Emerging Energy Issues and New Technologiesminingusa.com/pem/PPT/Andrewsx1.pdf · 7,950 in 2030...

Emerging Energy Issues and New Technologies

University of KentuckyCenter for Applied Energy

Research

Rodney AndrewsDirector

Email: [email protected]: 859/ 257-0306

Agenda

• Energy Demand and Availability

• Coal Conversion Technologies– Gasification– Gasification– Coal to liquids / gas

• Carbon Management• Future Directions and

Impacts

Photo art: A. Benlow

USA Energy Consumption

30

40

50

60

Petroleum

Coal

ProjectionsHistory

quadrillion Btu

30

40

50

60

Petroleum

Coal

ProjectionsHistory

quadrillion Btu

Source: AEO 2007DOE/EIA-0383(2007)

0

10

20

30

1980 1990 2000 2005 2010 2020 2030

Natural Gas

NuclearNonhydro renewables

Hydropower0

10

20

30

1980 1990 2000 2005 2010 2020 2030

Natural Gas

NuclearNonhydro renewables

Hydropower

US Production and Consumption

80

100

120

140

Net imports

Consumption

ProjectionsHistory

quadrillion Btu

80

100

120

140

Net imports

Consumption

ProjectionsHistory

80

100

120

140

Net imports

Consumption

ProjectionsHistory

quadrillion Btu


0

20

40

60

1980 1990 2000 2005 2010 2020 2030

Production

0

20

40

60

1980 1990 2000 2005 2010 2020 2030

Production

0

20

40

60

1980 1990 2000 2005 2010 2020 2030

Production

Needed: 1,300 New Power PlantsA Conservative Estimate

1190 GWNeeded Capacity Growth

3,500

4,000

Nu

mb

er o

f P

ow

er P

lan

ts

1300 new plants

Source: EIA/DOE

797 GW

1999 2020

1999 2005 2010 2015 2020

2,500

3,000

Year

Nu

mb

er o

f P

ow

er P

lan

ts

Nationally Important to Make Right Choices for Infrastructure Investments With 50+ Year Lifetime

Generation Capacity Growth is Primarily Coal

40

60

OtherNatural Gas and OilCoal

gigawatts of net summer capacity

40

60

OtherNatural Gas and OilCoal

gigawatts of net summer capacity

0

20

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

0

20

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030


U.S. Electricity Generation Capacity Additions by Fuel, 2006-2030 (gigawatts)

40

60Natural Gas

Coal

Renewables

0

20

2006-2010 2011-2015 2016-2020 2021-2025 2026-2030

Annual Energy Outlook 2007

Nuclear

U.S. Coal Consumption by Sector,2005, 2010, 2020, and 2030 (quadrillion Btu)

20

30

40

22.824.2

27.5

ElectricPower

35.0

0

10

20

2005 2010 2020 2030

Coal toLiquids

Other


Agenda




Impacts


Coal for Power Generation

• Few coal fired power stations built in recent past – gas believed to be cheap, plentiful and clean

• Future: carbon taxes and global warming issues critical

• Nuclear power for power generation (currently about 20%) slow to increase

• Nuclear power for power generation (currently about 20%) slow to increase

• More recent combustion technologies: – supercritical and ultra-supercritical steam

systems for high efficiencies– fluidized bed combustors (FBC/CFBC)

• IGCC• Poly-generation

Coal Conversion

• Combustion to produce steam/power• Gasification with Combined Cycle (IGCC)• Gasification to produce syngas (H2 with

CO)CO)– Syngas to fuels (indirect liquefaction)– Syngas to chemicals, including methanol– Syngas to hydrogen– Syngas to synthetic natural gas (SNG/CTG)

• Direct coal liquefaction

Gasification: Syngas Uses

Source: Eastman

Operating Gasifiers

• World-wide about 117 operating plants; 385 gasifiers; 49% coal fed

• Use: 37% for chemicals, 36% for FT, 19% power generation

• Extensive overseas experience– South Africa: 97 units – now 80 (sub-bit. coal)– China (coal)– Europe (coal and biomass)

• USA: Wabash (petcoke), Tampa (petcoke with coal), Great Plains (lignite), Eastman Chemicals (coal)

• Many (~24) US units in planning phase

Reductions in Carbon EmissionsBy Adoption of New Power Generation Technologies

PC (2000)

IGCC (2000)

PC (2010) Coal

Gen

erat

ion

Tec

hn

olo

gy

IGCC (2010)

0 25 50 75 100

Gen

erat

ion

Tec

hn

olo

gy

NGCC (2010)

NGCC (2000) Gas

Percent Reduction in CO2 Emissions(Relative to Average PC Plant in 1999)

Source: NETL, Scott Klara

All Technologies with Sequestration

Agenda




Impacts


Alternative Liquid Fuels

• This year’s reference case anticipates … substantial development of unconventional production over the next 25 years. The prices in the AEO2007 reference case are high enough to trigger entry into the market of some alternative energy supplies that are expected to become economically viable in the range of $25 to $50 per barrel. They include oil viable in the range of $25 to $50 per barrel. They include oil sands, ultra-heavy oils, gas-to-liquids (GTL), and CTL.

• AEO2007 includes, for the first time, a reorganized breakdown of fuel categories that reflects the increasing importance, both now and in the future, of conversion technologies that can produce liquid fuels from natural gas, coal, and biomass.

Coal to Liquids (FT)

• Need for liquid fuels to accommodate projected growth, especially in transportation

• Strong growth and US driving preferences (compare with Europe)

• High crude prices• US per capita one of the highest energy users• Favorable coal reserves• Favorable coal reserves• Uncertain time line for H2 economy

• Growing crude imports and strategic concerns• Competition from China and India

Demand for Coal to Liquids will Dominate Non-Electric Coal Use

Coke Plants

Other Industrial

Coal to Liquids

Residential andCommercial

1.5

2.0quadrillion Btu

Coke Plants

Other Industrial

Coal to Liquids

Residential andCommercial

1.5

2.0quadrillion Btu

92 million tons


0.0

0.5

1.0

2005 2015 20300.0

0.5

1.0

2005 2015 2030

92 million tons

Coal Liquefaction: Two MethodsDirect: fine low-ash coal with

catalyst; high pressure (3500psi/230 bar+) and temperature (750°F/400°C) reacts with hydrogen to produce liquid hydrocarbons and char-like residue

Indirect: coal gasified with steam and oxygen and resultant CO and H2 (syngas) is catalytically converted to liquid hydrocarbons at about 375psi (25 bar) and 400-630°F (200-340°C)

and char-like residue

Indirect Liquefaction: Fischer-Tropsch (FT)

• Invented in 1920’s• Developed pre WW II

Germany• Commercialized in South • Commercialized in South

Africa 1955 and again late 70’s/early 80’s

• Other ventures based on natural gas built and more in progress

• Coal based: capital significantly higher than natural gas based – but: cost of coal versus natural gas

FT Products and Characteristics

Coal or

Coal-to-Liquids

Coal49,200 TPD

Synthesis Gas Cleaning/

Conditioning

Coal Prep

Coal Gasification

Fischer Tropsch

Synthesis

Product Recovery

and Upgrading

Carbon Dioxide Compression

CO2 to Storage16,100 TPD

CO2 CO2

Necessary hydrogen production / correction

Air

Oxygen

Sulfur

Sulfur Recovery

Air Separation

Acid Gas

Power Generation

Power

CO21790 TPDStack

LPG NAPHTHA

Diesel120,000 BPD

Hurdles to Implementation• Lack of domestic familiarity

– Not a power plant, not a refinery

• Capital Investment– 10,000 bbl/day: $1 billion– 10,000 bbl/day: $1 billion– 30,000 bbl/day: $2.5 billion– 60,000 bbl/day: $4 billion

• Volatility in the cost of petroleum and gas

Work Force Issues for Coal-to-Liquids and Coal-to-Gas

• No trained workforce exists– Seen as barrier to construction and operation of CTL

• Wyoming / Rentech Project Example– 10,000 bbl/day CTL plant– Staffing estimate

• 23 professionals• 112 operators• 112 operators• 47 other

• Extrapolate to 5 to 8 million bbl/day– 10,000 to 20,000 new engineers and scientists– chemical, mechanical, electronics, petroleum, and industrial

engineering, chemists– PLUS skilled operators and technicians

Sasol Plants At Secunda ~ 1985

Initial capacity: 2 x 50,000 bbl/d, Then 40% of SA’s fuel needs, now 28%; Cost $6bn; Site 13 km2 (~3,200 acres) Two plants built sequentially with $500m savingConstruction work force 28,700 from 39 nationalities250 million man-hours. Now 160,000 bbl/d

Agenda




Impacts


5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

U.S. Energy-Related Carbon Dioxide Emissions, 1980-2030(million metric tons)

6,214 in 2010

6,944 in 2020

History Projections

7,950 in 20305,945 in 2005

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

Carbon Dioxide Emission Intensity, 1980-2030(metric tons per million 2000 dollars of GDP)

486 in 2010

407 in 2020


353 in 2030

5

6

7

8

9

5

6

7

8

9

5.9 6.1

7.1

5.96.2

6.9

8.0

5.96.3

7.3

8.7

Electric Power

6.6

Carbon Dioxide Emissionsbillion metric tons

0

1

2

3

4

0

1

2

3

4

2005 2010 2020 2030 2005 2010 2020 2030 2005 2010 2020 2030

Transportation

Industrial

Low Growth Reference High Growth

ResidentialCommercial


Electricity Generation by Fuel in Two Cases,1990-2020 (billion kilowatt-hours)

Kyoto Reference Case 1990+9% Case5000

4000

3000

Renewable Hydropower NuclearPetroleumNatural GasCoal

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

2000

1000

0

Administration Response to Unratified Kyoto Treaty2000 EIA

Technology and InnovationCan Lead to Reductions in Carbon Emissions

FuelSwitching

ImproveEfficiency

Demand SideNatural Gas

SequesterCarbon

ReducePopulation

ReduceGDP

Capture &Storage

Supply Side

Nuclear

EnhanceNatural Sinks

Renewables


Reductions in Carbon EmissionsBy Demand-side Efficiency

•Insulate your house•Thermal windows•High efficiency appliances•Water-saving devices•Natural lighting/solar mass

•Eat lower on thefood chain

•Park your SUV •Take the Bus•Higher Price at

the Pump•Demand CAFÉ•Buy the “Hybrid”

•Encourage industrialefficiency

•“Green” chemistry•Recycle your waste

food chain•Get close to your

food

Reductions in Carbon EmissionsBy Greater Supply-side Efficiency

Electric Power

CoalProduction

Petroleum Natural Gas

Exploration &Production

Exploration &Production

Refining &Delivery

Transportation

Pipelines & Storage

DistributedPowerGeneration

Power Delivery

Power Generation

Source: USDOE

Reductions in Carbon EmissionsBy Adoption of New Power Generation Technologies

PC (2000)

IGCC (2000)

PC (2010) Coal

Gen

erat

ion

Tec

hn

olo

gy

IGCC (2010)

0 25 50 75 100

Gen

erat

ion

Tec

hn

olo

gy

NGCC (2010)

NGCC (2000) Gas

Percent Reduction in CO2 Emissions(Relative to Average PC Plant in 1999)

Source: NETL, Scott Klara

All Technologies with Sequestration

Technology and InnovationCan Lead to Reductions in Carbon Emissions

FuelSwitching

ImproveEfficiency

Demand SideNatural Gas

SequesterCarbon

ReducePopulation

ReduceGDP

Capture &Storage

Supply Side

Nuclear

EnhanceNatural Sinks

Renewables


Utilization or

Conversion???

CO2 Capture from Electricity Generation

Lowering the Energy Penalty of CO2 Capture

• Post-Combustion Capture: PC + MEA (28-34%)– Steam consumption for stripper: 20% of gross power output– Booster fan and agent pump for MEA scrubber: 3-4% of gross power output

• Pre-combustion Capture: IGCC (total 15-24%) – ASU + oxygen compression: 8-12% of gross power output– Selexol CO2 separation: 2% of gross power output2

• In-situ Capture: Oxy-Fuel Combustion (total 22-32%)– ASU: 15-20% of gross power output– Flue gas recirculation: 2% of gross power output– Possible CO2 further enrichment (unknown)

** Compression Train: 5-10% of gross power output

CO2 Capture from Coal-to-Liquids

Coal49,200 TPD

Synthesis Gas Cleaning/

Conditioning

Coal Prep

Coal Gasification

Fischer Tropsch

Synthesis

Product Recovery

and Upgrading

Carbon Dioxide Compression

CO2 to Storage16,100 TPD

CO2 CO2

Necessary hydrogen production / correction

Air

Oxygen

Sulfur

Sulfur Recovery

Air Separation

Acid Gas

Power Generation

Power

CO21790 TPDStack

LPG NAPHTHA

Diesel120,000 BPD

Mitigating Carbon Impact from the Production of FT Fuels

• Gas Cleaning/Conditioning:– To reduce the initial make of CO2– To reduce hydrogen demand

• Improved Catalysts – Reduce unwanted CO2 formation (for water-gas-shift)– Longer life/aging of catalysts – Longer life/aging of catalysts – Increased robustness (mechanical attrition resistance) – Catalyst for improved product selectivity and conversion

• Use of biomass in FT processes– Biomass gasification– Gas cleaning– Utilization of biomass as hydrogen source

• Co-feed of Coal and Biomass for CTL

Agenda




Impacts


Projections to 2025

• Current coal production about 1.1 billion t/year

• Additional needs 1.3 billion t/year

• Economic multiplier: Over next 20 years it will contribute to – 1.4 million new jobs – 1.4 million new jobs – GDP gains of $3 trillion

• Some concerns: – Impact on mining– Impact on the environment– Transportation of coal– Labor Force / Skills

National Coal Council Estimates

“Green Coal” Strategies

• Conventional Use of Coal to Lower CO2Emissions– Replace Natural Gas for Both Peak and Base-load

Power Generation• More fuel for direct use in the home• More fuel for direct use in the home• No transmission losses

– Displacing Petroleum via Electrification• Electrification of Transportation

• New Technologies for Emissions Control– Carbon capture and utilization

• Sequestration??

Energy Urgencies• Add New (Coal Based) Power Generation• Develop Incentives to update of coal power fleet

– Higher efficiency, lower emissions• Upgrade/strengthen our transmission infrastructure• Change the way we regulate power generation

– Include efficiency in the mix • i.e. lbs. of SO2/mmBtu to lbs. SO2/MW/hr• i.e. lbs. of SO2/mmBtu to lbs. SO2/MW/hr

• Develop a long term coal strategy for Kentucky– protect our manufacturing base– Coal to synthetic natural gas – Coal to liquid fuels– Green coal and efficiency

• There is no quick and simple “Fix” for our energy problems– Any rational strategy is multi-fuel, multi-sector– Any rational strategy must include production and efficiency together

Questions?

Graphic: Future Gen, US DoE


Emerging Energy Issues and New Technologiesminingusa.com/pem/PPT/Andrewsx1.pdf · 7,950 in 2030...

Documents

Transcript of Emerging Energy Issues and New Technologiesminingusa.com/pem/PPT/Andrewsx1.pdf · 7,950 in 2030...