roadmapping - International Energy Agency · roadmapping coal’s future international energy...

I N T E R N A T I O N A L E N E R G Y A G E N C Y

W O R K I N G P A R T Y O N F O S S I L F U E L S

C O A L I N D U S T R Y A D V I S O R Y B O A R D

ZERO EMISSIONS TECHNOLOGIES FOR FOSSIL FUELS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report was prepared by the International Energy Agency's Coal Industry Advisory Board incollaboration with the IEA Working Party on Fossil Fuels. It was published by the IEA Clean Coal Centrewho also provided valuable, editorial assistance. Within the IEA the project was managed by theEnergy Technology Division.

The IEA is an autonomous body that implements an internationalenergy programme and co-ordinates wide-ranging energy co-operation among its 26 member countries. Its aims are to regulateoil supplies, promote rational energy policies, provide market data,aid policy integration and encourage energy efficiency measures.The IEA supports the development of an extensive portfolio oftechnologies and maintains active involvement in networks andcollaborative exercises promoting joint research, development anddemonstration programmes (RD&D).

The Working Party on Fossil Fuels (WPFF) provides advice to IEA onfossil fuel technology-related policies, trends, projects andprogrammes, on strategies which address priority environmentalprotection and energy security interests, and carry out activities tomeet those needs through international co-operation andcollaboration facilitated by IEA.

The Coal Industry Advisory Board (CIAB) is a group of high-levelexecutives from coal-related industrial enterprises, established by theInternational Energy Agency (IEA) in July 1979 to provide advice tothe IEA on a wide range of issues relating to coal. The CIAB currentlyhas 39 members from 16 countries accounting for about 75% ofworld coal production.

RoadmappingCoal’s Future



W O R K I N G P A R T Y O N F O S S I L F U E L SC O A L I N D U S T R Y A D V I S O R Y B O A R D


INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCY9, rue de la Fédération,75739 Paris Cedex 15, FranceThe International Energy Agency (IEA) is an autonomous body which was established in November1974 within the framework of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)to implement an international energy programme.

It carries out a comprehensive programme of energy co-operation among twenty-six* of the OECD’sthirty member countries. The basic aims of the IEA are:■ to maintain and improve systems for coping with oil supply disruptions;■ to promote rational energy policies in a global context through co-operative relations with non-

member countries, industry and international organisations;■ to operate a permanent information system on the international oil market;■ to improve the world’s energy supply and demand structure by developing alternative energy

sources and increasing the efficiency of energy use;■ to assist in the integration of environmental and energy policies.

* IEA member countries: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland,France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Luxembourg, theNetherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the UnitedKingdom, the United States. The European Commission also takes part in the work of the IEA.

ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENTPursuant to Article 1 of the Convention signed in Paris on 14th December 1960, and which came intoforce on 30th September 1961, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(OECD) shall promote policies designed:

■ to achieve the highest sustainable economic growth and employment and a rising standard ofliving in member countries, while maintaining financial stability, and thus to contribute to thedevelopment of the world economy;

■ to contribute to sound economic expansion in member as well as non-member countries in theprocess of economic development; and

■ to contribute to the expansion of world trade on a multilateral, non-discriminatory basis inaccordance with international obligations.

The original member countries of the OECD are Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France,Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain,Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the United States. The following countriesbecame members subsequently through accession at the dates indicated hereafter: Japan (28th April1964), Finland (28th January 1969), Australia (7th June 1971), New Zealand (29th May 1973),Mexico (18th May 1994), the Czech Republic (21st December 1995), Hungary (7th May 1996),Poland (22nd November 1996), the Republic of Korea (12th December 1996) and Slovakia (28thSeptember 2000). The Commission of the European Communities takes part in the work of the OECD(Article 13 of the OECD Convention).

© OECD/IEA, 2005Applications for permission to reproduce or translate all or part of this publication should be made to:Head of Publications Service, OECD/IEA2, rue André-Pascal, 75775 Paris Cedex 16, Franceor9, rue de la Fédération, 75739 Paris Cedex 15, France.

ROADMAPPING COAL’S FUTURE - 3

INTRODUCTIONWorldwide, the use of coal as an energy source remains crucial to the economies ofmany developed and developing countries. Particularly with the latter, asindustrialisation and urbanisation spread and national energy requirements soar, coallooks set to retain its position as a secure, reliable source of energy, particularly for thegeneration of electricity.

Coal-fired power generation accounts for 39% of the world’s total electricity productionand in some countries, such as the USA, Germany, Poland, Australia, South Africa,China and India, it is very much higher due to its cost competitiveness. While use insome European countries remains static or is in decline, significant increases in coal-fired generation capacity are taking place in many of the developing nations, such asChina and India, where large capacity increases are planned to make use of abundantcoal reserves – far more abundant than oil and gas reserves. Coal-fired power plantshave a long working life and, with the extensive investments being made in many partsof the world, coal is likely to remain an important source of energy well into thiscentury. In many countries, policies to increase the diversity of energy supplies arebeing promoted to improve security within truly competitive energy markets. In thisrespect, coal has an important role to play – providing coal users are able to respondpositively to the environmental challenges associated with the use of fossil fuels.

Climate change is an issue of global proportion. There is a body of evidenceand increasing acceptance that a number of greenhouse gases are responsiblefor the global warming that leads to this change, the most significant contributorbeing carbon dioxide (CO2) produced by the burning of fossil fuels. The latterprovide a large proportion (around 80%) of the world’s energy needs and willcontinue to do so for the foreseeable future (Figure1). To ensure that substantialreductions in atmospheric CO2 emissions can be made during the present centuryand beyond, widespread deployment of technological solutions will be required.

The International Energy Agency1 (IEA) is playing a major role in addressingthis subject. Recognising the potential of CO2 capture and storage technologies,the IEA’s Working Party on Fossil Fuels2 (WPFF) launched its strategy for ZeroEmissions Technologies (ZETs) in 2001. With this concept, almost allconventional pollutants produced by the burning of fossil fuels will be eliminatedand used in by-products or, in the case of CO2, captured and stored in geologicalformations, thus preventing its emission to atmosphere.

1 Further details on the IEA’s activities can be obtained at www.iea.org2 The IEA’s WPFF can be contacted via its Chair: [email protected]

4 - ROADMAPPING COAL’S FUTURE

The IEA Coal Industry Advisory Board3 (CIAB) has prepared this brochure ontechnology roadmapping to complement a series of earlier WPFF/IEA brochures4

that examine various aspects of its ZETs strategy. This brochure focuses on thetechnology pathways leading to ZETs based on clean coal technologies (CCTs)– a significant, but feasible, leap forward that demands a co-ordinated responseby industry and governments.

World primary energy demand5Figure 1

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

Mto

e

23%

36%

21%

7%

2%

11%

coal

oil

gas

nuclear

hydro

other

22%

35%

25%

5%2%

11%

2000 2030

3 The CIAB website (www.ciab.org.uk) contains useful publications on coal-related matters4 All seven public information brochures are available to download from the publications section of

www.iea.org (click on “Browse all IEA papers by year and subject”, then select “Clean Fossil Fuels”in the subject search and “2003” in the year search)

5 World Energy Outlook 2004, Paris: International Energy Agency, 2004

ROADMAPPING COAL’S FUTURE - 5ROADMAPPING COAL’S FUTURE - 5

CHALLENGES AHEADAlthough coal remains hugely important for the economies of many countries, a majorchallenge is to reduce its environmental impact. Effective methods already exist forthe control of some pollutants such as sulphur and nitrogen oxides (SO2 and NOx)and particulates, but, despite dramatic improvements made during the past decade,there remains continued pressure to reduce emissions still further. In the future, therewill be growing pressure to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2).

There is much concern about the quantities of CO2 emitted from fossil fuel-burningpower plants for electricity production. Indeed, these are responsible for around one-third of total global emissions of CO2 and are candidates for the application of emergingCO2 capture and storage techniques. Although, with a very few exceptions, such controltechniques have not yet been adopted, the technological solutions exist that could beadapted and applied for reducing CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plant. Onesignificant challenge is large-scale application at an affordable cost. Identifyingappropriate power technologies and effective monitoring of the stored CO2 constituteadditional challenges. Moreover, a specific legal framework has to be created and marketrules established that would allow CO2 abatement costs to be recovered.

As electricity demand continues to rise, developing and developed countries alike canbe expected to continue using their abundant coal reserves; if action is not taken, CO2levels will rise. The eventual goal must be to achieve the deployment of energytechnologies that produce little or no emissions. It is widely accepted that no singletechnology will be capable of maintaining a secure, cost effective energy supply inIEA countries, and providing a greater share of the world’s population with access tomodern energy services, while making a substantial reduction in GHG emissions.The energy systems of tomorrow will rely on a mix of advanced, clean, efficienttechnologies for energy supply and use. Energy efficiency demands further effort andthe use of renewable energy will grow substantially from its small base; but, to meetthe predicted increase in global energy demand, whilst reducing emissions, will alsorequire a concerted effort to limit CO2 emissions from fossil fuel use. Coal will continueto play a major role in energy supply over the coming decades, with strong growth indeveloping countries. In order to reduce its environmental impact, development andapplication of Clean Coal Technologies (CCTs), designed to minimise the emissionsof various undesirable species from coal-fired power plants, should continue. Furtherdevelopment of CCTs will lead to a number of technology options (so-called Zero orNear-zero Emissions Technologies – ZETs) that emit very low levels of aallll emissions.


RD&D PLANNING WITH TECHNOLOGYROADMAPS

The environmental challenges, coupled with concerns about the future securityof energy supplies, have stimulated renewed interest in development programmesfor CCTs. In major coal-producing and coal-using countries, efforts have beenmade to consider how these CCTs can be used as bridging technologies, leadingto ZETs-based plants that produce virtually no undesirable emissions by 2020.This brochure presents an overview of the technical assessment and planningwork that is being undertaken by key organisations in these countries, all ofwhom have the common aim of seeing ZETs developed and deployed usingcoal. The brochure draws heavily on a review6 of this work by the IEA CleanCoal Centre7, often known as technology roadmapping.

As part of the process leading to the deployment of ZETs, many pathways are beingreviewed to identify the most appropriate technology strategies and the underpinningresearch, development and demonstration (RD&D) needs. These forms of assessmentare commonly termed Clean Coal Technology Roadmaps and are intended to describethe measures necessary to realise the different technologies, having regard to policyaims and market needs. Recently, a number of such roadmaps have been prepared,based on a variety of candidate technologies – some based on progressive improvementsto conventional power generation systems, and others on more advanced concepts. Anexample roadmap is outlined in the Annex to this brochure.

COMMON MESSAGES FROM THETECHNOLOGY ROADMAPSAll technology roadmapping exercises begin by examining wwhhaatt nneeeeddss ttoo bbee ddoonnee –what are the external drivers and do these result in clear technology performance targets.Next, the current situation or tthhee ssttaarrttiinngg ppooiinntt must be understood since this mayimpose constraints on the final step which is the definition of tteecchhnnoollooggyy ppaatthhwwaayyss.Using this final step, a programme of RD&D work can be initiated to achieve thetechnology performance targets.

6 Henderson, C., Clean Coal Technologies Roadmaps, report no. CCC/75, London: IEA CleanCoal Centre, October 2003

7 Further details on the IEA Clean Coal Centre can be obtained at www.iea-coal.org.uk


What needs to be done?Within the power generation sector, natural gas remains coal’s main competitor inregions where gas is available and natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) plants offercertain environmental benefits, notably half the CO2 emissions at the point of use;although supply chain emissions, particularly where liquefied natural gas (LNG) isused, complicates this simplistic comparison. Yet, bringing more distant reserves ofgas to market is proving expensive. So, despite its environmental challenges, coaloften has a substantial cost advantage which translates into lower power prices andhence a higher standard of living and social development in many coal-using countries.Nevertheless, if coal-fired systems are to be improved, then NGCC performance willremain one of a number of benchmarks for comparison.

Emissions and possible targets for selected coal-fired power generationtechnologies

In the case of SSOO22, emissions from gas-fired systems are generally negligible, thereforelevels produced from coal-fired equivalents will need to be reduced effectively to zero.Already, both PCC (pulverised coal combustion) and IGCC (integrated gasificationcombined cycle) plants can be configured for very low emissions of SO2 (see Table 1).For NNOOxx emissions, again, coal will need to reduce levels to be comparable with NGCC.At present, the application of selective catalytic reduction (SCR) to coal-fired plantcan produce NOx levels similar to those from gas-fired plant, and coal-fired systemsbased on IGCC technology promise even better performance. NGCC systems produceonly very fine, aerosol ppaarrttiiccuullaatteess with no dust; it will be important for pollutioncontrol technologies to follow the downward trend achieved at coal-fired plant in recentyears.

TTeecchhnnoollooggyy SSOO22 eemmiissssiioonnss((%% rreemmoovvaall))

NNOOxx eemmiissssiioonnss((aass NNOO22,, mmgg//mm33))

PPaarrttiiccuullaatteess((mmgg//mm33))

Pulverised Coal Combustion(PCC) with Flue GasDesulphurisation (FGD)

90–98 100–200 (SCR) 10–50

Circulating Fluidised BedCombustion (CFBC) 90–98 <200–400 <50

Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) 98–99 <125 <1

PCC – target for ZETs 95–98 <125 <10

IGCC – target for ZETs 99 <25 <1

Natural Gas Combined Cycle(NGCC) n/a <30 (SCR)-300 0

Table 1


Of increasing importance will be the control and minimisation of CCOO22 from all sources,including coal which accounted for 38% of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustionin 2002. Indications are that removal rates of 80–90% should be feasible from newcoal-fired plants and these are regarded as target levels for near-zero emissions plantbased on both PCC and IGCC technologies. It will be important to achieve these goals,and to tackle CO2 emissions from both oil and gas use as well, if atmospheric CO2concentrations are to be stabilised. In this respect, technologies to capture and storeCO2 are as applicable to future gas-fired plants as they are to coal-fired plants. Achievinglower emissions will add to the cost of energy supply. How this cost is recovered remainsuncertain, but ultimately consumers should expect to pay more for their energy needs.

The starting pointThe starting point for ZETs technologies is current state-of-the-art clean coaltechnologies8. There are many to choose from, some based on combustion and otherson gasification of coal. The most relevant in meeting short- to medium-term needsare:

■ supercritical pulverised coal combustion (PCC);■ circulating fluidised bed combustion (CFBC); and,■ integrated gasification combined cycles (IGCC).

At present, the candidates most likely to provide the basis for ZETs technologies aresupercritical PCC and IGCC. With the latter, there may be opportunities for combiningthe technology with fuel cells. In Japan, the EAGLE integrated gasification combinedcycle fuel cell (IGFC) project is testing this concept. An 8 MWe pilot plant is now inoperation at Wakamatsu, based around an oxygen-blown, two-stage, entrained-flowgasifier. The goal of this long-term, development project is to generate electricity ina solid oxide fuel cell fed with hydrogen from the coal gasifier.

8 For an in-depth review of CCTs, see: Henderson, C.; Clean Coal Technologies, report no.CCC/74, London: IEA Clean Coal Centre, October 2003


View of the Japanese EAGLE pilot plant

These state-of-the-art technologies can be adapted to enable the capture of CO2 andso prevent its release to atmosphere. In some instances, well-developed processes canbe used; in other cases, further development is needed before CO2 capture could beincorporated into new power plant projects. Once captured, the CO2 must be transportedand stored. A growing number of reference projects in the oil and gas industry suggestthat these are already becoming accepted practices.

Technology pathwaysHaving established that ZETs may have an important role in the coming years, whatwill be the best route forward in achieving their successful deployment? In practice,no single system will be capable of meeting all future requirements, hence a portfolioof technologies will be necessary. By not concentrating on a single candidate technology,the associated technological risks can be minimised, and of equal importance, possibleroutes forward can be tailored to meet the different situations prevailing in differentparts of the world; the structure of electricity generation sectors and future nationalpower demands are likely to vary significantly between countries and regions. So, thereare likely to be several possible routes forward towards the adoption of ZETs, withsome variants being more applicable to the industrialised nations and others focusedmore on developing countries.

With the clear need for more than one candidate ZET, there is a corresponding numberof possible routes forward, some based on PCC and others on IGCC. In both cases, thereare likely to be some distinct steps in taking forward today’s coal-based systems toachieve zero emissions. For systems based on PPCCCC, the pathways shown in Figure 3can be envisaged.

Figure 2

AIR

SEPARATION

UNIT

GAS

CLEAN-UPSULPHUR

RECOVERY

GASIFIER

AIR

SEPARATION

UNIT

GAS

CLEAN-UPSULPHUR

RECOVERY

GASIFIER


PCC-based ZETs pathway

CO2 capture from plant flue gases may be based on one of the technologies underdevelopment or currently in use within industry. Inevitably, CO2 capture imposesadditional costs and an energy penalty on the plant, so the most likely candidates forfuture use will be those whose impact on plant economics and efficiency has beenminimised. In the shorter term, the most promising capture technology may be basedon systems that scrub CO2 from plant flue gases using amine solutions. Such systemsare already used within some industrial sectors, although they were not developedspecifically for treating the mix of gases that characterise the exhaust or flue gas fromcoal-fired power plants. However, the potential to retrofit such systems to the largenumber of existing coal-fired units justifies the significant development effort neededbefore this can be viewed as a viable option. Commercial developments, currently takingplace, are aimed at increasing PCC plant efficiency above current, state-of-the-art levels,hence the impact of fitting a CO2 capture system to new plant would be less thanretrofits to existing units. In the medium term, alternative systems, such as those usingmembranes to separate CO2 from flue gas, could be developed and deployed. Theoutcome of RD&D programmes over the next few years will determine which optionscan be developed and refined to be most economic.

The other main possibility for ZETs-based PCC is where coal combustion takes placein an atmosphere comprising recycled flue gas mixed with oxygen (oxy-coal combustion).With conventional, PCC-based systems, the flue gas contains only a relatively lowconcentration of CO2; however, with oxy-coal, a more concentrated stream of CO2 is

Figure 3

Advanced UltraSupercritical PCC

demonon-CO2 capture

Advanced UltraSupercritical PCC

commercialnon-CO2 capture

AdvancedPCC-based ZETsfirst commercial

retrofits and new plants

AdvancedPCC-based ZETs

CO2 capture activities:pressure swing adsorptionmembranesoxy-coal demo

Ion Transfer MembraneOxygen Plants

commercial

CO2 capture activities:chemical scrubbing demo

Particulates removal:move to <10mg/m3

NOx activities:deeper removalwithout SCR

SO2 activities:deeper removalnew systems

Mercury activities:characterisationmonitoringremoval methods

Su

perc

riti

cal P

CC

~45%

effic

iency (

LH

V)

2005 -10 2010 -15 2015 onnow

increasing efficiency, lower emissions, lower costs


produced, easing its capture. Although the overall thermal efficiency could be higherthan that of more conventional plants with CO2 scrubbed from the flue gas, there wouldstill be an efficiency penalty as production of the necessary oxygen consumes aconsiderable amount of energy. Further development of the technique is required andefforts are under way, notably in Canada, Australia and Europe – again demonstratingthe need for early RD&D to provide economic options for the future.

With regard to other emissions from PCC-based plant, equipment is available toroutinely achieve low levels of particulates and SO2, and low levels of NOx are achievablevia several routes. In recent years, concern over mercury emissions has increased to theextent that there is a move in the USA to reduce emissions by 70% before 2018. Theimpact of this challenge on coal-fired generation is uncertain, but removal technologiesare being developed and, in any event, mercury emissions fall substantially with theapplication of conventional pollution control techniques such as flue gas desulphurisation(FGD).

Moving on to examine ZETs systems based on IIGGCCCC technology, Figure 4 illustratessome key steps.

GCC-based ZETs pathway

As with PCC systems, there are a number of different variants of the technology, somebased on a dry coal feed and others on a wet feed of coal-water slurry. There are threegeneric types of gasifier that could be applied (entrained flow, moving bed and fixedbed) all of which have different operating characteristics. Such IGCC systems are

Figure 4

IGCC-based ZETsearly, full-scalepower plants

CO2 capture activities:pressure swing adsorptionmembranes

Ion Transfer MembraneOxygen Plants

commercial

CO2 capture activities:chemical scrubbing demo

NOx activities:reduce emissions

Hot gas clean-up activities:particulatessulphurmercury

Inte

gra

ted

Gasif

icati

on

Co

mb

ined

Cycle

(IG

CC

)com

merc

ial-scale

dem

onstr

ations

2005 -10 2010 -15 2015 onnow

increasing efficiency, lower emissions, lower costs

AdvancedIGCC-based ZETscommercial plants

various technologiesmulti-products

IGCC Power Plantscommercial

non-CO2 capture


acknowledged widely as having a lower environmental impact than combustion-basedelectricity generation technologies and this will influence future strategies formulatedto ensure that coal-fired plant remains environmentally acceptable and commerciallyviable in the coming years. Nevertheless, there are far fewer IGCC plants operatingtoday than PCC units, as the technology is perceived to be expensive, complex andrelatively unproven. By their very nature, some first-generation IGCC demonstrationplants were costly and complex, although the next generation should see significantimprovements in this respect. In fact, a number of IGCC plants are now operating witha high degree of reliability and experience gained with these will help to provide afirm foundation for IGCC-based ZETs which offer a number of potential advantages:

■ CO2 capture imposes a lower energy penalty than for capture from PCC plant,since the CO2 content of the pre-combustion, syngas stream is greater and hencemore easily captured than from a flue gas.

■ The CO2 can be captured at a pressure suitable for pipeline transport, hencereducing CO2 compression costs.

■ A “sequestration ready” IGCC plant can be constructed today and CO2 captureadded at a later date, thus offering a valuable option to developers and investorsfaced with uncertain CO2 emission costs.

■ Straightforward, chemical processing of the syngas, coupled with CO2 capture,yields hydrogen suitable for combustion in gas turbines, direct conversion toelectricity in fuel cells or other uses, such as transport.

■ Developments in gas turbine technology will boost efficiency levels and fuel cellsoffer the prospect of even higher efficiencies.

■ Very low levels of SO2 emissions can already be achieved and NOx levels arecomparable to those of natural gas fired combined cycles.

■ Solid wastes produced are usually in a vitrified, inert form, thus easing theirdisposal.

There are a number of developments that have the potential to increase the efficiencyand attractiveness of IGCC providing they are supported under RD&D programmes.These include the successful application of systems to remove particulates and otherspecies from the syngas whilst still hot, and the deployment of a new, advanced methodfor generating oxygen (ion transport membrane technology – ITM). The latter has thepotential to generate oxygen more cheaply than current processes, hence it could findapplication in a number of power generation cycles.

In a further development of IGCC systems, there may be the possibility of thesimultaneous removal of CO2 with the hydrogen sulphide (H2S) present in syngas.These gases could then be co-disposed of in a single step. This technique is presentlybeing carried out commercially in North America where so-called acid gas injectionis being employed as an aid to recovering oil from mature fields. Such co-disposal offersthe potential of lowering the costs of CO2 capture.


Worldwide, as efforts gather pace to reduce emissions of CO2 and other speciesfrom coal-fired plant, there is increasing interest in the use of hydrogen as anenergy carrier. IGCC has the potential for co-producing electricity with otherproducts such as hydrogen, chemicals and liquid fuels. For example, in the USA,the FutureGen project is a major $1billion, 10-year, US Department of Energyinitiative that aims to demonstrate a near-zero emissions 275 MWe coal-fuelledIGCC that incorporates hydrogen production and CO2 separation followed bygeological sequestration. This prototype plant will serve as an engineeringlaboratory for the development of clean power, carbon capture, and coal-to-hydrogen technologies. Operations are expected to commence in 2011 withthe plant producing one million tonnes of CO2 each year. It will be requiredto achieve a level of at least 90% CO2 abatement, with the potential for levelsapproaching 100%.

ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONSMoving from existing technologies to ZETs equivalents that incorporate a CO2 capturestage, will clearly have major cost implications for systems developed from eitherPCC or IGCC. It has been estimated that for the former, plant capital costs would be56–82% greater than current systems, and for the latter, some 27–50% higher9. Alarge proportion of the increased capital costs are associated with the capture of CO2.Future technological advances will play an important role in the economics of a particularsystem, and there remains potential for considerable cost reductions to be made formore advanced forms of PCC- and IGCC-based technologies coupled with a range ofcandidate capture technologies. At present, comparisons of the efficiency penaltyassociated with the different ZETs systems suggests that IGCC is ahead, although theeconomics of future (ultra supercritical) PCC cycles with CO2 capture are not yetclear.

9 Henderson, C. and Topper, J. M., Clean coal technologies and the path to zero emissions, 7thInternational Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, 5-9 September 2004,Vancouver, BC, Canada; University of Regina, Natural Resources Canada, IEA Greenhouse GasR&D Programme, 2004


In the USA, where considerable progress is being made on the development of ZETs,ambitious cost targets have been set for power systems with CO2 capture and storage:

■ CO2 abatement cost <$10/tCO2 (compared to current estimates of over$30/tCO2)10.

■ <10% increase in cost of electricity for >90% removal of CO2 by 202011.■ “Carbon-free” hydrogen production from coal at a cost of $3–5/106Btu

($2.84–4.74/GJ or $0.41–0.68/kg) after 201512.

CONCLUDING REMARKSFossil fuels will remain the main pillar of the world’s energy supply for decades tocome. Over this same period, CO2 constraints are likely to become an ever greaterfeature of energy policies. ZETs are the only option available today that have thepotential to respond to these imperatives in a material way. The roadmapping process,outlined in this brochure, shows how these technologies might be introduced.

In regions with the most stringent environmental controls, where fuel costs are expectedto be high, and with competitive electricity markets, IGCC appears to be an attractiveproposition. However, zero-emissions plant based on PCC technology will be of greaterimportance in retrofit situations, where existing plants could be upgraded simultaneouslywith the installation of a CO2 capture system, as well as in the economies of majordeveloping nations, where electricity demand is expected to continue growing at asignificant rate.

Hydrogen is considered to have the potential to provide clean energy at the point ofuse, although there are many technical and economic challenges to be overcome beforeit becomes a practical link in the energy supply chain. Fossil fuels, notably coal andnatural gas, coupled with CO2 capture and storage, could provide the transitionalpathway to the longer-term objective of a hydrogen economy based on renewable energy.

In the drive towards the development and deployment of coal-fired plants that emitvirtually no unwanted emissions (using Zero or Near-zero Emissions Technologies –ZETs), it is clear that several strategies must be pursued:

■ Coal-fired systems based on both pulverised coal combustion (PCC) and integratedgasification combined cycles (IGCC) will need to be included in a comprehensiveZETs response to reducing CO2 emissions.

10 National Energy Technology Laboratory, Carbon Sequestration Technology Roadmap andProgram Plan, Office of Fossil Energy, US Department of Energy, March 12, 2003

11 DOE-CURC-EPRI Clean Coal Technology Roadmap, US Department of Energy, Coal UtilizationResearch Council and Electric Power Research Institute, January 2003

12 ibid. and Hydrogen Co-ordination Group, Hydrogen Program Plan – hydrogen from natural gasand coal: the road to a sustainable energy future, Office of Fossil Energy, US Department ofEnergy, June 2003


■ ZETs based on PCC may be of particular importance in countries such as Chinaand India, that have large and growing fleets of PCC-based power generationplant.

■ ZETs systems based on IGCC technology have the advantage of capturing CO2before combustion takes place, resulting in a smaller efficiency penalty and thepotential to supply large volumes of hydrogen. Efficiency improvements, throughimproved gas turbine designs and the use of fuel cells, can be expected in thefuture.

■ Potentially, PCC-based ZETs could close the gap with IGCC-based systems if theadvanced steam conditions, currently under development, were employed.

Only with effective RD&D programmes, over the next few years, will it be possiblefor these strategic options to be developed and refined to the point where they can beadopted commercially as part of the solution to global warming and climate change.


ANNEX – EXAMPLES OF CLEAN COALTECHNOLOGY ROADMAPSMany countries that host coal-related industries – mining, power generation, steelproduction – recognise that coal has a major role to play in their future and are planningaccordingly. Programmes have been formulated to provide a framework for futuredevelopments, especially in the case of coal-fired power generation, with detailedtechnology roadmaps appearing in Australia, Canada, the European Union, Germany,Japan, the UK and the USA, as listed below. By way of example, a description of aRD&D roadmapping exercise in Australia follows.

Organisations around the world engaged in technology roadmappingTable 2

AustraliaAustralian Coal AssociationCooperative Research Centre for Greenhouse GasTechnologies

COAL21CO2CRC

CanadaCanadian Clean Power CoalitionNatural Resources Canada – CANMET EnergyTechnology Centre

CCPCCO2TRM

European Union European Commission – Sixth FrameworkProgramme PowerClean

Germany Federal Ministry of Economics and Labour COORETEC

Japan

Center for Coal Utilization New Energy and Industrial TechnologyDevelopment Organization (NEDO) / ElectricPower Development Co Ltd (EPDC)

CCT strategy

EAGLE

United Kingdom Department of Trade and IndustryAdvanced Power Generation Technology Forum

CAT strategyAPGTF vision

USA

Office of Fossil Energy, Department of Energy(DOE)Federal Energy Technology Center, NationalEnergy Technology LaboratoryCoal Utilization Research Council / Electric PowerResearch Institute / DOE

FutureGen

Vision21

CCT roadmap

International Carbon Sequestration Leadership ForumIEA Clean Coal Centre

CSLFtopical reports


Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage: Research,Development and Demonstration in Australia –a technology roadmap13

BackgroundAs part of the growing effort to control global CO2 emissions, Australia is committedto limiting CO2 emissions to 108% of 1990 levels by 2008-12. However, the country’seconomic prosperity relies heavily on the continued use of its abundant reserves of fossilfuels. Encouragingly, half of Australia’s CO2 emissions come from stationary sources,and so have the potential to be captured and stored. Amongst the sources consideredsequesterable, power stations are the most significant, with smaller contributionsfrom the petroleum industry, oil refineries, the steel industry, non-ferrous metal refining,and other industrial processes. Of the CO2 produced by power stations, the vast majorityemanates from brown and black coal-fired plants.

Sources of CO2 from power stations in Australia

Australia’s future energy needs suggest that emissions of CO2 from stationary sourceswill rise significantly during the next twenty years and beyond. The greater use of fossilfuels, particularly coal and natural gas, is inevitable. Whilst renewable energytechnologies will meet part of the increased demand, fossil fuels will remain essentialif demand is to be met in full. In view of this, a range of measures will be needed toenable Australia to attain its emission targets: increased energy efficiency, decreasedcarbon intensity, and development and application of CO2 sequestration techniques.Of the latter, CO2 capture followed by geological storage is considered to be a promisingand materially significant option.

Figure 5

oil

1.4%

gas

6.1%

black coal

60.5%

brown coal

32.0%

13 Carbon Dioxide Capture & Storage: research development and demonstration in Australia – atechnology roadmap, September 2004 update, publication no. 2004/008, Canberra:Cooperative Research Centre for Greenhouse Gas Technologies, September 2004(www.co2crc.com.au)


The adoption of such measures opens up the possibility of integrating capture andstorage systems with advanced energy systems such as IGCC and oxyfuel-based powergeneration, alongside syngas and hydrogen production. In fact, advanced fossil fuel-based energy systems, coupled with CO2 capture and storage, could provide a pathwayto the hydrogen economy and, based on current estimates, this appears to be the mostcost-effective way forward. With this in mind, the Cooperative Research Centre forGreenhouse Gas Technologies (CO2CRC) has addressed the role of CO2 capture andstorage technologies via a multi-level roadmapping process that leads from the acceptanceand application of the technologies for low emission electricity generation from fossilfuels to the wide-scale production of hydrogen – initially from fossil fuels with CO2capture and storage, but ultimately from renewable sources.

CO2CRC roadmapping exerciseThe process was taken forward through the formulation and definition of a technologyroadmap, specific to Australia. This is structured on the following basis:

LLeevveell 00 DDeevveelloopp SSkkiillllss aanndd KKnnoowwlleeddggee – an assessment of preliminary activitiesover the previous five years that had contributed to the developmentof technical capability and knowledge. This provided the foundationfor Level 1.

LLeevveell 11 RR&&DD – a detailed roadmap aimed at defining R&D and technologydirections for the next 5–10 years. It required detailed technologyassessments and gap analysis for R&D related to CO2 capture, storageand utilisation.

LLeevveell 22 DDeemmoonnssttrraattiioonn//AApppplliiccaattiioonn – incorporates broad assessments ofpotential demonstration and application opportunities through pilot-scale RD&D projects, medium-scale demonstration projects, and large-scale commercial projects offering R&D opportunities over the next10–20 years.

LLeevveell 33 AAddvvaanncceedd SSyysstteemmss – development of a 20- to 30-year roadmap towardsthe hydrogen economy, stressing, in particular, the key role of CO2

capture and storage. It assumes that such an economy would initiallybe fossil fuel based, but with the longer-term objective of moving torenewable energy.


An emission-free vision for the future

A focal point for CO2 capture and storage RD&Din AustraliaThe technology roadmapping exercise proved to be a valuable exercise for Australianresearch organisations, industry and government alike. It proved useful in identifyingtechnology gaps and priorities, identifying expertise, strengthening national research,development and demonstration (RD&D) collaboration, enhancing opportunities forinternational R&D co-operation, and defining an Australian strategy for carbonsequestration technologies.

In the lead-up to the hydrogen economy, the country possesses significant naturaladvantages in terms of abundant fossil fuel reserves and a massive CO2 storage capacity.However, much of the technological development and most of the market-pull willcome from the larger OECD countries, in particular, the USA. Therefore, Australianeeds to position itself to work closely with other countries in the development ofzero emissions technologies.

Indeed, the findings of the exercise suggest strongly that it will only be through intenseco-operative action at the national and international level that progress will be madetowards undertaking essential R&D, developing new technological options, andimplementing new carbon sequestration technologies on the enormous scale requiredto have a significant impact on the levels of CO2 being emitted to the atmosphere.

The CO2CRC technology roadmap has been instrumental in identifying andhighlighting present and future challenges alongside the opportunities and possible

Figure 6

20 - ROADMAPPING COAL’S FUTURE20 - ROADMAPPING COAL’S FUTURE

routes forward. It helped provide the Australian Government with enough clarity andconfidence to launch a A$1.5billion programme in 2004 that will stimulate the drivetowards a cleaner future based on a variety of viable, large-scale technologies.

Commercial and research projects leading towards the hydrogeneconomy (Level 3 technology roadmap)

In Salah (Algeria), Snohvit (Norway) and Gorgon (Australia) are commercial, natural gasexploitation projects where the in-situ gas contains high concentrations of CO2. For environmentalreasons, re-injection of this CO2 underground is seen as a pre-requisite for all these projects.The experience gained with CO2 storage through these projects will be very beneficial to futuregas-to-liquid (GTL) projects that exploit remote gas reserves and also to subsequent coal-based power generation projects with CO2 capture as proposed, for example, by the USDepartment of Energy in the case of its FutureGen project. Together, these commercial projectsoffer a pathway towards the “hydrogen economy” where large supplies of hydrogen come, firstly,from fossil fuel sources and, ultimately, from renewable energy sources. A variety of underpinningresearch projects will be required to ensure commercial projects benefit, both technically andeconomically, from emerging technologies and refinements to existing technologies. For example,further work is needed to understand the CO2 storage potential of enhanced oil recovery(EOR) and, in the case of enhance coalbed methane (CBM) gas production, considerableuncertainties remain to be resolved.

Figure 7


W O R K I N G P A R T Y O N F O S S I L F U E L S

C O A L I N D U S T R Y A D V I S O R Y B O A R D


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report was prepared by the International Energy Agency's Coal Industry Advisory Board incollaboration with the IEA Working Party on Fossil Fuels. It was published by the IEA Clean Coal Centrewho also provided valuable, editorial assistance. Within the IEA the project was managed by theEnergy Technology Division.

The IEA is an autonomous body that implements an internationalenergy programme and co-ordinates wide-ranging energy co-operation among its 26 member countries. Its aims are to regulateoil supplies, promote rational energy policies, provide market data,aid policy integration and encourage energy efficiency measures.The IEA supports the development of an extensive portfolio oftechnologies and maintains active involvement in networks andcollaborative exercises promoting joint research, development anddemonstration programmes (RD&D).

The Working Party on Fossil Fuels (WPFF) provides advice to IEA onfossil fuel technology-related policies, trends, projects andprogrammes, on strategies which address priority environmentalprotection and energy security interests, and carry out activities tomeet those needs through international co-operation andcollaboration facilitated by IEA.

The Coal Industry Advisory Board (CIAB) is a group of high-levelexecutives from coal-related industrial enterprises, established by theInternational Energy Agency (IEA) in July 1979 to provide advice tothe IEA on a wide range of issues relating to coal. The CIAB currentlyhas 39 members from 16 countries accounting for about 75% ofworld coal production.


roadmapping - International Energy Agency · roadmapping coal’s future international energy...

Documents

Transcript of roadmapping - International Energy Agency · roadmapping coal’s future international energy...