or in the FT reactor itself through the use of an FT catalyst with significant WGS activity like iron. In practice, even with iron catalysts, a feed synthesis gas H 2 /CO ratio of 0.6-1.0 is too low, and external WGS must be employed to avoid excessive FT catalyst requirements and reactor sizes. While iron catalysts are preferred for the high temperature FT processes targeting chemical feedstocks and high octane gasoline, the choice of optimum catalyst type for low temperature FT synthesis, targeting middle distillates and other paraffinic products from coal derived syngas is not straightforward, as both cobalt and iron have significant advantages and disadvantages. In the preferred slurry bed reactors, iron catalysts are characterized by low cost, moderate syngas cleanup requirements, relatively low particle strengths (leading to potential catalyst wax separation issues), high deactivation rates and short effective catalyst life (leading to high catalyst replacement and solids handling volumes), and low methane but excessive CO 2 selectivities. Cobalt catalysts, on the other hand, are characterized by much higher costs, extremely high syngas cleanup requirements, high particle strength (relatively easy catalyst-wax separation), low deactivation rates and long effective life, and somewhat higher methane but much lower CO 2 selectivities. The major challenge facing the use of cobalt catalysts is synthesis gas clean-up, which will strongly depend on coal source and syngas generation (gasification) technology choices. Related coal syngas based catalytic processes, such as methanation and methanol synthesis, have similar syngas contaminant specifications and are currently practiced commercially, indicating technical feasibility. Preliminary results of cobalt catalyzed FT synthesis using a commercial coal gasification based synthesis gas will be presented. 8-4 The WMPI Coal-To-Liquids Program James C. Sorensen, Sorensenenergy, LCC, USA; John W. Rich, Jr., WMPI PTY., LLC, USA The Gilberton CTL Project, with plans to begin construction this year, represents the first step in WMPI’s U.S. Coal-To-Liquids program. In parallel with Gilberton, WMPI has begun exploratory development work on larger capacity CTL projects of a scale not requiring Government subsidy. This paper will provide an update on progress at Gilberton, summarize the efforts underway toward commercial project objectives and some initial conclusions, as well as outlining WMPI’s basic criteria for project success. In addition, key drivers behind the current surge of interest in Coal-To-Liquids will be discussed. 8-5 Selective Coal Liquefaction through Fischer-Tropsch Synthesis Hans Schulz, Engler-Bunte-Institute, GERMANY The selectivity of Fischer-Tropsh synthesis to very clean fuels and chemicals makes the process so attractive today – and also for future application on a coal basis, as much against direct coal liquefaction by hydrogenation. Coal gasification and the composition of synthesis gas from coal, in relation to the requirements of the Fischer- Tropsch synthesis are regarded together with specific process options of FT-synthesis. Of particular interest is the FT route to diesel fuel as relying strongly on the combination with “ideal hydrocracking”. But further options are also promising. The mechanistic basis of Fischer-Tropsch synthesis is then regarded, taking into account time resolved self-organization of the FT-regime. The fundamental differences of FT on iron and cobalt are evaluated and the common principle of “frustrated desorption” is established, as on the basis of detailed selectivity studies, seeing the highly ordered complexity of product composition. The progress in understanding FTcatalysis shall be useful also for progress in commercial application of Fischer-Tropsch synthesis on a coal basis. 7 9-1 SESSION 9 COMBUSTION TECHNOLOGIES – 2: MERCURY CAPTURE FROM FLUE GAS The U.S. Department of Energy’s Phase II Mercury Control Technology Field Testing Program Thomas Feeley, III, DOE/NETL, USA Mercury exists in trace amounts in coal. In the United States, coal-fired power plants emit about 48 tons of mercury and are the largest point source of emissions. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency determined the need to control mercury emissions from power plants and issued regulations on March 15, 2005 under the Clean Air Mercury Rule. In addition, several states have proposed mercury regulations more aggressive than the Federal rule. Recognizing the potential for mercury regulations, the U.S. Department of Energy/National Energy Technology Laboratory (DOE/NETL) has been carrying out a comprehensive mercury research and development program since the early 1990s. Working collaboratively with EPRI, industry, academia, and EPA, DOE/NETL has helped to advance the understanding of the formation, distribution, and capture of mercury. However, uncertainty remains, particularly related to the overall cost and effectiveness of controlling mercury from a diverse population of coal-fired boilers, as well as the ultimate fate of mercury once it is removed from the flue gas. This presentation will provide an update on DOE/NETL s Phase II mercury field testing program directed at full-scale and slip-stream evaluation of sorbent injection (e.g., activated carbon) and oxidation processes that have the capability to achieve 50 to 70 percent capture of mercury from operating pulverized-coal-fired power plants. In addition, results from the characterization of mercury in coal combustion by-products collected from the Phase II field testing program will be presented. 9-2 Control of Mercury Emissions from Clean Coal Power Plants with CO 2 Capture Kourosh E. Zanganeh, Ahmed Shafeen, Murlidhar Gupta, Robert Dureau, CANMET Energy Technology Centre, CANADA Currently, coal-fired power plants provide about 39% of the global electricity demand and this trend is likely to remain the same in the coming decades. According to the International Energy Agency’s predictions, the world’s electricity demand will be doubled between now and 2030. During this period, nearly 1400 GW of new coal-fired power capacity will be required worldwide. With emission standards becoming more stringent, future coal-fired power plants will be expected to significantly reduce their emission intensity by utilizing advanced clean coal technologies. The new generation of clean coal power plants with CO 2 capture, may include integrated energy conversion systems such as gasification with precombustion capture, ultra-supercritical steam boilers with post-combustion capture, and oxyfuel combustion systems with integrated capture and compression. The capture component of these advance systems could be facilitated by a variety of technologies including membrane separation, absorption, adsorption and cryogenic separation technologies. Some of these technologies such as post-combustion with amine scrubbing would carry significant potential for adaptation in the existing fleet of coal-fired power plants through retrofit, while others such as oxy-fuel combustion and gasification could be effectively deployed in the new state-of-the-art green-field plants with near-zero emissions. Controlling the emission of toxic air pollutants such as mercury and other trace metals is one of several key challenges facing the large-scale deployment of advanced clean coal power plants in the next two decades. This is further compounded by the imposed timelines, set in the recent regulations and standards in U.S. and Canada. Currently, there are ongoing initiatives to demonstrate clean coal technologies for power generation in North America, Europe and other parts of the world by 2012 and beyond. However, any successful demonstration of clean coal technologies should also consider the control of primary air pollutants such as mercury. In this paper, we present an overview of mercury emissions from clean coal power plants with CO 2 capture, possible pathways for mercury species in gasification, oxy-coal combustion and post-combustion capture plants, and potential control technologies for reducing mercury emissions from these plants. The CANMET’s oxy-fuel combustion group has been actively pursuing the development of new mercury control technologies for oxycoal combustion processes in recent years. The focus of this work is on low rank coals, mainly, sub-bituminous and lignite coals. In this paper, some results from the recent pilotscale testing at CANMET’s oxy-fuel combustion facility to develop effective mercury control technologies for the next generation of oxy-coal power plants are presented. The results obtained to date are very encouraging and further work is under progress to optimize these processes. 9-3 Mercury Speciation in Exhaust Gases of O 2 -CO 2 Coal Combustion Achariya Suriyawong, Pratim Biswas, Washington University in St. Louis, USA Carbon dioxide emissions from coal combustion are of particular concern due to their potential effects on global warming and climate change. In most coal combustors, however,
Page 1 and 2: TABLE OF CONTENTS Oral Sessions Pag
Page 3 and 4: 1-1 SESSION 1 GASIFICATION TECHNOLO
Page 5 and 6: The U.S. pioneered development of s
Page 7: 5-5 Enhanced Hydrogen Production wi
Page 11 and 12: Several physical adsorbents, partic
Page 13 and 14: 13-1 SESSION 13 GASIFICATION TECHNO
Page 15 and 16: promising Clean Coal technologies u
Page 17 and 18: high selectivity (theoretically pro
Page 19 and 20: 19-3 Development of Highly Efficien
Page 21 and 22: The Aim of the project is the impro
Page 23 and 24: 24-3 Development of Fluidizable Lit
Page 25 and 26: the classical Lurgi-gasifcation pro
Page 27 and 28: 28-5 A Kinetic Approach to Catalyti
Page 29 and 30: turbine cycles. The models provide
Page 31 and 32: up to 290 psia and temperatures up
Page 33 and 34: 35-2 Development of Iron-Based Pero
Page 35 and 36: features of the BGL 1000 technology
Page 37 and 38: Heat-exchangers, particle filters,
Page 39 and 40: 41-4 Using Fly Ash-Based Foundry Co
Page 41 and 42: ocks using elemental ratios. Data f
Page 43 and 44: 600-900°C. Changes in the amount o
Page 45 and 46: ATL process has three stages, namel
Page 47 and 48: commercial-scale gasifier was shutd
Page 49 and 50: 52-5 Pilot-Scale Demonstration of U
Page 51 and 52: POSTER SESSION 1 COMBUSTION TECHNOL
Page 53 and 54: experimental data available in lite
Page 55 and 56: activation. It was concluded that C

Abstract Booklet 2006 - Swanson School of Engineering - University ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?