Coal Gasification as Alternative Fuel for Glass Industry

Gasification Primer
Presented By Donald L. Bonk Senior Technical Advisor National Energy Technology Laboratory U. S. Department of Energy

Owens Corning Corporate Headquarters 1, Owens Corning Parkway, Toledo, OH July 27, 2005 10:00 4:00

Meeting Objective: Develop plans to obtain glass industry support for an investigation to determine the viability of using coal gasification "synfuel" as an economical alternative to natural gas for melting glass.

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Gasification Chemistry
Gasification with Oxygen C + 1/2 O2 CO Gasifier Gas Composition (Vol %) H2 CO CO2 H2O CH4 25 - 30 30 - 60 5 - 15 2 - 30 0-5

Coal

Combustion with Oxygen C + O2 CO2 Gasification with Carbon Dioxide C + CO2 2CO

Oxygen

Gasification with Steam C + H2O CO + H2 Gasification with Hydrogen C + 2H2 CH4

Steam

Water-Gas Shift CO + H2O H2 + CO2 Methanation CO + 3H2 CH4 + H2O

H2S 0.2 - 1 COS 0 - 0.1 N2 0.5 - 4 Ar 0.2 - 1 NH3 + HCN 0 -0.3 Ash/Slag/PM

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

History of Gasification
Town Gas
Town gas, a gaseous product manufactured from coal, supplies lighting and heating for America and Europe. Town gas is approximately 50% hydrogen, with the rest comprised of mostly methane and carbon dioxide, with 3% to 6% carbon monoxide.
First practical use of town gas in modern times was for

street lighting The first public street lighting with gas took place in Pall Mall, London on January 28, 1807
Baltimore, Maryland began

the first commercial gas lighting of residences, streets, and businesses in 1816
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

History of Gasification
Used during World War II to convert coal into

transportation fuels (Fischer Tropsch) Used extensively in the last 50+ years to convert coal and heavy oil into hydrogen for the production of ammonia/urea fertilizer Chemical industry (1960s) Refinery industry (1980s) Global power industry (Today)

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Major Gasification Milestone

1842 1887 1910 1940 1950 1960 1970s 1970 1983 1984 1990s 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 2002 Baltimore Electric Town Gas Lurgi Gasification Patent Coal Gasification Common in U.S. / Europe for Town Gas Gasification of Nature Gas for Hydrogen in the Chemical Industry (Ammonia) Gasification of Coal for Fischer-Tropsch (F-T) Liquids (Sasol-Sasolburg) Coal Tested as Fuel for Gas Turbines (Direct Firing) IGCC Studies by U.S. DOE Gasification of Oil for Hydrogen in the Refining Industry Gasification of Coal to Chemicals Plant (Eastman Chemical) First Coal IGCC Demonstration (Coolwater Plant) First Non-Recourse Project Financed Oil IGCC Projects (Italy) First Natural Gas Gasification F-T Project (Shell Bintulu) NUON/Demkolecs 253 MWe Buggenum Plant Begins Operation PSI Walbash, Indiana Coal IGCC Begins Operation (DOE CCT IV) Tampa Electric Polk Coal IGCC Begins Operation (DOE CCT III) First Oil Hydrogen/IGCC Plant Begin Operations (Shell Pernis) ELCOGAS 298 MWe Puertollano Plant IGCC is now an Accepted Refinery and Coal Plant Option
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Characteristics of a Gasification Process

FEEDS
Alternatives: Asphalt Coal Heavy Oil Petroleum Coke Orimulsion Natural Gas Wastes Clean Fuels

GASIFICATION

GAS CLEANUP

END PRODUCTS

Combined Cycle Power Block Electricity Steam

Oxygen

Gas & Steam Sulfur Turbines Removal

Gasifier Syngas Marketable Byproducts: Byproducts: Solids (ash) Sulfur

Alternatives: Hydrogen Ammonia Chemicals Methanol

Source: ChevronTexaco
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Gasifier Configurations
Moving Bed Entrained Flow

Fluidized Bed

Transport
G A r o d u a s , s h c t

G T

a o

s if i e r p

T G

r a a

n s p o r t s i fi e r

C C o a l , o r b e n t In e r t

o a

l,

h a

e c

y c l e

e c y c l e G a s

r i v e

S O o

t e a m , x y g e n r A i r G B

a s i f i e o t to m 0

r 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 5 0 0

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Gasifier Types
Flow Regime Combustion Analogy Fuel Type Fuel Size Residence Time Oxidant Gas Outlet Temp. Ash Handling Commercial Examples Moving (or "Fixed") Bed grate fired combustors solids only 5 - 50 mm 15 - 30 minutes air- or oxygen-blown 400 - 500 C slagging and non-slagging Lurgi dry-ash (non-slagging), BGL (slagging) "moving" beds are mechanically stirred, fixed beds are not gas and solid flows are always countercurrent in moving bed gasifiers Fluidized Bed fluidized bed combustors solids only 0.5 - 5 mm 5 - 50 seconds air- or oxygen-blown 700 900 C non-slagging GTI U-Gas, HT Winkler, KRW bed temperature below ash fusion point to prevent agglomeration preferred for high-ash feedstocks and waste fuels Entrained Flow pulverized coal combustors solids or liquids < 500 microns 1 - 10 seconds almost always oxygen-blown 900 1400 C always slagging GE Energy, Shell, Prenflo, ConocoPhillips, Noell not preferred for high-ash fuels due to energy penalty of ash-melting unsuitable for fuels that are hard to atomize or pulverize

Comments

Note: The "transport" gasifier flow regime is between fluidized and entrained and can be air- or oxygen-blown.

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Gasifier Characteristic Comparison

Moving Bed Ash Cond. Coal Feed Fines Dry ~2in Limited Slagging ~2in Fluidized Bed Dry ~1/4 in Entrained Flow Transport Flow Dry Agglomerate Slagging ~1/4 in Better

~ 100 Mesh ~1/16in Unlimited Better

Better than Good dry ash High 800-1,200 Low

Rank Gas Temp. (F) Oxidant Req. Steam Req. Issues

Low 800-1,200

Any

Any

Any 1,500-1,900

1,700-1,900 1,700-1,900 >2,300

Low High

Low Low

Moderate Moderate

Moderate Moderate

Low Low Raw gas cooling

Moderate Moderate Control carbon inventory and carryover

Fines and Hydrocarbon Carbon Conversion liquids

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Gasifiers
Oxygen Blown Entrained Flow

Air Blown Fluidized Bed

Fluidized Bed Moving Bed

HT Winkler Foster Wheeler British Gas Lurgi Sasol Lurgi Kellogg

Texaco E-GAS Shell Prenflo Noell

Spouting Bed

HT Winkler IGT Ugas KRW Foster Wheeler British Coal Foster Wheeler Mitsubishi Kellogg Foster Wheeler British Coal ENERCON FERCO/Silva

Entrained Flow

Transport Reactor Hybrid

Transport Reactor

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Gasification-Based Energy Production System Concepts

Sulfur By-Product Fly Ash By-Product

Slag By-Product

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Gasification-Based Industrial Concept

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Moving Bed Gasifier Lurgi, BGC

Counter current flow of reactants, products: gases and solids Separate zones for coal processing Products: top gases, hcs, tars; bottom dry ash or slag Issues: uniform flow of solids and gases Design: bottom temperature determines H2O/O2 Effects of dry or slagging bottom High cold gas efficiency, low O2
Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Mixed Bed Gasifier Winkler, KRW, IGT

Fluidized bed, mixed flow of reactants, products Mixed zones of heating, drying, devolatilization, gasification, combustion; dependent on feed location Process conditions: temperature limited by ash fusion; high temperatures promote gasification, limit desulfurization; flow velocity determined by fluidization requirements Products: top gases, no hcs tars, potentially desulfurized, particulates (C, ash); bottom, ash perhaps agglomerated Issues: reactant feed means, locations; ash removal means Design: bed volume, by gasification requirements; cross section, velocity Moderate cold gas efficiency; O2 H2O requirements; broad range of coals

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Co Current Gasifier Krupp Koppers, Texaco, Shell

Entrained flow of coal in O2 + H2O, reactants Widely dispersed particles heated by radiation, gas mixing Process conditions: high temperature for ash fusion, rapid gasification Products: CO, H2 (no CH4, hcs, oils tars); ash slag Issues: uniform feed of pulverized coal, slurry, dry; separation of gases and ash; heat recovery from high temperature product fuel gases Design: required volume is the time weighted average of reactant and product gas volumes/wt coal * the coal flow rate * the coal conversion time Low cold gas efficiency, high O2 demand

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Entrained Staged Gasifier Kellogg Rust

P G A r o d u a s , s h c t

Coal flow into recirculating particulates, devolatilization; char, particulates introduced to fluid bed, combustion, gasification Process conditions: nearly uniform temperature limited by ash agglomeration Products: CO, H2, devol products, ash fines Issues: coal particle size, flow conditions for rapid devol; recycle for char combustion, gasification; recirculation particulates Design: riser entrains particulates, coal; devolatilizes, cracks oils, tars; delivers char for gasification, combustion. Stand pipe, particulates from cyclones, delivers to fluid bed. Fluid bed combustion, gasification of char; product gases, particles enter riser Moderate efficiency, O2 demand, control of devolatilization

C S

o a l, o r b e n I n e r t

, n

c y c l e G a s

r i v e S O t e a m x y g e o r A i r

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Independence does not come cheap for the small utility

Based on NETL Studies Repowered Total Plant Cost vs. Original Size of Steam Plant

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Cedar Lane Farms FGR-FBC

A Study of Small Project Success & Cost

Cedar Lane Coal-Fired Flue Gas Recirculating Fluidized Bed Boiler

Cedar Lane Farms

Unit achieved ~7 months of

Wooster, Ohio 9,000,000 Btu FGC- FBB Demonstration

continuous computer control operation 96.9% availability over the 193 day heating season $200,000+ Saved over Natural Gas this season (2 of 5 Acres) 20% reduction in coal usage compared to old under-grate stokers 2 types of computer controlled operation demonstrated; demand and slumping Only 2 man-hours of labor required daily Unit up to 40,000,000 Btu Input Available

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Based upon a 10 million Btu high sulfur coal fired AFBC for hot water application. Based upon a 10 million Btu high sulfur coal fired AFBC for hot water application. Heating season set AT 250 days per year at 100% capacity. Heating season set AT 250 days per year at 100% capacity.

Economic Advantage Estimated Annual Fuel Cost Savings with Coal-Fired AFBC at Cedar Lane Farms

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date 06-FBC015-21 Cedar Lane Farms FBC

FGR-FBC Features

Energy Type Possible: Hot Water Steam Generation Power Generation/ Co-Gen Low Stack Emissions Low Limestone Consumption High Efficiency No In-Bed Heat Transfer Tubes Flue Gas Recirculation Automatic PLC Control

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

2005 Ex Works Budget Costs* for Hopper-to-Stack Equipment Similar to Cedar Lane Farms ABFB Equipment

10 MM BTU/hr [Coal Input] 20 MM Btu/hr [Coal Input] 30 MM BTU/hr [Coal Input] NOT Included in Above: Financing & Permitting Foundations & Building(s) Freight to Site Installation; Mechanical & Electrical Compliance Stack Testing *Generic cost not project estimate

$750,000. $1,300,000. $1,800,000.

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Fuel and Ash Storage Considerations based upon Cedar Lane Farms Experience

Where To Start - Good Engineering and Creditable Vendors Fuel, Limestone, and Ash Economics Economic Loads = 26 tons Coal or Limestone Therefore Storage Needs = Coal at 55 tons Limestone at 36 tons Alternate Fuel at 55 tons (Tire Chips or Waste) Ash at 55 tons

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Storage Types
Storage Horizontal or Vertical with

Preparation Equipment List below arranged from highest labor cost to lowest Agriculture Horizontal (BFG) = $100,000 Agriculture Vertical (ML) = $287,000 Industrial Vertical (F&P) = $689,000 Utility Vertical (R&S) = $910,000

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Cedar Lane Farms Actual Computer Graphic Of FBC Operation

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

FGR-FBC Easily Met OEPA Requirements Testing March 25, 2004

Ohio require sulfur release below 1.3 lbs/MMBtu and under 20% opacity on this size unit if equipped with baghouse
Local coal was an Ohio #6 having 12,877 Btu/lbs, 6.57%

moisture and 3.46% sulfur on an as received basis Local sorbent was a Bucyrus #18 dolomite having 80% calcium Control was completely automatic for three tests at an average 8.96 MM Btu/hr Average sorbent feed was 0.12 lbs/lbs of coal, approximately a Ca/S ratio = 1 Average sulfur capture approximately 88% or a release of 0.65 lbs/MMBtu Opacity = Zero Average oxygen % dry = 3.122

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

NETLs Compact Industrial Hybrid Gasifier Concept Based Upon Cedar Lane Experience and the Hybrid Gasification/Combustion Studies

Combustion/Gasification Fluidized Bed Combustion Combined Cycle (CGFBCC)

coal Syngas cooler syngas urea air steam

SNCR

pressurized circulating fluidized-bed partial gasifier

char limestone coal atmospheric circulating fluid bed combustor fluid bed heat exchanger

generator syngas airfeed compressor

Metallic filters

steam turbine

topping combustor

baghouse

air generator air compressor gas turbine

ID fan

exhaust stack

gas turbine

gas turbine exhaust used CFB combustion air

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

NETLs Compact Industrial Hybrid Gasifier Concept

Addresses Issues of Carbon Utilization Typical of Fluidized Bed Gasifiers

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date

Typical Gasifier Syngas Compositions

Wabash River Texaco Koppers-Totzek Shell (Lurgi) Winkler Possible NETL Compact Gasifier Composition Nitrogen Hydrogen Carbon monoxide Carbon dioxide Water Methane H2S Ammonia Total 100.0% 5.0% 26.0% 45.0% 14.0% 6.7% 2.0% 1.3% 0.1% 99.8% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 99.7% 5.8% 27.0% 35.6% 12.6% 18.6% 0.1% 0.8% 1.4% 32.8% 58.7% 7.1% 5.1% 29.7% 60.0% 2.3% 2.1% 3.0% 1.5% **37.4% 2.0% 3.0% 49.5% 25.0% 18.0% 32.5% 16.7% 11.1%

** Methane, Ethane, Ethylene

Descriptor - include initials, /org#/date