Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Mathieu Lucquiaud, Hannah Chalmers, Jon Gibbins

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Mathieu Lucquiaud, Hannah Chalmers, Jon Gibbins"— Presentation transcript:

1 Mathieu Lucquiaud, Hannah Chalmers, Jon Gibbins
UKCCSC meeting, Nottingham University, 18/04/2007 Ongoing work within the Mechanical Engineering Department, Imperial College, London Mathieu Lucquiaud, Hannah Chalmers, Jon Gibbins

2 INTRODUCTION The first generation of full-scale CCS plants is likely going to be built within the next 5-10 years worldwide. The EU has announced indicative targets : 12 CCS plants before 2015, CCS becomes routine by 2020. Some of these plants will be built in the UK and will start to operate with capture by But most plants to be built worldwide before 2020 will operate for a significant part of their life without CCS. Some answers to the issues associated with CCS in the power plant industry?

Reduce the energy penalty associated with CO2 capture 1/3 of this penalty => CO2 compression 2/3 of this penalty => Solvent regeneration by taking steam from the steam turbines For a power plant user: steam is electricity and electricity is money Better integration of the CO2 capture plant with the turbines/steam cycle is required

How a tight integration affect the operability of the plant? For the first generation of CCS plant the operability of the capture plant is likely to be low during the 1st years of operation These plants have to be able to operate without CO2 capture to keep the lights on !!! Consequences on plant/turbine/steam cycle design

Plants which have the ability to include CO2 capture when the necessary regulatory or economic drivers are in place Objective: 1. avoid the risk of “stranded” assets for the power plant industry 2. avoid consequent carbon lock-in for society Minimal requirements: 1. Inclusion of sufficient space and access for the additional plant 2. Identification of a reasonable route towards CO2 storage => IEA GHG report on capture-ready power plants to be released in 2007

For post-combustion capture some pre-investments in the steam cycle can be economically justified and allow to operate the plant: 1. with similar performance to standards units without CCS 2. with close performances to new-build CCS units 3. with a reduced retrofit time/plant outage 4. without capture after retrofit if required Facing the uncertainty of technology developments 1.Oxyfuel or post-combustion capture-ready for pulverised coal power plants 2. Design for a solvent with advanced performance but retrofit with post-combustion capture with today available solvent

Fossil-fuelled power plants are used to follow electricity seasonal/daily variation. Increasing integration of intermittent renewable electricity sources within the grid Pulverised coal power plants are likely to be operated more often at part-load in future. Reactivity to electricity demand variation is going to become a key issue. No existing data of coal plants with CO2 capture operated at part-load => Potential for flexible operation of pulverised coal power plants with CO2 capture, Conference paper to be presented in 2007

8 ENHANCED FLEXIBILITY with post-combustion capture(1)
It is possible to improve the value of plants with CO2 capture by delaying/altering the energy penalty associated with post-combustion capture. Electricity selling price varies seasonally but also daily. Selling electricity when people turn their kettles on is highly profitable!! Solvent storage/CO2 venting can be used to alter/delay the energy penalty associated with CO2 capture It can increase plant electricity output by approximately 20% when required for post-combustion capture Initial Assessment of Flexibility of Pulverised Coal Fired Power Plants with CO2 Capture, Conference paper to be presented in 2007

9 ENHANCED FLEXIBILITY with post-combustion capture(2)
It is done by by-passing the solvent reboiler and switching off the CO2 compression train for a short period. Solvent storage + delayed regeneration has no additional CO2 emissions Economic trade-off between solvent storage + delayed regeneration and CO2 venting. Possible additional revenues for power plant users depending on CO2 prices and electricity selling prices. Performance when storing/regenerating solvent needs has been partially characterised at Imperial => Initial evaluation of the impact of post-combustion capture of carbon dioxide on supercritical pulverised coal power plant part load performance, Fuel, 2007

10 FURTHER WORK within the next 6-12 months
Characterise plant performance at part-load and with varying levels of CO2 capture Develop model of the post-combustion capture plant => New DTI project + BCURA (British Coal Utilisation Research Association) project with Chemical Engineering Department at Imperial College Co-combustion of biomass + coal. => BCURA project Develop techno-economic methods to value flexibility of power plants CCS deployment option, including in China => Near Zero Emission in China (NZEC) project


12 CO2 compressed for transport
turbine island STORAGE TANK 2 to stack SCRUBBER STRIPPER FLUE GAS COOLER SOLVENT REBOILER STORAGE TANK 1 CO2 compressed for transport turbine island Steam from turbine island Cooling water solvent Steam cycle condensate Condensate from CO2 Flue gas CO2

13 Boiler Reheater Valve 1 Valve 2 Generator Heat Recovery from CO2 Plant
HP IP LP LP Heat Recovery from CO2 Plant Reheater Condenser Spray Heat to Solvent Reboiler

Download ppt "Mathieu Lucquiaud, Hannah Chalmers, Jon Gibbins"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google