Coal Energy for the Future (1995) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
10 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
10 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Pages 179-222
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 179... ...
The framework is based on projected scenarios for future energy demand and markets for coal technologies, taking into account likely future environmental requirements, competing energy sources, institutional issues, international activities, and other factors affecting the demand for coal. In the committee's view, the overall objective of DOE's coal program should be to provide the basis for technological solutions to likely future demands, as reflected in the scenarios.
|
From page 180... ...
Specific objectives have been formulated for that period for advanced power systems and advanced fuel systems. These objectives are discussed below in the sections on electric power generation and clean fuels from coal.
|
From page 181... ...
Finally, interest in recovery of coalbed methane has been stimulated by concern about greenhouse gases and EPACT requirements. Methane recovery technology for high methane concentrations is commercially available, and recovery is practiced by the gas and coal mining industries where local conditions justify the investment.
|
From page 182... ...
ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION Power Generation Systems The availability of high-performance gas turbines and low-cost natural gas has resulted in the use of natural-gas-fired combustion turbines for many recently installed power generation facilities. As discussed in Chapters 3 and 4, decreasing availability and higher costs for natural gas in the next decade and beyond are expected to result in a resurgence of construction and repowering of coal-based power generation facilities, with requirements for greatly improved emission controls and higher efficiency.
|
From page 183... ...
, coal gasification and gas cleanup energy losses will decrease efficiency by five to 10 efficiency points when using the gasification systems being demonstrated in the CCT program (see Chapter 61. Thus, substantial reduction of gasification-related losses is needed to achieve the DOE target system efficiency with IGCC.
|
From page 185... ...
185 Cal 2 o C)
|
From page 186... ...
A more realistic cost goal for the DOE advanced power systems program might be to achieve efficiency improvements at an overall electricity cost comparable to that for new coal plants today. For the future U.S.
|
From page 187... ...
Although hot gas cleanup is a component of advanced IGCC systems, cold gas cleanup could still allow the technology to succeed, if at a lower efficiency. In this sense, IGCC is a somewhat less risky technology than PFBC.
|
From page 188... ...
However, gas turbines and fuel cells could be used with coal-derived gas, with the addition of gasification and gas cleanup facilities. The principal operating difference between natural gas and coal-derived fuel gas in these applications relates to the contaminants in coal-derived gas.
|
From page 189... ...
Magnetohydrodynamics The use of topping cycles as in fuel cells, gas turbines, and MHD generators to achieve efficiencies higher than those attainable in the simple steam Rankine cycle (approximately 42 percent) has been adopted worldwide and is the major focus of the ongoing DOE program on advanced technologies for electricity generation.
|
From page 190... ...
Ideally, a risk-cost-benefit analysis would serve as the basis for determining environmental control regulations; discussion of this topic is beyond the scope of the present study. A possible vision for longer-term environmental R&D goals is to benchmark emissions of air pollutants from coal plants relative to cleaner but more costly competing fuels, particularly natural gas.
|
From page 191... ...
Technology Development Needs A number of technologies now being demonstrated in the CCT program offer potentially lower emissions control costs in the near term for conventional air pollutants, for both new and retrofit plants. The most challenging problem for DOE is to achieve reliable and cost-effective emissions control using hot gas cleanup for advanced power systems.
|
From page 192... ...
While current hot gas cleanup devices achieve very low levels of SO2 and particulate emissions, to date neither hot gas particulate removal nor hot gas desulfurization systems have approached the durability and reliability requirements needed for a commercial system. Furthermore, current hot gas cleanup systems do not control volatile air toxics or nitrogen oxides (NOX)
|
From page 193... ...
3. For group 2 and 3 systems with 45 to 60 percent targeted efficiency, new technological achievements are required to achieve the goals defined by DOE, including development of high-temperature gas turbines, high-temperature heat exchangers, hot gas cleanup systems, and advanced fuel cells.
|
From page 194... ...
16. NOx control measures meeting DOE's performance targets for advanced power systems with hot gas cleanup and high-temperature turbines remain to be fully specified and demonstrated.
|
From page 195... ...
Emissions Control Technologies7 7. HA critical assessment of hot gas cleanup systems for advanced IGCC and PFBC should be undertaken immediately to determine the likely costs and the ability to meet, in the next three to five years, all requirements for future hightemperature (>1260 °C t>2300 °F]
|
From page 196... ...
CLEAN FUELS AND SPECIALTY PRODUCTS FROM COAL Clean gases and liquid products derived from coal have the potential for substantial future use. At present, natural gas and refined petroleum are much less costly than comparable products from coal.
|
From page 197... ...
Clean fuels production processes that conserve hydrogen and involve in situ conversion of CO and water to H2 provide important gains in efficiency and cost reduction through heat integration and provide a preferred option for synthetic fuels manufacture. Synthetic Natural Gas Production While the current low cost of natural gas makes synthetic natural gas (SNG)
|
From page 198... ...
However, the resulting cost will still be higher than projections by the EIA (Energy Information Administration) for natural gas wellhead prices of about $3.50/thousand cubic feet or less in 2010.
|
From page 199... ...
Further cost reductions can be anticipated by continued systems studies; however, critical examination of the premium fuel credit should be included. Opportunities for cost reductions by research include optimization of oncethrough processes and development of catalyst systems compatible with sulfur levels attainable using hot gas cleanup.
|
From page 200... ...
Electric utilities supply electricity along with some steam to local users; oil refineries supply liquid fuels along with some petrochemical feedstocks; and gas suppliers collect, purify, and transmit natural gas to end users. Government regulations differ for these areas, and separate specialty business units have been established to deal with these separate regulatory systems.
|
From page 201... ...
identified major synergies between advanced power generation based on gasification and production of clean fuels and chemicals. The preceding discussion identified several examples of cost and energy savings from the manufacture of a variety of products from coal gasification.
|
From page 202... ...
14. Continued reductions in funding will cause a major degradation in the effectiveness of the DOE coal liquefaction program.
|
From page 203... ...
6. Within the DOE program on coal liquefaction, highest priority should be given to direct coal liquefaction research, concentrating on fundamental coal chemistry and innovative process development.
|
From page 204... ...
A major shortcoming, however, appears to be a lack of systematic assumptions and design premises within and across the full suite of DOE's advanced energy conversion and environmental control research programs. Rather, it appears that different parts of the DOE organization, working with a variety of different contractors, employ different assumptions and approaches-circumstances that preclude rigorous comparisons or evaluations of technologies in a given category (e.g., advanced power systems or advanced fuel systems)
|
From page 205... ...
The annual budget for FE coal R&D demonstration programs is approximately $150 million/year; additional funding for demonstrations of fuel cells and advanced turbines is included in the Office of FE's natural gas budget. The CCT program will expend about $6.9 billion over 14 years on 45 programs, with industry contributing more than two-thirds of the total funding.
|
From page 206... ...
While no further solicitations are planned under the existing CCT program, the FE coal R&D program should continue to cofund demonstrations of selected Group 2 and Group 3 advanced clean coal technologies beyond those currently being demonstrated by the CCT program.
|
From page 207... ...
. The reductions in funding for coal liquefaction, when combined with a proposed 36 percent reduction in funding for liquefaction programs outside the advanced research program, are of special concern, given the prospects for producing coal liquids in the mid to long term.~3 In Chapters 6 and 7 the committee identified ample opportunities for major contributions to fuels and power generation programs from advanced research However, DOE's budget reductions for advanced research are not commensurate with the requirements for advancement of coal technology, notably the increasing needs for lower-cost, more efficient, and more environmentally acceptable use of coal.
|
From page 208... ...
Table 10-4 summarizes the major EPACT provisions relating to coal, key features of relevant DOE programs, and the committee's comments and ratings in terms of priority for DOE. In assessing priorities for DOE activities, the committee used the criteria developed in Chapter 4.
|
From page 209... ...
The committee concluded that DOE's CCT program represents an excellent start in the area of commercializing advanced power generation technologies, but, as noted above, plans need to be developed by DOE for activities beyond the conclusion of current CCT activities. In contrast to DOE's generally adequate response to the sections of EPACT addressing power generation, its activities in coal liquefaction fall short of EPACT requirements, the committee concluded.
|
From page 210... ...
210 ct o V ct sit o ct o V o a CQ ._ PA En ¢ of En CO a: o Ct .~ Cal .O .
|
From page 211... ...
211 ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~R ~ · ~ ~ ~ ' Ct C,> hz gs 1, $~2~t ~ ~ s~ o ~ ~ .= .
|
From page 212... ...
212 _ q on m ¢ Cat O c: .
|
From page 216... ...
216 .= o on Ed U
|
From page 218... ...
218 _ s ~ 1 q to Em U
|
From page 219... ...
* Within the DOE coal program there should be an increasing emphasis on the production of clean fuels and other carbon-based products over time.
|
From page 220... ...
1994. Modeling uncertainties in advanced technologies: Application to a coal gasification system with hot gas cleanup.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.