Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants National Energy Technology Laboratory May 15, 2007 Revised August 2007 Final Results.

Published byAlfred Allen Modified over 9 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants National Energy Technology Laboratory May 15, 2007 Revised August 2007 Final Results."— Presentation transcript:

1 Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants National Energy Technology Laboratory May 15, 2007 Revised August 2007 Final Results

2 Revised 7/27/07 2 Disclaimer This presentation was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference therein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed therein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

3 Revised 7/27/07 3 Objective  Determine cost and performance estimates of near-term commercial offerings for power plants both with and without current technology for CO 2 capture  Consistent design requirements  Up-to-date performance and capital cost estimates  Technologies built now and deployed by 2010-2012  Provides baseline costs and performance  Compare existing technologies  Guide R&D for advancing technologies within the FE Program

4 Revised 7/27/07 4 Study Matrix Plant Type ST Cond. (psig/°F/°F) GT Gasifier/ Boiler Acid Gas Removal/ CO 2 Separation / Sulfur Recovery CO 2 Cap IGCC 1800/1050/1050 (non-CO 2 capture cases) 1800/1000/1000 (CO 2 capture cases) F Class GE Selexol / - / Claus Selexol / Selexol / Claus90% CoP E-Gas MDEA / - / Claus Selexol / Selexol / Claus88% 1 Shell Sulfinol-M / - / Claus Selexol / Selexol / Claus90% PC 2400/1050/1050Subcritical Wet FGD / - / Gypsum Wet FGD / Econamine / Gypsum90% 3500/1100/1100Supercritical Wet FGD / - / Gypsum Wet FGD / Econamine / Gypsum90% NGCC2400/1050/950 F Class HRSG - / Econamine / -90% GEE – GE Energy CoP – Conoco Phillips 1 CO 2 capture is limited to 88% by syngas CH 4 content

5 Revised 7/27/07 5 Design Basis: Coal Type Illinois #6 Coal Ultimate Analysis (weight %) As Rec’dDry Moisture11.120 Carbon63.7571.72 Hydrogen4.505.06 Nitrogen1.251.41 Chlorine0.290.33 Sulfur2.512.82 Ash9.7010.91 Oxygen (by difference)6.887.75 100.0 HHV (Btu/lb)11,66613,126

6 Revised 7/27/07 6 Environmental Targets Pollutant IGCC 1 PC 2 NGCC 3 SO 2 0.0128 lb/MMBtu 0.085 lb/MMBtu < 0.6 gr S /100 scf NOx 15 ppmv (dry) @ 15% O 2 0.07 lb/MMBtu 2.5 ppmv @ 15% O 2 PM 0.0071 lb/MMBtu 0.017 lb/MMBtu Negligible Hg > 90% capture 1.14 lb/TBtu Negligible 1 Based on EPRI’s CoalFleet User Design Basis Specification for Coal-Based IGCC Power Plants 2 Based on BACT analysis, exceeding new NSPS requirements 3 Based on EPA pipeline natural gas specification and 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart KKKK

7 Revised 7/27/07 7 Economic Assumptions Startup 2010 Plant Life (Years) 20 Capital Charge Factor, % High Risk (All IGCC, PC/NGCC with CO 2 capture) 17.5 Low Risk (PC/NGCC without CO 2 capture) 16.4 Dollars (Constant) 2007 Coal ($/MM Btu) 1.80 Natural Gas ($/MM Btu) 6.75 Capacity Factor IGCC 80 PC/NGCC 85

8 Revised 7/27/07 8 Technical Approach 1. Extensive Process Simulation (ASPEN)  All major chemical processes and equipment are simulated  Detailed mass and energy balances  Performance calculations (auxiliary power, gross/net power output) 1. Extensive Process Simulation (ASPEN)  All major chemical processes and equipment are simulated  Detailed mass and energy balances  Performance calculations (auxiliary power, gross/net power output) 2. Cost Estimation  Inputs from process simulation (Flow Rates/Gas Composition/Pressure/Temp.)  Sources for cost estimation Parsons Vendor sources where available  Follow DOE Analysis Guidelines 2. Cost Estimation  Inputs from process simulation (Flow Rates/Gas Composition/Pressure/Temp.)  Sources for cost estimation Parsons Vendor sources where available  Follow DOE Analysis Guidelines

9 Revised 7/27/07 9 Study Assumptions  Capacity Factor assumed to equal Availability  IGCC capacity factor = 80% w/ no spare gasifier  PC and NGCC capacity factor = 85%  GE gasifier operated in radiant/quench mode  Shell gasifier with CO 2 capture used water injection for cooling (instead of syngas recycle)  Nitrogen dilution was used to the maximum extent possible in all IGCC cases and syngas humidification/steam injection were used only if necessary to achieve approximately 120 Btu/scf syngas LHV  In CO 2 capture cases, CO 2 was compressed to 2200 psig, transported 50 miles, sequestered in a saline formation at a depth of 4,055 feet and monitored for 80 years  CO 2 transport, storage and monitoring (TS&M) costs were included in the levelized cost of electricity (COE)

10 Revised 7/27/07 10 IGCC Power Plant Current State-of-the-Art

11 Revised 7/27/07 11 Current Technology IGCC Power Plant Emission Controls: PM: Water scrubbing and/or candle filters to get 0.0071 lb/MMBtu NOx: N 2 dilution to ~120 Btu/scf LHV to get 15 ppmv @15% O 2 SOx: AGR design target of 0.0128 lb/MMBtu; Claus plant with tail gas recycle for ~99.8% overall S recovery Hg: Activated carbon beds for ~95% removal Advanced F-Class CC Turbine: 232 MWe Steam Conditions: 1800 psig/1050°F/1050°F (non-CO 2 capture cases) 1800 psig/1000°F/1000°F (CO 2 capture cases) Emission Controls: PM: Water scrubbing and/or candle filters to get 0.0071 lb/MMBtu NOx: N 2 dilution to ~120 Btu/scf LHV to get 15 ppmv @15% O 2 SOx: AGR design target of 0.0128 lb/MMBtu; Claus plant with tail gas recycle for ~99.8% overall S recovery Hg: Activated carbon beds for ~95% removal Advanced F-Class CC Turbine: 232 MWe Steam Conditions: 1800 psig/1050°F/1050°F (non-CO 2 capture cases) 1800 psig/1000°F/1000°F (CO 2 capture cases)

12 Revised 7/27/07 12 GE Energy Radiant Coal Slurry 63 wt.% 95% O 2 Slag/Fines Syngas 410°F, 800 Psia Composition (Mole%): H 2 26% CO 27% CO 2 12% H 2 O 34% Other 1% H 2 O/CO = 1.3 Design: Pressurized, single-stage, downward firing, entrained flow, slurry feed, oxygen blown, slagging, radiant and quench cooling Note: All gasification performance data estimated by the project team to be representative of GE gasifier To Acid Gas Removal or To Shift

13 Revised 7/27/07 13 ConocoPhillips E-Gas™ Coal Slurry 63 wt. % Stage 2 95 % O 2 Slag Quench Char Slag/Water Slurry Syngas 1,700°F, 614 psia Composition (Mole%): H 2 26% CO 37% CO 2 14% H 2 O 15% CH 4 4% Other 4% H 2 O/CO = 0.4 (0.78) (0.22) Stage 1 2,500 o F 614 Psia To Fire-tube boiler Design: Pressurized, two-stage, upward firing, entrained flow, slurry feed, oxygen blown, slagging, fire-tube boiling syngas cooling, syngas recycle Note: All gasification performance data estimated by the project team to be representative of an E-Gas gasifier To Acid Gas Removal or To Shift

14 Revised 7/27/07 14 Shell Gasification Syngas 350°F, 600 Psia Composition (Mole%): H 2 29% CO 57% CO 2 2% H 2 O 4% Other 8% H 2 O/CO = 0.1 Dry Coal Design: Pressurized, single-stage, downward firing, entrained flow, dry feed, oxygen blown, convective cooler Convective Cooler Soot Quench & Scrubber 95% O 2 HP Steam 650 o F Steam Source: “The Shell Gasification Process”, Uhde, ThyssenKrupp Technologies Syngas Quench 2 Notes: 1.All gasification performance data estimated by the project team to be representative of Shell gasifier. 2.CO 2 capture incorporates full water quench instead of syngas quench. To Acid Gas Removal or To Shift HP Steam Slag Gasifier 2,700 o F 615 psia

15 Revised 7/27/07 15 IGCC Performance Results No CO 2 Capture GE EnergyE-GasShell Gross Power (MW)770742748 Auxiliary Power (MW) Base Plant Load232521 Air Separation Unit1039190 Gas Cleanup431 Total Aux. Power (MW)130119112 Net Power (MW)640623636 Heat Rate (Btu/kWh)8,9228,6818,304 Efficiency (HHV)38.239.341.1

16 Revised 7/27/07 16 IGCC Economic Results No CO 2 Capture GE EnergyE-GasShell Plant Cost ($/kWe) 1 Base Plant1,3231,2721,522 Air Separation Unit287264256 Gas Cleanup203197199 Total Plant Cost ($/kWe)1,8131,7331,977 Capital COE (¢/kWh)4.534.334.94 Variable COE (¢/kWh)3.273.203.11 Total COE 2 (¢/kWh)7.807.538.05 1 Total Plant Capital Cost (Includes contingencies and engineering fees) 2 January 2007 Dollars, 80% Capacity Factor, 17.5% Capital Charge Factor, Coal cost $1.80/10 6 Btu

17 Revised 7/27/07 17 IGCC Power Plant With CO 2 Capture

18 Revised 7/27/07 18 Current Technology IGCC Power Plant with CO 2 Scrubbing Emission Controls: PM: Water scrubbing and/or candle filters to get 0.007 lb/MMBtu NOx: N 2 dilution to ~120 Btu/scf LHV to get 15 ppmv @15% O 2 SOx: Selexol AGR removal of sulfur to < 28 ppmv H 2 S in syngas Claus plant with tail gas recycle for ~99.8% overall S recovery Hg: Activated carbon beds for ~95% removal Advanced F-Class CC Turbine: 232 MWe Steam Conditions: 1800 psig/1000°F/1000°F Emission Controls: PM: Water scrubbing and/or candle filters to get 0.007 lb/MMBtu NOx: N 2 dilution to ~120 Btu/scf LHV to get 15 ppmv @15% O 2 SOx: Selexol AGR removal of sulfur to < 28 ppmv H 2 S in syngas Claus plant with tail gas recycle for ~99.8% overall S recovery Hg: Activated carbon beds for ~95% removal Advanced F-Class CC Turbine: 232 MWe Steam Conditions: 1800 psig/1000°F/1000°F

19 Revised 7/27/07 19 Water-Gas Shift Reactor System H 2 O/CO Ratio 1 GE1.3 E-Gas0.4 Shell1.5 Design:  Haldor Topsoe SSK Sulfur Tolerant Catalyst  Up to 97.5% CO Conversion  2 stages for GE and Shell, 3 stages for E-Gas  H 2 O/CO = 2.0 (Project Assumption)  Overall  P = ~30 psia 775 o F 450 o F 500 o F 450 o F Cooling Relative HP* Steam Flow Steam Turbine Output (MW) GE1.0275 E-Gas2.4230 Shell0.9230 455 o F Steam H 2 O + COCO 2 + H 2 *High Pressure Steam 1 Prior to shift steam addition

20 Revised 7/27/07 20 IGCC Performance Results GE Energy CO 2 CaptureNOYES Gross Power (MW)770745 Auxiliary Power (MW) Base Plant Load23 Air Separation Unit103121 Gas Cleanup/CO 2 Capture418 CO 2 Compression-27 Total Aux. Power (MW)130189 Net Power (MW)640556 Heat Rate (Btu/kWh)8,92210,505 Efficiency (HHV)38.232.5 Energy Penalty 1 -5.7 1 CO 2 Capture Energy Penalty = Percent points decrease in net power plant efficiency due to CO 2 Capture  in ASU air comp. load w/o CT integration Steam for Selexol Includes H 2 S/CO 2 Removal in Selexol Solvent

21 Revised 7/27/07 21 IGCC Performance Results GE EnergyE-GasShell CO 2 CaptureNOYESNOYESNOYES Gross Power (MW)770745742694748693 Auxiliary Power (MW) Base Plant Load23 25262119 Air Separation Unit1031219110990113 Gas Cleanup/CO 2 Capture418315116 CO 2 Compression-27-26-28 Total Aux. Power (MW)130189119176112176 Net Power (MW)640556623518636517 Heat Rate (Btu/kWh)8,92210,5058,68110,7578,30410,674 Efficiency (HHV)38.232.539.331.741.132.0 Energy Penalty 1 -5.7-7.6-9.1 1 CO 2 Capture Energy Penalty = Percent points decrease in net power plant efficiency due to CO 2 Capture

22 Revised 7/27/07 22 IGCC Economic Results GE EnergyE-GasShell CO 2 CaptureNOYESNOYESNOYES Plant Cost ($/kWe) 1 Base Plant1,3231,5661,2721,5921,5221,817 Air Separation Unit287342264329256336 Gas Cleanup/CO 2 Capture203414197441199445 CO 2 Compression-68-69-70 Total Plant Cost ($/kWe)1,8132,3901,7332,4311,9772,668 Capital COE (¢/kWh)4.535.974.336.074.946.66 Variable COE (¢/kWh)3.273.933.204.093.113.97 CO 2 TS&M COE (¢/kWh)0.000.390.000.410.000.41 Total COE 2 (¢/kWh)7.8010.297.5310.578.0511.04 Increase in COE (%)-32-40-37 $/tonne CO 2 Avoided-35-45-46 1 Total Plant Capital Cost (Includes contingencies and engineering fees) 2 January 2007 Dollars, 80% Capacity Factor, 17.5% Capital Charge Factor, Coal cost $1.80/10 6 Btu

23 Revised 7/27/07 23 Comparison to PC and NGCC Current State-of-the-Art

24 Revised 7/27/07 24 Current Technology Pulverized Coal Power Plant* PM Control: Baghouse to achieve 0.013 lb/MMBtu (99.8% removal) SOx Control: FGD to achieve 0.085 lb/MMBtu (98% removal) NOx Control: LNB + OFA + SCR to maintain 0.07 lb/MMBtu Mercury Control: Co-benefit capture ~90% removal Steam Conditions (Sub): 2400 psig/1050°F/1050°F Steam Conditions (SC): 3500 psig/1100°F/1100°F PM Control: Baghouse to achieve 0.013 lb/MMBtu (99.8% removal) SOx Control: FGD to achieve 0.085 lb/MMBtu (98% removal) NOx Control: LNB + OFA + SCR to maintain 0.07 lb/MMBtu Mercury Control: Co-benefit capture ~90% removal Steam Conditions (Sub): 2400 psig/1050°F/1050°F Steam Conditions (SC): 3500 psig/1100°F/1100°F * Orange Blocks Indicate Unit Operations Added for CO 2 Capture Case

25 Revised 7/27/07 25 Current Technology Natural Gas Combined Cycle* NOx Control: LNB + SCR to maintain 2.5 ppmvd @ 15% O 2 Steam Conditions: 2400 psig/1050°F/950°F NOx Control: LNB + SCR to maintain 2.5 ppmvd @ 15% O 2 Steam Conditions: 2400 psig/1050°F/950°F * Orange Blocks Indicate Unit Operations Added for CO 2 Capture Case HRSG MEA Combustion Turbine CO 2 Compressor Stack Direct Contact Cooler Blower Natural Gas AirCooling Water Stack Gas CO 2 2200 psig Reboiler Steam Condensate Return

26 Revised 7/27/07 26 PC and NGCC Performance Results SubcriticalSupercriticalNGCC CO 2 CaptureNOYESNOYESNOYES Gross Power (MW)583680580663570520 Base Plant Load294826431013 Gas Cleanup/CO 2 Capture430427010 CO 2 Compression-52-47015 Total Aux. Power (MW)33130301171038 Net Power (MW)550 546560482 Heat Rate (Btu/kWh)9,27613,7248,72112,5346,7197,813 Efficiency (HHV)36.824.939.127.250.843.7 Energy Penalty 1 -11.9- -7.1 1 CO 2 Capture Energy Penalty = Percent points decrease in net power plant efficiency due to CO 2 Capture

27 Revised 7/27/07 27 PC and NGCC Economic Results SubcriticalSupercriticalNGCC CO 2 CaptureNOYESNOYESNOYES Plant Cost ($/kWe) 1 Base Plant1,3021,6891,3451,729554676 Gas Cleanup (SOx/NOx)246323229302-- CO 2 Capture-792-752-441 CO 2 Compression-89-85-52 Total Plant Cost ($/kWe)1,5492,8951,5752,8705541,172 Capital COE (¢/kWh)3.416.813.476.751.222.75 Variable COE (¢/kWh)2.994.642.864.345.626.70 CO 2 TS&M COE (¢/kWh)0.000.430.000.390.000.29 Total COE 2 (¢/kWh)6.4011.886.3311.486.849.74 Increase in COE (%)-85-81-43 $/tonne CO 2 Avoided-75- -91 1 Total Plant Capital Cost (Includes contingencies and engineering fees) 2 January 2007 Dollars, 85% Capacity Factor, 16.4% (no capture) 17.5% (capture) Capital Charge Factor, Coal cost $1.80/10 6 Btu, Natural Gas cost $6.75/10 6 Btu

28 Revised 7/27/07 28 Environmental Performance Comparison IGCC, PC and NGCC

29 Revised 7/27/07 29 Criteria Pollutant Emissions for All Cases

30 Revised 7/27/07 30 CO 2 Emissions for All Cases

31 Revised 7/27/07 31 Raw Water Usage Comparison IGCC, PC and NGCC

32 Revised 7/27/07 32 Raw Water Usage per MW net (Absolute)

33 Revised 7/27/07 33 Raw Water Usage per MW net (Relative to NGCC w/ no CO 2 Capture)

34 Revised 7/27/07 34 Economic Results for All Cases

35 Revised 7/27/07 35 CO 2 Mitigation Costs

36 Revised 7/27/07 36 Total Plant Cost Comparison Total Plant Capital Cost includes contingencies and engineering fees

37 Revised 7/27/07 37 Cost of Electricity Comparison January 2007 Dollars, Coal cost $1.80/10 6 Btu. Gas cost $6.75/10 6 Btu cents/kWh ($2007)

38 Revised 7/27/07 38 Highlights

39 Revised 7/27/07 39 NETL Viewpoint  Most up-to-date performance and costs available in public literature to date  Establishes baseline performance and cost estimates for current state of technology  Improved efficiencies and reduced costs are required to improve competitiveness of advanced coal-based systems  In today’s market and regulatory environment  Also in a carbon constrained scenario  Fossil Energy RD&D aimed at improving performance and cost of clean coal power systems including development of new approaches to capture and sequester greenhouse gases

40 Revised 7/27/07 40 Result Highlights: Efficiency & Capital Cost  Coal-based plants using today’s technology are efficient and clean  IGCC & PC: 39%, HHV (without capture on bituminous coal)  Meet or exceed current environmental requirements  Today’s capture technology can remove 90% of CO 2, but at significant increase in COE  Total Plant Cost: IGCC ~20% higher than PC capex  NGCC: $554/kW  PC: $1561/kW (average)  IGCC: $1841/kW (average)  Total Plant Cost with Capture: PC > IGCC capex  NGCC: $1169/kW  IGCC: $2496/kW (average)  PC: $2788/kW (average)

41 Revised 7/27/07 41 Results Highlights: COE  20 year levelized COE: PC lowest cost generator  PC: 64 mills/kWh (average)  NGCC: 68 mills/kWh  IGCC: 78 mills/kWh (average)  With CCS: IGCC lowest coal-based option  NGCC: 96 mills/kWh  IGCC: 105 mills/kWh (average)  PC: 116 mills/kWh (average)  Breakeven LCOE* when natural gas price is:  No Capture IGCC: $7.99/MMBtu PC: $6.15/MMBtu  With Capture IGCC: $7.73/MMBtu PC: $8.87/MMBtu * At baseline coal cost of $1.80/MMBtu

42 Revised 7/27/07 42 Summary Table for All Cases

43 Revised 7/27/07 43 Summary Table

Download ppt "Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants National Energy Technology Laboratory May 15, 2007 Revised August 2007 Final Results."

Similar presentations

Welcome. SAFETY FIRST Safety tip for the day BIG BEND STATION1900 MW 4 Coal fired steam units TAMPA ELECTRIC GENERATION BAYSIDE POWER STATION 1800 MW.

Welcome. SAFETY FIRST Safety tip for the day BIG BEND STATION1900 MW 4 Coal fired steam units TAMPA ELECTRIC GENERATION BAYSIDE POWER STATION 1800 MW.
Joe Chaisson April 21, 2004 www.catf.us Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) Power Plants and Geologic Carbon Sequestration Joe Chaisson.

Joe Chaisson April 21, Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) Power Plants and Geologic Carbon Sequestration Joe Chaisson.
Mathieu Lucquiaud, Hannah Chalmers, Jon Gibbins

Mathieu Lucquiaud, Hannah Chalmers, Jon Gibbins
Nuon Future plan: Magnum Project

Nuon Future plan: Magnum Project
A novel IGCC system with steam injected H2/O2 cycle and CO2 recovery P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department Low Quality Fuel but High.

A novel IGCC system with steam injected H2/O2 cycle and CO2 recovery P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department Low Quality Fuel but High.
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) IGCC is basically the combination of the gasification unit and the combined cycle. It has high efficiency.

Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) IGCC is basically the combination of the gasification unit and the combined cycle. It has high efficiency.
1 Gas Turbine R&D and Emissions 4 th International Gas Turbine Conference Brussels 2008 Dr. Victor Der Office of Fossil Energy US Department of Energy.

1 Gas Turbine R&D and Emissions 4 th International Gas Turbine Conference Brussels 2008 Dr. Victor Der Office of Fossil Energy US Department of Energy.
Steve Moorman Mgr Business Development, Advanced Technologies Babcock & Wilcox CO2 Emission Reduction from Coal Fired Plants FutureGen 2.0 CO2 Capture.

Steve Moorman Mgr Business Development, Advanced Technologies Babcock & Wilcox CO2 Emission Reduction from Coal Fired Plants FutureGen 2.0 CO2 Capture.
WinDS-H2 Model and Analysis Walter Short, Nate Blair, Donna Heimiller, Keith Parks National Renewable Energy Laboratory May 27, 2005 Project AN4 This presentation.

WinDS-H2 Model and Analysis Walter Short, Nate Blair, Donna Heimiller, Keith Parks National Renewable Energy Laboratory May 27, 2005 Project AN4 This presentation.
CAIR & MATS 2012 Southern Sectional AWMA Annual Meeting & Technical Conference September 12, 2012 Chris Goodman, P.E. Environmental Strategy.

CAIR & MATS 2012 Southern Sectional AWMA Annual Meeting & Technical Conference September 12, 2012 Chris Goodman, P.E. Environmental Strategy.
Concentrating Solar Deployment Systems (CSDS) A New Model for Estimating U.S. Concentrating Solar Power Market Potential Nate Blair, Walter Short, Mark.

Concentrating Solar Deployment Systems (CSDS) A New Model for Estimating U.S. Concentrating Solar Power Market Potential Nate Blair, Walter Short, Mark.
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycles P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department Go Slow with Irreversible Process…. The Combustion..

Integrated Gasification Combined Cycles P M V Subbarao Professor Mechanical Engineering Department Go Slow with Irreversible Process…. The Combustion..
Refractory Wear During Gasification Larry Baxter 1, Shrinivas Lokare 1, Humberto Garcia 2, Bing Liu 1 Clearwater Coal Conference Clearwater, FL June 2,

Refractory Wear During Gasification Larry Baxter 1, Shrinivas Lokare 1, Humberto Garcia 2, Bing Liu 1 Clearwater Coal Conference Clearwater, FL June 2,
Sara Jones 24NOV08. Background  In most conventional combustion processes, air is used as the source of oxygen  Nitrogen is not necessary for combustion.

Sara Jones 24NOV08. Background  In most conventional combustion processes, air is used as the source of oxygen  Nitrogen is not necessary for combustion.
Control of sulfur oxide. 低硫燃料 (low sulfur fuel) 燃料脫硫 (fuel desulfurization, removal of sulfur from fuel) 排煙脫硫 (flue gas desulfurization, FGD)

Control of sulfur oxide. 低硫燃料 (low sulfur fuel) 燃料脫硫 (fuel desulfurization, removal of sulfur from fuel) 排煙脫硫 (flue gas desulfurization, FGD)
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants – Volume 2 Coal to Synthetic Natural Gas and Ammonia U.S. Department of Energy National Energy Technology.

Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants – Volume 2 Coal to Synthetic Natural Gas and Ammonia U.S. Department of Energy National Energy Technology.
Previous MACT Sub Categories EPA has recognized differences in other industry rules by using sub-categorization: – Differences in processes – Differences.

Previous MACT Sub Categories EPA has recognized differences in other industry rules by using sub-categorization: – Differences in processes – Differences.
SINTEF Energy Research Power cycles with CO 2 capture – combining solide oxide fuel cells and gas turbines Dr. ing. Ola Maurstad.

SINTEF Energy Research Power cycles with CO 2 capture – combining solide oxide fuel cells and gas turbines Dr. ing. Ola Maurstad.
E&CS Overview & Major Construction Update Eddie Clayton.

E&CS Overview & Major Construction Update Eddie Clayton.
Coal Gasification : A PRB Overview Mark Davies – Kennecott Energy Outline Background – Our Interest History – Development of IGCC Current status – Commercial.

Coal Gasification : A PRB Overview Mark Davies – Kennecott Energy Outline Background – Our Interest History – Development of IGCC Current status – Commercial.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google