Title: Clean Coal Technologies
1- Clean Coal Technologies
- -Keeping Coal in the Money-
- Gary Spitznogle
- Manager
- New Generation Development
- November 8, 2006
2AGENDA
- Integrated Resource Plan (IRP)
- Strategy
- Generation options
- Technology options
- Generation costs
- Power Plant siting
- New Generation status update
- Conclusions
- Questions
3AEP 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
4What 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)
5What is AEPs need for new peaking and
intermediate generation?
- AEP Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) shows that by
2015 - 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)
6AEPs 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
2010 - 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)
7What base load options are available? -Looked at
natural gas-
8What base load options are available? -Looked at
nuclear-
9What base load options are available? -Looked at
coal-
10And 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
11U.S. coal capacity additions
12What technology should we use for the different
generation needs?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
13Looked at technology for peaking and intermediate
load - Natural gas -
14Looked at CFB technology for base load - Coal -
15Looked at IGCC technology for base load - Coal -
16Looked at PC technology for base load - Coal -
17What about fuel choice? - Technology selection
IGCC plants become less competitive with low-BTU
coals having other technology options available
is strategically important.
18Generating 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
indistinguishable - 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
emissions. - Higher efficiency Less emissions
19Generating 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.
20Generating 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
WV)
21IGCC Advantages
- Relatively low fuel cost from domestic coal
- Multiple product versatility
- Electricity
- Chemicals
- Liquids
22IGCC Advantages
- Reduce incremental cost of CO2 capture
- And also make Hydrogen
CO H2O gt CO2 H2
23Whats the Catch?
- IGCC technology is developing
- The I is missing in IGCC
- Capital cost premium
- Cultural Changes
- IGCC cost advantage longer horizon
24IGCC 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
success
- Federal Government has a role
- Provide incentives and remove roadblocks, but do
not attach unacceptable strings
25Current economics of new AEP East baseload
generation
- Source Results of AEP analysis based on EPRI
studies. - 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.
26But current economics ignore possible future
GHG requirements
- Investment evaluation should consider possible
future option value of IGCC vs. PC on carbon
capture
- 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
27CO2 Emissions
28How do the generation options compare?
29Where to build AEPs first commercial IGCC unit?
30Great Bend-Ohio IGCC Plant
31Mountaineer-WV IGCC Plant
32AEPs 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
Demonstration - 2005 September, FutureGen Alliance created
33AEPs 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
34AEPs 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)
35Conclusions
- 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
initiative
36Conclusions
- 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
from
37Conclusions
- 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