Upload
bhaskar-dahal
View
215
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
1/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Coal Gasification as Alternative Fuel forGlass Industry
Gasification PrimerPresented By
Donald L. Bonk
Senior Technical Advisor
National Energy Technology Laboratory
U. S. Department of Energy
Owens Corning CorporateHeadquarters
1, Owens Corning Parkway,Toledo, OH
July 27, 200510:00 4:00
Meeting Objective:Develop plans toobtain glass industry support for aninvestigation to determine the
viability of using coal gasification"synfuel" as an economicalalternative to natural gas for meltingglass.
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
2/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Gasification Chemistry
Gasification with Oxygen
C + 1/2 O2 CO
Combustion with Oxygen
C + O2 CO2
Gasification with Carbon Dioxide
C + CO2 2CO
Gasification with Steam
C + H2O CO + H2
Gasification with Hydrogen
C + 2H2 CH4
Water-Gas Shift
CO + H2O H2 + CO2
Methanation
CO + 3H2 CH4 + H2O
Coal
Oxygen
Steam
Gasifier GasComposition
(Vol %)
H2 25 - 30
CO 30 - 60
CO2 5 - 15H2O 2 - 30
CH4 0 - 5
H2S 0.2 - 1
COS 0 - 0.1
N2 0.5 - 4Ar 0.2 - 1
NH3 + HCN 0 -0.3
Ash/Slag/PM
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
3/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
History of GasificationTown Gas
First practical use of town gas in modern times was forstreet lighting
The first public street lighting with gas took place in PallMall, London on January 28, 1807
Town gas, a gaseous product manufactured from coal,
supplies lighting and heating for America and Europe.
Town gas is approximately 50% hydrogen, with the restcomprised of mostly methane and carbon dioxide, with 3%to 6% carbon monoxide.
Baltimore, Maryland beganthe first commercial gaslighting of residences, streets,and businesses in 1816
http://www.hatheway.net/images/baltimore_bayard_station_large.jpg8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
4/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
History of Gasification
Used during World War II to convert coal intotransportation fuels (Fischer Tropsch)
Used extensively in the last 50+ years to convert coaland heavy oil into hydrogen for the production ofammonia/urea fertilizer
Chemical industry (1960s)
Refinery industry (1980s)
Global power industry (Today)
http://www.ctts.nrel.gov/transtimes/images/fischer-tropsch.jpghttp://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=www.foxboro.com/industries/ammonia/images/ammonia_photo.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.foxboro.com/industries/ammonia/&h=171&w=259&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dammonia%26start%3D40%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DN8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
5/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Major Gasification Milestone1842 Baltimore Electric Town Gas1887 Lurgi Gasification Patent
1910 Coal Gasification Common in U.S. / Europe for Town Gas1940 Gasification of Nature Gas for Hydrogen in the Chemical Industry
(Ammonia)1950 Gasification of Coal for Fischer-Tropsch (F-T) Liquids (Sasol-Sasolburg)1960 Coal Tested as Fuel for Gas Turbines (Direct Firing)1970s IGCC Studies by U.S. DOE1970 Gasification of Oil for Hydrogen in the Refining Industry1983 Gasification of Coal to Chemicals Plant (Eastman Chemical)1984 First Coal IGCC Demonstration (Coolwater Plant)1990s First Non-Recourse Project Financed Oil IGCC Projects (Italy)1993 First Natural Gas Gasification F-T Project (Shell Bintulu)
1994 NUON/Demkolecs 253 MWe Buggenum Plant Begins Operation1995 PSI Walbash, Indiana Coal IGCC Begins Operation (DOE CCT IV)1996 Tampa Electric Polk Coal IGCC Begins Operation (DOE CCT III)1997 First Oil Hydrogen/IGCC Plant Begin Operations (Shell Pernis)1998 ELCOGAS 298 MWe Puertollano Plant2002 IGCC is now an Accepted Refinery and Coal Plant Option
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
6/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
FEEDS GASIFICATION GAS CLEANUP END PRODUCTS
Alternatives: Asphalt Coal Heavy Oil Petroleum Coke Orimulsion Natural Gas Wastes Clean Fuels
Alternatives: Hydrogen Ammonia Chemicals
MethanolMarketableByproducts:
Sulfur
Gas & SteamTurbinesSulfurRemoval
Syngas
ElectricitySteam
Combined CyclePower Block
Byproducts:
Solids (ash)
Gasifier
Oxygen
Source: ChevronTexaco
Characteristics of a Gasification Process
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
7/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Gasifier Configurations
S t e a m ,
O x y g e n
o r A i r
R e c y c l e D r i v e
G a s
P r o d u c t
G a s ,A s h
C o a l ,S o r b e n t o r
I n e r t
G a s i f i e r T o p
G a s i f i e r
B o t t o m0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 5 0 0
T r a n s p o r t
G a s i f i e r
C o a l , C h a r R e c y c l e , G a s
Moving Bed Entrained Flow
TransportFluidized Bed
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
8/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Gasifier TypesFlow Regime Moving (or "Fixed") Bed Fluidized Bed Entrained Flow
Combustion
Analogygrate fired combustors fluidized bed combustors pulverized coal combustors
Fuel Type solids only solids only solids or liquidsFuel Size 5 - 50 mm 0.5 - 5 mm < 500 microns
Residence Time 15 - 30 minutes 5 - 50 seconds 1 - 10 seconds
Oxidant air- or oxygen-blown air- or oxygen-blown almost always oxygen-blown
Gas Outlet Temp. 400 - 500 C 700 900 C 900 1400 C
Ash Handling slagging and non-slagging non-slagging always slagging
Commercial
Examples
Lurgi dry-ash (non-slagging),
BGL (slagging)
GTI U-Gas, HT Winkler,
KRW
GE Energy, Shell, Prenflo,
ConocoPhillips, Noell
"moving" beds are
mechanically stirred, fixedbeds are not
bed temperature below ash
fusion point to preventagglomeration
not preferred for high-ash
fuels due to energy penaltyof ash-melting
gas and solid flows are
always countercurrent in
moving bed gasifiers
preferred for high-ash
feedstocks and waste fuels
unsuitable for fuels that are
hard to atomize or pulverize
Note: The "transport" gasifier flow regime is between fluidized and entrained and can be air- or oxygen-blown.
Comments
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
9/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Gasifier Characteristic ComparisonMoving Bed Fluidized Bed Entrained
FlowTransport Flow
Ash Cond. Dry Slagging Dry AgglomerateSlagging Dry
Coal Feed ~2in ~2in ~1/4 in ~1/4 in ~ 100 Mesh ~1/16in
Fines Limited Better thandry ash
Good Better Unlimited Better
Rank Low High Low Any Any Any
Gas Temp.
(F)
800-1,200 800-1,200 1,700-1,900 1,700-1,900 >2,300 1,500-1,900
Oxidant Req. Low Low Moderate Moderate Low Moderate
Steam Req. High Low Moderate Moderate Low Moderate
Issues Fines and Hydrocarbonliquids
Carbon Conversion Raw gascooling
Control carboninventory andcarryover
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
10/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Gasifiers
Oxygen BlownOxygen Blown Entrained Flow
Texaco E-GAS Shell Prenflo Noell
Fluidized Bed HT Winkler Foster Wheeler
Moving Bed British Gas Lurgi Sasol Lurgi
Transport Reactor Kellogg
Air BlownAir Blown Fluidized Bed
HT Winkler IGT Ugas KRW Foster Wheeler
Spouting Bed
British Coal Foster Wheeler Entrained Flow
Mitsubishi Transport Reactor
Kellogg Hybrid
Foster Wheeler
British Coal ENERCON FERCO/Silva
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
11/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Gasification-Based Energy ProductionSystem Concepts
SulfurBy-Product
Fly AshBy-Product
SlagBy-Product
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
12/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Gasification-Based Industrial Concept
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
13/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Moving Bed Gasifier Lurgi, BGC
Counter current flow ofreactants, products: gases andsolids
Separate zones for coalprocessing
Products: top gases, hcs, tars;bottom dry ash or slag
Issues: uniform flow of solidsand gases
Design: bottom temperaturedetermines H
2
O/O2
Effects of dry or slaggingbottom
High cold gas efficiency, low O2
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
14/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Mixed Bed Gasifier Winkler, KRW, IGT
Fluidized bed, mixed flow of reactants,products
Mixed zones of heating, drying,devolatilization, gasification,combustion; dependent on feedlocation
Process conditions: temperature limitedby ash fusion; high temperaturespromote gasification, limit
desulfurization; flow velocitydetermined by fluidization requirements Products: top gases, no hcs tars,
potentially desulfurized, particulates (C,ash); bottom, ash perhapsagglomerated
Issues: reactant feed means, locations;ash removal means
Design: bed volume, by gasificationrequirements; cross section, velocity
Moderate cold gas efficiency; O2 H2O
requirements; broad range of coals
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
15/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Co Current Gasifier Krupp Koppers,Texaco, Shell
Entrained flow of coal in O2+ H
2O,
reactants
Widely dispersed particles heated byradiation, gas mixing
Process conditions: high temperature forash fusion, rapid gasification
Products: CO, H2(no CH
4, hcs, oils tars);
ash slag
Issues: uniform feed of pulverized coal,slurry, dry; separation of gases and ash;heat recovery from high temperatureproduct fuel gases
Design: required volume is the time
weighted average of reactant andproduct gas volumes/wt coal * the coalflow rate * the coal conversion time
Low cold gas efficiency, high O2demand
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
16/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Entrained Staged Gasifier Kellogg Rust
Coal flow into recirculating particulates,
devolatilization; char, particulates introducedto fluid bed, combustion, gasification
Process conditions: nearly uniformtemperature limited by ash agglomeration
Products: CO, H2, devol products, ash fines
Issues: coal particle size, flow conditions for
rapid devol; recycle for char combustion,gasification; recirculation particulates
Design: riser entrains particulates, coal;devolatilizes, cracks oils, tars; delivers charfor gasification, combustion. Stand pipe,particulates from cyclones, delivers to fluidbed. Fluid bed combustion, gasification of
char; product gases, particles enter riser Moderate efficiency, O
2demand, control of
devolatilizationS t e a m ,O x y g e n
o r A i r
P r o d u c t
G a s ,
A s h
R e c y c l e D r i v e
G a s
C o a l ,S o r b e n t o r
I n e r t
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
17/31
Independence does not
come cheap forthe
small utility
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
18/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Based on NETL StudiesRepowered Total Plant Cost vs. Original Size of Steam Plant
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
19/31
Cedar Lane Farms FGR-FBC
A Study
ofSmall Project
Success & Cost
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
20/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Cedar Lane Coal-Fired Flue GasRecirculating Fluidized Bed Boiler
Unit achieved ~7 months ofcontinuous computer controloperation
96.9% availability over the 193day heating season
$200,000+ Saved over NaturalGas this season (2 of 5 Acres)
20% reduction in coal usagecompared to old under-gratestokers
2 types of computer controlledoperation demonstrated;demand and slumping
Only 2 man-hours of laborrequired daily
Unit up to 40,000,000 Btu InputAvailable
Cedar LaneCedar Lane
FarmsFarms
Wooster, OhioWooster, Ohio
9,000,000 Btu FGC- FBB Demonstration9,000,000 Btu FGC- FBB Demonstration
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
21/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Economic Advantage Estimated Annual Fuel CostSavings with Coal-Fired AFBC at Cedar Lane Farms
Based upon a 10 million Btu high sulfur coal fired AFBC for hot water application.Heating season set AT 250 days per year at 100% capacity.
Economic Advantage Estimated Annual Fuel CostSavings with Coal-Fired AFBC at Cedar Lane Farms
Based upon a 10 million Btu high sulfur coal fired AFBC for hot water application.Heating season set AT 250 days per year at 100% capacity.
06-FBC015-21 Cedar Lane Farms FBC
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
22/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
FGR-FBC Features
Energy Type Possible:
Hot Water Steam Generation
Power Generation/ Co-Gen
Low Stack Emissions
Low Limestone Consumption High Efficiency
No In-Bed Heat Transfer Tubes
Flue Gas Recirculation
Automatic PLC Control
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
23/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
2005 Ex Works Budget Costs* for Hopper-to-StackEquipment Similar to Cedar Lane Farms ABFB
Equipment 10 MM BTU/hr [Coal Input] $750,000.
20 MM Btu/hr [Coal Input] $1,300,000.
30 MM BTU/hr [Coal Input] $1,800,000.
NOT Included in Above: Financing & Permitting Foundations & Building(s) Freight to Site Installation; Mechanical & Electrical
Compliance Stack Testing
*Generic cost not project estimate
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
24/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Fuel and Ash Storage Considerations based uponCedar Lane Farms Experience
Where To Start - Good Engineering and CreditableVendors
Fuel, Limestone, and Ash Economics
Economic Loads = 26 tons Coal or Limestone Therefore Storage Needs =
Coal at 55 tons Limestone at 36 tons Alternate Fuel at 55 tons (Tire Chips or Waste) Ash at 55 tons
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
25/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Storage Types
Storage Horizontal or Vertical withPreparation Equipment
List below arranged from highest labor costto lowest
Agriculture Horizontal (BFG) = $100,000 Agriculture Vertical (ML) = $287,000
Industrial Vertical (F&P) = $689,000
Utility Vertical (R&S) = $910,000
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
26/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Cedar Lane Farms Actual ComputerGraphic Of FBC Operation
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
27/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
FGR-FBC Easily Met OEPA RequirementsTesting March 25, 2004
Ohio require sulfur release below 1.3 lbs/MMBtu andunder 20% opacity on this size unit if equipped withbaghouse
Local coal was an Ohio #6 having 12,877 Btu/lbs, 6.57%moisture and 3.46% sulfur on an as received basis
Local sorbent was a Bucyrus #18 dolomite having 80%
calcium Control was completely automatic for three tests at an
average 8.96 MM Btu/hr Average sorbent feed was 0.12 lbs/lbs of coal, approximately
a Ca/S ratio = 1 Average sulfur capture approximately 88% or a release of 0.65
lbs/MMBtu Opacity = Zero Average oxygen % dry = 3.122
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
28/31
NETLs Compact Industrial HybridGasifier Concept
Based Upon Cedar Lane
Experience and the HybridGasification/Combustion
Studies
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
29/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
gas turbine exhaustused CFB combustion air
steam
steam turbine
generator
air
limestone
syngas
coal
stackstackair
aircompressor
gasgasturbineturbine
gas turbine
exhaust
toppingtopping
combustorcombustor
generator
syngas airfeed compressor
ID fan
baghouse
charfluid bed heat exchangeratmospheric
circulating
fluid bedcombustorcoalSNC
R
urea
Syngascooler
Metallicfilters
Combustion/Gasification Fluidized BedCombustion Combined Cycle (CGFBCC)
pressurizedcirculating
fluidized-bed
partial gasifier
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
30/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
NETLs Compact Industrial Hybrid GasifierConcept
Addresses Issues of Carbon Utilization Typical of Fluidized Bed Gasifiers
8/6/2019 Industrial Gasification Types and Peripherals
31/31
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date
Typical Gasifier Syngas Compositions
Wabash River Texaco Koppers-Totzek Shell (Lurgi) Winkler Possible NETL CompactGasifier Composition
Nitrogen 5.0% 5.8% 1.4% 5.1% 3.0%
Hydrogen 26.0% 27.0% 32.8% 29.7% 49.5% 32.5%
Carbon monoxide 45.0% 35.6% 58.7% 60.0% 25.0% 16.7%
Carbon dioxide 14.0% 12.6% 7.1% 2.3% 18.0% 11.1%
Water 6.7% 18.6% 2.1%
Methane 2.0% 0.1% 3.0% **37.4%
H2S 1.3% 0.8% 1.5% 2.0%
Ammonia 0.1%
Total 100.0% 99.8% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 99.7%
** Methane, Ethane, Ethylene