CARBON DIOXIDE CAPTURE CC OPTIONS FOR ENERGY INTENSIVE

CARBON DIOXIDE CAPTURE (CC) OPTIONS FOR ENERGY INTENSIVE INDUSTRIES Dr. Avinash N. Patkar Head- Corporate Environment & Safety Group The TATA Power Company Ltd. (TPC) International Workshop on Carbon Capture and Storage in Power Sector: R&D Priorities in India New Delhi, INDIA January 23, 2008 1

THE TATA POWER COMPANY LIMITED Thermal Hydro Wind 1) Trombay (1, 330 MW) 2) Jojobera (428 MW) 3) Belgaum (81 MW) 1) Khopoli (72 MW) 2) Bhivpuri (75 MW) 3) Bhira (300 MW) 1) Supe (17 MW) 2) Nagar (45 MW) 2

ELECTRICITY USE AND CO 2 (PER CAPITA, 2005) k. Wh person CO 2 (tons/yr) person 3

AVERAGE CO 2 EMISSIONS (MT/MWh)1: INDIA Fuel Small (S) Medium (M) Large (L) Coal S/M/L Size, MW 1. 20 1. 05 1. 00 100/250/500 Lignite 1. 32 1. 23 1. 28 75/125/250 N. Gas 0. 43 0. 42 0. 43 50/75/100 1: Central Electric Authority of India Database (2006). See reference for assumptions. 4

REDUCING CO 2 EMISSIONS – STEPS Prepare a CO 2 and GHG Emissions Inventory. Improve efficiency by energy audits and rehabilitating old, inefficient plants. Higher efficiency technologies (Super-Critical and IGCC) for new plants. Renewable energy – Hydro, wind, solar, bio-energy, ocean and geo-thermal. Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS). 5

PFD FOR MEA CO 2 CAPTURE (CC) SYSTEM 6

AMINE BASED COMMERCIAL SOLVENTS 1 Supplier/ Solvent Loss, kg/ton CO 2 Solvent Cost $/kg $/ton CO 2 Steam Used kg/kg CO 2 Many/MEA 1. 0 to 3. 0 1. 25 1. 20 to 2. 50 2. 0 Fluor/MEA+ 2. 0 1. 50 2. 3 MHI/KS-1* 0. 35 3. 00 1. 55 1. 5 1: US EPA (2006); +: With Inhibitors *: Hindered Amines 7

BUDGET ESTIMATES FOR NEW PLANT (500 MW): WITHOUT CC 1, 2, 3 Parameter Sub Critical Net Thermal Eff. , % 34. 8 Net Heat Rate, Kcal/k. Wh 2, 490 Coal Used tons/hr 200. 7 Gross Power, MW 541 Capital Investment, $/ k. W 1, 387 COE, cents/k. Wh 5. 2 Super Critical 41. 9 2, 070 166. 9 543 1, 575 4. 3 1: Sub-bituminous coal; High Heating Value (HHV) = 4, 800 kcal/kg (as received). 2: EPA, 2006: With a SCR system (NOx < 15 ppmv) and a limestone FGD (SO 2 < 10 ppmv). 3: Costs are + 30%, US Dollars. December 2004. 8

BUDGET ESTIMATES FOR NEW PLANT (500 MW): WITH CC 1, 2, 3, 4 Parameter Sub Critical Net Thermal Eff. , % 26. 1 Net Heat Rate, Kcal/k. Wh 3, 110 Coal Used tons/hr 261. 5 Gross Power, MW 670 Capital Investment, $/ k. W 1, 997 COE, cents/k. Wh 7. 8 Super Critical 31. 5 2, 590 208. 6 673 2, 270 4. 3 1: Sub-bituminous coal; HHV = 4, 800 kcal/kg (as received). CO 2 Removal = 85%. 2: EPA, 2006: With a SCR system (NOx < 15 ppmv) and a limestone FGD (SO 2 < 10 ppmv). 3: Costs are + 30%, US Dollars. December 2004. 4: IPCC, 2005 (TS. 3): CC system - More energy (24%); higher capital (44%) and higher COE (42%) than baseline. These are the lower values of a range given. 9

PROBLMES WITH MEA SYSTEMS • • Degradation of MEA due to O 2, SO 2, NOx Losses to flue gas and leakage: Solvent costs High solvent regeneration energy required Corrosion of vessels, packing, piping High capital costs (+ ~ 44% for new) High operating costs (+ ~ 24% for new) High Cost of Energy (+ ~ 42% for new) Retrofit could be almost double as expensive 10

R&D WORK WITH CC SOLVENT SYSTEMS • • Solvents with higher CO 2 loading (kg/kg) Solvents that will resist O 2, SO 2, NOX Packing with higher surface area (250 m 2/m 3) Packing with lower gas DP at high gas velocity (3 m/sec) and high L/G ratio (60 m 3/m 2. hr) • (NH 4)2 CO 3: Alstom and Powerspan (in USA) • K 2 CO 3: U. of Texas, Austin, TX, USA • Penalty Targets: Energy < 10%; Cost < 20% 11

PFD FOR OXY-FUEL COMBUSTION 12

REVIEW OF OXY-FUEL COMBUSTION Advantages • Concentrated SO 2, NOx and CO 2 • Absorption systems will be much smaller • A 30 MW demo plant is planned by Vattenfall Disadvantages • Higher energy for pure O 2 than MEA system • Difficult to retrofit • Pilot scale work so far (< 1 MW) 13

R&D WORK ON OXY-FUEL COMBUSTION • • • More efficient membranes for pure O 2 system More efficient adsorbents for pure O 2 system Optimization of combustion and CC Defined system for SO 2 and NOx control A 10 MW pilot plant is planned by B&W A 30 MW demo plant is built by Vattenfall 14

CONSTRAINTS ON CC TECHNOLOGIES: 2008 High Investment and energy penalty Amine CC capital investment will be ~1. 9 Crore/MW (~44% of power plant); Parasitic energy would be ~ 24% of gross output and COE will be ~42% higher as of Jan. 2008! More for Oxy-Fuel CC. Technologies at pilot/demo scale CC technologies for coal-fired power plant are in pilot (1 -5 MW) or demo (10 -30 MW) scale; Thus uncertainty in scale-up to 500 MW Sequestration/Reuse Uncertainty Limited CO 2 reuse in Gas/Oil/Methane Recovery; Costs of compression/liquification and transport Regulatory uncertainty No global consensus, Limits long-term loans and raises interest rates: Limited global financing 15

Any Questions? For copies of this presentation, please send an e -mail to: apatkar@tpc. co. in 16