DOE FE Advanced Turbines Program - netl.doe.gov Library/Events/2017/utsr/general... · DOE FE...
Transcript of DOE FE Advanced Turbines Program - netl.doe.gov Library/Events/2017/utsr/general... · DOE FE...
DOE FE Advanced Turbines Program
Rich DennisU.S. Department of Energy
National Energy Technology Laboratory
November 1, 2017University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
2017 University Turbine Systems Research Project Review Meeting
2
• Program elements / goals• System studies
• H2 turbine at 3,100°F• SCO2 w/ oxy-CFB• SCO2 direct (coal gasification based)
• Program project work• Core projects• UTSR projects• START rig• NETL RIC
• Next steps• Summary
Presentation Overview2017 University Turbine Systems Research Project Review Meeting
3
• Advanced Combustion Turbines• CC eff. ~ 65 % (LHV, NG bench mark), TIT of 3,100 F• Delivers transformational performance benefits by 2025
• SCO2 Turbomachinery• Recompression Brayton Cycles (Indirect) for “boilers” • Allam Cycles (Direct) for gasification and NG
• Pressure Gain Combustion• Alternate pathway to high efficiency
Advanced Turbines Program ElementsResearch Focused in Three Key Technology Areas
4
H2 Turbines - Performance and Cost ComparisonsReference, Advanced H2 Turbine, and Transformation H2 Turbine “All-in” Cases
Parameter "F" Turbine (reference)
AHT(2650 F)
THT(3100 F)
H2 Turbine (MW) 464 680 940Fuel Gas Expander (MW) 7 3 7Air Expander (MW) n/a 14 39Steam Turbine (MW) 248 392 485Gross Power (MW) 719 1,090 1,471Auxiliary Power (MW) -186 -262 -338Net Power (MW) 533 828 1,133Coal Feed (lb/hr) 481,783 635,089 816,118Plant Efficiency (%) 32.4 38.1 40.6COE ($/MWh)* 134.5 104.1 92.7* w/o T&S
5
• LP Cryogenic ASU • 99.5% O2• 3.1% excess O2 to CFB
• Atmospheric oxy-CFB • Bituminous coal • 99% carbon conversion• In-bed sulfur capture (94%), 140% excess CaCO3• Infiltration air 2% of air to ASU MAC
• Operating conditions for Rankine plants• Supercritical (SC) Rankine cycle
(Case B22F: 24.2 MPa/ 600 °C/ 600 °C)• Advanced ultra-supercritical (AUSC) Rankine cycle
(Case B24F: 24.2 MPa/ 760 °C / 760 °C)• No low temperature flue gas heat recovery• 45% flue gas recycle to CFB• CO2 purification unit
• ~100% CO2 purity• 96% carbon recovery
Oxy-CFB Coal-fired Rankine Cycle Power PlantSteam Rankine Comparison Cases
MAC1 Cryogenic ASU2Ambient Air
3
Oxy-Circulating
Fluidized Bed Combustor
Forced Draft Fan
Primary Air Fan
14
13
Coal 11
BottomAsh
IDFans
BagHouse 17
16
15 18
LP CO2Compressor w/
Intercooling
CO2 Drying 30
Infiltration Air
Knockout Water
CO2 Product
5
4
26
7
8
27
Fly Ash9
10
6
20
19
Note: Block Flow Diagram is not intended to represent a complete material balance. Only major process streams and equipment are shown.
28
Interstage Cooling
CO2 Purification 29
Compression/Pumping
CO2 Compression, Drying, and Purification Unit
Interstage Knockout
HP TURBINE
2122
23
IPTURBINE LP TURBINE
CONDENSER25FEEDWATER
HEATER SYSTEM
24BOILER
FEEDWATER
12Limestone
Vent
O2
Source: NETL
6
• LP Cryogenic ASU • 99.5% O2• 3.1% excess O2 to CFB
• Atmospheric oxy-CFB • Bituminous coal • 99% carbon conversion• In-bed sulfur capture (94%), 140% excess CaCO3• Infiltration air 2% of air to ASU MAC
• Recompression sCO2 Brayton cycle• Turbine inlet temperature 620 °C and• Turbine inlet temperature 760 °C
• Low temperature flue gas heat recovery in sCO2 power cycle
• 45% flue gas recycle to CFB• CO2 purification unit
• ~100% CO2 purity• 96% carbon recovery
Oxy-CFB Coal-fired Indirect sCO2 Power PlantBaseline sCO2 process
MAC1 Cryogenic ASU2Ambient Air
3
Oxy-Circulating
Fluidized Bed Combustor
14
Coal
BottomAsh
BagHouse
19
16
15
LP CO2Compressor w/
Intercooling
CO2 Drying 30
Knockout Water
CO2 Product
4
26
27
Fly Ash
6
Note: Block Flow Diagram is not intended to represent a complete process. Only major process streams and equipment are shown.
28Interstage Cooling
CO2 Purification 29
Compression/Pumping
CO2 Compression, Drying, and Purification Unit
Interstage Knockout
31
MAIN CO2 COMPRESSOR
CO2 COOLER
HIGH TEMPERATURE RECUPERATOR
46
12Limestone LOW TEMPERATURE RECUPERATOR
32
33
Bypass CO2 Compressor
38
39
41
37
FLUE GAS COOLER
17
22
18
42
Vent
O2
11
4034
35
36CO2 TURBINE
10
45
5
7
8
923
24
FD Fan
PA Fan
N2 Heater
20
Knockout Water
ID Fan
21
44
Source: NETL
7
MAC1 Cryogenic ASU2Ambient Air
3
Oxy-Circulating
Fluidized Bed Combustor
14
Coal
BottomAsh
BagHouse
19
16
15
LP CO2Compressor w/
Intercooling
CO2 Drying 30
Knockout Water
CO2 Product
4
26
27
Fly Ash
6
28Interstage Cooling
CO2 Purification 29
Compression/Pumping
CO2 Compression, Drying, and Purification Unit
Interstage Knockout
31
MAIN CO2 COMPRESSOR
CO2 COOLER
HIGH TEMPERATURE RECUPERATOR
46
12Limestone LOW TEMPERATURE RECUPERATOR
32
33
Bypass CO2 Compressor
38
39
41
37
FLUE GAS COOLER
17
22
18
42
Vent
O2
11
40
34
35
36CO2
TURBINE
10
45
5
7
8
923
24
FD Fan
PA Fan
N2 Heater
20
Knockout Water
ID Fan
21
44
13
Infiltration Air
• Baseline configuration
• Reheat sCO2 turbine
• Intercooled 2-stage main sCO2compressor
• Reheat sCO2 turbine and Intercooled main sCO2compressor
Oxy-CFB Coal-fired Indirect sCO2 Power PlantFour sCO2 cycle configurations analyzed
MAC1 Cryogenic ASU2Ambient Air
3
Oxy-Circulating
Fluidized Bed Combustor
14
Coal 11
BottomAsh
BagHouse
19
17
15
LP CO2Compressor w/
Intercooling
CO2 Drying 30
Knockout Water
CO2 Product
5
4
7
8
27
Fly Ash
6
28Interstage Cooling
CO2 Purification 29
Compression/Pumping
CO2 Compression, Drying, and Purification Unit
Interstage Knockout
31
High Temperature Recuperator
46
12Limestone LOW TEMPERATURE RECUPERATOR33
44
Flue Gas Cooler
22
49
50
Very High Temperature Recuperator
32
43
Bypass CO2 Compressor
38
40
37
42
CO2 Cooler
26
Knockout Water
Vent
O2
HP CO2 TURBINE
IP CO2 TURBINE
10
9
20
34
35
36
45
47
48
23
24
FD Fan
PA Fan
ID Fan
21
13
Infiltration Air
1618
N2 Heater
MAIN CO2 COMPRESSOR
39
41
Note: Block Flow Diagram is not intended to represent a complete process. Only major process streams and equipment are shown.
MAC1 Cryogenic ASU2Ambient Air
3
Oxy-Circulating
Fluidized Bed Combustor
14
Coal
BottomAsh
BagHouse
19
16
15
LP CO2Compressor w/
Intercooling
CO2 Drying 30
Knockout Water
CO2 Product
4
26
27
Fly Ash
6
28Interstage Cooling
CO2 Purification 29
Compression/Pumping
CO2 Compression, Drying, and Purification Unit
Interstage Knockout
31
MAIN CO2 COMPRESSOR
CO2 COOLER
HIGH TEMPERATURE RECUPERATOR
46
12Limestone LOW TEMPERATURE RECUPERATOR
32
33
Bypass CO2 Compressor
38
39
41
37
FLUE GAS COOLER
17
22
18
42
Vent
O2
11
40
34
35
36CO2
TURBINE
10
45
5
7
8
923
24
FD Fan
PA Fan
N2 Heater
20
Knockout Water
ID Fan
21
44
13
Infiltration Air
MAC1 Cryogenic ASU2Ambient Air
3
Oxy-Circulating
Fluidized Bed Combustor
14
Coal 11
BottomAsh
LP CO2Compressor w/
Intercooling
CO2 Drying 30
Knockout Water
CO2 Product
5
4
7
8
27
6
28Interstage Cooling
CO2 Purification 29
Compression/Pumping
CO2 Compression, Drying, and Purification Unit
Interstage Knockout
High Temperature Recuperator
12Limestone LOW TEMPERATURE RECUPERATOR33
44
Flue Gas Cooler
22
Main CO2 Compressor
Stage 1
Bypass CO2 Compressor
38
40
41
37
42
Intercooler
Main CO2 Compressor
Stage 2
CO2 Cooler
26
Vent
O2
10
9
34
35
36
39
45
23
24
FD Fan
PA Fan
21
13
Infiltration Air
31
46
32
CO2 TURBINE
BagHouse
19
16
15
Fly Ash
FLUE GAS COOLER
1718
N2 Heater
20
Knockout Water
ID Fan
MAC1 Cryogenic ASU2Ambient Air
3
Oxy-Circulating
Fluidized Bed Combustor
14
Coal 11
BottomAsh
BagHouse
19
17
15
LP CO2Compressor w/
Intercooling
CO2 Drying 30
Knockout Water
CO2 Product
5
4
7
8
27
Fly Ash
6
28Interstage Cooling
CO2 Purification 29
Compression/Pumping
CO2 Compression, Drying, and Purification Unit
Interstage Knockout
31
High Temperature Recuperator
46
12Limestone LOW TEMPERATURE RECUPERATOR33
44
Flue Gas Cooler
22
49
50
Very High Temperature Recuperator
32
43
Main CO2 Compressor
Stage 1
Bypass CO2 Compressor
38
40
41
37
42
Intercooler
Main CO2 Compressor
Stage 2
CO2 Cooler
26
Knockout Water
Vent
O2
HP CO2 TURBINE
IP CO2 TURBINE
10
9
20
34
35
36
39
45
47
48
23
24
FD Fan
PA Fan
ID Fan
21
13
Infiltration Air
1618
N2 Heater
Source: NETL
8
• Relative to the steam Rankine cycles:• At 620 °C, sCO2 cycles are 1.1 – 3.2
percentage points higher in efficiency• At 760 °C, sCO2 cycles are 2.6 – 4.3
percentage points higher• The addition of reheat improves sCO2
cycle efficiency by 1.3 – 1.5 percentage points
• The addition of main compressor intercooling improves efficiency by 0.4 – 0.6 percentage points
• Main compressor intercooling reduces compressor power requirements for both the main and bypass compressors
Summary of Overall Plant HHV Efficiencies
620 °C760 °C
30
32
34
36
38
40
42
Rankine Base IC Reheat Reheat+IC
33.634.7
35.336.2
36.836.9
39.5 39.940.8 41.2
Plan
t Effi
cien
cy (H
HV %
)
Power Summary (MW) B22F Base IC Reheat Reheat+ICCoal Thermal Input 1,635 1,586 1,557 1,519 1,494sCO2 Turbine Power 721 1,006 933 980 913CO2 Main Compressor 160 154 148 142CO2 Bypass Compressor 124 60 117 58Net sCO2 Cycle Power 721 711 708 704 702Air Separation Unit 85 83 81 79 78Carbon Purification Unit 60 56 55 54 53Total Auxiliaries, MWe 171 161 158 154 152Net Power, MWe 550 550 550 550 550
Source: NETL
9
• Note that there is significant uncertaintyin the CFB and sCO2 component capital costs (-15% to +50%)
• Large capital cost uncertainties being addressedin projects funded by NETL, EPRI and OEM(s):
• sCO2 turbine (GE, Doosan, Siemens)• Recuperators (Thar Energy, Brayton Energy, Altex)• Primary heat exchanger (B&W, GE)
• sCO2 cases have comparable COE to steam Rankine plant at 620 °C, and lowerCOE for 760 °C cases
• Main compressor intercooling improves COE 2.2 – 3.5 $/MWh• Low cost means of reducing sCO2 cycle mass flow
• Reheat reduces the COE for the 620 °C cases, but increases COE for turbine inlet temperatures of 760 °C
• Due to the high cost of materials for the reheat portions of the cycle in 760 °C cases
Summary of COE Steam Rankine vs. sCO2 Cases
760 °C620 °C
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
Rankine Base IC Reheat Reheat+IC
123.2120.0
117.8120.8
118.5
125.7128.2
124.7 126.0123.0
COE
( $/M
Wh)
Source: NETL
w/o transportation and storage (T&S) costs
10
• Reference: Supercritical Oxy-combustion CFB with Auto-refrigerated CPU (Case B22F)
• $0/tonne CO2 Revenue• 550 MWe
• COE reductions are relative to an air fired, supercritical PC coal plant with CCS (B12B)
• Higher efficiency and lower COE for sCO2 cycles relative to steam
• Large uncertainty in commercial scale sCO2 component costs
• Further improvements to the sCO2 cycle are currently under investigation
Comparison of sCO2 versus Rankine CasesCOE vs. Process Efficiency Analysis, with CCS
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48
COE
(with
out T
&S) (
$/M
Wh)
Net Plant HHV Efficiency for Coal Plant with Adv. Cycle (%)
Oxy-CFB (B22F)
10% reduction in COE
from B12B
20% reduction in COE
from B12B
X = 100%
X = 140%
X = 𝑨𝒅𝒗. 𝑺𝒚𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒎 𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕𝑷𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒓 𝑰𝒔𝒍𝒂𝒏𝒅+𝑪𝒐𝒎𝒃𝒖𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒓𝑹𝒆𝒇.𝑺𝒚𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒎 𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕𝑷𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒓 𝑰𝒔𝒍𝒂𝒏𝒅+𝑪𝒐𝒎𝒃𝒖𝒔𝒕𝒐𝒓
620 °C sCO2
760 °C sCO2
Oxy-CFB(B24F)
SC Cycles (620 °C)AUSC Cycles (760 °C)
Baseline COE($133.2/MWh)
Air-PC(B12B)
Source: NETL
11
• NETL Study Objective: Develop a performance and cost baseline for a syngas-fired direct sCO2cycle
• Gasification-direct sCO2 plant design:• Low pressure cryogenic Air Separation Unit (ASU) with
99.5% oxygen purity [3]• Down-selected to commercial Shell gasifier with standard
AGR technology• Dry-fed gasifier with high cold gas efficiency
• CO2 purification unit (CPU) used to meet CO2 pipeline purity specifications
• sCO2 turbine cooling flows included [4]• Condensing sCO2 cycle operation (CIT = 27 °C)• Thermal integration between sCO2 cycle, gasifier, and
Balance of Plant (BOP)• Preheats syngas and sCO2 prior to combustion• Includes process steam plant for BOP thermal duties
Analysis of Integrated Gasification Direct-Fired sCO2 Power Cycle
CO2
StorageP
TC
CoolerCooler
Syngas
O2
sCO2
H2O
Combustor
Compressor
Pump
Turbine
Syngas Cooler
Illinois #6 Coal
ASU
N2
ShellGasifier
QuenchCOS
H2SS
Dryer
Air
Q
LTR HTR
Cooling sCO2
Sulfinol(AGR)
Claus Plant
Syngas
Source: NETL
12
sCO2 and IGCC Economic Comparison• sCO2 Total Plant Costs are similar relative to
reference IGCC plant:• Higher syngas cooler and ASU costs• Lower gas cleanup and CO2 storage compression costs• Comparable Power cycle + HRSG + Steam Plant costs
• Case 2 TPC is 5% lower than the Baseline sCO2Case
• Syngas cooler cost reduced by eliminating HT sCO2preheating
• sCO2 cycle cost increases with CO2 flow rate, recuperator duty, and increased power output
• sCO2 plants have lower COE than IGCC plant• TPC better on a $/MW basis• sCO2 Baseline COE is 10% lower than IGCC plant,
Case 2 is 20% lower• Case 2 has 11% lower COE compared to Baseline sCO2
plant, due to lower TPC and increased efficiency
Parameter IGCC [5] sCO2Baseline
sCO2Case 2
Capital Costs (TPC, $1,000)Coal Handling System 43,156 41,775 41,775Coal Prep and Feed 218,724 199,571 199,571Feedwater & Miscellaneous BOP 65,849 21,252 21,363Gasifier and Accessories 429,678 667,292 540,793Cryogenic ASU 251,490 346,824 348,623Gas Cleanup & Piping 323,580 160,519 160,528CO2 Compression & Storage 81,688 60,601 61,460sCO2 Cycle/Comb. Turbine & Acc. 160,049 261,793 290,387HRSG Ductwork & Stack 56,527 0 0Steam Plant 85,322 34,428 29,214Cooling Water System 39,217 39,523 39,332Balance of Plant 222,322 226,634 230,227Total Plant Cost (TPC) 1,977,603 2,060,211 1,963,273
Operating & Maintenance Costs ($1,000/yr)Fixed O&M 71,389 76,877 73,508Variable O&M 45,146 45,479 43,573Fuel 111,740 104,867 104,867COE (w/o T&S) (2011$/MWh) 152.6 137.3 122.7
For discussion purposes only do not cite or reference
13
• Thermal integration in Case 2 improves thermal efficiency by 2.9 percentage points relative to Baseline sCO2 case
• Both cases compare favorably to the EPRI sCO2 study, which does not include turbine blade cooling or combustor pressure drops [3]
• sCO2 cases deliver higher efficiency than IGCC cases with a gas turbine + steam combined cycle power island
• Change to GE gasifier may improve efficiency [5]• Optimized sCO2 outperforms advanced (AHT) and
transformational hydrogen turbine (THT) cases from the IGCC Pathway Study [8]
• Turbine only comparison, with GE gasifier
Comparison with Other Gasification StudiesPlant Design and Performance Comparison
Source: NETL
For discussion purposes only do not cite or reference
14
• The COE for the sCO2 plant is 11-20% lower than the COE for the reference IGCC plant
• Decrease in COE is primarily due to the higher efficiency of the sCO2 plant
• Comparable COE to EPRI study, though this uses lower cost PRB coal [3]
• IGCC AHT and THT cases based on a GE gasifier with a radiant syngas cooler [8]
• TPC 15% lower than Shell gasifier [5]• COE $17.2/MWh lower (-11.3%)
Comparison with Other Gasification StudiesEconomic Analysis Results – COE
GE GasifierShell Gasifier
79.670.5
85.8 8774.2
61 53.6
19.517.3
1320.5
18.2
14.612.5
11.5
10.3
1313
12.2
10.29.1
26.6
24.715.8
32.1
30.7
28.1
26.4
146.18.8
131.18.3
135.98.3
162.49.8
144.79.2
122.48.4
109.57.9
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
sCO2Baseline
sCO2Case 2
EPRICase 3
Ref. IGCC- Shell
Ref.IGCC-GE
IGCCAHT
IGCCTHT
COE
(201
1$/M
Wh)
CO2 T&SFuelVariable O&MFixed O&MCapital
Source: NETL
For discussion purposes only do not cite or reference
15
Core projects of the AT programComponent development for combustion turbines and SCO2 turbomachinery
• Phase II 2016 awards 6 projects supporting 3100 F TIT and SCO2 turbomachinery
• GE - Low-Leakage Shaft End Seals for Utility-Scale sCO2 Turbo Expanders
• SwRI - High Inlet Temperature Comb. for Direct Fired Supercritical Oxy-Combustion
• Aerojet Rocketdyne – RDC for GT and System Synthesis to Exceed 65% Eff.
• GE - High Temperature Ceramic Matrix Composite (CMC) Nozzles for 65% Efficiency
• Siemens – Ceramic Matrix Composite Advanced Transition for 65% Combined Cycle
• GE – Advanced Multi-Tube Mixer Combustion for 65% Efficiency
16
Microstructure Sensitive Crystal Viscoplasticity for Ni-Base Superalloys Georgia TechEvaluation of Flow and Heat Transfer Inside Lean Pre-Mixed Combustor Systems Under Reacting Flow Conditions Virginia Tech
High-Pressure Turbulent Flame Speeds and Chemical Kinetics of Syngas Blends with and without Impurities Texas A&M
New Mechanistic Models of Creep-Fatigue Interactions for Gas Turbine Components Purdue UniversityEffects of Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) on Turbulent Combustion and Emissions in Advanced Gas Turbine Combustors with High-Hydrogen-Content (HHC) Fuels Purdue University
Thermally Effective and Efficient Cooling Technologies for Advanced Gas Turbines U. North DakotaAbradable Sealing Materials for Emerging IGCC-Based Turbine System U. California, IrvineAn Experimental and Modeling Study of NOX-CO Formation in High Hydrogen Content Fuels Combustion in Gas Turbine Applications U. South Carolina
Predictive Large Eddy Simulation Modeling and Validation of Turbulent Flames and Flashback in Hydrogen Enriched Gas Turbines U. Texas at Austin
Investigation of Autoignition and Combustion Stability of High Pressure Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Oxycombustion Georgia Tech
Chemical Kinetic Modeling Development and Validation Experiments for Direct Fired Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Combustor U. Central Florida
A Joint Experimental/Computational Study of Non-Idealities in Practical Rotating Detonation Engines U. MichiganRevolutionizing Turbine Cooling with Micro-Architectures Enabled by Direct Metal Laser Sintering Ohio StateAdvancing Pressure Gain Combustion in Terrestrial Turbine Systems Purdue UniversityHigh Temperature, Low NOX Combustor Concept Development Georgia TechUnderstanding Transient Combustion Phenomena in Low-NOx Gas Turbines Penn State
Effect of Mixture Concentration Inhomogeneity on Detonation Properties in Pressure Gain Combustion Penn State
Design, Fabrication and Performance Characterization of Near-Surface Embedded Cooling Channels (NSECC) with an Oxide Dispersion Strengthened (ODS) Coating Layer U. Pittsburgh
UTSR Project Portfolio Existing / Active Projects
17
Discrete Element Roughness Modeling For Design Optimization Of Additively And Conventionally Manufactured Internal Turbine Cooling Passages PSU
High-Frequency Transverse Combustion Instabilities In Low-Nox Gas Turbines GA Tech
Real-Time Health Monitoring For GT Components Using Online Learning And High Dimensional Data GA Tech
Improving NOx Entitlement with Axial Staging Embry-Riddle
Integrated Transpiration and Lattice Cooling Systems Developed by Additive Manufacturing with Oxide-Dispersion-Strengthened Alloys U of Pitt
Integrated TBC/EBC for SiC Fiber Reinforced SiC Matrix Composites for Next-Generation Gas Turbines Clemson
Development of High Performance Ni-Base Alloys for Gas Turbine Wheels using a Coprecipitation Approach OSU
Optical Monitoring of Operating GT Blade Coatings Under Extreme Environments UCF
Fuel Injection Dynamics and Composition Effects on RDE Performance Michigan
UTSR Project PortfolioNew 2017 UTSR Awards
18
• Collaboration between DOE/NETL, Penn State, and Pratt & Whitney
• Working with NASA, DOD, OEMs• One of the world’s leading gas turbine test
facilities for aerodynamics and heat transfer
Steady Thermal Aero Research Turbine (START) FacilityGovernment, Industry, and Academia Collaboration
Settling Chamber
Venturi
TURBINE
Mot
orSt
arte
r
Overhead Crane
CoolantSystem Flow Meters
Building Back Wall
Roof Exhaust
Turbine Cooling Air
RoofIntake
COMPRESSORS
Motor
Motor
By-Pass
PLC
Mot
orSt
arte
r Controls+ DAQ System
COMPRESSOR ROOM (45’ x 35’)
CONTROL ROOM(25’ x 10’)
TEST BAY ROOM(45’ x 40’)
Tank* OilH2O Treatment
H2O Pre-Treatment
Dyno
*Heat
er
RoofIntake
19
NETL RIC Advanced Turbines ResearchGoal – Develop technology toward achieving the program goal of 3-5% points increase in efficiency.Approach – Perform R&D in three important areas: Combustion, Heat Transfer and Advanced Cycles. Perform systems analyses to support research focus and verify performance targets.
Pressure Gain Combustion*Improving efficiency through pressure increase across combustor.
∆P < 0
∆P > 0
C T
C T
Conventional “Constant Pressure “ Combustion has pressure loss across combustor
“Constant Volume” Combustion incorporates a Pressure Gain with combustion
Aerothermal and Heat Transfer
Improving efficiency by increasing firing temperature and reducing cooling load.
mdotcTc
Tw
mdot∞T∞U∞
z
coolant
Supercritical CO2 CyclesImproving efficiency through unique properties of supercritical CO2 as a working fluid.
Systems AnalysisSupport research focus and verify performance targets.
25
30
35
40
45
50
SOA
Refe
renc
e
Coal
Pum
p
War
m G
as C
lean
up
Adv.
Mem
bran
e
Adv.
Tur
bine
(26
50°F
)
Ion
Tran
spor
t Mem
bran
e
Efficiency (% HHV)
IGCC with CCSIGCC w/o CCSSCPC w/o CCS
*Paid for by Advanced Combustion Systems Program
20
Objectives• Plan, design, build, and operate
a 10 MWe sCO2 Pilot Plant Test Facility• Demonstrate the operability of the
sCO2 power cycle• Verify performance of components
(turbomachinery, recuperators, compressors, etc.)
• Evaluate system and component performance capabilities• Steady state, transient, load following,
limited endurance operation• Demonstrate potential for producing a lower
COE and thermodynamic efficiency greater than 50%
Supercritical Carbon Dioxide 10 MWe Pilot Plant Test FacilityGas Technology Institute
GAS TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTEFE0028979
Partners: SwRI, GE Global Research10/1/2016 – 9/30/2022
BUDGET
DOE Participant Total
$79,999,226 $33,279,408 $113,278,634
21
• Competitive market place• US, International, and secondary markets
• Synergies with DOE and DOD• US universities fully engaged• Significant deployment of NGCC• Significant small business opportunities• FE invests in basic R&D at the component
scale leading to early applied solutions• OEMs eager to deploy components in the
existing fleet leading to TRL acceleration• New products by OEMs can then
incorporate FE sponsored advanced technology at lower risk
Technology MaturationTurbine technology market provides a special case for TRL acceleration
Turbine market place accelerates this model for TRL maturation process
22
• Status of the current CC goal 65 %• Are higher efficiencies on our current path
• Advanced manufacturing to realize GT performance goals
• Additive, coatings, castings, MRO, ceramics, materials, digital solutions, instrumentation, etc.
• Raising the digital twin• The existing fleet• Advanced power systems• Technology maturation
Next Steps
23
• Advanced Turbines Program focused on three areas• Combined cycle combustion turbine• Turbomachinery for SCO2 power cycles• Pressure gain combustion
• System to realize these benefits• Technology / market synergies in manufacturing, across
agencies, applications etc. will facilitate program success
Summary