Summary of the Report Low-Carbon Coal: Meeting U.S. Energy ... · Section 7 -Coal Beneficiation...
Transcript of Summary of the Report Low-Carbon Coal: Meeting U.S. Energy ... · Section 7 -Coal Beneficiation...
Summary of the Report
Low-Carbon Coal: Meeting U.S.
Energy, Employment and CO2 Emission
Goals with 21st Century Technologies
Presented to the National Coal CouncilDecember 4, 2009
Steve JenkinsCH2M HILL
22
Sections of the ReportSections of the Report
• The Context of Coal-Based Generation With CCS
• Timeline and Costs
• Retrofitting the Existing Fleet
• Technologies for the Capture of CO2
• Securely Storing CO2
• Legal/Regulatory Issues
• Coal Beneficiation
• Underground Coal Gasification
• The U.S. as the Technology Leader
33
What Makes this Report Different?What Makes this Report Different?
• “Hands-on” work group members that are
personally involved in technology R&D and
with CCS project demonstrations
• Academia, coal industry, electric utilities,
engineering firms, law firms, regulatory
agencies, and technology developers
• Real-time study results and conclusions
44
Report Section LeadersReport Section Leaders
• Dr. Frank Burke – Consultant
• Dr. Frank Clemente – Pennsylvania State University
• Kipp Coddington – Alston & Bird
• Bill DePriest – Sargent & Lundy
• Janet Gellici – American Coal Council
• Steve Jenkins – CH2M HILL, Inc.
• Dr. Holly Krutka – ADA Environmental Solutions
• Mark Schoenfield – Jupiter Oxygen Corporation
• Steve Winberg – CONSOL Energy
55
Findings and RecommendationsFindings and Recommendations
• Listed in the Executive Summary and at the
beginning of each section of the report
• Findings - based on details and descriptions in each
section
• Recommendations
– Actions for DOE to take
– Funding needed for the CCS implementation strategy
– Regulatory and legal changes needed to provide a
permitting pathway, reduce risk, and manage technical
and financial liabilities
66
Section 1 - The Energy Context of Coal-Based Generation With CCS
Section 1 - The Energy Context of Coal-Based Generation With CCS
Key Recommendations
• DOE should work with other relevant groups to implement
the National Research Council’s conclusion that the
existing coal-based generation fleet can be fully replaced
by a combination of retrofitted, repowered and new coal-
based generation with CCS.
• The Council fully supports implementation of the DOE plan
to have 10 large-scale CCS demonstration projects on line
by 2016, with the goal of initiating widespread deployment
of coal-based generation with CCS at commercial scale in
the next 8-10 years.
77
Section 2 - Timeline and Costs for Commercial-Scale CCS Deployment
Section 2 - Timeline and Costs for Commercial-Scale CCS Deployment
Key Findings• CCS deployment can begin with a “Pioneer Plant” phase of integrated CCS
projects (5-7 GW).
• With sufficient funding and an immediate start, these plants could begin operating by ~2016.
• A subsequent financially subsidized “Early Adopter” phase of ~60 GW would be the next step.
• The current U.S. coal-based fleet of ~300 GW capacity could be replaced with CCS by 2050.
• This approach, which is consistent with Secretary Chu’s goals for CCS deployment, is based on an immediate start of the Pioneer Plant phase, and that legal, regulatory, permitting, liability, and financial factors do not impede commercial-scale CCS deployment.
88
2007 2012 2017 2022 2027 2032 2037 2042 2047
Storage Demos/RCSP
Storage Demos/ New
Projects
Pioneer Plants (Retrofit)
Pioneer Plants (Greenfield)
Pioneer Plants (O&G)
Early Adopters (Retrofit)
Early Adopters (Greenfield)
Second Generation
Project Definition
Project Development
Regulatory Approval
Final Design & Construction
Startup & Shakedown
Operation
Monitoring
Capacity Addition
Implementation ScheduleImplementation Schedule
99
CCS Capacity Addition
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Year
Cu
mu
lati
ve C
CS
Cap
acit
y, G
W
Retrofit
New
Advanced
Total non-EOR
EOR
Total w/ EOR
Schedule for Capacity AdditionSchedule for Capacity Addition
1010
CostsCosts
• The incremental capital cost (relative to new plants without CCS) for
the CCS Pioneer Plants is $12 billion, and for Early Adopters is
$192 billion (2007$).
• The annual increment of the LCOE is $2.4 billion for the Pioneer
Plants and $16.4 billion for the Early Adopters.
• CCS costs are competitive with other technologies to “decarbonize”
electricity generation and should decline with R&D and experience
1111
CCS Financing and Risk ManagementCCS Financing and Risk Management
• CCS projects must fall within reasonable risk
guidelines and provide an internal rate of return
at or exceeding 20 percent per annum to attract
private-sector investment.
• The insurance industry will not commit capital to
long-term CO2 storage projects without a well-
defined role for government and an
understanding of how liability is to be addressed.
1212
Section 2 - Timeline and Costs for Commercial-Scale CCS Deployment
Section 2 - Timeline and Costs for Commercial-Scale CCS Deployment
Key Recommendations
• DOE should conduct large, long duration CO2 injection tests in a wide range of geologic settings and characterization of 5-10 potential commercial scale CO2 storage sites.
• DOE should design and determine the costs, timing and co-funding requirements of the “Pioneer Plant” program. These projects should be geographically/geologically diverse, encompass a range of coals, CO2 capture and electricity generating technologies.
• DOE should continue and expand research to improve the performance and reduce the cost of CCS for greenfield and retrofit applications. This should include expedited testing atpilot and larger scale of promising CO2 capture technologies.
1313
Section 2 - Timeline and Costs for Commercial-Scale CCS Deployment
Section 2 - Timeline and Costs for Commercial-Scale CCS Deployment
Key Recommendations
• Legislation or relevant agency actions at DOE and elsewhere are needed to:
– Create an appropriate mix of medium to high levels of financial incentives to stimulate CCS investments.
– Define the responsibilities/liabilities, including federal and state regulatory roles for long-term CO2 storage facilities. Previously established models can be followed to fund or insure the liabilities associated with these facilities.
– Encourage alternatives to long-term CO2 storage, such as CO2 reuse in industrial processes, which should be explored to alleviate legacy liabilities.
1414
Section 3 - Retrofitting the Existing Coal-based Generating Fleet to Increase Efficiency and Decrease CO2 Emissions
Section 3 - Retrofitting the Existing Coal-based Generating Fleet to Increase Efficiency and Decrease CO2 Emissions
• Two primary methods to achieve significant CO2
emission reductions on the existing fleet TODAY:
– Retrofit technologies to improve efficiency: less coal is
burned for the same amount of electricity, resulting in
lower CO2 emissions
– Retrofit partial CO2 capture technology on existing units
• The combination of high efficiency retrofits and
partial CO2 capture would result in significant
near-term reductions in CO2 emissions.
1515
Technologies for Enhanced EfficiencyTechnologies for Enhanced Efficiency
• A suite of commercially-available technologies to improve plant efficiency
• Increasing fleet efficiency by 1-2% would result in near-term CO2 reductions of 20-40 million tons per year.
• Report lists specific groups of technologies by cost range:
• ~$1 million• $1-10 million• >$10 million
1616
Efficiency ImprovementsEfficiency Improvements
• Examples of retrofit technologies
– Combustion improvements.
– Chemical reagents to improve boiler cleanliness
when using coals with low ash fusion
temperatures or difficult ash chemistry.
– Steam turbine improvements, including
computer-designed upgrades of blades.
– Variable-speed drive to reduce power
consumption on pumps and motors.
– Air heater upgrades to increase heat recovery
and reduce leakage.
– Advanced control systems to optimize
temperature, pressure and flow rates of coal,
air, steam and water.
1717
Partial CO2 CapturePartial CO2 Capture
• Until high CO2 removal rate and CO2 storage technologies are commercially available and proven at large scale, partial CO2 capture (i.e. 40-60%) could provide additional near-term reductions in CO2
emissions from the existing coal-based generating fleet
– High removal rate CO2 capture systems on a slipstream of each plant’s exhaust gases.
– Example: 80% CO2 capture from 50% of the flue gas provides overall 40% CO2 reduction
• Benefits of partial CO2 capture
– Minimizes impacts on existing plant configuration, efficiency and output
– Will help to commercialize technologies for full-scale implementation
• Best candidate sites
– Higher efficiency SCPC units with existing FGD and NOx controls
– Sufficient space for addition of CO2 capture equipment
– Located near sites where the CO2 can be stored or used for EOR
1818
Section 3 - Retrofitting the Existing Coal-based Generating Fleet to Increase Efficiency and Decrease CO2 Emissions
Section 3 - Retrofitting the Existing Coal-based Generating Fleet to Increase Efficiency and Decrease CO2 Emissions
Key Recommendation
• In order to achieve near-term reductions in CO2
emissions from the existing coal-based generating
fleet, Congress and the DOE should provide
economic incentives to encourage the retrofit of
efficiency-improving technologies and/or partial
CO2 capture technologies to the existing coal-
based generating fleet.
1919
Section 4 - Technologies for the Capture of CO2Section 4 - Technologies for the Capture of CO2
Key Findings
• Advanced emission control technologies have reduced
regulated emissions by >90% over 30 years – similar
development steps are currently being taken to address
CO2.
• A suite of technology options are being researched,
developed, and demonstrated.
• With continued support, further reductions in the costs
associated with commercial-scale CCS technologies will
occur.
2020
Section 4 - Technologies for the Capture of CO2Section 4 - Technologies for the Capture of CO2
Key Recommendations
• DOE should expand its R,D&D program
– Clean Coal Power Initiative (CCPI)
– Develop more consortia-matching projects
• DOE should continue to support the FutureGen
demonstration program to utilize IGCC with CCS.
• DOE should increase its R&D efforts to develop advanced
construction materials.
• DOE should find ways to reduce the delays associated with
co-funded projects.
2121
Section 5 - Securely Storing CO2Section 5 - Securely Storing CO2
Key Findings
• CO2 has been successfully transported on a commercial basis for
over 30 years with the majority of the CO2 used for EOR.
• Geological CO2 storage capacity in the U.S. is geographically wide-
spread and represents centuries of storage capacity. The Regional
Carbon Sequestration Partnerships has been very successful in
addressing many of the issues surrounding CO2 storage, but more
work is required to qualify tests and develop more and better data
from large-scale (>1 million tons/year) demonstrations.
• Some of the biggest challenges facing long-term geological storage
are the custody and liability issues.
• Beneficial use technologies face both technical and economic
hurdles to scale-up and to achieve widespread deployment, but
they offer a permanent solution to CO2 emission reductions.
2222
Section 5 - Securely Storing CO2Section 5 - Securely Storing CO2
Key Recommendations
• DOE should continue its efforts to more fully characterize and document the available geological formations available for CO2
storage and to better understand the effects of CO2 storage on geological formations.
• DOE should continue to work with other Federal agencies on long-term liability, and public education and outreach. DOE’sCCS expertise can be of enormous assistance to other federal agencies tasked with various CCS-related regulatory requirements.
• DOE should spearhead the cataloguing of available information tocompare and contrast beneficial use technologies and conduct tests to determine which are the most promising. This would expedite the determination of which alternatives are most economically attractive, based on the specific circumstances of a company or plant.
2323
Section 6 - Legal/Regulatory IssuesSection 6 - Legal/Regulatory Issues
Key Findings
• Legal/regulatory issues must be addressed,
with long-term stewardship being a priority.
• Legal framework is taking shape, led by EPA
and the States.
• DOE must be play a leading role in ensuring
that appropriate regulations are developed.
2424
Section 6 - Legal/Regulatory IssuesSection 6 - Legal/Regulatory Issues
Recommendations
• Federal/State governments must take responsibility
for closed storage sites.
• Permitting requirements must be stringent but
unified and take advantage of work that the States
already have done.
• Exempting injection and storage from existing laws
(RCRA and CERCLA) that never contemplated CCS
may be necessary and appropriate.
2525
Section 7 - Coal Beneficiation Reduces CO2 Emissions from the Overall Coal-to-Electricity Process
Section 7 - Coal Beneficiation Reduces CO2 Emissions from the Overall Coal-to-Electricity Process
• Coal beneficiation technologies modify and enhance a
coal’s characteristics prior to combustion.
• A suite of technologies exist today to reduce a wide
range of power plant emissions.
– NOx, SO2, PM, Hg, HAPs, CO
• Benefits include improved energy conversion efficiency
and improved environmental performance.
– Higher efficiency means lower CO2 emissions for the same
MWh generated
• Beneficiated coals can be used in existing and new coal-
based power plants.
262626
Coal Beneficiation
Moisture Reduction
Lower LOI
Reduced
Velocities
Reduced Draft
Reduced Emissions:
NOx, CO, SO2
Reduced Air
Improved
Combustion
Reduced Mill Demand
Increased
Boiler
Efficiency
Less NOx
Less CO
Mineral Matter Reduction
Reduced
Reagents
Reduced
Ash Load
Cleaner Fuel
PM, Hg, HAPs
Combined Benefits
Reduced Tube Erosion
Reduced Derates
Reduced Water Use
Reduced
Sootblowing
Less Slag
Less Fouling
Lower CO2
emissions
2727
Section 7 - Coal Beneficiation Reduces CO2 Emissions from the Overall Coal-to-Electricity Process
Section 7 - Coal Beneficiation Reduces CO2 Emissions from the Overall Coal-to-Electricity Process
Recommendations
• DOE should ensure that coal-based units receive
credit for CO2 emission reductions achieved
through the use of beneficiated coal technologies.
• DOE should use the CCPI or EPAct 2005’s Loan
Guarantee Program for accelerated development
and commercial deployment of coal beneficiation
technologies.
2828
Section 8 - Underground Coal GasificationSection 8 - Underground Coal Gasification
Key Findings
• UCG has the potential to yield access to the energy
of hundreds of billions of tons of unmineable coal in
many countries, including the U.S.
• UCG appears to be especially amenable to CCS
because the CO2 can be stored in the cavities
formed by UCG.
• More extensive and systematic research is needed
to fully assess the potential of UCG.
2929
Section 8 - Underground Coal GasificationSection 8 - Underground Coal Gasification
Recommendations
• A four-year UCG program (similar to that proposed
by the Clean Air Task Force) should be
implemented as soon as possible – including the
development of up to five commercial scale
projects within the U.S.
3030
Section 9 - The U.S. as the Technology LeaderSection 9 - The U.S. as the Technology Leader
Key Findings
• Technology transfer from the U.S. is vital to the effort to
reduce global emissions of CO2.
• This transfer will not occur at required levels unless
intellectual property rights for CCS technologies are
honored and protected throughout the world.
• A good example of technology cooperation with protection
is GreenGen, a $1 billion coal-based power plant with CCS
scheduled for operation in China in 2011.
3131
Section 9 - The U.S. as the Technology LeaderSection 9 - The U.S. as the Technology Leader
Recommendations
• DOE should work with other parts of the Administration to strengthen and enhance the cooperation symbolized by the Joint Agreement between President Obama and President Hu Jintao.
• DOE should support the position that all nations bear the greater share of the economic burden of CO2 mitigation within their own borders.
• DOE should play a leading role in the Administration’s effort to ensure that intellectual property rights for CCS technologies developed by American companies are fairly protected in other countries.
• DOE should play a leading role in developing an equitable international framework to enable widespread and affordable deployment of CCS to begin within 8 to 10 years.
3232
Next StepsNext Steps
• In order to meet the President’s CO2 reduction
goals, it is imperative that a policy similar to the
CCS implementation plan described in this report
begin immediately and be appropriately funded.
• The legal and regulatory issues related to liability
of long-term CO2 storage must be solved now in
order for the implementation plan to move
forward.