Gasification - Versatile Solutions€¦ · Gasification - Versatile Solutions Overview of...

Gasification - Versatile Solutions

Overviewof

GasificationTechnologies

Global Climate and Energy Project

Advanced Coal Workshop

March 15, 2005

Gary J. Stiegel, Technology Manager - Gasification National Energy Technology Laboratory, US Department of Energy

Gasification Overview for Global Climate Energy Project, Provo, UT / GJS / March 15, 2005

What is Gasification?

Coal

Water

Oxygen Extreme Conditions:1,000 psig or more2,600 Deg FCorrosive slag and H2S gas

Products (syngas)CO (Carbon Monoxide)H2 (Hydrogen)[CO/H2 ratio can be adjusted]

By-productsH2S (Hydrogen Sulfide)CO2 (Carbon Dioxide)Slag (Minerals from Coal)

GasClean-Up

BeforeProduct

Use


So what can you do with CO and H2 ?

Syngas

Transportation Fuels(Hydrogen)

Building Blocks forChemical Industry

CleanElectricity


Comparison of Environmental Factors Pulverized Coal-Fired, NGCC, and IGCC Plants

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

2.2

SO2(lb/MWh)

NOx(lb/MWh)

PM10(lb/MWh)

CO2(lb/1000 MWh)

Total Solids(lb/100 MWh)

Water Usage(gal/1000 MWh)

= PC-Fired Plant with FGD & SCR

= NGCC Plant

= IGCC Plant without SCR

* Based on 1998 Parson study for DOE : “Market-Based Advanced Coal Power Systems”


• Drivers: Support DOE’s overarching policy issues and Presidential Initiatives− Clear Skies, Clean Coal Power, Climate Change,

FutureGen, and Hydrogen Initiatives• Objective: Develop advanced gasification-based

technologies for affordable, efficient, zero emission power generation

• Performance Goals:

Mission

Capital Costs Efficiency EnvironmentYear ($/kWe) (%HHV)

Today 1200 - 1300 40 - 42 NSPS2010 900 - 1000 45 - 50 <1/10 NSPS2020 850 50 - 60 Near-zero

Capital Costs Efficiency EnvironmentYear ($/kWe) (%HHV)

Today 1200 - 1300 40 - 42 NSPS2010 900 - 1000 45 - 50 <1/10 NSPS2020 850 50 - 60 Near-zero


Oxygen Membrane

Gasification

Fuel Gas

Gas Cleaning

Durability of the MembraneIntegration with Overall Process

Oxygen

Coal

CO2

Hydrogen

Cost-Effective Multi-Contaminant Control toUltra-Clean Specifications

Moderate TemperatureHg Removal at Elevated

TemperaturesIntegrated Specifications

with Downstream Process RequirementsIntegration with NOx

Reduction Processes

Injector ReliabilitySingle Train AvailabilityDurability of Refractory MaterialDurability and Accuracy of

Monitoring DevicesAlternative FeedstocksFeed System ReliabilityHeat RemovalTemperature Measurement & Control

Water-Gas ShiftH2 – CO2 Gas SeparationDurability of the MembraneLow Flux Contaminant SensitivityHeat Removal

Low-rank Coal

Major Technology Issues


Gasification Systems

Southern Company• EPRI• Kellogg, Brown & Root• Siemens Westinghouse Power• Southern Research (SRI)• Rolls Royce – Allison Engine• Lignite Energy Council• Peabody Coal • BNSF Railrway

Development and demonstration of modular industrial scale gasification-based processes and components at Power Systems Development Facility (PSDF)



- GE Energy- Integrated Environmental

Technologies- Virginia Tech

− Global Energy- FluoreScience- Entertechnix (previously

Combustion Specialists)Design, assemble, and test high temperature measurement systems

Instrumentation DevelopmentTemperature Measurements

Modeling- Fluent- NETL in-house

CFD modeling of advanced gasifiers

Albany Research Center- Development of new

refractory materials

SRI- Diffusion coatings

Materials Development

Injector Flame Measurements- GTI

Develop and test monitoring devices



Rocketdyne

Develop and test technology for a novel plug flow gasifier with:-Rapid mix injectors-Actively cooled wall liner-Dry feed system

PSDF &UND EERC TRDU

Development and testing of transport gasification reactor-Air-blown and O2-blown-Bituminous and low-rankcoals

Alstom

Develop hybrid combustion-gasification using high tempchemical and thermal looping- Solids transfer media - Multiple reactors for oxidation,

reduction , carbonation, andcalcination of calcium compounds

Alstom

Develop hybrid combustion-gasification using high tempchemical and thermal looping- Solids transfer media - Multiple reactors for oxidation,

reduction , carbonation, andcalcination of calcium compounds

GE Global Research.• California Energy

Commission

Development of advancedgasification process for CO2 separation and H2production


Some Visions for Gasifier Options

Ready for FutureGen FY10All Applications

Not economicallyAttractive

Low Carbon Burnout

CommercialPower/Chem/H2

Low Efficiency

Bituminous Coal/Petcoke

Ready for FutureGen FY10All Applications

Economically Attractive

Under Developmentfor Power (air-blown)

Not EconomicallyAttractive (poor eff.,

high CAPEX)

Low-Rank Coal/Lignite

Compact Gasifier

(Dry-feed with rapid-mix injectors)

Low Temp. Fluid Bed Gasifiers

High Temp. Entrained Flow

Gasifiers


Rocketdyne’s H2 Production PerformanceCompact Gasifier with Various Coals vs. Entrained Gasifier

1.501.500.751.501.50Cost of Fuel ($/mmBtu)

2.542.502.252.443.03RequiredSales Price ($/MSCF)

89.6%92.0%92.3%90.7%93.3%CarbonCapture

70.3%71.1%71.0%73.5%66.5%Overall Efficiency (HHV)

Sequestration Ready CO2

2.262.211.972.182.73RequiredSales Price ($MSCF)

72.8%73.5%73.3%75.7%68.8%OverallEfficiency (HHV)

CO2 Vented

LignitePRBPetcokeBituminous

CoalBituminous

Coal

Compact GasifierEntrained Gasifier

Note: Increased efficiency due primarily to novel dry feed system


Ultra Gas Cleaning

Siemens Westinghouse Power Corporation

• Gas Technology InstituteDevelop a two-stage process to reduceH2S, HCl, and particulates to ppb levels

Siemens Westinghouse Power Corporation

• Gas Technology InstituteDevelop a two-stage process to reduceH2S, HCl, and particulates to ppb levels

RTI International• SRI International• MEDAL• Sud Chemie, Inc.• University of Texas at Austin• Eastman Chemical• KBR

Develop processes to reduce H2S and CO2(using membranes),NH3 (sorbents), and HCl (sodium bicarbonate) to ppb levels

Pilot testing with EastmanChemical gasifier slipstreamat Kingsport

RTI International• SRI International• MEDAL• Sud Chemie, Inc.• University of Texas at Austin• Eastman Chemical• KBR

Develop processes to reduce H2S and CO2(using membranes),NH3 (sorbents), and HCl (sodium bicarbonate) to ppb levels

Pilot testing with EastmanChemical gasifier slipstreamat Kingsport

NETL In-House Research• NETL with CrystaTech• Selective Catalytic Oxidation of H2S

(SCOHS)TDA Research• DirectSulf

Single-step process for convertingH2S to elemental sulfur

NETL In-House Research• NETL with CrystaTech• Selective Catalytic Oxidation of H2S

(SCOHS)TDA Research• DirectSulf

Single-step process for convertingH2S to elemental sulfur


Economic Advantage of Warm Gas Cleaning

Cold GasWarm GasCool GasTypeCapital Cost (in $millions)

+ 10.5%- 7.9%0 %Delta Cost (as % of Base)

+ 39.6- 30.00Delta Cost ($ millions)

164.8138.6150.8Power Generation / HRSG

27.67.432.3S Recovery + Tail Gas Treat

49.738.719.3NH3 + AG Removal

12.3012.3Low Temp Gas Cooling

RectisolRTI HTDS w/DSRP

Base CaseMDEA


Field Test Objective:First integrated evaluation of warm-gas contaminant cleanup technologies with

coal-derived gas

Results:Maintained H2S and COS reduction levelbelow 2 ppmv detection limit with gasifierproduced syngas for 90 minutes test

Future Test Plans:FY05 2000 hr test at Eastman Chemical of

HTDS with sorbents and DSRPFY06 Multi-component removal of NH3, Hg, S

using membranes and sorbents

Future Test Plans:FY05 2000 hr test at Eastman Chemical of

HTDS with sorbents and DSRPFY06 Multi-component removal of NH3, Hg, S

using membranes and sorbents

Ultra-Clean Warm Gas Cleanup Progress at RTI

Lab Results:Demonstrated regenerable NH3sorbent to reduce 500 ppmv to less than 40 ppmv

Identified in reverse-selectivemembranes with H2S/H2 selectivities of 40 and two candidates for Hgremoval at 400 to 570oF

Lab Results:Demonstrated regenerable NH3sorbent to reduce 500 ppmv to less than 40 ppmv

Identified in reverse-selectivemembranes with H2S/H2 selectivities of 40 and two candidates for Hgremoval at 400 to 570oF


Why Oxygen Separation Membrane Technology is Important

• In an IGCC plant, the air separation unit− Accounts for ~15% of the plant capital cost− Consumes ~ 10% of the gross power output

• Reducing capital cost and increasing efficiency of ASU− Improve economic viability of IGCC,− Stimulate commercial deployment.

• Systems studies of membrane technologies have shown significant potential − Increased net MWe− IGCC plant efficiency− Major decreased cost of oxygen production, − Overall decrease in Cost of Electricity (COE)


Membrane Air Separation AdvantagesAir Products

- 71,0941,020IGCC Specific Cost ($/kW)-----448,000447,000Total IGCC Cost ($,000)- 3520,13213,000Oxygen Plant Cost ($/sTPD)

+53,0403,200Oxygen Plant Size (sTPD)- 37235147Oxygen Power Req’t (kWh/ton)

+240.939.5

41.840.4

Net IGCC Efficiency (% LHV)(% HHV)

+7409438IGCC Net Power (MWe)

∆ %CryoASU

ITM Oxygen

IGCC plant cost reduced 7%, plant efficiency increase 2% with >35% cost and energy savings in oxygen production

© Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. 2002


APCI Air Separation ITM Modules

• Test membrane modules− FY06 – 5 TPD− FY08 – 25 TPD

• Offer commercial air separation modules− Post- FY09 demos

of IGCC and FutureGen

Step 1:Submodule

Construction

Step 2:Module

Construction

12-wafersubmodule

Tonnage-Quantity Module


Gas Separations - H2 & CO2

NETL OSTA In-House ResearchPd and Pd/Cu alloy membranes, characterization, and standard test capabilities

ANLHigh-temperature ceramicmembrane separating H2 fromsyngas and water splitting

Eltron Research- Coors Tek- Sud Chemie, Inc.- ANL - NORAM Engineering & Construction Co.- WahChang

ORNLMicroporous inorganic membranes development and fabrication

Nexant- Simteche - LANL

Low-temperature approach to H2and CO2 separation via hydrates

RTIAlternate membrane materials,polymeric reverse selective membranes

NETL OSTA In-House ResearchFluorinated HydrocarbonMembranes

NETL OSTA In-House ResearchFluorinated HydrocarbonMembranes


Summary of Hydrogen from Coal Cases

5.89 / 0.79

425

25

75.5

3000

158

Yes (100%)

Membrane

Advanced

Case 2

AdvancedConventional Gasifier*

MembranePSASeparation System

Yes (100%)Yes (87%)Carbon Sequestration

3.98 / 0.548.18 / 1.10RSP of Hydrogen ($/MMBtu) / ($/kg)

950417Capital ($MM)

41726.9Excess Power (MW)

5959Efficiency (%) (HHV basis)

60003000Coal (TPD) as received

153119Hydrogen Production (MMSCFD)

Case 3Case 1

* Conventional gasification technology assumes quench gasification (GE technology; formerly Texaco); advanced gasification technology assumes advanced E-Gas gasification.

Source: Hydrogen from Coal, Mitretek Technical Paper MTR 2002-31. July 2002.

• Membrane RD&D is estimated to reduce the cost of hydrogen from coal by 25%.• Co-production of hydrogen and electricity can further reduce the cost of

hydrogen production by 32%.


ELTRON H2 Separation Membrane Characteristics

<50320 to 500Thin Film Palladium on Porous Support

≈ 0.01700 to 950Single Phase Ceramic

>400320 to 440Intermediate-TemperatureComposite

≈ 4550 to 950High-Temperature Cermet with H2-Permeable Metal (Pd)

≈ 1700 to 950High-Temperature CermetWith Non H2-Permeable Metal (Ni)

≈ 0.1700 to 950Ceramic/Ceramic

MaximumPermeation Rate(mL·min-1·cm-2)

TemperatureRange (°C)

MembraneCategory


Oak Ridge Inorganic Membrane TechnologyOffers Great Potential for Hydrogen Separation

• Most advanced nanoporous inorganic membrane technology in the world with excellent mechanical, thermal, and chemical stability

• Seventeen membrane products have been determined to be unclassified

• Technical goal: separate from synthesis gas 95% of the hydrogen at 99+% purity in a single stage

• Economic goal is <<$100/ft2 fabrication cost for nanoporous inorganic membranes

• High membrane permeance and low cost per foot will result in economically superior hydrogen separation systems


RTI/Medal CO2 Membranes

• CO2 + H2S removal from syngas stream• Polymeric membranes• Reverse selective, enriching CO2 in permeate• Primary useful components of syngas (H2 and

CO) are maintained at high pressure• Avoids the high cost of providing the

significant heat for regeneration of sorbents in competing technologies (such as Selexol)

• Expected results:−Removal of 50% of CO2 with only 10% loss of H2−Removal of significant amount of H2S


CO2 Hydrate - Process Advantages

• Recovery of CO2 & H2 at High Pressure• Relatively Simple Process Flow Scheme

− No Large Mass-Transfer Columns− CO2 Recovery is Simple Heat Input− No Organic Solvents Needed

• Projected Low Capital Cost• Projected Low Energy/Operating Cost• Main Competitors – Selexol, Amine Processes• Engineering Analysis

− Projected cost & capture targets compared to commercial process @ $15/ton CO2 avoided

− $8 per ton of CO2 avoided @ 68% carbon capture− $10-11 per ton of CO2 avoided @ 90% capture with use of

promoters


Technology Time Sequence for Deployment

Base

85% Capacity Factor98% Carbon Conversion

Dry FeedFB

Turbine

WGCUITM-O2

90% CapacityFactor

H-Turbine SOFC

Timeline

TARGET50% Efficiency (HHV)

$1000/kW

TARGET60% Efficiency (HHV)

$900/kW

2003 2006 2008 2010 2012 2015 2018 2020

Warm Hg RemovalH2 Membrane Separator

100% CO2 CaptureBase withCO2 Capture

Year of Pre-Commercial Demonstration Availability


Capital Cost ($/kW) Timeline

14

11(60)11

109

13

8

76

5

34

12

21

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020

Cap

ital $

/kW

# = Case

With CO2 Capture

Without CO2 Capture

Year of Pre-Commercial Demonstration Availability


Efficiency Timeline

11(60) 14

11

10

1

9

13

8765

432

1230

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020

Effic

ienc

y (%

) H

HV

With CO2 Capture

Without CO2 Capture

# = CaseYear of Pre-Commercial Demonstration Availability


COE Timeline

14

11(60)11

108 9

13

765

34

12

21

25

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020

CO

E $/

MW

h

With CO2 Capture

Without CO2 Capture

# = CaseYear of Pre-Commercial Demonstration Availability


…the BenefitsGASIFICATION− Stable, affordable, high-efficiency energy supply with

a minimal environmental impact− Feedstock Flexibility/Product Flexibility − Flexible applications for new power generation, as well

as for repowering older coal-fired plantsBIG PICTURE

− Energy Security - -Maintain coal as a significant component in the US energy mix

− A Cleaner Environment (…reduced emissions of pollutants) -- The most economical technology for CO2capture

− Ultra-clean Liquids from Coal -- Early Source of Hydrogen


Opportunities for Coal Gasification

• Environmentally-preferred coal power generation− Near-zero levels of SO2, NOx, PM, Hg achievable and

demonstrated− Gasification well suited to CO2 capture

• Hydrogen production from coal (FutureGen)− Gasification is key element for producing H2 –rich syngas

• Chemical and fertilizer industries− 2003 trade deficit – loss of jobs, plant closures− Replace natural gas with coal and waste gasification

• Production of synthetic natural gas− Significant interest because of high natural gas prices.


Visit the Gasification Technology Websiteat http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/gasification/index.html


Cases Analyzed: No Carbon CaptureBituminous Coal to Power

Case Description1 Base (Texaco) 75% Capacity Factor/95% Carbon Conversion2 Texaco 85% Capacity Factor/95% Carbon Conversion3 Texaco 85% Capacity Factor/98% Carbon Conversion4 E-Gas 85% Capacity Factor/98% Carbon Conversion5 Dry Feed 85% Capacity Factor/98% Carbon Conversion6 Dry Feed 85% Capacity Factor/98% Carbon Conversion/FB Turbine7 Dry Feed 85% Capacity Factor/98% Carbon Conversion/FB/SCOHS8 Dry Feed 85% Capacity Factor/98% Carbon Conversion/FB/SCOHS/ITM

Target Date: 20109 Dry Feed 90% Capacity Factor/98% Conversion/FB/SCOHS/ITM10 Dry Feed 90% Capacity Factor/98% Conversion /H-Turbine/SCOHS/ITM11 Dry Feed 90% Capacity Factor/98% Conversion /H/SCOHS/ITM/SOFC11(60) Same as Case 11 with ratio of SOFC to GT/ST adjusted to get

60% efficiencyTarget Date: 2020


Cases Analyzed: With Carbon CaptureBituminous Coal to Power

Case Description12 Baseline Current

Slurry Feed Single Stage Gasification with75% Capacity Factor / 95% Carbon Conversion

13 Target Date: 2010Dry Feed 85% Capacity Factor / 98% Carbon ConversionFB-Gas Turbines, SCOHS Gas Cleaning, ITM Air Separation

14 Target Date: 2020Dry Feed 90% Capacity Factor / 98% Carbon ConversionF-Turbine, SCOHS Gas Cleaning, ITM Air Separation, SOFC


Alstom Advanced Chemical Looping Process

CaO to CaCO3 LoopCaO to CaCO3 Loop

CaS to CaSO4 LoopCaS to CaSO4 Loop

ShiftReaction

ShiftReaction

4C+CaSO4=4CO+CaS

CaS+2O2=CaSO4

CO+H2O=CO2+H2

CaO+CO2=CaCO3

CaCO3=CaO+CO2

H2O

Coal

CaCO3CaSO4

CaS

CaCO3

CaO

H2 CO2

Air Ash & spentCaSO4

N2

CO 2+ H

2

Hot Bauxite

Cold Bauxite

Gasification - Versatile Solutions€¦ · Gasification - Versatile Solutions Overview of...

Documents

Transcript of Gasification - Versatile Solutions€¦ · Gasification - Versatile Solutions Overview of...