Circulating Fluidized Bed Boiler Technology

A competitive option for CO2 capture through oxyfuel combustion?

IEA 1stt Oxyfuel Combustion Conference, Cottbus, 9 September 2009

Nicklas Simonsson
Simonsson, Vattenfall Research & Development AB
Timo Eriksson, Foster Wheeler Energia Oy
Minish Shah, Praxair Inc.

Vattenfall AB
 Outline

1. Air CFB boiler technology

Development trends
Current state of the art
Main principles and benefits
2. Hamburg CHP oxyfuel CFB conceptual design study
Objective
Design basis
ASU and CO2 processing unit
Boiler design
Techno-economical
T h i l results
lt
3. Summary and conclusions

Vattenfall AB
2
 Air CFB Technology
gy Development
p trends

Traditionally CFB boilers

800 800 MWe characterised by
Unit Capacity (MWe)
600 Small unit sizes
Low/moderate steam data
500
Mainly used in applications
Lagisza
400 with difficult to use fuels
and biomass
300
JEA Significant
g scale up
p of unit
200 Turow 1 size and increase of steam
Tri-State Nova Scotia data during last decade
100 Vaskiluodon
Pilot Plant
Oriental Chem Today CFB technology must
General Motors
0 be considered a competitive
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 option also for large-scale
Start-Up Year utility applications
Source: Foster Wheeler

Vattenfall AB
3
To help protect y our priv acy , PowerPoint prev ented this external picture from being automatically downloaded. To download and display this picture, click Options in the Message Bar, and then click Enable external content.

Air CFB Technology

gy Current state of the art

Foster Wheeler Lagisza CFB unit

Worlds largest and first supercritical CFB boiler

Handed over to customer in Poland in June 2009
460 MWe gross
275bar/560C/580C
290C feed water temperature
>43%
43% net efficiency Th Foster
The F t Wheeler
Wh l Lagisza
L i CFB b
boiler
il from
f conceptual
t l
design to existing plant

Vattenfall AB
4
 Air CFB Technology
gy Principles
p and benefits
Combustion of fuel in a high bed inventory consisting of a mixture of
fuel, ashes and sorbent (limestone). Bed suspended or fluidised through
air entering the bottom of furnace

Solid
recirculation

Source: Foster Wheeler

Vattenfall AB
5
 Hamburg
g OxyCFB
y CHP conceptual
p design
g study
y

Objective:
To evaluate the competitiveness
p and p possibilities
of CFB technology in oxyfuel applications

Study performed in close cooperation with:

F
Foster
t Wheeler
Wh l (boiler
(b il d
design)
i )
Praxair (ASU and CO2 compression)

Design basis:
Hamburg site conditions
Bituminous coal (LHV 25.1 MJ/kg)
500 MWe gross
0-400 MWDH (output and temperature levels
varying during the year)
The Tiefstack CHP plant one of several units
Both air and oxyfuel cases investigated delivering district heating to the the city of
CO2 capture
t rate
t >90% Hamburg The Hamburg district heating network
Hamburg.
consist of over 770 km pipelines.

Vattenfall AB
6
 Hamburg
g OxyCFB
y CHP conceptual
p design
g study
y

Included activities:
Conceptual boiler design, performance, cost
and layouts for air and oxyfuel
ASU and CPU design, performance, cost and
layouts
Flue gas cleaning options
ASU O2 purity sensitivity and optimisation study
Detailed
D t il d overallll plant
l t H&MB calculations
l l ti
Overall plant heat integration optimisation
Plant Layout
Economical evaluations
Risk assessment

Fl
Flow sheet
h t ffrom th
the H&MB calculations
l l ti (above)
( b )
and the resulting OxyCFB plant layout.

Vattenfall AB
7
 ASU and CO2 compression and purification unit
designs
Unit designs based on Praxairs state of the art

Air separation unit

Dual trains with total capacity 7088 TPD O2 (contained)
@ 1.3 bar and 172C
Optimisation study 97%
97%-vol
vol O2 purity selected
Low temperature heat recovery to DH network

CO2 processing unit

Single train (with two parallel compression units) with
total capacity of 7860 TPD CO2 contained (inlet flue
gas CO2 concentration ~85%-vol)
CO2 capture rate 93.3%
CO2 product quality 96.1%-vol. @ 110 bar and 30C
Low temperature heat recovery to DH network and
heat integration for vent gas expansion
No provisions for SOX and NOX removal although
pursued by Praxair for future developments

Vattenfall AB
8
 Air- and oxyfuel
y CFB boiler design
g

Existing 460 MWe,gross Lagisza boiler design used as

starting point
Low mass flux BENSON once-through technology with
vertical furnace tubes
Sliding pressure operation

Steam data representative for given time frame

Steam data: 600C/620C /290 bar
Feed water temp: 300C

Assumptions OxyCFB design (compared to AirCFB)

HP steam flow kept constant
Furnace velocities similar as in air firing
Same flue gas excess O2 content (3.6%-vol, dry)
Oxidant O2 so that adiabatic combustion temperature does
not exceed that of air firing
Same Ca/S ratio
Air ingress 1% of flue gas flow

Vattenfall AB
9
 OxyCFB
y p
process flow diagram
g flue g
gas side
To stack
Vent
Bypass eco gases
LP eco B

Conden-
Gas Drying

ser
Boiler cleaning HRC Compression
eco
Boiler
Secondary
gas RG preheater
CO2

H2O and
Intrex HRS soluble
impurities
Fuel Recycle gases

Transport
Storage

Mixing Preheaters
Fluidizing gas
Air
ASU
Oxygen
(97% O2)
Mixing
Steam N2

Air

Vattenfall AB
10
 Overall p
plant technical & economical key
y data
AirCFB AirCFB OxyCFB OxyCFB Economical assumptions
Condens DH* Condens DH*
Yearly operating time: 7500h
Fuel input [MW] 1052 1052 1047 1047 Rate of interest: 6%(real)
( )
Gross Power [MWe] 506 469 516 482 Plant life: 25 years
Net Power [MWe] 472 435 381 347 Coal price: 6.6 /MWh (incl.
transport & handling) (IEA WEO
District heating [MWth] - 269 - 269 2007)
Net efficiency [%] 44.9 41.4 36.4 33.2 District heating credit: 25 /MWh
(EU bborder
d NG pricei + 8 /MWh)
Total efficiency [%] - 67.0 - 59.9 (NG=17 /MWh IEA WEO 2007)
Investments on Q3 2008 level and
Specific invest. [/kWe net] 1621 1703 2952 3096 uncertainty of +/-30%
No cost for CO2 transport and
COE [[/MWhe] 39.8 28.1 65.6 52.7 storage included
CO2 avoid. cost [/ton CO2] - - 37.9 33.4
*Yearly average values due to varying DH output and temperature levels.

DH can significantly improve plant economics

Slightly higher COE and CO2 avoid. cost compared to PF cases on equal basis. However:
Uncertainties in investment costs between studies
Not considered that CFB cases potentially could utilise lower quality fuels more cost effective
CFB could
ld very well
ll be
b competitive
titi both
b th with
ith and
d without
ith t CO2 capture!
t !

Vattenfall AB
11
 Hamburg
g OxyCFB
y study
y Summary
y
Established air CFB advantages also valid for
OxyCFB
Fuel flexibility (Hard coal
coal, Lignite
Lignite, Biomass)
Possibility to use low grade/less expensive fuels
SOX and NOX reduction without secondary CFB Solid CFB Solid
measures REACTOR recirculation REACTOR recirculation

Simple
Si l ffuell ffeeding
di system
Solid
Solid flow in
Additional potential advantages in oxyfuel flow in

operation Solid
flow
Solid
flow
out out
High O2 concentration designs turbulent bed
Fluidizing Fluidizing
and heat exchanger arrangements provide good air flow air flow
means of equalising temperature levels a) Internal circulation b) External circulation

Flexi-BurnTM Easier to enable same boiler to be

operated with both air and oxyfuel firing
No fuel pulverising no need for primary recycle The INTegrated Recycle heat EXchanger
flow (INTREXTM) - an additional advantage in oxyfuel
operation in terms of combustion temperature
Furnace at overpressure easier to minimise air control
control.
ingress
INTREXTM and Flexi-BurnTM are trademarks of Foster Wheeler AG
Vattenfall AB
12
 Hamburg
g OxyCFB
y study
y Summary
y

Disadvantages/issues:
Boiler
B il iisland
l d auxiliary
ili consumption
ti slightly
li htl lower
l plant
l t efficiency
ffi i
Limestone consumption
Ash flows and disposal issues
Erosion of reactor walls although rare in new CFB designs

Uncertainties, risks and development needs:

So far only small scale OxyCFB test rigs (< 100 kW)
Further validation in pilot and demo scale necessary (as for PF Oxyfuel)
Uncertainties related to:
Ultra-supercritical steam data (> 600C) in both air and Oxyfuel operation
In-bed SO2 capture in Oxyfuel operation
Combustion control systems
Heat transfer in Oxyfuel operation

Vattenfall will continue to follow development of oxyfuel CFB technology closely!

Vattenfall AB
13
 Thank you!

For further information please contact:

Nicklas Simonsson
Vattenfall Research & Development AB
tel.: +46 (0)8 739 5561
nicklas.simonsson@vattenfall.com

Vattenfall AB
 Back-up

Vattenfall AB
 OxyCFB
y DH p
profiles efficiency
y distribution
Electrical and total efficiences in the operating profiles

80,0
Yearly
70,0 67,9 average
66,1
61,1
58,8
60,0

49,8
Effficiency [%]

50,0

40,0
35,4 35,6 35,6
33,4 33,2
31,7
29 7
29,7
30,0

20,0

10 0
10,0

0,0
Profile 1 Profile 2 Profile 3 Profile 4 Profile 5 0MW Yearly average
400MW DH 360MW DH 290MW DH 150MW DH DH cond. 269 MW DH

El t i l nett efficency
Electrical ffi T t l efficency
Total ffi

Vattenfall AB
16
 Efficiency
y summary
y
Efficiency summary - condensing and DH operation

90,0
Efficiency penalty
DH -yearly
yearly Condensing condensing
80,0 average operation operation:
70,0 67,0
8.5 %-points

60,0 58,8 Efficiency penalty

district heating
Efficiency [%]

50,0
44,9 operation:
41,4
40,0
, 36 4
36,4
8.2 %-points
p
33,2

30,0
Efficiency penalty
lower in district
20,0
heating operation
10,0 due to better
possibilities for low
0,0
AirCFB with DH OxyCFB with DH AirCFB condensing OxyCFB condensing
temperature heat
El t i l nett efficency
Electrical ffi T t l efficency
Total ffi
integration

Vattenfall AB
17
 ASU oxygen
yg p purity
y optimisation
p study
y
Impact of ASU O2 purity

CO2 avoidance cost CO2 capture cost CO2 capture rate

37,00 100

%]
capture rate [%
32,00 95
O2 cost [/ton]

CO2 capture rate

CO2 c
CO

27,00 90

22,00 85
95% 97% 99,5%
Oxygen purity [%]

Vattenfall AB
18