Clean hydrogen rich gas from catalytic steam gasification ...
Shell Coal Gasification Process for Power and Hydrogen ... · GTC Oct 2004 Washington 2 Shell Coal...
Transcript of Shell Coal Gasification Process for Power and Hydrogen ... · GTC Oct 2004 Washington 2 Shell Coal...
Shell Coal Gasification Process for Powerand Hydrogen/Chemicals
GTC October 2004 Washington
P.L. Zuideveld
2GTC Oct 2004 Washington
Shell Coal Gasification Process for Powerand Hydrogen/Chemicals
• Introduction, Progress• Features, Benefits• US Case Study
- Basis Of Design- Results
• Conclusions
2GTC2004 Washington
3GTC Oct 2004 Washington
Shell Gasification Optional Products
Shell(Coal)
GasificationProcess
Syngas
CC_CogenPower
Generation
CoalLignitePetroleum CokeBiomass
Oil/ResidGasOrimulsion
Electricity
Chemicalfeedstock
Conditioning/distribution
Liquefaction
Steam
AmmoniaMethanolHydrogenother chemicals
Town gas
TransportationFuel
4GTC Oct 2004 Washington
From Deer Park (US) to Buggenum (NL)
1993 – Present2000 tpd coal253 MW_e Demo Plant
1987-1995250-400 tpd
5GTC Oct 2004 Washington
Shell Gasification Projects
New SGP projects:- Agip Sannazzaro Refinery- Opti, Canada- Rafineria Gdanska, PolandNew SCGP projects:-12 projects in China- 1 project USA (WMPI)
6GTC Oct 2004 Washington
SCGP Licences China
89
12
4
1
3
6
Yueyang Sinopec and Shell Coal Gasification Co Ltd2,000 t/d plant to supply a fertiliser plant.* 2001Hubei Shuanghuan Chemical Group Co Ltd900 t/d plant to supply a fertiliser plant. 2001Liuzhou Chemical Industry Co Ltd1,200 t/d plant to supply fertiliser plant. 2001Sinopec Hubei Chemical Fertiliser Co2,000 t/d plant to supply a fertiliser plant. 2003Sinopec Anqing Chemical Fertiliser Co2,000 t/d plant to supply a fertiliser plant. 2003Yunnan Tianan Chemical Co Ltd2,700 t/d plant to supply a fertiliser plant. 2003Yunnan Zhanhua Co Ltd2,700 t/d plant to supply a fertiliser plant. 2003Dahua Group Ltd1,100 t/d plant to supply methanol plant. 2004Yongcheng Coal and Power Group2,150 t/d plant to supply a methanol plant. 2004Shenhua Coal Liquefaction Corporation2x2,250 t/d plant to supply H2 for coal liq. 2004Zhongyuan Dahua Group2,150 t/d plant to supply methanol plant. 2004Kaixiang Group1,000 t/d plant to supply methanol plant. 2004
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
25
7
10
* Shell-Sinopec 50/50 joint venture
11
11
12
7GTC Oct 2004 Washington
SCGP Process Flow Diagram
REMOVALSOLIDS WET
SCRUBBINGCOAL FEEDING
MILLING/DRYING
MILLING AND DRYINGFLY ASH TO
HP STEAM
MP STEAM
SLAG
COAL/PETCOKE FLY ASHRECIRC.FLY ASHRECIRC.
QUENCH GAS
GASIFIER
SALTS SULPHUR
CLEANSYNGAS
WATERTREATMENT
WATERTREATMENT
1600 °C
900 °C
GAS TREATING
FLY ASH SYSTEM
O2
N2MP-HP BFW
DRY
LP STEAM
STM CONDENSATE
8GTC Oct 2004 Washington
SlagBath
Gasifier
Duct
Quench
Evaporator 1
Evaporator 2
SCGP ReactorSyngas Cooler
Assembly
9GTC Oct 2004 Washington
SCGP Key Benefits since Buggenum (NUON)
• Reactor Membrane wall expected life-times > 25 yrs• Burner life-times > 20,000 hrs• Reactor-Syngas Cooler ~40% cheaper (international supply)• Steam system simplified (headers, pipe spec, materials optimized)• Water-cooled skirt Reactor• Slag crusher• Wider procurement options equipment • Reactor-Syngas Cooler train up to 5000 tpd• Unplanned outages < 4% (scheduled maintenance project specific)
Prov
enN
ew P
ojec
ts
10GTC Oct 2004 Washington
SCGP IGCC Case Study – Holland Michigan
HOLLAND
Powder River Basin
Pittsburgh #8
11GTC Oct 2004 Washington
SCGP IGCC USA Case Study – Block FlowAir Separation Unit
SyngasManufacturingProcessPlant
HPO2 Air
HPN2 MPN2
1-2 string combinations Net Elec.400 MW550 MW800 MW
Pitts#8PRBPRB/C HPS
MPS
BFW
Cond
CombinedCyclePowerPlant
W501FW501G
Syngas
12GTC Oct 2004 Washington
SCGP IGCC USA Study – Economic Premises (NPV)
• Project location factor HOLLAND Michigan USA (ISO conditions)• Project life 25 years, 7008 h/a (80% full load IGCC)• O&M 50 $/kW_e net/a + 0.002 $/kWh• Depreciation 15 years, 90% of investment• Debt/equity ratio = 80/20; discount rate 5.5%, tax 38.2% (Harvard)• Inflation/escalation rate 4% (coal no inflation)• EPC contractor soft costs typical ratio’s, no Owners Costs• Electricity price (year 0) 40 $/MWh • Fuel price (year 0) 0.6-1-1.24 $/MMBtu (Cokes-PRB, PRB, P#8)
13GTC Oct 2004 Washington
SCGP IGCC USA Study – Economics Steam Pressure
Specific Investment for 800 MW_e IGCC
10001020104010601080110011201140116011801200
Powder River Basin
Inve
stm
ent [
$/kW
_e]
SGC_125 barSGC_50 bar
Simpler Steam Systemreduces $/kW_e 5-6%
(1)
IGCC_eff46.5 %HHV
IGCC_eff45 %HHV
14GTC Oct 2004 Washington
Specific IGCC Investment Powder River Basin
0100200300400500600700800900
10001100120013001400
418 572 572 837
2959 4097 4097 5918
Net Power [MW_e] & Coal Capacity [tpd]
$/kW
_e CCPPGasificationASUAGR-SRUSyngas MF H2OSyngas MF gen
SCGP IGCC USA Study – Economy Of Scale
1–2 IGCC
2-2 => 1-2 IGCC reduces $/kW_e12%
Power
Coal
2-2 IGCC1–1 IGCC
(2)
2-2 IGCC
15GTC Oct 2004 Washington
SCGP IGCC USA Study – Economics Coals/Pet Coke
Specific Investment for 800 MW_e IGCC
1120
1130
1140
1150
1160
1170
1180
1190
Pitts#8 PRB PRB-Petcoke
Spec
ific
Inve
stm
ent [
$/kW
_e]
Payout for 800 MW_e IGCC
0.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.5
Pitts#8 PRB PRB-Petcoke
Payo
ut [y
rs]
SCGP insensitive to coal types for $/kW_e;max. 4% bituminous vs sub-bituminous types
SCGP IGCC economics improve as a result!
16GTC Oct 2004 Washington
Comparison SCGP vs US Literature [Pittsburgh#8]
Ref. Harvard Report/EPRI Summary Cases ‘03:- 2* Syngas Manufaturing Blocks (2R)- 2* 7FA Power Block 550 MW_e- Owners Costs/Contingency ~4% included
Shell New Comparison [US Paper 2004]:- 1* or 2* Syngas MF Blocks (1R or 2R)- 2* W501F Power Block 550 MW_e- Shell study ‘04 without OC/Contingency- BOP robust (Cooling Towers, FO back-up)
12741243
1170
1030
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
Shell Study '04
IGCC Investment [$/kW_e]
Harvard Report
Shell-2R_125b
Shell-2R_50b
Shell-1R_50b
41
45.544 43.8
35
37
39
41
43
45
47
Shell Study '04
IGCC Efficiency [%HHV]
Harvard Report
Shell_nR_125b
Shell_nR_50b
Shell_drycoal
(1)
(2)
17GTC Oct 2004 Washington
Conclusions SCGP based IGCC
• IGCC costs can be lowered to 1000-1100 $/kW_e in 2 steps:- By simplifying steam system (SGC pressure 50-77 bar)- By scaling up SCGP with SMPP units > 4000 tpd
• HHV efficiencies 44-45% including 1.5% drop for 125->50 bar SGC• SCGP $/kW_e insensitive to Sub-bit coals (~3-4% HHV)• Petcoke coal mixes can be economic• SCGP systems do not need spare reactor due to reliable design