emerging technologies in emerging economies (with...

1

Emerging Technologiesin Emerging Economies

with Emphasis on China & India

Emerging Technologiesin Emerging Economies

with Emphasis on China & India

Jarad DanielsOffice of Fossil Energy

U.S. Department of Energy

Jarad DanielsOffice of Fossil Energy

U.S. Department of Energy

2

Coal is expected to play a key role in growth of Emerging Economies

Coal is expected to play a key role in growth of Emerging Economies

Source: IEA, World Energy Outlook 2007, Reference scenario.

0

500

1 000

1 500

2 000

2 500

3 000

3 500

4 000

2005 2030 2005 2030

Mtoe

TEOther OECDEU27JapanUSOther DCIndiaChina

Power generation Other

Coa

l inp

ut

Global CO2 emissions from coal: 11 GtCO2 in 2005, 19 GtCO2 in 2030

3

Electricity Generation by Fuel Type in 2005 (%) China, India, and USA

Electricity Generation by Fuel Type in 2005 (%) China, India, and USA

Operational Capacity by Fuel Type (2005)

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%

CHINA

USA

INDIA

Coal Gas Oil Hydro Nuclear Others / Renewables

Country Total Capacity (MW) Coal Capacity (MW)India 116,860 67,296USA 991,794 327,551

China 379,895 272,243Data Source: Platts UDI, 2005

4

Age of Existing Coal-Fired Units in 2005 (Number of Units) in India, China, and USA

Age of Existing Coal-Fired Units in 2005 (Number of Units) in India, China, and USA

552

406

133108

6372

111 10580

3820

116

223258

569

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0-10 Years Old(1996-2005)

11-20 Years Old(1986-1995)

21-30 Years Old(1976-1985)

31-40 Years Old(1966-1975)

41Years andOlder (1965)

Num

ber o

f Uni

ts

ChinaIndiaUS

552

406

133108

6372

111 10580

3820

116

223258

569

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0-10 Years Old(1996-2005)

11-20 Years Old(1986-1995)

21-30 Years Old(1976-1985)

31-40 Years Old(1966-1975)


Num

ber o

f Uni

ts

ChinaIndiaUS

Data Source: Platts UDI, 2005

5

Age of Existing Coal-Fired Capacity in 2005 (MW) in India, China, and USA

Age of Existing Coal-Fired Capacity in 2005 (MW) in India, China, and USA

132,862

82,554

17,015

5,956

105,780

112,795

77,287

2,3296,776

19,92217,126

1,852

25,245

4,937

26,631

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

0-10 Years Old(1996-2005)

11-20 Years Old(1986-1995)

21-30 Years Old(1976-1985)

31-40 Years Old(1966-1975)


Cap

acity

(MW

)

ChinaIndiaUS

132,862

82,554

17,015

5,956

105,780

112,795

77,287

2,3296,776

19,92217,126

1,852

25,245

4,937

26,631

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

0-10 Years Old(1996-2005)

11-20 Years Old(1986-1995)

21-30 Years Old(1976-1985)

31-40 Years Old(1966-1975)


Cap

acity

(MW

)

ChinaIndiaUS

Data Source: Platts UDI, 2005

6

Average Coal-Fired Power Plant EfficienciesChina, India, and USA

Average Coal-Fired Power Plant EfficienciesChina, India, and USA

CountryAverage

Efficiency (HHV) (%)

OECD 36

USA 33-34

China ~30-32

India ~25-34

China’s reported power efficiency is approaching OECD levels following rapid build up of new units over the last 5+ years

India is improving too but not as fast as China owing to slower build up and the number of poor performing SEB stations, which represent about 2/3 of India’s electricity generation

7

China is shifting rapidly to advanced coal technologies

China is shifting rapidly to advanced coal technologies

• Average efficiency of coal-fired generation: 33.2% LHV• Over 8,000 small, low-efficiency units <200 MW• First 350 MW subcritical unit commissioned in 1982, first

600 MW subcritical unit in 1989• Has been building mostly large (200-800 MW) subcritical

units• Focus shifted to add large supercritical and ultra-

supercritical units⎯3% of existing (30 units) and 9% of planned capacity

with goal of 50% of new capacity by 2020⎯Domestic units of 600 MW under demonstration and

imported 1,000-MW units under construction• Ultra-supercritical units

⎯4 x 1000-MW units recently commissioned

• Average efficiency of coal-fired generation: 33.2% LHV• Over 8,000 small, low-efficiency units <200 MW• First 350 MW subcritical unit commissioned in 1982, first

600 MW subcritical unit in 1989• Has been building mostly large (200-800 MW) subcritical

units• Focus shifted to add large supercritical and ultra-

supercritical units⎯3% of existing (30 units) and 9% of planned capacity

with goal of 50% of new capacity by 2020⎯Domestic units of 600 MW under demonstration and

imported 1,000-MW units under construction• Ultra-supercritical units

⎯4 x 1000-MW units recently commissioned

8

India is adopting advanced technologies more slowlyIndia is adopting advanced technologies more slowly

• Average efficiency of coal-fired generation: 27.6% LHV

• Poor quality coal (>40% ash) limits performance• Currently, 100% subcritical pulverized coal

⎯135 x 200-250 MW units since 1978 and 27 x 500 MW since 1984 commissioned by BHEL

• 1st supercritical plant (3 x 660 MW) under construction at Sipat using South Korean technology

• “Ultra-mega” projects planned using 800-MW supercritical units

• Average efficiency of coal-fired generation: 27.6% LHV

• Poor quality coal (>40% ash) limits performance• Currently, 100% subcritical pulverized coal

⎯135 x 200-250 MW units since 1978 and 27 x 500 MW since 1984 commissioned by BHEL

• 1st supercritical plant (3 x 660 MW) under construction at Sipat using South Korean technology

• “Ultra-mega” projects planned using 800-MW supercritical units

9

Environmental Regulations in China Focus on SO2 and NOx

Environmental Regulations in China Focus on SO2 and NOx

New SO2, NOx, and PM Emission Standards (1/1/04)

• SO2, NOx, and PM standards within World Bank guidelines

• SO2 standards, on par with OECD average, require use of low-sulfur coal and FGD controls⎯ Goal: FGD at 60% of thermal capacity by 2010⎯ Government focus on developing cost-effective FGD

systems

• NOx standards relatively modest compared to OECD⎯ Can be satisfied by Chinese low-NOx burners but have

begun importing SCNR and SCR systems

• PM emission standards require high-efficiency ESPs

10

China has installed SO2 scrubbers at an astounding rate since 2005

China has installed SO2 scrubbers at an astounding rate since 2005

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Year

Capaci

ty (

GW

e)

US. coal power

China SO2 scrubber

China coal power

US. SO2 scrubber

2006 and 2007 in China: Power plant addition ≈ 100 GW/yrScrubber installation ≈ 100 GW/yr

Slide Source: Professor Socolow, Princeton University

11

Environmental Regulations in IndiaEnvironmental Regulations in India

India does not have SO2 or NOx stack emission standards for coal-fired power generation

India does have PM emission controls and ambient air standards

Government focus on improving overall coal conversion process:• Reduce ash content of coal

• Build larger, more efficient units

• Renovate and modernize existing capacity

• Build plants closer to mines

India does not have SO2 or NOx stack emission standards for coal-fired power generation

India does have PM emission controls and ambient air standards

Government focus on improving overall coal conversion process:• Reduce ash content of coal

• Build larger, more efficient units

• Renovate and modernize existing capacity

• Build plants closer to mines

12

Coal Technology Status in China and IndiaCoal Technology Status in China and IndiaTechnology China India

IGCCYantai IGCC project under consideration for past decade. Several power and polygenerationprojects being developed by major utilities.

$2.5-M DOE/USAID/NTPC feasibility study for 100-MW unit completed. Pursuing a demo project of about 100 MW by NTPC . BHEL developed domestic technology, tested at 6-MW scale.

Gasifiers37 on coal, 13 on petroleum and 1 on gas(25 Shell, 22 GE, 3 Sasol Lurgi, 1 GTI U-Gas)(35 Operating, 16 Planned)

6 operating on petroleum and petcoke(5 Shell, 1 GE)

CFBC Many domestically built 50-200-MW unitsTechnology acquired through licensing. Four domestically built 125-MW units, including 2 firing lignite. 250-MW unit under installation at Neyveli Lignite.

CTL/ Polygeneration

First phase of Shenhua’s direct liquefaction plant in Inner Mongolia to start operation in 2008, producing 1.08 million tons of liquid products (diesel, LPG, and naphtha). Total production of two phases is 5 million tons. Also, developing two indirect liquefaction plants with Sasol Polygeneration under study by others, including Hunnan International Technopolis Shenyang (HITS) using coal and waste/garbage and DatangPower (4 plants) using coal

Under study; on January 2007, Investment Commission said go forward, but not a near-term project

Supercritical Several dozen units commissioned

Original license from Combustion Engineering (USA, now Alstom); scaled up by BHEL. No units constructed yet, but first plant announced by BHEL and TNEB for 2 x 800 plant at Tuticorin, Tamil Nadu. First imported unit 1980-MW (3 x 660 MW) Sipat to be commissioned in 2008 by Doosan Babcock (Korea), which will burn 43% ash coal. Three other projects already awarded to IPPs through tariff-based competitive bidding. Many more supercritical units in pipeline.

Ultra Supercritical

First plant commissioned early 2008 (Huaneng’s 4 x 1000-MW Yuhuan Plant)

Initial tie-up with Babcock Borsig. Recently, licensed Alstom boiler technology and Siemens steam turbine technology up to 660 MW. BHEL plans to develop up to 800 MW. No units constructed yet.

13

Thermal Power Technology R&D PrioritiesThermal Power Technology R&D PrioritiesChina

• R&D and manufacture of >600-MW SC/USC p.c. units• Import state-of-the-art control technology for NOx and SO2• Introduce large-scale gasification and coal liquefaction• Polygeneration of Fuels & Power• Focus on Chinese manufacture to control costs by:

⎯ transfer foreign technologies to select equipment manufacturers via licenses and joint ventures

⎯ participating in international R&D projectsIndia

• Introduce large (660-MW) SC and USC plants• Promote utilization of IGCC and CFBC• Renovate and modernize old units • License foreign technology

China• R&D and manufacture of >600-MW SC/USC p.c. units• Import state-of-the-art control technology for NOx and SO2• Introduce large-scale gasification and coal liquefaction• Polygeneration of Fuels & Power• Focus on Chinese manufacture to control costs by:

⎯ transfer foreign technologies to select equipment manufacturers via licenses and joint ventures

⎯ participating in international R&D projectsIndia

• Introduce large (660-MW) SC and USC plants• Promote utilization of IGCC and CFBC• Renovate and modernize old units • License foreign technology

14

Institutional Capacity for Fossil Fuel RD&D and Technology Adoption Much Greater in China than India

Institutional Capacity for Fossil Fuel RD&D and Technology Adoption Much Greater in China than IndiaEntities Involved in Fossil Fuel

RD&D and Manufacture China India

Research Institutes Many (w/commercial companies) Few

Universities Many (w/commercial companies) Few

Conventional Technology Manufacturers Many Two

Advanced Technology Manufacturers Few One

Government Funding for R&D Significant Limited

Government Ministries Responsible for RD&D and Technology Adoption

Responsibilities divided (MOST supports R&D and

NRDC supports commercialization)

Responsibilities overlap (Ministries of Coal,

Mines, Power, Petroleum & Natural Gas, and Dept.

of S&T)

India Note: NTPC has broke ground on “national” Energy Technology Centreand BHEL has announced 300 crore ($75M) CCT R&D Centre

15

2010: • 45-50% Efficiency (HHV)• 99% SO2 removal• NOx < 0.01 lb/MM Btu• 90% Hg removal

2012:• 90% CO2 capture• <10% increase in cost of electricity (COE) with carbon

sequestration2015• Multi-product capability (e.g., power + H2)• 60% efficiency (measured without carbon capture)

2010: • 45-50% Efficiency (HHV)• 99% SO2 removal• NOx < 0.01 lb/MM Btu• 90% Hg removal

2012:• 90% CO2 capture• <10% increase in cost of electricity (COE) with carbon

sequestration2015• Multi-product capability (e.g., power + H2)• 60% efficiency (measured without carbon capture)

DOE’s Office of Fossil EnergyAdvanced (Coal) Power Systems Goals

DOE’s Office of Fossil EnergyAdvanced (Coal) Power Systems Goals

16

2007 World Gasification Survey Highlights2007 World Gasification Survey Highlights

What is:• 3 Sasol plants in South Africa account for over 30%

of world gasification production• China has 35 operating gasification plants (11 new

since 2004) with total syngas output of about 18% of worldwide production

What is Planned:• 16 new plants planned for China - 7 in start up –

growing to almost 25% of worldwide production• In terms of product, Fischer Tropsch liquids will

have largest share of planned growth, most of which is from single gas-to-liquids project in Qatar – 15% of worldwide production

What is:• 3 Sasol plants in South Africa account for over 30%

of world gasification production• China has 35 operating gasification plants (11 new

since 2004) with total syngas output of about 18% of worldwide production

What is Planned:• 16 new plants planned for China - 7 in start up –

growing to almost 25% of worldwide production• In terms of product, Fischer Tropsch liquids will

have largest share of planned growth, most of which is from single gas-to-liquids project in Qatar – 15% of worldwide production

17

Existing and Potential CTL ProjectsExisting and Potential CTL Projects

Reference: from Headwaters Inc. J.N. Ward Senate Briefing 1/19/07

18

CTL Baseline Plant EconomicsBare Erected Cost

CTL Baseline Plant EconomicsBare Erected Cost

CTL Plant Size

Coal Feed Rate

Total Plant Costs

Costs per Bbl day

Small –10,000 bbl /day

4,000 t/d $800 M $80,000

Large –50,000 bbl/day

25,000 t/d $3,650 M $73,000

Required Selling Price (RSP) range between $41-$60 per bbl - dependant on coal type, region, and plant size (65/45 debt/equity financing)

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/press/2007/07040-Coal_to_Liquids_Study.html

19

GasifiersGasifiersKBR

TransportConocoPhillips

E-GasShellSCGP

Siemens(GSP/Noell)

Slag

Fuel Gas

HP Steam

Dry Coal

O2

GE Energy(Chevron-Texaco)

20

Criteria Pollutants for All CasesCriteria Pollutants for All Cases

0.000.010.020.030.040.050.060.070.080.090.100.110.12

GE GEw/CO2

CoP CoPw/CO2

Shell Shellw/CO2

PC-sub PC-subw/CO2

PC-SC PC-SCw/CO2

NGCC NGCCw/CO2

Emis

sion

s (lb

/MM

Btu

)

SO2NOxPM

Source: DOE/NETL Report: “Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants”, May 2007

21

Comparison of Water Consumptionfor Various Fossil Plants

Comparison of Water Consumptionfor Various Fossil Plants

Note: Cooling water requirements are estimated for generic Eastern US siteSource: NETL “Power Plant Water Usage and Loss Study” revised May 2007

26106

301

433

2577

341

443

2978

345

452

34105

372

511

087

283

370

9107

598

714

895

536

639

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

E-Gas Shell GE R-C GEQuench

NGCC PC Sub PCSuper

Cooling Tower LossesFlue Gas LossesProcess Losses

Gallons per/MWh

22

CO2 Emissions for All CasesCO2 Emissions for All Cases

1,459

154

1,452

189

1,409

149

1,780

225

1,681

209

783

86

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

2,000

CO

2 em

issi

ons,

lb/M

Wh

GEE GEE w/CCS

CoP CoP w/CCS

Shell Shell w/CCS

PC-Sub PC-Sub w/ CCS

PC-SC PC-SC w/ CCS

NGCC NGCC w/ CCS

CO2 Emissions Normalized By Gross Output


23

Total Plant Cost ComparisonTotal Plant Cost Comparison

Total Plant Capital Cost includes contingencies and engineering fees

1841

2496

1549

2895

1575

2870

554

1172

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Avg IGCC Avg IGCCw/ CO2Capture

PC-Sub PC-Sub w/CO2

Capture

PC-Super PC-Superw/ CO2Capture

NGCC NGCC w/CO2

Capture

$/kW

($20

07)


24

Cost of Electricity ComparisonCost of Electricity Comparison

January 2007 Dollars, Coal cost $1.80/106Btu. Gas cost $6.75/106Btu

7.79

10.63

6.40

11.88

6.33

11.48

6.84

9.74

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

Avg IGCC Avg IGCCw/ CO2Capture

PC-Sub PC-Sub w/CO2

Capture

PC-Super PC-Superw/ CO2Capture

NGCC NGCC w/CO2

Capture

cent

s /kW

h ($

2007

)


25

39.5

32.1

36.8

24.9

39.1

27.2

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

Avg IGCC Avg IGCC w/CO2 Capture

PC-Sub PC-Sub w/CO2 Capture

PC-Super PC-Super w/CO2 Capture

Capturing CO2 with Today’s TechnologySignificantly Reduces Plant Efficiency

Capturing CO2 with Today’s TechnologySignificantly Reduces Plant EfficiencyEf

ficie

n cy

to e

l ect

r ici t y

, net

(HH

V )


-19%-32% -30%

Gasification Pulverized Coal Combustion

26

7.79

10.63

6.40

11.88

6.33

11.48

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

Avg IGCC Avg IGCC w/CO2 Capture

PC-Sub PC-Sub w/CO2 Capture

PC-Super PC-Super w/CO2 Capture

Capturing CO2 with Today’s Technology is Expensive

Cost of Electricity Comparison

Capturing CO2 with Today’s Technology is Expensive

Cost of Electricity Comparison

January 2007 Dollars, Coal cost $1.80/106 Btu

cen t

s /kW

h ($

2007

)

+36% +86% +81%

Gasification Pulverized Coal Combustion


27

Benchmark: $30/tCO2Benchmark: $30/tCO2

Form of Energy Equivalent to $30/tCO2 (≈ $100/tC)

Natural gas $1.60/1000 scf

Crude oil $13/barrel

Coal $70/U.S. ton

Gasoline 25¢/gallon (ethanol subsidy: 50¢/gallon)

Electricity from coal 2.4¢/kWh (wind and nuclear subsidies: 1.8 ¢/kWh)

Electricity from natural gas 1.1¢/kWh

Carbon emission charges in the neighborhood of $30/tCO2 can enable scale-up of most of technologies, if supplemented with sectoral policy to facilitate transition.

$30/tCO2 is the current European Trading System price for 2008 emissions.At this price, current global emissions (30 GtCO2/yr) cost $900 billion/yr, 2% of GWP.

Slide Source: Professor Socolow, Princeton University

28

For Additional InformationFor Additional Information

U.S. Department of EnergyOffice of Fossil Energy

www.fe.doe.gov

Jarad [email protected]

http://www.fe.doe.gov/

emerging technologies in emerging economies (with...

Documents