Capture-ready principles and design for pulverised coal plants

1. Capture-ready principles and design for pulverised coal plants Mathieu Lucquiaud, Hannah Chalmers, Jia Li and Jon Gibbins Energy Technology for Sustainable Development Group, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Imperial Xi Liang and David Reiner, Judge Business School, Cambridge UKCCSC project meeting, 20th March 2008

2. Why do CCS? – cumulative global CO2 emissions From 3rd Assessment Report, http://www.ipcc.ch/ ‘Unconventional oil’ includes oil sands and oil shales but not CTL. ‘Unconventional gas’ includes coal bed methane, deep geopressured gas etc. but not gas from coal and a possible 12,000 GtC from gas hydrates. CARBON THAT CAN BE EMITTED TO ATMOSPHERE CARBON IN FOSSIL FUELS

3. Why do capture-ready? – time needed to learn (1) Critical path for IGCC and oxyfuel demo and deployment?… CCS retrofit on capture-ready plants CCS build-up plus all plants built capture-ready Overall effort also important to maintain continuity GLOBAL CCS ROLLOUT SECOND TRANCHE Commercial & Regulatory Drivers EU CCS ROLLOUT 12 plants by 2015 in EU Big prize is getting two learning cycles from two tranches of CCS projects before global rollout FIRST TRANCHE Demonstration PLANTS COMING INTO SERVICE 2020 CCS STANDARD IN EU 2015 DEMO PROJECTS IN PLACE 2025 GLOBAL CCS ROLLOUT Gibbins and Chalmers (2008), Energy Policy

4. Why do capture-ready? – time needed to learn (2) Critical path for post-combustion capture demo and deployment?… Second tranche plants overlap with first tranche since many lessons can be learned without needing a new plant (e.g. solvent development and some aspects of absorber design, including packing) Big prize is having technology suitable for global deployment available up to 5 years earlier (and well suited to retrofit too) First tranche plants earlier (especially if retrofits) PLANTS COMING INTO SERVICE 2015 2020 2025 Construction of second tranche plants can start earlier since capture plant design fixed later in the process Shorter timescales for building new capture plant (since don’t need new power plant) mean that more learning is available from earlier tranches for rollout Gibbins and Chalmers (2008), Energy Policy

5. Also, some risk-based perspectives… • Owner • needs to protect the investment value • needs to get plant permitted • Society • doesn’t need to protect investment value, but • does need someone to be able to operate the plant in the future with CCS (if the original owner goes broke) • Regulator(s) • needs to keep the lights on, get new plant built, provide continuity, minimise costs etc.

6. Basic principles for capture-ready design • Must: • Have access to suitable geological storage • Have space and access for capture equipment • Have reasonable confidence it will work (feasibility study) • Also consider: • Up-front expenditure with savings later, e.g. • Bigger/better equipment? • Move near cheaper/better CO2 storage? • Flexibility – initial retrofit and later technology upgrades • But only pre-investments with very good returns justified • See IEA GHG report on capture-ready

7. Whys map on to hows Society Reasonably-justified plan for the future • Must: • Have access to geological storage • Have space and access for capture equipment • Have reasonable confidence it will work • Also consider: • Up-front expenditure with savings later, e.g. • Bigger, better equipment? • Cheaper/better CO2 storage? • Flexibility – initial retrofit and later technology upgrades e.g. Have to re-permit for CO2 after ten years? but different interests? Regulator Must Owner & auditors, bank’s engineers etc. Detailed studies for immediate action, protect investment value

8. IGCC and oxyfuel capture-ready designs • IGCC • Hard to integrate before and after capture • Oversize components (Parsons study) • Shift before capture (Jacobs GEM) • Simpler option - build a second unit alongside when capture is added and size to integrate? • Many designs possible (e.g. 4 entrained flow gasifiers) • OXYFUEL • Boiler manufacturers developing designs • Can also make post-combustion capture ready

9. Post-combustion capture-ready designs • Post-com capture credibility - must be demonstrated • Many future developments likely • Should not lock in to known technology • Likely common requirements, can be met at low cost: • Space – large volumes of gas to handle, building work • Clean and probably cool flue gas • Pressure drop • Provision for extra instrumentation and control, other services • Extra cooling (efficiency penalty) • Some electricity for capture/compression plant • Some steam for temperature swing solvents

10. Some key issues to consider for pipeline (and storage) planning • Limited experience of offshore CO2 pipelines • More experience with onshore pipelines, but often in places with little/no population • It seems likely that regulators will need to play a role here • One key issue is then what a UK/North Sea network might look like (hub and spokes model?)…

11. Overview so far… • CCS is needed since danger of excess cumulative emissions from fossil fuel use • Various options for capture, transport and storage • Main actions now are getting ready for CCS • Serious demonstration projects and deployment strategy required (local, regional and global) • Also want new-build plants to be capture-ready • Challenging, but we know enough to get started

12. 3.6 bar • Throttled LP turbine • Clutched LP turbine DSH DSH DSH LP added for capture added for capture added for capture reboiler reboiler reboiler unclutched for capture or removed and LP rotor replaced by lay shaft 3.6 bar LP LP IP LP LP IP LP IP • Floating IP/LP crossover pressure HP HP HP Steam turbine design for capture-readiness 6.7 bar => 3.6 bar

14. Inputs to policy process include… • IEA GHG Report – 2007/4 CO2 capture-ready power plants • Report commissioned in response to G8 Gleneagles communiqué • It will be presented at the G8 summit in Japan this summer

15. Key conclusions • Capture-ready makes sense in the context of cumulative emissions and new-build of coal-fired power plants (globally) • Capture-ready principles for post-combustion capture at coal-fired power plants are clear • Additional costs close to zero • Steam turbine manufacturers and power utilities have taken the message on board

16. Capture-ready photo montage(some details omitted) Tilbury 2x 800 MW Richard Hotchkiss, RWE npower - Recent Developments in Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) – Coal Research Forum - http://www.coalresearchforum.org/pastmeetings.html

17. Capture-ready photo montage(some details omitted) Richard Hotchkiss, RWE npower - Recent Developments in Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) – Coal Research Forum - http://www.coalresearchforum.org/pastmeetings.html

18. PROJECT TITLE: CHINESE ADVANCED POWER PLANT CARBON CAPTURE OPTIONS (CAPPCCO) • TECHNICAL SUMMARY OF PROJECT • Carbon capture characteristics database for existing & planned plants • Develop and assess capture options for planned new pulverised coal (PC) plants • Develop and assess capture options for existing PC plants • Special issues for adding carbon capture to Chinese power plants e.g. water requirements, cooling requirements, coal properties, capture performance under variable Chinese climatic conditions including likely performance of next-generation pollutant control technologies • Financing capture ready and capture retrofit

19. Capture Option – Financing Capture Ready Issuing a Tradable Capture Option help financing Capture Ready A Capture Option has plenty of potential benefits The value of a Capture Option is significant The feasibility of Capture Ready depends on the additional capital outlay for Capture Ready. (For example, in this model, Capture Ready is economic at all discount rate, if required additional total capital is less than 2%. ) Capture Option Financing Capture Ready: Issuing a Tradable Capture Option 19

20. Capture Option Capture Site Transportation Storage Site Storage Site (IPCC CCS Special Report, 2005) Reiner D, Liang X, Gibbins J, Li J 20

21. Closure Possibilities Capture Option 21

22. Capture Option 22