IGCC - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – IGCC PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 3b1c4a-MThiO



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

IGCC

Description:

Reliance Industries Limited IGCC Clean Coal Technology Conference 10th November,2009 - PDPU, Gandhinagar By Parthasarathi Deb Emerging Technologies 3. – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:1334
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 68
Provided by: pdpuAcInd
Learn more at: http://pdpu.ac.in
Category:
Tags: igcc

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: IGCC


1
Reliance Industries Limited
  • IGCC

Clean Coal Technology Conference 10th
November,2009 - PDPU, Gandhinagar
By
Parthasarathi Deb
2
Contents
IGCC Salient features
History of Gasification Global Indian
Types of Gasifiers
Reliance Strategy for Petcoke Utilisation
Project formulation for Petcoke Gasification
Process of Evaluation
Emerging Technologies
3
Integrated Gasification and Combined Cycle (IGCC)
Gasification Island
Air Separation Unit (ASU)
Power Island
IGCC Integration among the various Islands of
Technology.
4
Block Flow Diagram of IGCC Integration options
GASIFICATION ISLAND
Slag
Coal
Heat Recovery
Sulphur
Coal Preparation
Gasification
Gas Cleaning
Fly Ash
N2
O2
Waste N2
Clean Gas
Air
Air Separation Unit (ASU)
Gas Turbine
Air
Water
Air
Heat Recovery Steam generator (HSRG)
Feed water
Steam
Water / Steam integration
Air side ASU-CC integration
Steam Turbine
N2 side ASU-CC integration
COMBINED CYCLE
5
Existing Coal-based IGCCs
Tampa (Florida)
6
Existing Coal-based IGCCs
Buggenum (Netherlands)
7
Existing Coal-based IGCCs
Wabash (Indiana)
8
Existing Coal-based IGCCs
Puertollano (Spain)
9
Features of IGCC Technology
Efficiency
10
Features of IGCC Technology
Environment
11
Features of IGCC Technology
Environment
1. SOx , NOx and Particles SOx , NOx and
particulate emissions are comparable to or less
than those obtained in a combined cycle
using Natural Gas (NGCC). 2. Greenhouse
effect gas CO2 CO2 emission is reduced by
20 in IGCC over conventional boiler base
power plant. CO in syngas can be converted
to CO2 and production of Hydrogen can be
increased. Thus CO2 can be captured directly
using regular commercial process at a
higher pressure than extracting it from
combustion gases from conventional PC
plant or NGCC plant. 3. Water consumption
Specific consumption of water for the operation
of IGCC plant is approx. half that of
conventional plant using gas cleaning system.
12
Features of IGCC Technology
Environment
4. Other contaminants Chlorine , Mercury,
Heavy metals In IGCC operation,
Chlorine compounds are extracted from Gas by
washing with water. Heavy metals are almost
entirely captured in the slag which is a
vitrified, non leachable, inert solid.
Mercury can be removed by absorption on a bed
of active carbon for IGCC at a cost of
1/12 that of PC power plant. 5. Solid by
products Sulphur is recovered in a pure
elemental state or as sulphuric acid. Solid
waste (slag) can be disposed as by products for
manufacturing of ceramic material, fiber
glass, filling roads, manufacturing of cements,
roof tiles or bricks.
13
Features of IGCC Technology
Fuel-multiple choice
IGCC / POX 1. Fossil Fuel- Natural gas
Petroleum coal 2. Alternative fuels-
Petroleum coke Biomass and waste products
The security of supply of fuel, stability in
prices of fuel and multiplicity in choice of
fuel, IGCC Technology has clear cut edge
over other technology / process for power
generation.

14
Features of IGCC Technology
Global Situation
15
Features of IGCC Technology
Global Situation
16
Features of IGCC Technology
Investment Cost
/kw
1,500
1000
500

0
1997
2000
2010
2015
Forecast development evolution IGCC power plants
costs (/kw)
17
Features of IGCC Technology
Cost Comparison among IGCC, PC and NGCC Power
plant

18
Features of IGCC Technology
Cost Comparison among IGCC, PC and NGCC Power
plant
Coal price 1.38 /MMBtu Gas price 3.74 /MMBtu

19
History of Gasification Global Indian
20
History of Gasification
  • PERIOD TECHNOLOGY
  • Before 1700 Major fuels were Wood and Charcoal
  • 1700-1750 Industrial revolution Coal as fuel
  • 1800-1900 Coal Pyrolysis Town gas supply
  • Water gas, Producer Gas
  • 1920 Cryogenic air separation Oxygen replaces
    air
  • 1926 Winkler Fluidized Bed Gasifier
  • 1931 Lurgi Moving Bed Gasifier
  • Koppers-Totzek Entrained Flow Gasifier
  • 1950s Texaco and Shell develop Oil Gasification

21
History of Gasification
PERIOD TECHNOLOGY 1970s Oil
crisis 1973 Texaco develops Slurry Process for
Coal Gasification 1974 Shell and
Koppers-Totzek Pressure Gasification
JV 1981 High Temperature Winkler
Gasification 1984 Lurgi Slagging Gasifier
(together with British Gas) 1999 Shell/Krupp-Uh
de develops Pressurised Entrained Flow
(PRENFLO) Gasifier Beyond 2000 Shell
Gasification, GE Quench/PHR/FHR, Siemens,
Chinese, GPE, Plasma, Headwaters
22
Gasification Indian Context
PERIOD TECHNOLOGY FEED LOCATION 1940s Wood
Gasification Wood FACT - Cochin 1945-1950 Lurgi
Fixed Bed Coal Sindri 1960s Winkler
Fluidized Bed Lignite Neyveli 1960s Texaco N
aphtha FACT - Cochin 1970s Krupp-Koppers Coal
Ramagundam Entrained Bed Atm. Talcher 1970s
Shell Fuel oil Sindri 1980s Shell Fuel
oil NFL - Bhatinda, Panipat,
Nangal 1980s Texaco Fuel oil GNFC - Bharuch
23
Types of Gasifiers
24
What Is Gasification?
  • Conversion of any carbonaceous fuel to a gaseous
    product with a useable heating value.
  • The feed for Gasification can be
  • Gas (e.g., Natural gas)
  • Liquid (e.g., Light or Heavy oils)
  • Solid (e.g., Petroleum Coke, Coal, Lignite or
    Biomass).

25
Combustion v/s Gasification
26
Types of Gasifiers
1) Moving/Fixed bed e.g., Lurgi Counter-curre
nt Co-current 2) Fluidized bed e.g.,
Winkler/KBR/U-GAS 3) Entrained flow Dry
pulverized solid fuel e.g., Shell/Prenflo/Siemens
Fuel slurry e.g., GE/Conoco-Philips Atomize
d liquid fuel e.g., GE/Shell
27
Types of Gasifier
28
Temperature Profile of Gasifiers
MOVING BED GASIFIER(400-1100 0 C, 10 to 100 bar)
FLUIDIZED BED GASIFIER(800 10500C, 10 to 25
bar)
ENTRAINED FLOW GASIFIER(1200-16000C, 25 to 80
bar)
29
Fluidised based gasifier
30
Equilibrium Exit Gas Composition
31
Reliance Strategy for Petcoke Utilization
32
Background Story of Petcoke Usage
  • First Refinery at Jamnagar started up in Q499.
    Petcoke production 8500 TPD
  • During project engineering phase several options
    for petcoke usage were discussed
  • Thermal power plant CFBC Boiler STG
  • Petcoke gasification to generate H2 for refinery.
    Back up of coal feed during start up
  • Storage of petcoke during intervening period
    between start up of refinery and proposed units
    above
  • Focused effort for marketing of petcoke
    National International Customers
  • Marketing efforts were so successful, that we
    didnt pursue any of the other options.

33
Future Petcoke Scenario
  • Second Refinery at Jamnagar start up on Q408
  • Expected petcoke production 9000 TPD
  • Total Reliance petcoke generation 6.5 MMTPA
  • Expected additional generation of petcoke in
    India by 2012 10 MMTPA
  • This far exceeds captive demand of 4 MMTPA
  • Surplus petcoke is available
  • Reliance considers petcoke gasification as
    opportunity for value addition

34
Key Drivers for Petcoke Gasification
  • Transform Jamnagar into bottomless refinery
  • Exploit price delta between natural gas and
    petcoke
  • Replace natural gas with syngas, to manage the
    supply risk
  • Insulate the Jamnagar refinery from future energy
    cost escalation
  • Pursue reduction in GHG through possible CO2
    capture and sequestration

35
Project Formulation for Petcoke Gasification
36
Project Scope
  • PETCOKE QTY - 17500 TPD (Dry Basis)
  • 19000 TPD (As recd. Basis)
  • OXYGEN - 18,000 TPD
  • SYN. GAS PRODUCTION - 40,000 TPD
  • 2/3rd FOR POWER
  • 1/3rd FOR HYDROGEN/
  • CHEMICALS
  • POWER GENERATION - 1140 MW
  • HYDROGEN GENERATION - 900 TPD

37
Typical Fuel Composition
For reference of comparison only
38
Energy Content and Composition of Solid Fuels
Petcoke
39
Reactivity of Fuels as Function of Temperature
40
Why Entrained Flow Gasifier?
  • Ability to handle variety of solid fuels
  • High throughput because of high reaction
    rates/temperature
  • Opportunity for heat recovery
  • High carbon conversion
  • Syngas free of oils and tars
  • Low methane production

41
Salient Features of GE and Shell Technologies
42
GE Quench Gasifier Slurry Feed
14500C
10000C
5500C
2800C
3000C
1
  • Steel Pressure Shell
  • Insulation Layer
  • Castable Layer
  • Hot-face Refractory

2
3
4
43
Shell Membrane Walled Gasifier
16500C
Syngas Cooler
  • Flowing Slag Layer
  • Solid Slag Layer
  • High Alumina Refractory Material
  • Metallic Studs (Incolloy)
  • Membrane Tube Wall
  • Free Space
  • Refractory Lining on Pressure Vessel
  • Pressure Vessel

44
Process Flow
HRSG
STG
Flue gases
Power
N2
Power
GT
Air
Steam
ASU
SRU
O2
H2S
Sulphur
Air
Gasifier
Gas Cleaning Cooling
AGR
Steam
Grinding
CO2 Capture
Feed
Coke
Slag Fine Ash
To SRU
AGR CO2
Sour Shift
AGR H2S
Sweet Shift
PSA
Hydrogen
45
Typical Syngas Composition (Gasifier O/L)
46
Retrofitting of existing assets
Retrofittings of GT (Frame 6 Frame 9) for
Syngas firing
  • Piping
  • Syngas
  • N2 Purge
  • N2 / steam
  • Controls
  • MK 6
  • Software
  • Instrumentation (valves / flow meter)
  • Combustion
  • Fuel Nozzle
  • Liners
  • Syngas Skid
  • Syngas injection
  • Air Extraction (Optional)
  • N2 injection ( Optional)
  • Compartment modification
  • Off base enclosure
  • CFD modeling
  • Hazardous gas detection system


47
Gasification Ultimate Product Flexibility
Power Steam
Carbon Source
Iron Reduction
Fuel/Town Gas
Gasification
Naptha
Fischer- Tropsch Liquids
Ammonia Urea
Waxes
Synthesis Gas
H2
Diesel/Jet/Gas Fuels
Methanol
Dimethyl Ether
Synthetic Natural Gas
Ethylene Propylene
Methyl Acetate
Acetic Acid
Acetate Esters
Ketene
VAM
Oxo Chemicals
Diketene Derivatives
Polyolefins
Acetic Anhydride
PVA
48
Process of Evaluation
49
Process of Evaluation
  • Proposal from process licensors
  • Series of discussions with process licensors
  • Visit to plants of GE Shell and discussion with
    plant operators
  • Location Feedstock
  • GE
  • Coffeyville resources, USA Petcoke
  • Polk Power Plant, Tampa Coal Petcoke
  • Eastman Chemical Company, Kingsport Coal
  • Sarlux IGCC, Cagliari Vacuum residue
  • Wison Chemical Co, Nanjing Coal
  • Sinopec Nanjing Chemical Industries Co,
    Nanjing Coal
  • Shanghai Coking and Chemical Company Coal
  • GNFC, Bharuch Fuel oil
  • Shell
  • Nuon Power, The Netherlands Coal Biomass
  • Elcogas, Puertallano, Spain Coal Petcoke
  • Yueyang Sinopec Shell Coal Gasification Co Ltd,
    China Coal


50
Process of Evaluation (contd.)
  • Information and data available in the public
    domain.
  • CAPEX estimation based on
  • PFD sized equipment list provided by the
    licensors
  • Pre-engineering to estimate quantities of bulk
    materials
  • OPEX estimation for Jamnagar location
  • Personal experience of operating oil and coal
    gasifiers.


51
Parameters for Evaluation of Performance
  • OPERATIONAL PARAMETERS / RATIOS
  • No. of Gasifiers
  • Gasifier Temperature Pressure
  • Oxygen Purity
  • O2 / Te of coal
  • Syngas / Te of coal
  • (CO H2) per Te of coal
  • Steam Water / Te of coal
  • Gas Composition
  • Calorific Value of Syngas

52
Parameters for Evaluation of Performance (contd.)
  • F-R-A-M-E (Flexibility, Reliability,
    Availability, Maintainability, Efficiency)
  • Flexibility
  • Feed
  • No. of burners (single vs. multiple)
  • Design margin
  • Turn down
  • Gasifier sparing
  • Gasifier downstream processing
  • Product
  • Reliability / Availability
  • On-stream factor
  • Planned outage
  • Unplanned outage
  • Forced outage rate

53
Parameters for Evaluation of Performance (contd.)
  • F-R-A-M-E (Flexibility, Reliability,
    Availability, Maintainability, Efficiency)
  • Maintainability
  • Air compressor train
  • Grinding mills
  • Slurry feed pumps
  • Gasifier
  • Burners, refractory, waste heat recovery
  • AGR
  • Columns, heat exchangers, vessels, pumps etc.
  • SRU
  • Efficiency
  • Carbon Efficiency (Te of carbon in
    CO,CO2,CH4,COS)/(Te of C in feed)x100
  • Total Thermal Efficiency (Cold gas energy
    steam energy (LP/MP/HHP))/(input

  • energy of coal ) x 100
  • Cold Gas Efficiency (LHV of cold gas x Te
    of syngas)/(LHV of coal x Te of coal) x 100
  • Useful Gas Efficiency (Ton of COH2
    produced)/(Ton of CH2O2 in feed) x 100

54
Environmental Performance
  • SOx control
  • H2S COS removal mature technologies
    available.
  • Captured acid gas to solid sulfur or sulfuric
    acid
  • gt99 removal
  • NOx control
  • Minimize fuel nitrogen NH3 washes out of
    syngas with water
  • Minimize thermal NOx moderate flame
    temperature in GT with diluent injection
    (N2/steam)
  • PM control
  • Ash is converted to glassy slag which is inert
    and usable
  • Secondary removal of fine solids from syngas with
    barrier filters and water scrubbers

55
Economics
  • Raw Material
  • Solid
  • Coke, Lignite
  • ASU
  • Number of trains
  • Oxygen purity (95.0 vs 99.7)
  • Cold box operating pressure
  • Number of compressors
  • Drive for compressors (Motor vs Turbine)
  • Oxygen supply (liquid/gas)
  • Recovery of rare gases
  • Extent of integration with GTs
  • Grinding
  • Wet vs. Dry
  • Feed slurry pumping vs. pneumatic feed

56
Energy Requirement vs. Oxygen Purity
Going From 95 to 99 Purity, increases the
energy by 5 .Going From 99 to 99.5 Purity,
increases the energy by another 5 . Energy
requirement sharply increases beyond 99 .
Source Industrial Gas Handbook, Gas
Separation Purification, By Frank G. Kerry
57
Economics (contd.)
  • Gasifier
  • Type (Quench, FHR)
  • Pressure (low High)
  • CO Shift
  • Sour vs. Sweet
  • Acid Gas Removal Unit
  • Chemical vs. Physical
  • Sulphur Recovery
  • Granulated sulphur vs. sulphuric acid
  • CO2 capture
  • Sequestration vs chemical
  • Product Slate
  • Power, H2, NH3, Urea, MeOH, AA, MTO, DME, GTL
    etc.
  • Integration
  • Gas, Air, Nitrogen Steam

58
Conceptual Scheme for GT ASU Integration
59
Technology Suppliers Considered
60
Typical Capex Break-up for IGCC
61
Sensitivity Analysis
JAMNAGAR IGCC Feedstock 17500 TPD
petcoke Product Syngas CAPEX Approximately
USD 3.0 - 3.3 billion
62
EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
63
Emerging Technologies
  • To summarise
  • Gasification Technology offers the cleanest and
    most efficient way to convert low
  • and / or negative value carbon based feed
    stock to syngas.
  • Syngas can ultimately replace natural gas for
    Industrial uses, electrical power
  • generation and basic raw material to produce
    chemical and fuel oil.
  • Commercial Success of Gasification Technology
    will depend on the advancement
  • of technologies such as
  • Low cost oxygen production
  • Syngas cleanup and
  • Cost effective separation of Hydrogen from C2

64
Emerging Technologies
  • Advanced and / or Novel Gasifier Technology
  • Hydrogen Separation (from H2 and CO2 mixtures)
    Membrane Technology
  • Solvent Absorption / Physical Solvent
    Technologies
  • Sulfur Conversion and Recovery Technology
  • Non-Cryogenic Oxygen (e.g. Membrane)
    Production Technology
  • Multi-Component Removal Technology
  • Gasification Integration

65
Emerging Technologies
  • New Gasifier designs
  • 1. GE global/ Unmixed fuel processor (UOP)
  • Elimination of Air Separation Unit (ASU)
  • High Temperature Syngas Clean up
  • Higher efficiency
  • Lower cost
  • 2. KBR Transport Gasifier (TRIGTM)
  • Low rank, high-ash, high-moisture coal
    compatible
  • For power generation, air can be employed as
    the oxidant
  • Lower cost predicted
  • Higher availability predicted
  • Non-slagging, and refractory issues should
    therefore be minimal
  • Higher predicted efficiency
  • Lower emissions (due to higher efficiency)
  • Large scale up of the technology still
    required, by a factor of 30
  • By 2010, this technology will be operating at
    the scale of E-Gas which has gt20 years
  • experience already in 2007.
  • Lower temperatures and short gas residence time
    may lead to some methane formation,
  • which is detrimental in chemical
    applications.

66
Emerging Technologies
  • 3. Catalytic Coal Gasification BluegasTM
  • Elimination of oxygen plant
  • For SNG objective, little or no catalytic
    methanation required
  • High thermodynamic efficiency potential
  • Catalyst cost and recoverability
  • Carbon conversion and methane production yields
    in the gasifier
  • Cost of applying the catalyst effectively to
    the coal
  • Inherently must be done in a fluidized bed
    which have not been scaled up to larger
    capacities
  • of entrained gasifiers (yet)
  • Interactions of catalyst with coal ash
  • Separation costs of syngas and methane
    cryogenic process
  • Excess steam requirements
  • Unsuitable for chemical synthesis processes due
    to CH4 reforming requirement.

67
THANK YOU
About PowerShow.com