1 / 23

Welcome

Welcome Safety tip for the day SAFETY FIRST TAMPA ELECTRIC GENERATION BIG BEND STATION 1900 MW 4 Coal fired steam units BAYSIDE POWER STATION 1800 MW Repowered NGCC One 3 on 1 One 4 on 1 POLK POWER STATION 650 MW One IGCC Two Peaking CT’s

elina
Download Presentation

Welcome

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Welcome

  2. Safety tip for the day SAFETY FIRST

  3. TAMPA ELECTRIC GENERATION • BIG BEND STATION 1900 MW • 4 Coal fired steam units • BAYSIDE POWER STATION 1800 MW • Repowered NGCC • One 3 on 1 • One 4 on 1 • POLK POWER STATION 650 MW • One IGCC • Two Peaking CT’s • PHILLIPS POWER STATION 36 MW • Two slow speed diesels ________ • TOTAL CAPACITY (approx) 4400 MW

  4. POLK POWER STATION • UNIT 1 IGCC, Base load on syngas, intermediate on oil • Combined cycle, GE 7F, 7221 192MW • GE D11, steam 120MW • Dual fuel, Syngas/Distillate Oil • DOE Clean Coal Technology co-funding $120M • In service 1996 • UNIT 2, 3, 4 & 5 Simple Cycle CT, Peaking • Simple cycle GE 7FA+E, 7241 165 MW each • 2 & 3 Dual fuel, Nat gas/Distillate Oil; 4 & 5 Nat Gas only • Unit 2 in service 2000, Unit 3 2002, Units 4&5 2007 • Total site over 4000 acres (previously mined for phosphate) • 750 acre cooling pond • 80 Tampa Electric employees

  5. POLK 1 – Technology Summary • Gasification technology originally developed by Texaco, now owned by General Electric • Oxygen blown, slurry fed, entrained flow gasifier • Operating pressure 400 psi nominal • Gasifier vessel refractory lined (largest built) • Radiant plus convective syngas coolers for heat recovery • Single train configuration (one gasifier supplying one CT) • CT is GE 7F w/ MNQC combusters, larger 1st stage nozzle • Diluent N2 plus syngas saturation for NOx control • Modest air extraction rate from CT to ASU • Feedstock is 2200 tons/day coal and petroleum coke blend • ASU by Air Products, 2100 tons/day oxygen production • Sulfuric acid plant by Monsanto, (unique to Florida) • Acid gas removal via MDEA and COS hydrolysis

  6. SULFURIC ACID PLANT OXYGEN PLANT GASIFIER STRUCTURE COAL SILOS SLURRY PREPARATION UNIT 1 CT STEAM TURBINE UNIT 2 CT HRSG YOU ARE HERE UNIT 3 CT UNDER CONSTRUCTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION AERIAL PHOTO N ,

  7. Overall Flowsheet

  8. IGCC DRIVER LOW EMISSIONS FROM LOW COST FEEDSTOCKS FOR LOW COST ELECTRICITY

  9. POLK 1 PERFORMANCE ENVIRONMENTAL • Polk rated the “Cleanest Coal Fired Power Plant in North America” by the Energy Probe Research Foundation • (total emissions from 2002 TRI data)

  10. LOW EMISSIONS Typical Emissions (Lb/MMBTU) PolkPolk Expected (Permit) (Steady State) New IGCC SO2 0.14 0.12 0.02 NOx 0.055 0.04 0.02 (w/SCR) Particulate 0.007 <0.004 0.007 Mercury NA NA 90% removal (New IGCC values are basis 8,800 hhv btu/kwh net)

  11. OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ADVANTAGES • Beneficial Reuse of Sulfur – H2SO4 at Polk • Beneficial Reuse of Slag • Low Water Use (2/3 that of PC unit) • Minimal solid waste (no gypsum from FGD) • Zero Process Water Discharge

  12. ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES • Mercury - Cost-Effective Removal on IGCC using small activated carbon bed • ( $0.25/MWh vs. $3.10/MWh for PC) • Testing done at Polk • Commercially at Eastman to 95+% • Other Volatile Metals – Will also be removed by carbon bed

  13. ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES CO2 Removal Solvents used for sulfur removal can also remove CO2 (more cost effective due to <1% volume) For New Solid Fuel Power Plants (EPRI estimates) 25% Higher COE with IGCC 50% + Higher COE with PC CO2 Sequestration Saline aquifer injection – USF feasibility study

  14. FUEL FLEXIBILITY • Polk has operated on over 20 different fuels including: Coals Coal Blends Coal/Pet Coke Blends • Coal/Coke/Biomass Blends • Slagging gasifier requires somewhat higher fusion temps (Polk targets 2350 – 2700 F T-250 temps) • Low rank fuels can be used in slurry fed gasifiers, but hurt efficiency • Power block can operate on syngas or distillate oil

  15. LOW COST FEEDSTOCKS RELATIVE FUEL PRICES AT POLK • 40% Coal/60% Pet Coke Blend 1.0 • Pet Coke 0.7 • Coal 1.5 • Natural Gas 3.6 • Low Sulfur Oil 6.0

  16. RENEWABLE FUELS • BIOMASS CO-UTILIZATION TESTS • Eucalyptus Biomass Test - December, 2001 • Bahiagrass Biomass Test - April, 2004 (Bahiagrass Harvest and Storage Test started approximately one year prior) • No impact on syngas quality or emissions • Minor issues with material handling

  17. REPRESENTATIVE COSTS Fuel processing costs per mmbtu fuel input (Excludes combined cycle costs) Fuel $1.62O&M $0.96 “Controllable Expense” $2.58 A&G, Depreciation, Taxes, etc $1.06 Solid Fuel Processing Cost $3.64 For Natural Gas Comparison, Multiply by heat rate ratio: $3.64 X 9,500 / 7,000 = $4.93 Current Natural Gas Price: $8.00 +/-

  18. KEY AVAILABILITY STATISTICS

  19. TEC’s ADVANCMENTS of IGCC • Refractory life extension to 3 years • Successful integration of fines recycle • NOx below 15ppm with diluent N2 and saturation • Successful zero process water discharge system • Air extraction/integration with GE 7F turbine • IGCC use with sulfuric acid plant with variable % • Leader in clean coal power production > 13M gwhrs • IGCC ambassadors, 4000+ visitors

  20. PERCEPTIONS AND MISPERCEPTIONS REGARDING IGCC • HIGHER INSTALLED COST – TRUE • Current estimates are 10 – 20% higher than SCPC unit with scrubber and • SCR. This is offset by lower fuel cost and reduced emissions. • NO SINGLE SUPPLIER OR OVERALL PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE – NO LONGER TRUE • Alliances GE/Bechtel and Conoco/Phillips-Fluor are offering comprehensive • EPC contracts with performance guarantees. • NO FINANCIAL REWARD FOR SUPERIOR ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE – SOMEWHAT TRUE • IGCC is capable of lower emissions than other coal based technologies and • will be the most cost effective at mercury and CO2 removal. Anticipated • environmental regulations will define financial value.

  21. PERCEPTIONS AND MISPERCEPTIONS REGARDING IGCC (cont’d) • IGCC HAS LOW AVAILABILITY – NOT TRUE • Overall reliability of the power block is higher than other “coal-fired” units • (95%). The dual fuel capability of IGCC adds significant value. Gasifier • reliability (currently low 80%), will be higher for next generation, dual train • plants. • IGCC IS EXPERIMENTAL AND REQUIRES UNIQUE SKILLS • – NOT TRUE • Gasification has been used since the 1800’s and there are hundreds of gasifiers • operating worldwide. The first generation IGCC plants have now been in • service for 10 years. • Tampa Electric (a modest size electric utility) has successfully operated and • maintained the Polk Unit 1 IGCC since 1996.

  22. POLK UNIT 6 • TEC is planning for the addition of a 630 MW IGCC • unit in 2013. • Preliminary engineering and preparations for • permitting and regulatory approval are in progress. • TEC has been awarded a $133.5M tax credit under • the Energy Policy Act of 2005 for Polk 6. • Expected configuration is two gasifiers feeding two • CT’s with one ST. Minimum scale up (same size • gasifiers as Polk 1). • Allowances made in design for addition of CO2 • capture and sequestration equipment.

More Related