Presentation to ARPA-E, January 14, 2022 Award No. DE-FE0031848/0000 Post-Combustion Capture
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Front-End Engineering Design Study for a Carbon Capture Plant Retrofit to a Natural Gas-Fired
Turbine Combined Cycle Power Plant (2x2x1 Duct-Fired 758-MWe Facility with F Class Turbines)
In Partnership with:
Presentation to ARPA-E, January 14, 2022
US DOE/NETL
Award No. DE-FE0031848/0000 EPRI
Post-Combustion Capture Nexant
Project Scope and Objectives
§ FEED Study encompasses the engineering required for the design, construction, and
operation of the carbon capture and compression unit, including modifications to the
existing facility per the retrofit
– Transportation of CO2 and ultimate use were not part of this study, but were factors in
identifying the location
§ Open-access philosophy was adhered to for this project and all aspects of the capture
unit design are non-proprietary
§ Project’s Objectives:
✓ Utilize a low-cost generic solvent
✓ Provide balances and process data details, open for public review
✓ Provide cost estimates and material quantities, open for public review
✓ Provide implementation schedule and operation economics (accounting for current operation
regimes in Texas/ERCOT)
✓ Allow the study deliverables be available to the public
© 2021 Bechtel | 2 Level 3 - Bechtel Internal & Select External Distribution
Sherman Energy Center, Sherman, Texas, USA
Why Sherman Energy Center?
§ F-class gas turbines (state of the art
technology)
§ Sufficient land available contiguous to the
power plant
§ Proximity to oil fields, saline aquifers, and
sedimentary basis, for recovered CO2
storage
§ Cooperative host that is a Bechtel customer
© 2021 Bechtel | 3 Level 3 - Bechtel Internal & Select External Distribution
Project Background – Process & Operation
§ This FEED is based on a prior study led by Bechtel,
for a similar plant in Kårstø, Norway (also publicly
available)
§ Carbon capture process encompasses a conventional
absorber-stripper configuration using a low-cost
amine-based solvent
– Using generic solvent facilitates procurement at
competitive prices. There will be no wide-reaching
restrictions on knowledge transfer to and from the
project.
R. R. Bottoms Patent, 1930
© 2021 Bechtel | 4 Level 3 - Bechtel Internal & Select External Distribution
Results: Layout DP (Integrated Layout)
Carbon Capture Plant
Power Plant
© 2021 Bechtel | 5 Level 3 - Bechtel Internal & Select External Distribution
Results: Cost Estimation DP
Capital cost of the five major portions of the
PCC plant:
– Flue Gas Conveyance and Conditioning: $102M
– CO2 Absorption: $151M
– Solvent Regeneration: $75.6M
– CO2 Compression and Conditioning: $84.5M
– Stack Modification: $31.1M
Total: $444M
Cost for PCC Areas as Percent of Contractor’s Cost
© 2021 Bechtel | 6 Level 3 - Bechtel Internal & Select External Distribution
Results: Cost Estimation DP
§ Capital cost of the PCC plant broken down into
the commodities and classes of costs used in the
EPC estimating process
− Material/Equipment: $116M
− Piping: $17.8M
− Instrumentation: $13.3M
− Electrical Equipment: $17.8M
− Field Indirect: $40M
− Total Field Services: $22.2M
− Engineering/Other Office Services: $44.5M
− Labor: $48.9M
− Sub-Contractor: $22.2M
− Contingency: $35.6M
− Fee, Risk, and Misc: $57.8M
− Civil Works: $8.90M
Total: $444M
Costs as Percentage of Contractor’s Cost
© 2021 Bechtel | 7 Level 3 - Bechtel Internal & Select External DistributionResults: Cost Estimation DP
Basis of Operating Cost
© 2021 Bechtel | 8 Level 3 - Bechtel Internal & Select External DistributionResults: Cost Estimation DP
Cost Sensitivities and Uncertainty Levels Tornado Diagram
© 2021 Bechtel | 9 Level 3 - Bechtel Internal & Select External DistributionPilot Plant
Purpose:
• Understand amine
degradation in the
atmosphere
• Confirm efficacy of
reclaimer
• Analyze long-term solvent
health/confirm degradation
rates
• Confirm loadings and
packing heights required for
given capture rates (models
may not be fully reliable)
© 2021 Bechtel | 10 Level 3 - Bechtel Internal & Select External DistributionSummary of Key Findings
Estimated baseline of CO2 capture: $114.50 / tCO2 (includes both annualized
capital and annual operations/maintenance)
Energy penalty on power plant: 67.3 MW (supplying steam and electricity
requirements)
Average forgone electricity revenue: $25 / MWh, contributing $13 / tCO2 captured
A pilot testing program is proposed to resolve design uncertainties
© 2021 Bechtel | 11 Level 3 - Bechtel Internal & Select External DistributionClosing Remarks
§ Pilot plant implementation is crucial for full-scale carbon capture projects, to address the
process uncertainties arising from the lack of operational data available in the public
domain.
§ Open technology PCC projects using a generic, non-proprietary solvent, facilitates
procurement at competitive prices.
§ Open technology enables owners to work with a range of suppliers to modify/upgrade the
PCC plant hardware and solvent, as the industry progresses.
© 2021 Bechtel | 12 Level 3 - Bechtel Internal & Select External DistributionAcknowledgements
This work was completed as part of National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) research for the U.S.
Department of Energy’s (DOE) Carbon Capture Program. The authors wish to acknowledge Naomi O’Neil, the
NETL Project Manager for this FEED study for her counsel and support throughout the study.
The authors would like to thank August Benz (Independent) and Jonathan Gibbins (University of Sheffield) for
their technical contributions throughout the study; Kunlei Liu (University of Kentucky) for reviewing the process
and providing technical comments; Des Dillion, Adam Berger, Abhoyjit Bhown, and Yang Du from the Electric
Power Institute (EPRI), the sub awardee of this study, for their many technical contributions and for serving as
the final report editor and publisher; and Nexant, the technical subcontractor to EPRI.
We are also grateful to Siemen’s, the power island equipment supplier, for their assistance in steam turbine
interface decision.
Finally, and most notably, we thank Joe Lloyd and Darryl Nitschke of Panda Power for allowing the Sherman
Power Plant to serve as the basis for this study.
© 2021 Bechtel | 13 Level 3 - Bechtel Internal & Select External DistributionYou can also read
