1 / 15

Energy Systems Analysis Group Activities

Energy Systems Analysis Group Activities. Bob Williams CMI Annual Meeting Princeton University 9 February 2010. Toward Decarbonization of Coal Power. US coal power accounts for: ½ of electricity ⅓ of CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel burning

fergal
Download Presentation

Energy Systems Analysis Group Activities

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. Energy Systems Analysis Group Activities Bob Williams CMI Annual Meeting Princeton University 9 February 2010

  2. Toward Decarbonization of Coal Power US coal power accounts for: ½ of electricity ⅓ of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel burning Decarbonizing existing coal plant sites warrants priority under serious C-mitigation policy Options considered: CCS retrofit for pulverized coal plant (PC-CCS retrofit) Four repowering options Definitions: Retrofit: retain plant but add equipment to “scrub” CO2 from flue gases Repower: bulldoze site and rebuild there—but retain all infrastructure…or rebuild elsewhere if site unsuitable

  3. Carbon Mitigation Options Examined

  4. Repowering via Coal/Biomass Coproduction of Liquid Fuels + Electricity with CCS (CBTLE-CCS) • Outputs: Fischer-Tropsch liquid fuels (~ 2/3 energy out = synthetic • diesel/gasoline) + electricity (~ 1/3 energy out from combined cycle) • ~ ½ feedstock C captured as CO2, stored in geological media • GHG emission rate declines as biomass % of energy input increases • Configuration considered: • 7,800 B/D of FTL + 264 MWe (net) • Biomass @ 1 x 106 dt/y = 38% of input (energy basis, HHV) • 2.1 x 106 t CO2 stored annually • GHG emissions are ~ 90% < for conventional energy displaced • (existing coal power + equivalent crude oil-derived products)

  5. LEVELIZED ELECTRICITY GENERATION COST vs GHG EMISSIONS PRICE

  6. THOUGHT EXPERIMENT: DECARBONIZE 90% OF EXISTING COAL POWER, 2020-2050 (9.4 GWe/y) • CBTLE-CCS coproduct: 3.9 million barrels/day of low-C synfuels • 0.5 Gt biomass needed annually by 2050 for repowering option • NG generation up 2 X, 2020-2050 (assumed make-up power:NGCC-CCS)

  7. FUTURE WORK • Potentially abundant, ubiquitous shale gas at reasonable cost  extend coproduction idea CBTLE-CCS  GBTLE-CCS • Extend analysis to China—exploring prospects for both as alternatives to continued building of PC-V plants

  8. Core Group: Robert Williams Eric Larson Tom Kreutz LIU Guangjian ZHENG Zhong China Collaborators LI Zheng (Tsinghua) CHEN Haiping (NCEPU) GUO Xianbo (SINOPEC) ZHOU Zhe (Tsinghua) Politecnico di Milano collaborators: Stefano Consonni Emanuele Martelli Giulia Fiorese ECN, The Netherlands Michiel Carbo ESAG TEAM AND MAIN COLLABORATORS, 2009-2010

More Related