"Status of Gasification and IGCC” was the Hot Topic Hour on April 5, 2012

The following speakers discussed the status of gasification and IGCC technology; described their experience with the permitting, design, construction, operation and maintenance of gasification plants and IGCC power plants and discussed the economic and environmental performance of these plants.

Dr. Anthony (Tony) F. Black, an Energy Engineer in the Gasification and CO₂ Technologies Area within Black & Veatch, presented a comparison of the emissions, capital cost and cost for electricity for IGCC plants utilizing current technology versus current supercritical pulverized coal-fired (SCPC) power plants. His conclusion was that although emissions from IGCC power plants are significantly lower, the much higher capital cost and a higher cost for electricity would mean that no IGCC power plants would be built today unless there were other driving factors. Regulations requiring carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is one factor that changes the comparison. The cost of energy is about equal when carbon capture is required. Tony also reviewed technology under development and likely to be available by 2020 that may make IGCC equal to or preferred to SCPC. Technology for ion transport membranes in the air separation unit, warm gas cleaning systems and advanced gasification systems will improve the efficiency and reduce the capital cost.

Steve Jenkins, Vice President Gasification Services CH₂M Hill, presented evidence that gasification plants and IGCC can be constructed and economically operated now. He reviewed the status of seven large-scale coal gasification and IGCC projects under construction and in development.

1. Duke Energy Indiana's Edwardsport IGCC project will start up this year with 618 MW net output.
    
2. Mississippi Power Company's Kemper County IGCC project has a planned startup in 2014 with 582 MW net output. The plant captures 65 percent of the CO₂ and sells it for enhanced oil recovery (EOR). This helps to make the plant economically feasible.
    
3. Summit Power Group's Texas Clean Energy IGCC project will have 400 MW gross output, produce 700,000 tons of urea for sale and capture and sell for EOR 90 percent of the CO₂.
    
4. Texas Clean Energy Project received $450 million in funding from the DOE Clean Coal Power Initiative as well as Federal and State tax credits. It will produce urea for sale and capture and sell CO₂ for EOR as well as produce electricity.
    
5. Indiana Gasification plant has a contract to sell the SNG produced to the Indiana Finance Authority. Start of construction is awaiting legislation for state tax credits and a $1.875 billion loan guarantee from the Federal government.
    
6. Hydrogen Energy California 400 MW plant planned to start up in 2017 will also produce 1.8 million tons per year of urea based fertilizers and capture 90 percent of the CO₂ for sale for EOR. It also received $408 million from the DOE.
    
7. DKRW's Medicine Bow Fuel & Power project is planned to begin operation in December 2015 producing 10,600 barrels of gasoline daily using GE Energy gasification technology, the Davy process to convert syngas to methanol and the ExxonMobil methanol-to-gasoline technology. The plant will also capture CO₂ and sell it for EOR.
    
8. U.S. TransCarbon's Adams Fork Energy project is planned to start up in 2016 producing 18,000 barrels of gasoline per day from coal using the Uhde Prenflo technology.

During the ensuing discussion, Steve pointed out that co-production of urea or other chemicals and sale of CO₂ for EOR can make IGCC feasible. He also stated that gasification of coal to produce gasoline is profitable as long as oil prices are above $80 a barrel. In response to a statement from the audience that the market for urea is limited and the opportunities for sale of CO₂ for EOR are also limited, Steve said that at least another ten large (600 MW) plants co-producing urea and selling CO₂ could be constructed before this became a concern.

Steve also briefly discussed the new hazardous and air toxics (Utility MACT or MATS) limits that apply to IGCC plants. He pointed out that the limits for PM and mercury are actually more stringent for new PC plants than for IGCC. He suggested that this was probably a political decision because there are so few IGCC plants in operation or under construction.

Keith Moore, Principle of CastleLight Energy Corp. described an advanced hybrid coal gasification system can be installed on existing coal-fired boilers. The system combines a coal beneficiation processes to remove water, ash, and mercury from coal with the Clean Combustion System (CCS) for control of SO₂ and NO_x. He presented data from an installation on a stoker boiler that demonstrated the hybrid gasification system will meet or exceed the requirements of the utility MACT and CSAPR Rules without the need for additional pollution control systems (SCR or FGD) except for a particulate collection device. Additional benefits of the hybrid gasification system are boiler efficiency improvement of 2 to 10 percent, reduced CO₂ emissions, high combustion efficiency (LOI < 1%), limestone is the only additive required and there is no waste water for disposal. Keith stated that the technology can be installed at a significantly lower cost than adding on NO_x and SO₂ controls and the operating cost is less than a plant with the controls. The operator may also obtain a construction permit with waiver of PSD (no NSR). The hybrid coal gasification technology can be applied to extend the life of the older, smaller (<400MW) coal-fired generating plants that may be abandoned due to the cost of emissions compliance.

The Bios, Abstracts and Photos information is linked below.

BIOS, ABSTRACTS, PHOTOS - APRIL 5, 2012.htm