GE Energy IGCC’s Role in Advancing Coal Carbon … can help ccs to crawl, walk, run combined cycle power plant agr gasification & scrubbing electric power coal raw clean syngas co2-rich

GE Energy

IGCC’s Role in Advancing Coal Carbon PolicyCoal Carbon Policy

Our challenge is growing…

Reuters - Wednesday, September 24

NEW YORK - Nobel Peace Prize winner and environmental crusader Al Gore urged young people on Wednesday to engage in civil disobedience to stop the

t ti f l l t ith t thconstruction of coal plants without the ability to store carbon.

2

Copyright 2008 General Electric Company. All Rights Reserved.

US power sector carbon emissions3,000

Mt)

2006: Electric Power2.3 Gt, 40% of US

E S t CO2

2,000

2,500

nnes

(MEnergy Sector CO2 Emissions

1,500

etric

To

CoalPetroleumN t l G

2006: Coal1 928 Mt 83%

1,000

illion

MeNatural Gas 1,928 Mt, 83%

0

500 M2006: Oil55 Mt, 2% 2006: Natural Gas

340 Mt, 15%

3


1949 1954 1959 1964 1969 1974 1979 1984 1989 1994 1999 2004Source: Energy Information Administration (EIA)

The generation planner’s dilemmaLegislative &

?

Legislative & regulatory uncertainty

Public Utility Commissions

“Give me the lowestPolitical & enviro“Give me carbon

?

Give me the lowest cost” capture NOW”

Carbon credit pricing, incentives &

costs

Return & safety for shareholderscosts

Technology

4


gyreadiness

What are the options for carbon?Power Sector

CO2 Reductions

Demandreduction

Fuelswitching

Alter theexpansion

plan

Replace ormodify existing

systemplan system

• Switch from high carbon to low carbon fuels

• More natural gas• Less

conventional l

• Energy efficiency• Demand-side

management

• Retirements• Plant efficiency

improvementscoal

• Coal with CCS• More nuclear• More renewables

• Conservation• Fuel substitution

• Retrofit CCS• Repowering• Refueling

5


CCS needed to achieve GHG targetsto

ns)

3000

3500

3000

3500

3000

3500

3000

3500

CCS

Sect

oron

met

ric t

2500

3000 EIA Base Case 2007

2500

3000

2500

3000

2500

3000

EfficiencyAdvanced Coal

RenewablesNuclear

CCS

. Ele

ctric

Son

s (m

illio

1500

2000

1500

2000 CCS1500

2000

1500

2000 NuclearPHEV

U.S

.O

2Em

issi

o

500

1000

500

1000

500

1000

500

1000

CO

01990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

01990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

01990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

01990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

© 2008 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved

6


Source: EPRI Prism Analysis

Policy and regulatory gaps

Carbon Capture

CO2Transport

CO2StorageCapture Transport Storage

No current carbon valueRequired levels of

Major national infrastructure investmentCoal plant may require

Ownership of CO2 & long-term liabilityProperty rights &Required levels of

capture undefinedExpected to be defined by federal

Coal plant may require 100kms of pipeline to storageWill cross jurisdiction

Property rights & trespassOwnership of “pore space” y

climate change billCap & trade would provide market price

jboundaries & land ownershipEminent domain debate

pUnderground plumes can cover 100’s of square miles

Early incentives needed

Can cross state and even international boundaries St t F d l

7


State vs. Federal jurisdiction

We need a playbook for offense• Carbon Capture Ready

– Meets well-defined criteriaReady for expected CO2 trigger – Ready for expected CO2 trigger price under cap and trade

• Crawl/Walk/Run– Partial=>NGCC=>85%-90%

• Permitting– Pro-forma CO2 BACT analysisPro forma CO2 BACT analysis– CCS NGCC min base, O&M– Trigger price for retrofit

• Infrastructure investment– Economic benefits flowdown– Jobs, energy security, jobs

8


Jobs, energy security, jobs

1st play – Carbon Capture ReadyTh d N l l tThe need: New coal plants

When can we build them?

Now - for plants meeting clear, well-defined requirements for carbon capture readinessbuild them? requirements for carbon capture readiness

When do we capture?

When carbon has value, regulatory clarity and relief on liability for stored CO2

How much do we capture?

65% capture for parity with natural gas combined cycle

Wh t CO S it bl f i t i i i j ti it tWhat CO2quality do we need?

Suitable for maintaining injectivity, storage capacity + optimized for minimum total cost of capture, transport and injection.

What else is Policy that sets carbon value at avoidance cost +What else is needed?

Policy that sets carbon value at avoidance cost + incentives for early movers + regulatory clarity on liability and standards

9


All processes and components are in Inventions and those in early technology

Defining carbon capture readyp p

commercial application todayy gy

development do not qualify.

Components should be at, or within accepted engineering limits of scale-up

Technology still requiring pilot scale-up for validation do not qualify.

Incremental investment is needed only for addition of components and process steps.

No significant modification, underutilization or scrapping of existing major equipment

Site utilities – e.g. once-through and makeup Post combustion capture likely to require g g pwater – are sufficient for operation with CC

p y qsignificantly more water with CC

Plant space is reserved and adequate for specific process components and layout.

Supported by engineering analysis with heat and mass balances for component sizing.

Potential life-of-plant sequestration resources and access identified

Candidate primary sequestration sinks as well as back-up sites screened.

CO2 quality must be suitable for Compatible with reservoir geochemistry, well CO2 quality must be suitable for sequestration.

Compatible with reservoir geochemistry, well life, maintenance of injectivity and capacity.

Deferring retrofit will incur <10% economic penalty in avoided cost of carbon.

Incentive for adding CC when carbon price or regulatory requirements justify doing so.

10


IGCC can help CCS to crawl, walk, run

COMBINED CYCLE POWER

PLANTAGRGASIFICATION

& SCRUBBING

ELECTRIC POWER

COAL

RAW

CLEAN SYNGAS

CO2-RICH FLASHED STREAM

SYNGAS SATURATION

WATER

LTGC

CO2 ENRICHMENT

EXHAUST

CAPTURED CO2 CO2

COMPRESSION 2200 PSIG

ASU

O2

AIR

CO2 RECYCLE COMPRESSOR

CO2-DEPLETED CLEAN SYNGAS

STREAM

Case 1bCapture (%) 5 - 17

Captured CO2 (ktons/yr) 225 – 725

Low cost large-scale CO2RAW SYNGAS

SULFUR RECOVERY

SULFUR

SLAG

TAIL GAS RECYCLE

2source for CCS demos and storage validation

Capture (%) 50 - 65

CAPACITY-ENHANCED

AGR

GASIFICATION & SCRUBBING

COAL

RAW SYNGAS



SLAG

LTGC

CAPTURED CO2 CO2 COMPRESSION

2200 PSIG

ASU

O2

AIR


TAIL GAS RECYCLE


PLANT

ELECTRIC POWER

ONE-STAGE SOUR SHIFT

EXHAUST

Case 2bCO2

ENRICHMENT

RECOVEREDCLEAN SYNGAS

SHIFTED RAW

SYNGAS SYNGAS SATURATION(REMOVED)

Captured CO2 (ktons/yr) 2,200 – 2,700

Retrofit to NGeq – meets CA reg or capture criteria

SULFUR RECOVERY

SULFUR

RECYCLE

CAPTURED CO2 CO2

COMPRESSION 2200 PSIG

Case 5

for Fed incentives

Capture (%) 85 - 90

Captured CO2 (ktons/yr) 3,750 – 4,000

AGR WITH INTEGRATED

CO2 ENRICHMENT

GASIFICATION & SCRUBBING

COAL

RAW SYNGAS


SULFUR RECOVERY


SLAG

LTGC

ASU

O2

AIR


TAIL GAS RECYCLE


PLANT

ELECTRIC POWER

DILUTION NITROGEN

TWO-STAGE SOUR SHIFT

EXHAUST

SHIFTED RAW

SYNGAS SYNGAS SATURATION(REMOVED)

p 2 ( y ) , ,

Appropriate for EOR or when warranted by market price of CO2

11


SULFUR market price of CO2

What policies do we need to succeed?

ShapingCreating Setting Public

Government Policy Measures

Shaping Markets

• Taxes/User Fees• Property Rights • Standards • Legal Standing

Creating Markets

Setting Regulations

Public Participation

• Setting/removing price caps

• Tradable Permits

D ti d

• Bans/Caps

• Permits and

• Right to Organize

• Public Hearings• Subsidies (+, -)

• Controlling entry d it

• Domestic and International Offset Systems

Permits and Quotas

• Mandates

Public Hearings

• Information Disclosure Rules

and exit• Defined liability

Governments can shape markets multiple ways

12


p p y

US climate change policy• Senate Climate Security Act

Boxer-Warner-Lieberman 2008– Cap and tradep– Decrease GHGs from 2005:

(-4%) by 2012;(-19%) by 2020; ( 71%) b 2050(-71%) by 2050

– Failed cloture – Issues to be resolved:

• Protection for consumersProtection for consumers • Limits on offsets• Need safety valve• More time & $ for technology

M th• Many others• Left to new administration

– Candidates favor cap and tradeLikely not top 2009 issue

13


– Likely not top 2009 issue

Will we regulate CO2 under CAA?EPA’s prior position• CO2 is not an air pollutant• Not authorized to regulate

April 07 Supreme Court ruling overturned EPA’s objections• CO2 an air pollutant under CAA• EPA tasked to consider need and

approach for regulationJuly 2008 issuance of ANPR• CAA ill-suited for CO2 regulation• Purpose “to elicit information”

on how EPA might regulate d CAAunder CAA

• No legal effect• Gives views on how EPA may

l t CO if f d t d14


regulate CO2 if forced to do so

EPA and CO2 injection • ANPR for new class VI well for GS• Authorized under SWDA• Requirements for

– Site characterization & modelingg– Area of Review– Overlying covers, under aquifers– Well construction and operation

Monitoring site care and closure– Monitoring, site care and closure• States may choose own stricter

standards

• But the ANPR doesn’t answer:– Levels of contaminants – Ambiguity of RCRA & CERCAg y– Limits of leakage– Ownership and long-term liability

15


Current Federal funding

Emergency Economic

Stabilization Bill

– +$1.25B for advanced coal +$0.25B gasification for ITC– 30% ITC; minimum 65% capture– $20/tonne for sequestered CO2; $10 EOR (new)– Min 500k tonnes/yr; max 75MM tonnes totalS Min 500k tonnes/yr; max 75MM tonnes total

Federal Loan Guarantees

– $6B gasification, retrofit and new coal power– Goal: reduce GHG emissions by min 50%

$(3rd solicitation under Title VII EPACT 2005)

– $2B for advanced coal gasification– 100% of loan, max 80% of total project cost

CCPI III– $340MM - 50% cost share, no repay

300kt / CO2 CCS ( i l IGCC t i hift)CCPI III – 300ktons/yr CO2 CCS (= single IGCC train no shift)– 90% capture (CO2 in stream)

– $1.3B total: $216MM FY091 - rest as appropriatedI t l t f CCS ( ) 50% f CCS t fitFutureGen

(Restructured)

– Incremental cost of CCS (new) or 50% of CCS retrofit– Op cost share limited to additional fuel– 3-5 yrs CCS operation + 2 yrs MMV– Min 300MW IGCC gross; Min 81% capture

16


1 With continuing resolution for FY09

States are defining coal policy

States with current and proposed benefits for cleaner coal1

1 Source: Coal Utilization Research Council, July 2007

17


Sou ce Coa Ut at o esea c Cou c , Ju y 00

States leading in reducing uncertainty

Pending or adopted legislation on CCSState assumption of CO2 liability

18


p yAdopted or pending storage permit standards.

Drivers for CCS with IGCC1. IGCC with carbon capture can be provided now

2. CCS uncertainty lies with storage – validation, t d bli tacceptance and public acceptance

3. IGCC flexibility supports a crawl-walk-run validation of CCS and with high quality CO2CCS and with high quality CO2

4. We need to learn-by-doing – at commercial scale

5 IGCC retrofittability to NGCC equivalence is a5. IGCC retrofittability to NGCC equivalence is a compelling solution for maintaining coal build

6. The surest and quickest route to reducing the cost of q gCCS is to build IGCC plants

19


GE Energy

IGCC’s Role in Advancing Coal Carbon PolicyCoal Carbon Policy

Documents

GE Energy IGCC’s Role in Advancing Coal Carbon … can help ccs to crawl, walk, run combined cycle power plant agr gasification & scrubbing electric power coal raw clean syngas co2-rich