Clean Coal Technologies - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


PPT – Clean Coal Technologies PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 1b642c-ZDc1Z


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation

Clean Coal Technologies


Clean Coal Technologies – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:112
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 38
Provided by: Loeff


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

Title: Clean Coal Technologies

  • Clean Coal Technologies
  • -Keeping Coal in the Money-
  • Gary Spitznogle
  • Manager
  • New Generation Development
  • November 8, 2006

  • Integrated Resource Plan (IRP)
  • Strategy
  • Generation options
  • Technology options
  • Generation costs
  • Power Plant siting
  • New Generation status update
  • Conclusions
  • Questions

AEP An introduction
  • AEP Facts at a Glance
  • Largest U.S. Electricity Generator and coal user
  • 11 States (7-East 4-West)
  • 36,000 MW Generation
  • 75-80 MM tons of coal per year
  • 39,000 Miles Transmission
  • 210,000 Miles Distribution
  • 5 Million Customers
  • 20,000 Employees
  • US 11.9 Billion Revenue
  • US 36.2 Billion in Assets

Coal NG Nuclear Hydro Wind
73 26,280MW 16 5,760MW 8 2,880MW 2 720MW 1 360MW
What is AEPs need for new base load generation?
  • AEP has not added base load capacity since the
    Zimmer Conversion (nuclear to coal) in 1991
  • AEP Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) shows that by
    2015 baseload generation needs are
  • East - at least 1200 MW (2 x 600MW)
  • West at least 1800 MW (3 x 600 MW)

What is AEPs need for new peaking and
intermediate generation?
  • AEP Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) shows that by
  • peaking and intermediate generation needs are
  • East - at least 300 MW (Peakers)
  • - at least 1,000 MW (Intermediate)
  • West - at least 650 MW (Peakers)
  • - at least 500 MW (Intermediate)

AEPs air emissions control strategy
  • Asset diversification and optimization
  • Multiple fuels (coal, gas, renewables)
  • Substantial air emissions compliance program
  • 3.6 billion in retrofits from 2004 through
  • FGD - SO2
  • 3 billion (5,000 MW done 8,000 MW to do)
  • 95 to 98 removal
  • SCR - NOx
  • 500 million (10,000 MW done 2,000 MW to do)
  • 85 to 93 removal
  • Hg (Mercury)
  • SCRFGD co-benefit - 80 removal
  • Undetermined number of activated carbon systems
    (likely 5,000 MW)

What base load options are available? -Looked at
natural gas-
What base load options are available? -Looked at
What base load options are available? -Looked at
And the answer for base load is
COAL AEPs commitment to coal has been a basic
element of our generation strategy
  • We know coal
  • Its abundant and available
  • Its important to the states we serve
  • Its important to our nation

U.S. coal capacity additions
What technology should we use for the different
generation needs?
Looked at technology for peaking and intermediate
load - Natural gas -
Looked at CFB technology for base load - Coal -
Looked at IGCC technology for base load - Coal -
Looked at PC technology for base load - Coal -
What about fuel choice? - Technology selection
IGCC plants become less competitive with low-BTU
coals having other technology options available
is strategically important.
Generating Technology Options Ultra
Supercritical PC Units
  • An ultra-supercritical (USC) steam generation
    unit operates above the supercritical pressure
    point of water, typically 3500 psi or higher, and
    at steam temperatures above 1100 oF (593 oC).
  • The critical point of water is 3208 psi and is
    the point at which the vapor and liquid are
  • For comparison
  • A conventional supercritical unit operates at
    steam pressures of 3500 psig or higher and steam
    temperatures of 1000-1050 oF (538-566 oC).
  • A subcritical unit operates below the critical
    pressure, typically 2400 psig.
  • Modern chrome and nickel-based super alloys in
    the steam generator, steam turbine, and piping
    systems can withstand prolonged exposure to this
    high temperature steam.
  • By operating at elevated steam temperatures, the
    turbine cycle is more efficient. This reduces
    fuel (coal) consumption, and thereby reduces
  • Higher efficiency Less emissions

Generating Technology Options Ultra
Supercritical PC Units
  • USC technology has been specified for capacity
    additions to AEP West
  • USC technology is most efficient cycle available
    for PRB fuels
  • Main Steam 1115 F
  • Reheat Steam 1130 F
  • Pressure 3725 psi
  • IGCC is limited for PRB Applications
  • Dry feed IGCC technology such as Shell not
    available with full EPC wrap
  • The GE Slurry feed gasifier technology we are
    using for our new AEP East IGCC units not suited
    to low rank fuels
  • In addition to improved environmental performance
    due to reduced fuel, USC technology will include
    state-of-the-art emission control technologies
  • SCR system for NOx reduction
  • Wet or Dry FGD system for SO2 reduction
  • Baghouse for particulate removal.

Generating Technology Options IGCC Units
  • AEP Board Report (August 2004)
  • Committed AEP to being an industry leader in
    development of coal-fueled IGCC technology
  • AEP East - building 2 x 600 MW IGCC plants (OH

IGCC Advantages
  • Relatively low fuel cost from domestic coal
  • Multiple product versatility
  • Electricity
  • Chemicals
  • Liquids

IGCC Advantages
  • Reduce incremental cost of CO2 capture
  • And also make Hydrogen

CO H2O gt CO2 H2
Whats the Catch?
  • IGCC technology is developing
  • The I is missing in IGCC
  • Capital cost premium
  • Cultural Changes
  • IGCC cost advantage longer horizon

IGCC a leadership decision
  • Choosing IGCC for AEP East was not just a
    technology decision it was a leadership decision
  • If not AEP, then who
  • If not one of our states, then where
  • If not coal, then what
  • Being leaders has its perils and risks
  • Partnerships and cooperation are necessary for
  • Federal Government has a role
  • Provide incentives and remove roadblocks, but do
    not attach unacceptable strings

Current economics of new AEP East baseload
  • Source Results of AEP analysis based on EPRI
  • Total Plant Cost (2005s) includes the cost to
    Engineer, Procure and Construct plant and owners
    direct costs does not include
    interconnections, transmission lines,
    transmission upgrades, contingency or AFUDC.
  • Assumes Northern Appalachian Coal price of 1.60
    /mmBtu for PC and IGCC, and natural gas price of
    7.00/mmBtu for NGCC.
  • Assumes 85 capacity factor for PC and IGCC, 25
    for NGCC.
  • Production Cost includes Fuel Cost and Variable
    Operations Maintenance (VOM) cost.
  • Cost of Electricity based on EPC cost, does not
    include the cost of Emission Credits.

But current economics ignore possible future
GHG requirements
  • Investment evaluation should consider possible
    future option value of IGCC vs. PC on carbon
  • Possible scenarios
  • No CO2 legislation
  • CO2 legislation 2015 Low carbon prices
  • CO2 legislation 2015 High carbon prices
  • Stringent CO2 legislation Forcing carbon
    capture on coal by 2020

CO2 Emissions

How do the generation options compare?
Where to build AEPs first commercial IGCC unit?
Great Bend-Ohio IGCC Plant
Mountaineer-WV IGCC Plant
AEPs investment in IGCC
  • Engineering Studies
  • FEED with GE/Bechtel for Great Bend, Ohio with
    completion targeted for mid-November
  • FEED for Mountaineer, WV with completion targeted
    for mid-December
  • PJM Facilities Study Report firm up scope and
    cost of the system improvements.
  • Regulatory cost recovery
  • 2005 March, Filed cost recovery plan with PUCO
  • 2006 April, Received approval to recover
    27million development cost
  • Ohio Supreme Court appeal of PUCO order
  • 2006 January, Provided notice of intent to file
    with WV PSC
  • RD Activities
  • 2002 November, Mountaineer Storage Study
  • 2005 September, FutureGen Alliance created

AEPs Western units
  • AEP West (PSO SWEPCO) Regulatory Process
  • Required for Utilities to solicit proposals for
    new electric generating facilities
  • Request for Proposals (RFP) issued September 2005
  • Baseload Awards
  • SWEPCO Self-build 600 MW USC PC unit at
    Hempstead County, AR
  • Joint Ownership with OGE at Red Rock for a 950
    MW USC PC unit

AEPs Western units
  • Peaker Awards
  • PSO Self-build at Riverside (160 MW) and
    Southwestern (160 MW)
  • SWEPCO - Self-build at Tontitown, AR (320 MW)
  • Intermediate Awards
  • SWEPCO Self-build at Arsenal Hill, LA 500 MW
    Natural Gas Combined Cycle (NGCC)

  • AEP recognizes the strategic importance of IGCC
  • Important to the future of coal
  • Produces synthetic gas for poly-generation
  • Potential to displace the use of natural gas (NG)
    in the electricity generation market
  • Helps to stabilize the price of natural gas
  • Frees NG for use in the chemicals, fuels and
    fertilizer industries
  • Saves domestic jobs
  • Accelerates progress towards the hydrogen economy

  • AEP recognizes the importance of other clean
    coal-based technologies
  • AEP supports RD to futher advance Ultra
    supercritical PC and CFB
  • Especially in the areas of carbon capture and
    disposal, and ultra-supercritical designs and
    other efficiency improvements
  • Investors in coal-based power plants need a
    portfolio of attractive technologies to choose

  • AEP supports necessary RD to advance clean
    coal-based technology
  • FutureGen (near zero-emission coal-fueled plant)
  • 275 MW Unit
  • 1 million tons/year CO2 captured and sequestered
  • Co-production of H2 and electricity
  • Public-private partnership
  • 750M from DOE
  • 250M from alliance members
  • Mountaineer Carbon Sequestration project