Electrochemical Membrane for Carbon Dioxide Capture and ... · HRU AIR Catalytic Oxidizer DC to AC...

Electrochemical Membrane for Carbon Dioxide Capture and Power Generation

FuelCell Energy No. DE-FE0007634

Project Kick-off MeetingDecember 2, 2011

2

Presentation Outline

ECM TechnologyBackgroundTesting Results

Application to Pulverized Coal Plant Carbon Capture from Large IndustriesDE-FE0007634 Project OutlineSummary

3

ECM Active Components

ECM Structure and Mechanism of CO2 Transport

•

ECM components are fabricated from inexpensive inorganic materials.•

Because of fast electrode kinetics at the operating temperatures

of 550-650°C, ECM is suitable for CO2 concentration of <15% normally found in the PC plant flue gas.

•

Due to the planar geometry and large gas flow channels, ECM can process large gas volumes without significant back pressures (5-8 cm of water).

•

ECM is completely selective towards CO2 as compared to N2

(CO2

/N2

selectivity = ).•

The driving force for the gas separation is electrical potential

as opposed to the pressure differential. Flue gas does not need to be pressurized. ECM operates at atmospheric pressure without energy penalties normally associated with other

membrane-based technologies.

4

ECM Cell Package

•

ECM cells are made using automated fabrication techniques such as tape casting (utilized in semiconductor industries).

•

Repeat planar cell geometry has simple and inexpensive stacking characteristics.

5

ECM Assembly

ECM Stack Four-Stack Module Enclosed Module

ECM is a modular technology:•

Ease of scale up•

Suitable for incremental phased applications to almost any type of power plants

•

Skid mounted modules easy to transport

ECM Module Assembly

Planar Electrochemical Membrane Assemblies Are Stacked and Incorporated into MW-scale Modules.

6

Benefits of ECM for CO2 Separation

ECM allows for separation of at least 90% of carbon dioxide from the greenhouse gases (GHG) generated by coal fired power plants and other industrial sites.

Preliminary estimates show that DOE target of <35% increase in cost-of-

electricity (COE) is achievable for commercial units.

ECM internally converts fossil fuels (coal syngas, natural gas, renewables, etc.) into H2 to produce electricity (no need for external conversion devices).

Unlike other CO2

capture technologies which reduce net electric power, ECM increases the power generated by the existing fossil fueled plants.

ECM systems generate excess clean water, an important feature where water is scarce.

Laboratory data has shown that ECM also significantly reduces NOx

emissions produced by the older plants.

CH4 + 2H2O 4H2 + CO2

ANODE CATALYST

CATHODE CATALYSTCATHODE

ELECTROLYTE

INTERNAL REFORMING

H2 + CO3= H2O + CO2 + 2e-

1/2O2 + CO2 + 2e- CO3=

ANODE

NATURAL GAS/BIOGAS

CO3=

e-

e-

STEAM

FLUE GAS

HEAT

CO2 DEPLETED GAS

CAPTURED CO2,H2, H2O

CH4 + 2H2O 4H2 + CO2

ANODE CATALYST

CATHODE CATALYSTCATHODE

ELECTROLYTE

INTERNAL REFORMING

H2 + CO3= H2O + CO2 + 2e-

1/2O2 + CO2 + 2e- CO3=

ANODE

NATURAL GAS/BIOGAS

CO3=

e-

e-

STEAM

FLUE GAS

HEAT

CO2 DEPLETED GAS

CAPTURED CO2,H2, H2O

7

Basis for ECM Technology: Proven DFC Power Plants

WATER

Anode

Cathode

FUEL

HRUAIR

CatalyticOxidizer

DC to AC INVERTER

~

Heat Recovery Unit(a)

WATERFUEL

HRU

GHG WITH CO2

DC to AC INVERTER

~

DIRECT FUELCELL®

Heat Recovery Unit

ANODE EXHAUST

RICH IN CO2

(b)

Anode

Cathode

DIRECT FUELCELL®

WATER

Anode

Cathode

Anode

Cathode

FUEL

HRUAIR

CatalyticOxidizer

DC to AC INVERTER

~

Heat Recovery Unit(a)

WATERFUEL

HRU

GHG WITH CO2

DC to AC INVERTER

~

DIRECT FUELCELL®

Heat Recovery Unit

ANODE EXHAUST

RICH IN CO2

(b)

Anode

Cathode

Anode

Cathode

DIRECT FUELCELL®

Commercially-proven Direct FuelCell (DFC) Power Plant

ECM system is an emerging application for proven DFC technology

ECM

8

ECM Lab-Scale Testing

Laboratory Scale Proof-of-concept ECM tests were performed under a variety of R&D activities supported by FCE (IR&D), DOE (DE-FC26-04NT42206), and EPA (EP-D-11-042)

9

ECM Test Results PC Boiler Case

Fuel Cell Performance on Simulated PC Boiler

Exhaust Gas

Full-area cells (0.9 m2/cell in 400 cell stacks) operating at

67-69% CO2

utilization

Cell Performance on Simulated PC Boiler Exhaust Gas

10

ECM Test Results IGCC Case

Cell Performance on Simulated IGCC

Exhaust Gas

Full-area cells (0.9 m2/cell in 400 cell stacks) operating at

67-69% CO2

utilization

11




12

ECM Application for Carbon Separation from Fossil Plant Exhaust

•

Carbonate electrochemical process transfers CO2

from Air Electrode (Cathode) to Fuel Electrode (Anode)

•

CO2

is easily separated from Fuel Electrode exhaust gas because it is no longer diluted with air

Conventional Natural Gas or Coal Plant

CATHODE

ANODEFuel

Fossil Plant Exhaust with 5% to 15% CO2

CO2 Depleted Flue Gas

H2Stripping

Depleted Fuel with ~70% CO2

CO2

CO2 to Sequestration

Combined Electric Power and Carbon- Dioxide Separation (CEPACS) System

30 to 100% of Conventional Plant Rating

POWER

POWER

ECM

13

CEPACS System Block Flow Diagram

ANODE

CATHODEFlue Gas

Air

Natural Gas

DI Water

SHIFT

Product Water

CO

2 /H2

Sep.H2 Recovery

Carbon Dioxide

Plant Exhaust

Oxidizer1 4

2

3

96 8

7

11

10

14

12

13

15

5

16

ANODE

CATHODEFlue Gas

Air

Natural Gas

DI Water

SHIFT

Product Water

CO

2 /H2

Sep.H2 Recovery

Carbon Dioxide

Plant Exhaust

Oxidizer1 4

2

3

96 8

7

11

10

14

12

13

15

5

16

CEPACS System Concept Implementation for 433 MW (Conesville #5) PC Plant Located in Ohio

CEPACS system design produces liquid CO2 . The low permeate-gas outlet pressure is not a significant factor relative to the required CO2 delivery pressure, as the liquid CO2 is pumped to the pipeline pressure (~152 bars) without significant energy penalty.

14

Case Study: Carbon Capture from Conesville Plant

10394 ton/day

Flue Gas CO2

Coal Power Plant

Air

AEP, Unit # 5 Conesville, OH 434 MW

CO2 Emission, 1 ton/MWh

~

CO2 Emission, 0.05 ton/MWh

94% Reduction in Carbon Dioxide Emission per MWh is Achievable!

1146 SCFH

Natural Gas

Electrolyte

Cathode

CH4 + 2H2 O 4H2 + CO2

Internal Reforming

Anode4H2 +4CO3

= 4H2 O + 4CO2 + 8e-

2O2 + 4CO2 + 8e- 4CO3=

5913 ton/day

9380 ton/day

90.2%

15293 ton/day, 93.8% Overall

1014 ton/day CO2 Sequestration

Plant Exhaust CO2

DC/AC Converter

443 MW AC Net Fuel Cell Power~

15

Case Study: Advantage of CEPACS System

ECM Based System Compared to State-of-the-Art Amine Scrubbing Technology

* Reference: Carbon Dioxide Capture from Existing Coal-Fired Power Plants, DOE/NETL-401/110907, November 2007

70%

70%

90%

90%

Base Plant with No Carbon

Capture

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Unit # 5 ConesvillePulverized Coal Power

Plant*

w/ Amine-BasedScrubbing Carbon

Capture*

w/ CEPACS CarbonCapture

Net

Pow

er, M

W Net Power Reduces with Increased Carbon Capture Percentage

Net Power Increases with Increased Carbon Capture Percentage

16

CEPACS vs. Amine Scrubbing

Amine Scrubbing Technology330 ton CO2 /day

Steam Consumption: ~1.3 ton Steam/ton CO2 (~650 kWh/ton CO2 )

Ref: Mitsubishi Heavy Industry, Ltd, M. LijimaFootprint for Conesville Retrofit: 4 Acres

32 MW CEPACS Using ECM930 ton CO2 /day

Power Generation: ~1150 kWh/ton CO2

Footprint for Conesville Retrofit: 10-12 Acres

CEPACS is designed using minimal plot area for large scale applications.

17

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Amine Oxyfuel DFC Based Separation

% In

crea

se in

Cos

t of E

lect

rici

ty

Energy Cost Capital + O&M

Baseline Plant COE = 6.4 cents/kWh

Percent Increase in Cost-of-Electricity: Comparison with Competing Technologies

•

Percent increase in cost-of-electricity for a PC plant producing power at 6.4¢/kWh

Less than 35% increase in COE is achievable by using the electrochemical separation technology.

Reference (Amine and Oxyfuel):Jared Ciferno; "Overview of DOE/NETL CO2 Capture R&D Program", Annual NETL CO2 Capture Technology for Existing Plants R&D Meeting, Pittsburgh, PA, March 24-26, 2009.

DOE's Goal:<35% Increase in COE

for Existing Plants

CEPACS

18




19

Fuel

Power Plant

HeatIndustry

Electricity

NOx , CO2

Fuel

Direct FuelCellHeat

Industry

Electricity

NOx , CO2

Cleaned Exhaust

CO2 Capture

Application of ECM to Large Industry

Large Industries typically consume significant amount of electric power and heat while producing pollutants and greenhouse gases.ECM can provide efficient onsite electric power and heat while simultaneously removing NOx and CO2 pollutants.

20

Industrial Sources

•

CO2 separation from industrial flue gases represents a promising mid-term market entry opportunity for CEPACS system.

•

Large industrial sites produce significant amount of carbon dioxide resulting from combustion of fossil fuels in providing heat for various processes:

>

Refinery>

Cement>

Pulp and paper>

Steel•

These industries also consume substantial amount of electricity and heat.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

Mill

lion

Met

ric T

on

Carbon dioxide emissions by sector and fuel, 2008 and 2035

Petroleum

1980 2008 2035

Natural gas

Coal

Electricity

2008

20354,7105,814 6,820

Total carbon dioxide emissions

Com

mer

cial

Indu

stria

l

Tran

spor

tatio

n

Elec

tric

ity g

ener

atio

n

Million Metric Ton

Res

iden

tial

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

Mill

lion

Met

ric T

on

Carbon dioxide emissions by sector and fuel, 2008 and 2035

Petroleum

1980 2008 2035

Natural gas

Coal

Electricity

2008

20354,7105,814 6,820

Total carbon dioxide emissions

Com

mer

cial

Indu

stria

l

Tran

spor

tatio

n

Elec

tric

ity g

ener

atio

n

Million Metric Ton

Res

iden

tial

Amount of CO2 generated in US annually from 2008 and projected to 2035, broken down by various sources of emissions including industrial, commercial, and residential and transportation sectors.

21

ECM’s NOx Destruction Mechanism

NOx

is converted to Nitrate and Nitrite ions in the cathode.

Nitrite and Nitrate ions migrate to the anode where they are reduced by hydrogen to nitrogen and water

322

22

32

222

222

2222

NOeONO

NOeONO

NOeONO

Anode

Cathode

23 , NONO

N2, H2 O

NOx

ECM

eOHNHNO

eOHNHNO

2442

2662

2222

2223

22

NOx Destruction with Power Production

1:1 NO:NO2 ratio

NO

NO2

NOx

200ppm Inlet NOx Concentration

23

NOx Destruction as a Function of Inlet NOx Concentration

*

* 13ppm data at open circuit conditions (no power generation)

Inlet NOx Composition:50% NO, 50% NO2

24




25

Project Objectives

Demonstrate the ability of FCE’s

electrochemical membrane (ECM)-based system to separate ≥

90% of the CO2

from a simulated PC flue-gas stream and to compress the CO2

for sequestration or beneficial use Demonstrate that the ECM system is an economical alternative for

post-

combustion CO2

capture in PC-based power plants, and that it meets DOE objectives for incremental cost of electricity (COE)Complete a Preliminary Technical and Economic Feasibility Study on FCE’s

ECM carbon capture system scaled up for a 550MW PC power plant

Perform small-area membrane tests using clean simulated flue-gasPerform contaminant testing to establish maximum permissible concentrations

of impurities in flue gas without causing unacceptable ECM degradationComplete design for BOP components, including flue-gas pre-treatment sys.Complete a Technology Gap Analysis to identify any equipment, materials, or

other components/processes that may hinder advancement of this technologyPerform an EH&S assessment to ensure there are no environmental or safety

concerns which would prohibit commercialization efforts for the ECM systemComplete bench-scale testing of an 11.7 m2

area electrochemical membrane system for CO2

capture, purification, and compression.

26

FuelCell Energy Inc. (FCE), Danbury, CT

Key experience: Manufacturing and commercialization of fuel cell power plant systems in sizes ranging from 300kW to Multi-MW.

Project Role: Prime Contractor

The FCE team is comprised of diverse organizations with expertise in key functional areas:

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, WA

Key Experience: Extensive research expertise in high-

temperature fuel cell fabrication, development and characterization

Project Role: Testing effects of flue gas contaminants on ECM

ECM Project Team Structure

URS Corporation (URS), Austin, TX

Key Experience: Leading global EPC & technology development firm

Project Role: Review ECM system design, Equipment and plant costing, Flue gas clean-up system design

27

URS: Leading Global EPC and 1st Tier Federal Contractor

•

48,000 employees in >40 countries•

$10 Billion in revenue annually•

ENR’s

List of Top Firms: #2 for Design, Green Design and Environmental Design among other honors

•

Current DOE NETL CO2

Capture Projects–

Dry Sorbent Technology for Pre-combustion CO2

Capture (prime)–

Evaluation of Concentrated PZ from Coal Fired Flue Gas (prime)–

Waste Heat Integration for CO2

Capture from Coal-Fired Flue Gas (subcontractor)

•

Multiple private industry CO2

capture and sequestration clients

•

DOE CO2

projects being conducted out of Austin, TX Process Technologies Office (PTO)

28

URS Process Technologies Office:Air Pollution Control Expertise and Experience

•

PTO rooted in R&D •

Air pollution abatement systems–

SO2–

SO3–

NOx–

Hg & other toxics (e.g., Se, As)–

VOC and Cl–

Particulate Matter–

CO2

•

Coal-fired flue gas clean-up–

Wet FGD, SBS (SO3

)–

Control technology evaluations (e.g., Hg, MACT pollutants)

•

Capabilities and Resources–

>25 licensed engineers in 125 person office–

CFD, Aspen, FGDPRISM, AutoCAD, etc

29

PNNL Relevant Experience and Fuel Cell Test Facilities

•

Significant base of knowledge, equipment, expertise, and experiences related to SOFCs, PEMs, micro-channel reformers, carbon capture, catalysis, high temperature electrochemistry, gas and water cleanup has been developed

•

25 year experience in SOFC technology is well documented in numerous technical papers and patents

•

SECA-related activities include extensive experimental work on fuel cell degradation in the presence of coal gas impurities (S, Se, P, As, Cl, etc), in addition, supported by thermochemical

and computational modeling

Multiple test rigs in the ventilated lab space

Walk-in ventilated lab space

30

Work Breakdown Structure

Task 1Project

ManagementAnd Planning

Task 1Project

ManagementAnd Planning

Task 1.1 Contract

Reporting

Task 1.1 Contract

Reporting

Task 1.2PMP

Update

Task 1.2PMP

Update

Task 1.3Final Report

Task 1.3Final Report

Task 2Preliminary

Technical andEconomic

Feasibility Study

Task 2Preliminary

Technical andEconomic

Feasibility Study

Task 2.1Technical

Review

Task 2.1Technical

Review

Task 2.2EconomicFeasibility

Study

Task 2.2EconomicFeasibility

Study

Task 3Technology

GapIdentification

Task 3Technology

GapIdentification

Task 3.1ContaminantEvaluation

Task 3.2Membrane

Testing

Task 3.2Membrane

Testing

Task 3.3BOP

Task 3.3BOP

Task 4EH&S

Review

Task 4EH&S

Review

Task 4.1Process

EmissionReview

Task 4.1Process

EmissionReview

Task 4.2Technical

EH&S Review Report

Task 4.2Technical

EH&SReview Report

Task 5Bench-scale

Testing

Task 5Bench-scale

Testing

Task 5.1Facility Design

Task 5.1Facility Design

Task 5.2Stack

Fabrication

Task 5.2Stack

Fabrication

Task 5.3Facility Build

Task 5.3Facility Build

Task 5.4Demonstration

Task 5.4Demonstration

Task 5.5Post Test Analysis

Task 5.5Post Test Analysis

BP 1

The work breakdown structure is designed to ensure success in achieving the program objectives with minimal risk.

URS Support

PNNL Lead

BP 2 BP 3

31

CELL STACKS

MCFC

A C

SUPERHEATER

CATHODE EXHAUST

RU

6

5

H20

ANODE EXHAUST 20

7

5

PRECONVERTER

H20

WATER COLLECTION& TREATMENT

27

TO BOILERSTREAM 2

DRAINCONDENSER

NATURAL GAS

FLUE GASFLUE GAS BLOWER

ANODE EXITFILTER

HEATER

13

CO2

9

28

33

34

17

23

LIQUID

22

CHILLER

OXIDIZER/START BRNR

1ST STAGECOMPR

2ND STAGE COMPRLTSC 37

CONDENSATEPUMP #1

8

CHILLER

36

CHILLERSTAGE 1 STAGE 2

STAGE 3

19

39

30

COAL PLANTFLUE GAS

AIR FILTER

AIRBLOWER

41

42

10

25

COOLING WATER

550 MW

40

FUEL CELL EXHAUST

9

27

45

1815

38

24

29 35

7

31

32

ANODE EXIT COOLER

60

1

HL 11

HL

12HL

HL

26

10

HL

30 4344

HL HLHL

21

14

CONDENSATEPUMP #2

FEEDWATERPUMP

46

66

HL

47HL

CO2 REHEATER

CO2 PUMP

WATERSEPARATOR #1

WATERSEPARATOR #2

CO2 SEPARATOR

5116

4953

52

CHILLER HEAT LOAD

HL

AIR INTAKE

FUEL CELLMODULES

6

11

12

13

16

17

18 19

20 21 22 2423

2526

2831

34

35

38

39

40

41

42

43 44 45 46 47

50

53

5455

56

59

57

58

61

62

63

65 67

68

69 7172

73

76

8

541

433 32

64

START FUEL

60

48

CO2 RECY CLE HEATER

AIR PREHEATER

55

7978 FEEDWATER

BOILER

56281

WATER LEVELCONTROL

3

2

4 36

77

37

29

FUELPREHEATER

82

80

57

3

48

74

14

15

50

58

49

51

52

75

8384

TO AIRPREHTR

FRM AIRPREHTR

70

Task 2 – Technical & Economic Feasibility Study

Task 2 Objective: Complete a Preliminary Technical and Economic Feasibility Study on FCE’s

ECM technology scaled up to a carbon capture system applied to a 550MW PC power plant

Success criterion: Show that the ECM technology has an economic advantage over the Econamine

system (Case 10 in DOE report: Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants, Volume 1: Bituminous Coal and Natural Gas to Electricity, rev 2010), and that a path forward to reducing the incremental COE resulting from carbon capture has been identified and correlates with DOE’s

cost target. •

Perform detailed system analysis utilizing Chemcad

simulation software>

System performance, including parasitic power losses>

Mass and Energy Balances>

Carbon and Water Balances>

Process specifications for major equipment•

Develop preliminary cost estimate of the ECM system according to

DOE guidelines

>

Capital cost of ECM system (Bare Erected Cost → Total As-Spent Capital)>

Incremental cost of electricity

32

•

Engineering review and assessment of:>

FCE PFD>

Heat and material balances>

Equipment specifications•

Optimize system heat recovery and integration•

Flue gas clean-up>

Existing state-of-the-art>

Additional cleanup technologies required•

Cost estimating and economic analysis>

Software packages»

Aspen Icarus»

RS Means and Richardson Cost Database (commodities)>

Construction estimates based on ‘pieces, parts, and components’»

Vendor quotes for large, specialty equipment»

Labor estimated based on:–

Factored estimate–

Labor survey (contact unions or contractor hot-sheets and industry sources for regional labor rates)

Task 2 – URS Scope of Work

33

Task Objective:

EEstablish maximum permissible concentrations of impurities in flue gas without causing unacceptable ECM degradation

•

Assess interactions of main pollutants (S, Se, HCl, Hg) with the ECM cathode•

Perform button cell tests using synthetic flue gas with individual contaminants present at realistic concentrations

>

Monitor changes in the electrochemical performance due to impurity interactions and compare to control cells

>

Evaluate cell degradation as a function of impurity concentration, temperature, current density, and the exposure time»

Perform post-test analysis to determine nature of impurity/ cathode interactions, whether alteration phases are formed from any reactions or the effects are due to surface adsorption

»

Recommend specific cleanup levels to avoid negative impact on the membrane life and performance

Task 3.1 – Contaminant Analysis

Ni-YSZ Anode/Current Collector

Air Air inlet tube

I-V wires

‘K’ type thermocouple

I-V wires

Alumina outer tube with circular openings

fuel in

fuel out

LSM current collector with Au gauze

LSM cathodeSDC layer

YSZ

Glass seal

Alumina fuel inlet tube

Ni grid current collector

Ni gauze

Multiple button cells in each furnace with individual gas flow and electrical controls

34

Task 3.2 & 3.3 – Membrane Testing & BOP

Task 3.2 –Membrane Testing•

Test Objective: Document the performance, operating limits, and reliability of the membrane under varying conditions that would be expected in a PC power plant.

•

Vary flue-gas composition and operating parameters to identify the ECM’s

versatility to successfully remove CO2•

Small area membrane tests may also include tests with contaminants identified in subtask 3.1.

Task 3.3 –

BOP Equipment•

Objective: Identify BOP equipment that could have a technology gap between currently available process equipment and unique equipment that is required for CO2

capture and compression.•

BOP equipment that will be evaluated includes: >

Hydrogen (H2

) recovery systems, specialty blowers, heat exchangers, and other unique components.

•

Equipment that could impact development and deployment of the ECM system will be highlighted in the BP2 Technology Gap Analysis Topical Report.

35

Task 4 – EH&S Review

Task Objective: Perform a technical EH&S review to assess the environmental friendliness and safety of future deployment of the ECM system

Task Success Criterion: Illustrate that there are no environmental or safety concerns which would prohibit commercialization efforts for the ECM system.

•

Evaluate emissions types (gas, liquid, solid), emission levels, emission properties (hazardous, toxicity, flammability, etc.), regulatory compliance and implications, and safe handling and storage procedures for raw materials, intermediates, products, and by-products.

•

Complete BP3 Technical EH&S Review Report

36

OxidantOutPipe

Cathode OutManifold(Back)

Fuel TurnManifold

Corner ‘A’ Corner ‘D’Fuel OutManifold

CathodeIn

Face

Cathode (+)End PlateAnode (-)End Plate

FuelIn IIR

FuelOutPipe Voltage

LeadsThermalCoupleLeads

Base

OxidantOutPipe

Cathode OutManifold(Back)

Fuel TurnManifold

Corner ‘A’ Corner ‘D’Fuel OutManifold

CathodeIn

Face

Cathode (+)End PlateAnode (-)End Plate

FuelIn IIR

FuelOutPipe Voltage

LeadsThermalCoupleLeads

Base

Task 5 – Bench Scale Testing

Task Objective: Validate ECM performance in large-area membrane module under simulated flue gas operating conditions

•

Modify test facility to include additional ECM system components•

Fabricate 11.7m2

membrane module (15 cells w/ 7800cm2

active area each), which will produce ~10kW

•

Perform testing for 13 months: 9 months steady-state, followed by 4 months of transient and parametric studies

•

Perform post-test analysis

10 kW DFC Stack Installed in Module Base

37




38

ECM technology offers a unique and attractive alternative for CO2 capture.

Preliminary tests have indicated the potential of ECM technology for achieving >90% carbon dioxide separation.

Conceptual designs of ECM-based systems, focusing on GHG mitigation from coal fired plants, were developed.

Preliminary economic analysis has indicated that ECM-based systems offer cost-effective solutions for combined power generation and CO2 capture.

Incremental cost of electricity is anticipated to be less than 35% due to the on-going commercialization of the technology and high volume manufacturing.

ECM is based on commercially proven Direct FuelCell® technology.

Summary

39

Thank You!

Contact Information:Hossein Ghezel-AyaghDirector, SECA Program(203) [email protected]

FuelCell Energy, Inc. | 3 Great Pasture Rd | Danbury CT 06810

www.fuelcellenergy.com

Electrochemical Membrane for Carbon Dioxide Capture and ... · HRU AIR Catalytic Oxidizer DC to AC...

Documents

Transcript of Electrochemical Membrane for Carbon Dioxide Capture and ... · HRU AIR Catalytic Oxidizer DC to AC...