1. www.ieagreen.org.uk Co-Production of Hydrogen and Electricity (GHG/07/42) Hydrogen may be used in future as an energy carrier In the long term it is expected that hydrogen will be made using renewable energy In the medium term fossil fuels with CO 2 capture are expected to be the lowest cost option A study was undertaken to assess production of hydrogen and electricity by coal gasification with CO 2 capture Study undertaken by Foster Wheeler Italiana Report 2007/13, September 2007

2. www.ieagreen.org.uk Hydrogen and Electricity Co-Production Coal Air Power Air separation Combined cycle Nitrogen Air Gasification Acid gas removal Shift conversion Hydrogen Oxygen CO 2 CO 2 compression Sulphur H2SH2S Sulphur recovery Hydrogen separation

3. www.ieagreen.org.uk Plant Performance and Costs Screening assessment of gasifiers and acid gas removal processes Shell, Siemens and GE gasifiers Little difference in overall costs Selexol and Rectisol acid gas removal Shell gasifier and Selexol were selected Estimates of performance and costs of plants Electricity, without CO 2 capture Electricity, with capture Hydrogen, with capture (+ electricity for internal consumption) Electricity and hydrogen co-production (fixed ratio), with capture Electricity and hydrogen co-production (variable ratio), with capture

4. www.ieagreen.org.uk Plant Performance and Costs Electricity-only IGCCs Capital cost of plant with CO 2 capture is €2380/kW Cost of electricity with capture is €0.072/kWh Cost of avoiding emissions is €31/tonne CO 2 Costs are higher than in the past (higher materials costs etc) Hydrogen-only plant Cost of hydrogen is € 9.45/GJ

5. www.ieagreen.org.uk Plant Performance and Costs Co-production plants (fixed H 2 : electricity ratio) Co-production reduces costs compared to electricity- only and hydrogen-only plants About 4% overall Flexible co-production plants H 2 :electricity ratio can be varied from 1.3 to 3.1:1 Coal gasifiers and gas turbine remain fully loaded Flexibility increases the capital cost by 1%

6. www.ieagreen.org.uk Scenario Modelling The aim of the scenario modelling was to quantify benefits of flexible co-production Hydrogen and electricity demands were specified Based on current Netherlands and USA energy consumptions Hydrogen was assumed to be used to replace vehicle fuels and a fraction of natural gas used by small consumers Current nuclear and renewable electricity supply was assumed to be retained Monthly net electricity and hydrogen demands were calculated (also daily for the Netherlands) Emphasise that these are hypothetical scenarios Predicting future energy systems is very complicated

7. www.ieagreen.org.uk Electricity and Hydrogen Demands

8. www.ieagreen.org.uk Scenario Modelling Five plant scenarios were modelled Without hydrogen storage Electricity-only and hydrogen-only plants Including non-flexible co-production plants Including flexible co-production plants With underground buffer storage of hydrogen Non-flexible co-production plants Flexible co-production plants

9. www.ieagreen.org.uk Scenario Results

10. www.ieagreen.org.uk Conclusions Hydrogen can be co-produced in IGCC plants with CO 2 capture The electricity : hydrogen output ratio can be adjusted Varying hydrogen and electricity demands can be satisfied Gasifiers can be operated at full load Practical advantage: fewer operating problems Economic advantage: better utilisation of capital investment The lowest cost option is to use flexible co-production plants with underground buffer storage of hydrogen

11. www.ieagreen.org.uk Recommendations Costs of abating CO 2 emissions from small stationary sources by CCS or by using energy carriers (hydrogen or electricity) from large plants with CCS should be compared Proposal 32-11 was submitted but received insufficient votes