1

Integrated Modeling of Carbon Integrated Modeling of Carbon Management Technologies for Management Technologies for

Electric Power SystemsElectric Power Systems

Edward S. Rubin and Anand B. RaoDepartment of Engineering & Public Policy

Carnegie Mellon University

July 20, 2000

Some Questions to be AddressedSome Questions to be Addressed

What carbon management technologies may be used in a particular application (e.g., existing vs. new plants)?What are the key parameters that affect the performance, emissions, and cost of a given option? How do the alternative options compare in terms of performance, reliability, and cost?What are the uncertainties and technological risks of different carbon management options?What are the priorities and benefits of R&D to reduce key uncertainties in new process designs?

2

Combustion&

Power Gen. Air Flue Gas

Treatment

CO2

Combustion&

Power Gen.

Flue Gas Treatment

CO2 CaptureUnit

CO2Product Storage/Use

Coal or Gas

Coal or Gas

Conventional Power Plant

Conventional Power Plant with CO2 Capture

ASUAir O2Air

Current ApplicationsCurrent Applications

Enhanced oil recovery (EOR)Dow MEA (Some plants in TX and NM, now shut down) Common in 1970s and 1980s (100-1200 tons CO2/d)

Fertilizer industryH2 and CO2 separation ⇒ Urea production Dow MEA (Indo Gulf Fertilizer Co.) - 150 tons CO2/d

Carbonation of brine (soda ash)Kerr-McGee MEA (North American Chemical Co.,operational since 1978) - 800 tons CO2/d

Food-gradeFluor Daniel / Dow MEA (Northeast Energy Associates, MA) - 320 tons CO2/d

Commercial CO2 capture and sequestration facility

Injection into deep saline aquifer (Sleipner West gas field, Norway, installed in 1996) - ~3000 tons CO2/d

3

4

Power Generation Options Using Power Generation Options Using Fossil FuelsFossil Fuels

Combustion-basedGasification-based

Coal

Direct CombustionGas Reforming

Gas

Fuel

Air

Pure Oxygen

Oxidant

Pulverized CoalGas Turbines

Simple Cycle

Gas TurbinesCoal GasificationFuel CellsOther

Combined Cycle

Technology

Power Generation Technologies

COCO22 Capture TechnologiesCapture Technologies

MEACausticOther

Chemical

SelexolRectisolOther

Physical

Absorption

AluminaZeoliteActivated C

Adsorber Beds

Pressure SwingTemperature SwingWashing

Regeneration Method

Adsorption Cryogenics

PolyphenyleneoxidePolydimethylsiloxane

Gas Separation

Polypropelene

Gas Absorption

Ceramic BasedSystems

Membranes Microbial/AlgalSystems

CO2 Separation and Capture

5

COCO22 Sequestration OptionsSequestration Options

Deep SalineReservoirs

ExhaustedOil and Gas Wells

AbandonedCoal Seams

GeologicalSequestration

Very Deep OceanInjection

Unconfined Release(@ ~ 1000 m)

Dense Plume Formation(shallow)

Dry Ice Injection

OceanSequestration

Forests andTerrestrial Systems

Marine Alga

BiologicalSequestration

Storage as a solid in anInsulated Repository

Utilization Schemes(e.g. Polymerization)

OtherMethods

CO2 Disposal / Storage Options

Modeling Framework for Carbon Modeling Framework for Carbon Management OptionsManagement Options

Power Generation

CO2Capture

CO2 Storageor Disposal

CO2Transport

AbsorptionAdsorptionCryogenicsMembranes

PipelineOther

Deep Saline ReservoirsOil and Gas WellsDeep Coal Seams

OceansByproduct Utilization

Air orPure O2

Coal orNatural Gas

Simple CycleCombined Cycle

6

Energy ConsiderationsEnergy Considerations

ProcessHeat

Capture Process

Compression

Transport

Storage/Disposal

Electricity

Total Energy Requirement

Important Factors•Gas Stream Flow and Composition•Choice of CO2 Capture Technology•Desired CO2 Capture Efficiency•Process Parameters•Desired CO2 Product Specifications•Mode of Transport•Transportation Distance•Choice of Disposal Method

~ 60-80% cost ofseparation & capture

Current StatusCurrent Status

Developed preliminary models (performance, emissions, and cost) for several CO2 capture options, CO2 transport options, and CO2 storage optionsInitial focus on modeling of current commercial technologies (amine scrubbing systems) for combustion-based power systemsIntegrated the new CO2 module with the IECM combustion-based power plant model developed for the USDOE

7

Integrated EnvironmentalIntegrated EnvironmentalControl Model (IECM)Control Model (IECM)

CoalCleaning

CombustionControls

Flue Gas Cleanup & Waste Management

NOxRemoval

ParticulateRemoval

CombinedSOx/NOxRemoval

AdvancedParticulateRemoval

SO2Removal

ObjectivesObjectives

Develop a comprehensive modeling framework to estimate the performance, environmental emissions, and cost of coal-based power generation technologies

Develop a method for comparing alternative options on a systematic basis, including the effects of uncertainty

8

ApproachApproach

Process Technology ModelsEngineering Economic ModelsAdvanced Software CapabilitiesSystems Analysis Framework

Probabilistic Software CapabilityProbabilistic Software Capability

Allows you to specify parameter values as distribution functions, as well as conventional deterministic (point) estimatesAllows you to explicitly quantify the effects of uncertainty in performance, emissions, and cost, yielding confidence intervals for uncertain results

9

SorbentSulfur

Loading

GasifierFines

Carryover

CarbonRetention inBottom Ash

353025201510500.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

Sorbent Sulfur Loading, wt-%20151050

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

Carbon Retention in Bottom Ash% of coal feed carbon

3025201510500.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

Fines Carryover, % of coal feed

Expert Judgments on Expert Judgments on Key Model ParametersKey Model Parameters

Calculated Plant EfficiencyCalculated Plant Efficiency

444342414039380.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

ProbabilisticDeterministic

Net Plant Efficiency (%, HHV basis)

Cum

ulat

ive

Prob

abili

ty

10

Total Plant Capital CostTotal Plant Capital CostC

umul

ativ

e Pr

obab

ility

Total Capital Requirement ($1994/kW)1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500

DOE (1989)Probabilistic

0.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

524 MW net

Value of Targeted ResearchValue of Targeted Research

1201101009080706050400.0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

Base Case UncertaintiesReduced Uncertainties inSelected Performanceand Cost Parameters

Levelized Cost of Electricity, Constant 1989 mills/kWh

Input Uncertainty Assumptions

Cum

ulat

ive

Prob

abili

ty

11

Probabilistic Comparison of Probabilistic Comparison of Competing TechnologiesCompeting Technologies

IECM Software PackageIECM Software Package

Fuel PropertiesFuel PropertiesHeating ValueHeating ValueCompositionCompositionDelivered CostDelivered Cost

Plant DesignPlant DesignFurnace TypeFurnace TypeEmission ControlsEmission ControlsSolid Waste MgmtSolid Waste MgmtChemical InputsChemical Inputs

Cost DataCost DataO&M CostsO&M CostsCapital CostsCapital CostsFinancial FactorsFinancial Factors

PowerPowerPlantPlantModelModel

GraphicalGraphicalUserUser

InterfaceInterface

SessionSession& Fuel& Fuel

DatabasesDatabases

Plant & ProcessPlant & ProcessPerformancePerformance

EnvironmentalEnvironmentalEmissionsEmissions

Plant & ProcessPlant & ProcessCostsCosts

12

The IECM is Available for The IECM is Available for DownloadingDownloading

Web Access:

ftp://ftp.netl.doe.gov/pub/IECM

Preliminary IECM User GroupPreliminary IECM User Group

ABB Power Plant ControlAmerican Electric Power Consol, Inc.Energy & Env. Research Corp.Exportech Company, Inc.FirstEnergy Corp.FLS Miljo A/SFoster Wheeler Development Corp.Lehigh UniversityLower Colorado River AuthorityMcDermott Technology, Inc.Mitsui Babcock Energy LTD.

National Power Plc.Niksa Energy AssociatesPacific Corp.Pennsylvania Electric AssociationPotomac Electric Power Co.Savvy EngineeringSierra Pacific Power Co.Southern Company Services, Inc.Stone & Webster Engineering Corp.Tampa Electric Co.University of California, BerkeleyUS Environmental Protection Agency

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

COCO22 Module ResultsModule Results

Flue gas (out) compositionCO2 emission level (kg CO2/hr)Amount of CO2 product (ton/hr)Purity of CO2 product (%)Solvent circulation rate (m3/hr)Make-up solvent rate (kg MEA/hr)Make-up rate relative to the circulation rate (%)

Waste generation rate (kg/hr) Energy penalty (% of MWg)Net power generationCost of CO2 captured ($/ tonCO2 captured)Cost increase in electricity (cents/kWh)Cost of CO2 avoided ($/ tonCO2 avoided)

21

Additional Technology OptionsAdditional Technology Options

Just CompletedCombustion NOx Controls

– Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR)

– Low NOx Burners (LNB)– LNB + Overfire air– LNB + SNCR– Natural Gas Reburn– Tangential, Wall &

Cyclone Firing

Just StartedPost-Combustion Controls

– Air Toxics (mercury)

Other Fossil FuelsAlternative Power Generation SystemsCO2 Sequestration Options

Future Developments:Future Developments:A Menu of Technology OptionsA Menu of Technology Options

22

ASPEN Model of an ASPEN Model of an IGCC SystemIGCC System

CoalHandling

Gasification,Particulate &Ash Removal,Fines Recycle

GasTurbines

BoilerFeedwaterTreatment

SteamTurbine

SteamCycle

& SCR

SteamCycle

& SCR

ZincFerriteProcess

ZincFerriteProcess

SulfuricAcid PlantSulfuric

Acid Plant

SulfuricAcid

Rawwater

Coal Coal

CleanSyngas

Exhaust Gas

Gasifier Steam

Boiler Feedwater

Exhaust Gas

Shift & Regen.Steam

Cyclone

RawSyngas

Cyclone

Blowdown

Return Water

CoolingWater

Makeup

CoolingWaterBlowdown

Air

NetElectricityOutput

InternalElectricLoads

Ash Gasifier Air

AirTailgas

Off-GasCaptured Fines

Response Surface ModelResponse Surface Modelfor an IGCC Systemfor an IGCC System

0.39

0.4

0.41

0.42

0.43

0.39 0.4 0.41 0.42 0.43

Actual Efficiency

Pred

icte

d Ef

ficie

ncy

23

Desktop Model of an IGCC SystemDesktop Model of an IGCC System

Model ApplicationsModel Applications

Process designTechnology evaluationCost estimationR&D management

Risk analysisEnvironmental complianceMarketing studiesStrategic planning

24

Com

mun

icat

ion

A Hierarchy of Process ModelsA Hierarchy of Process Models

EnterpriseEnterpriseEnterprise

System ModelsSystem ModelsSystem Models

Integrated ModelsIntegrated ModelsIntegrated Models

Component ModelsComponent ModelsComponent Models

Mechanistic/Empirical ModelsMechanistic/Empirical ModelsMechanistic/Empirical Models

Val

idat

ion

Scope and ObjectivesScope and ObjectivesIdentify potential options for power generation with carbon capture and sequestration, suitable for, (a) existing plants, and (b) new plantsDevelop a model to quantify performance, emissions, and cost of alternative options, and their dependency on key plant and technology design parameters, operating parameters, and carbon management methodsCharacterize uncertainty in key parameters of the carbon management system Integrate carbon management technologies with other plant environmental control systems Conduct case studies to illustrate model applications

25

Future WorkFuture Work

Refine the parameter defaultsDevelop more detailed relationships among key performance parametersCharacterize the uncertainties in key parameters of the carbon management system Conduct a preliminary case study to illustrate model application

MEAMEA--based CObased CO2 2 Process Module:Process Module:User Input Performance ParametersUser Input Performance Parameters

CO2 capture efficiencyMEA concentrationCO2 product temperatureCO2 product pressureCO2 transportation distance

26

Additional Performance ParametersAdditional Performance Parameters

CO2 solubility in MEASOx removal efficiencyParticulate removal efficiencyRegeneration energy requirementLoss of solventCO2 content of lean solventPump, fan, and compressor efficiencies

Base Plant Inputs ParametersBase Plant Inputs Parameters

Flue gas flow rateFlue gas molar compositionFlue gas particulate concentrationFlue gas temperatureFlue gas pressureGross power generationNet power generation (excluding CO2)Annual plant capacity factor

27

Model Cost ParametersModel Cost Parameters

Cost of MEA ($/kg MEA)Cost of MEA disposal ($/kg MEA)Cost of transportation ($/ ton CO2 /km) Cost of CO2 disposal ($/ ton CO2)Direct capital cost (CO2 Unit) ($)

O & M cost ($/year)