combustion with carbon capture - global climate and ... engine & overall results component power...
TRANSCRIPT
Combustion with Carbon Capture:Pursuit of Efficient, Carbon‐
Mitigated PowerMitigated PowerChris F. Edwards
J R Heberle S Ramakrishnan P MobleyJ. R. Heberle, S. Ramakrishnan, P. Mobley, A. Calbry‐Muzyka, R. Pass
(JR & SPAR)
Advanced Energy Systems LaboratoryDepartment of Mechanical Engineering
Stanford University f y
Efficient, Carbon‐Mitigated “Engines”4
ork)
25%4 25%
en
|← No Sequestration|← 50% Seq. →|→| |← 90% Seq.
Efficient, Carbon Mitigated Engines
SCWAQS
100% Seq.
3.5
Exe
rgy/
MJ-
W
Super-SFAOxyPC-SFA
GE3Sh ll SFASuper
GE
Shell
SI
SI HSIM OH
29%3.5 29%
SIsum
ptio
nW
ork)
y ergy
)SI
SIH
Hyd
roge
SI
SIHSuper
Oxy
Q
2.5
3
sum
ptio
n (M
J-
6FB
LM6000
Sub.Super
ElsamSuper-SFAGE1
GE2GE3
Shell-SFAEgas
Shell-SFA Sub.
Super
EU
Super
ShellUltra
GE
Shell
SuperOxyPC
O NG
SI-H
DICILM6000D
SIH2PEM
SIMeOH
SIMeOH
CLSCMC-Ultra-Coal-NG
MCGC-RAMCGC-RB
CESMAT 40%
33%
2.5
3
40%
33%Sub
Super
IGCC
SI
SIH
CI
xerg
y C
ons
xerg
y/M
J-W
c E
ffici
ency
J-In
put-E
xe
ADGT
ICGT
HFGT
CIADGT
HCCI
PCCISI
IGCC
Oxy
IGCLMatMCUltra
IGMC
ACCESS
2
c E
xerg
y C
ons
LMS100
STIG
GTCC-H
EUDOE
GTCC-SFA
GTCC-SFA
EUDOEFGC1
FGC2ATR
OxyNG
LBCIPEM
CLCC
SOGT CASOGT CBSOGT-RASOGT RB
SOGT-ZSOGT-BA
SOGT-BB
MCNG-RA
MCNG-RB
AZEPAZEPGraz
ATR-GTCCWC-KWC-GWC-G
50%2 50%DOEPCEUPC
Ultra IGCC
-Spe
cific
Ex
MJ-
Inpu
t-Ex
Exe
rget
iM
J-W
ork/
MJICGT
GTCC
RGT LBCI
CC
PEM
SIH
GTCC
OxyATRCCCLCC
Graz
AZE
P
MCCC
1
1.5
Wor
k-S
peci
fic
GTCC HPEMSOGT-M
SOGT-CASOGT-CBSOGT-CB SOGT-RBSOGT-RC
SOGT BB
SOGT-BCSOGT-C
SOGT-K
100%
67%
1
1.5
100%
67%Wor
k- (M (MSOGTSOGTSOGT
ECFPE
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.081
Work-Specific Carbon Emission to Atmosphere (kg-C/MJ-Work)
W 100%0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08
1 100%
Work-Specific Carbon Emission to Atmosphere(kg-C/MJ-Work)
SCATR
The Goal!
Deep Saline Aquifer StorageDeep Saline Aquifer Storage
Power Plant Atm. Emissions
Coal ElectricitySolids
CO22•• Loss of efficiency from separationLoss of efficiency from separation
•• Concern over escape from buoyancyConcern over escape from buoyancy
Storage SecurityStorage Security
Adapted from IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage 2005, p. 208
Storage Security by Surface DissolutionStorage Security by Surface Dissolution
TraceNOx, SOx,PM, Hg
All not‐yet‐All not yetregulatedspecies
Dissolution and Pre‐equilibration byb i i i i lCombustion in Supercritical Water
No emissionsto atmosphere
XStill have ash,salts to returnto lithosphere
Xp
Pre‐equilibrated SequestrationPre equilibrated Sequestration
Power Plant
Coal ElectricitySolids
Brine Brine
CarbonatedBrine
•• No CONo CO22 separationseparation
•• NonNon‐‐buoyant buoyant injectantinjectant
Supercritical Water Aquifer Sequestration (a k a SCWAQS)Sequestration (a.k.a., SCWAQS)
Can be treated as a
SolidSeparator
Supercritical Water
CombustorReformer “black‐box” for current purposes
SOLIDSRECYCLE
MINERALSOLIDS
Supercritical WaterOxidation System
Heat Engine
Ai COALSlurryPreparation
Regenerator/Desalinator
AIR AirSeparation
Unit
INJECTANTAQUIFERBRINE
NITROGEN
Detailed ASU AnalysisDetailed ASU Analysis
Air NitrogenOxygenLOXPump
HX 3
LowPress.
Q3
Pump
LP
Col.
Q3
HX 1MP HPHX 3
HX 2
High
Exp.
Press.Col.
Analysis using AspenPlus. Plant based on patents by Praxair.
ASU Performance
1 4
1.6
O 2
ASU Performance
1.2
1.4
nsity
, MJ/
kg O
0.3
0.35
on
, % 51% Exergy Efficiency
0.8
1
Oxy
gen
Inte
n
Liquid Pumped ASUCompressed Gas IPCC ASU-High0 15
0.2
0.25
Dest
ruct
io
0 100 200 300 400 500Exit Pressure, bar
p gCompressed Gas IPCC ASU-Low
0.05
0.1
0.15
Exerg
y D
0
Detailed Desalinator/RegeneratorDetailed Desalinator/Regenerator
R tProducts
AIRASU
Regenerator Stream
To SCWO
OxygenLP Desal.
Q2
NITROGEN
IPPump
HPPumpsIP Desal.
SystemIP HX
LP HXp
LPPump
LP HX
Brine Econ.Slurry HX Slurry Regen.
LiftPump
InjectionPump
COAL
SlurryPrep.Slurry
Pump
Q1
AQUIFER BRINEINJECTANT
Heat Engine & Overall ResultsHeat Engine & Overall ResultsComponent Power (MW)
Brayton CycleMain HeatCOMBUSTIONTO REGEN/ y y
Compressor ‐314.4
Turbine 527.1
Net 212.7
Exchanger COMBUSTIONPRODUCTS
TO REGEN/DESAL
Net 212.7
Rankine Cycle
Condensate Pump ‐0.030
Feed Pump ‐2 69
Brayton Cycle
WorkFeed Pump 2.69
Turbine 461.6
Net 458.8
ASU 146 1Rankine CycleQ1 Q2
ASU ‐146.1
Water Pumps ‐25.5
Overall Plant 500.0
Heat Rate (LHV basis) 1364 1
Rankine Cycle Work
Heat Rejectedt E i t Heat Rate (LHV basis) 1364.1
Overall Efficiency 36.7%
to Environment
Comparison with AlternativesComparison with Alternatives40
30
35
V)
20
25
ency, %
(LHV
10
15
Efficie
0
5
Subcritical PC w/ CO2 Supercritical PC w/ IGCC w/ CO2 Capture SCWO w/ Full CaptureSubcritical PC w/ CO2 Capture
Supercritical PC w/ CO2 Capture
IGCC w/ CO2 Capture SCWO w/ Full Capture
Source: NETL, Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants, 2010
and Pre‐equilibration
Exergy DestructionExergy Destruction45
!!!
30
35
40
n, %
!!!
20
25
30
y Destruction
10
15
Exergy
0
5
Going After the Combustion LossGoing After the Combustion Loss
22
1800
20
22
24
26
2ure,
K 1700
20
22
2
28
empe
ratu
1600
Efficiency above 40% (HHV) is probable
22
24
262830
rodu
ct T
e
1400
1500Efficiency above 40% (HHV) is probable
22
2426
Pr 1400
Reactant Temperature, K600 700 800 900
Supercritical Water Aquifer Sequestrationp q q
SolidSeparator
Supercritical Water
CombustorReformer
SOLIDSRECYCLE
MINERALSOLIDS
Supercritical WaterOxidation System
Heat Engine
Ai COALSlurryPreparation
Regenerator/Desalinator
AIR AirSeparation
Unit
INJECTANTAQUIFERBRINE
NITROGEN
Fuel Processing Experimentsh h ll hin the Mitchell Research Group
Ignition of Methanol AchievedIgnition of Methanol Achieved
Reactant Flow Rates
0.20.40.6
ow R
ate
(g/s
)
oxygen
150 160 170 180 1900
Time (min.)
Mas
s Flo methanol
500
550Temperature Downstream of Burner
ture
(K)
150 160 170 180 190450
500
Ti ( i )
Tem
pera
t
Time (min.)
A Better Plant for Conventionalf dAquifer‐Based Storage?Power Plant Atm. EmissionsX
Coal
Power Plant
ElectricitySolids
No emissions to atmosphereX
COCO2•• Remove pollutants as salts Remove pollutants as salts
•• More efficient separationMore efficient separation
Supercritical Autothermal Rankine ( k )(a.k.a. SCATR)
Depicted for methane. Coal is next.
• Essentially a gas turbine cycle sitting atop a supercritical steam cycleatop a supercritical steam cycle.
• Steam preheats or has 5000:1 expansion.• CO2 self‐separates in the “condenser”.
Exergy Distribution for SCATRExergy Distribution for SCATR
242000 Effi i b 50% (HHV)
18
20
2
22
22
24
24
26
atur
e, K
1800
1900
2000
Methane Fuel47% Exergy Efficiency(44% HHV Efficiency)
Efficiency above 50% (HHV)using coal is probable.
18
20
20
22
2426
28
duct
Tem
pera
1600
1700
(44% HHV Efficiency)
Water as coolant!Water as coolant!
20
222428
30
Reactant Temperature KP
rod
600 700 800 900 1000
1500
Reactant Temperature, K
Some Points of ReferenceSome Points of ReferenceTechnology Option,Fuel Used in Analysis
Efficiency w/out Capture
Efficiencywith Capture
Total Plant Cost w/out
C t
Total Plant Cost with C ty
(Basic Specs.)p
(%, HHV)p
(%, HHV) Capture($/kW)
Capture($/kW)
Subcrit. PC, Illinois #6(165 bar, 566°C, 566°C) 36.8 26.2 1622 2942
Supercrit. PC, Illinois #6 39 3 28 4 1647 2913(241 bar, 593°C, 593°C) 39.3 28.4 1647 2913
IGCC, Illinois #6(GE Radiant & Quench) 39.0 32.6 1987 2711
IGCC, Illinois #6(CoP E Gas FSQ) 39.7 31.0 1913 2817(CoP E-Gas FSQ)IGCC, Illinois #6(Shell Dry Feed) 42.1 31.2 2217 3181
SCWAQS, PRB Coal(250 bar, 1600 K) N.A. 35.4 (40?) N.A. Unknown !!!NGCC, Nat. Gas(GE F-Class GT) 50.2 42.8 584 1226
SCATR, Methane(500 bar, 1600 K) N.A. 44.2 (50?) N.A. Unknown
Source: NETL, Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants, 2010
• Can we identify “optimal architectures” for carbon‐mitigated coal?
Experimental Combustor SchematicExperimental Combustor Schematic
Experimental Combustor DesignExperimental Combustor Design
Experimental ChallengesExperimental Challenges
• Backpressure regulator resolved• JetSeal issue resolved • Window thermal shock resolution• Window thermal shock resolution in progress