The Future of Coal

Andrew Maxson and David Thimsen

ARTVILLE, LLC., PHOTODISC

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MPE.2013.2245580

Date of publication: 17 April 2013

46

ieee power & energy magazine

11mpe03-maxson-2245580.indd 46

1540-7977/13/$31.002013IEEE

may/june 2013

04/04/13 3:04 PM

COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS CURRENTLY SUPPLY NEARLY HALF

the electricity consumed worldwide. Globally, coal continues to be the primary
fuel for affordable and reliable electric power production, due to its low cost
and because many countries have indigenous coal resources, providing energy
independence.
However, the continued use of coal to fuel electric power generation is confronted by environmental/economic challenges that, in some regions, are threatening to reduce or eliminate its use. Coal powers major contribution to increasing
carbon dioxide (CO2) concentrations in the atmosphere that could result in global
climate change poses a new challenge.
While solutions are possible, much is unknown or untested. Meeting the environmental challenges of coal will require improvements in existing technologies
and the development of new breakthrough technologies.
To capitalize on coals advantages and help mitigate its environmental challenges, the following key R&D goals need to be accomplished:
improve power plant efficiency to reduce the amount of coal used
improve emissions control, producing near-zero emissions (NZEs) of all
conventional pollutants
implement cost-effective, environmentally acceptable, scalable technologies to capture and permanently store CO2 produced by coal-fired power
plants.

Coal Power Systems

At a high level, coal power systems can be broken into two principal forms: combustion and gasification.

Combustion

Confronting
Environmental
Challenges
That Threaten
Its Use

may/june 2013

11mpe03-maxson-2245580.indd 47

Combustion-based coal power plants burn coal in solid form to produce thermal
energy. A primary example is pulverized coal (PC) power plants, the most prevalent type, worldwide, for coal-based generation. Coal is ground to the consistency
of flour by mills and blown into a furnace where combustion takes place with
air, and heat is transferred to steam that, in turn, is passed to the steam turbine to
produce power. A block flow diagram of a PC system with associated air quality
control system (AQCS) components is shown in Figure 1.
Equipment in the AQCS is designed to control coal-related emissions including the following:
mercury, produced from coal-bound mercury and controlled by activated
carbon injection (ACI) with the subsequent capture of the carbon particles
nitrogen oxides (NOX), produced from coal-bound nitrogen and from the
nitrogen in the air at high flame temperatures and controlled by staged
combustion to keep flame temperatures low and selective catalytic reduction (SCR) to destroy NOX produced
particulate matter (PM), produced largely from coal ash but also from SO3
in the flue gas and controlled by electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) or fabric
filter bag houses
sulfur oxides (SOX), produced from coal-bound sulfur and controlled by
flue gas desulfurization (FGD).
Another type of combustion-based coal power plant is fluidized bed combustion (FBC). Crushed coal is burned in a bed of hot sorbent particles suspended
in motion by rising combustion air. The chief benefits of FBC technology are
the capture of sulfur by the sorbent bed, the reduced NOX production at the relatively low temperatures, and its ability to burn almost any combustible material
as fuel.
Steam power cycles employed by PC and FBC power plants are commonly
categorized by the following steam conditions:
ieee power & energy magazine

47

04/04/13 3:04 PM

Steam Turbine

Boiler

LP
Steam

Feed Water
NH3

Coal
Coal Prep
and Feed

Fabric
Filter

SCR
Air
Preheat

FGD

CO2
Recovery
Stack

Air

Ash
CO2
Compression CO
2
to Pipeline

figure 1. Block diagram of a PC power plant (with CO2 capture).

Subcritical cycles have a steam pressure that is below

the critical point of water. The steam conditions used

in subcritical units are up to 180 bar/541 C.
Supercritical (SC) cycles became fully commercial in
coal plants in the early 1960s. SC cycles typically have
steam pressures of 240 bar or higher and steam temperatures around 565 C.
Ultra-supercritical (USC) cycles have steam temperatures around 600 C and steam pressures greater than
300 bar. While not common, these plants represent
the highest efficiency PC plants available today [up to
42% (note that all efficiencies given in this article are
on a net, higher heating value, basis)].
The potential requirement to limit CO2 emissions from
coal has brought forth the development of another combustion-based coal power system: oxycombustion. Oxycombustion is the combustion of pulverized coal with oxygen
separated from the air, resulting in a flue gas that is predominantly CO2 and water vapor, greatly simplifying the capture
and removal of CO2. An oxycombustion power plant has
many similarities to an air-fired power plant; the fuel handling systems, steam cycles, and other balance of plant systems will be nearly identical to their air-fired counterparts.
Figure 2 is a block diagram for a typical oxycombustion
power plant. Systems unique to an oxycombustion plant
include:
an air separation unit (ASU) removes nitrogen and
other trace gases from the air by liquefaction and
cryogenic distillation to produce a stream of oxygen
a CO2 purification unit (CPU) includes a flue gas drying system and compressors to deliver the CO2 to a
receiving pipeline or geological storage site. It could
48

ieee power & energy magazine

11mpe03-maxson-2245580.indd 48

also include a cryogenic partial condensation process

to clean the CO2 of impurities.

Gasification
Integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) power plants
gasify coal in a gasifier producing a syngas, which then
fuels a high-efficiency combustion turbine combined cycle
power plant. The hot, raw syngas consists primarily of
carbon monoxide (CO), CO2, hydrogen, water, methane,
reduced sulfur compounds, nitrogen, and argon.
After the syngas is cooled, the mercury is removed by
adsorption on activated carbon. Hydrogen sulfide and CO2
are then removed in an acid gas removal (AGR) step. By
cleaning the pressurized syngas prior to combustion, IGCC
plants can meet extremely stringent air emission standards.
The clean syngas fuels the gas turbine. The hot exhaust
from the gas turbine passes to a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) where it produces steam that drives a steam turbine. A block diagram of a typical oxygen-fired IGCC system
with precombustion CO2 capture is shown in Figure 3.

Improving Efficiency
Improving the thermodynamic efficiency of coal power
plants is a key part of any strategy to make coal generation
more viable in the future. Increased efficiency not only provides fuel cost savings but it reduces all emissions per unit of
plant output, in particular CO2 emissions (a nine percentage
point efficiency gain results in a 20% reduction in CO2 emissions). Higher-efficiency plants can also have better part-load
operation and operating flexibility, cutting balance-of-plant
costs, due to reduced size, water consumption, and waste
generation and consumables.
may/june 2013

04/04/13 3:04 PM

Oxygen
CO2
to Pipeline

Air
Separation
Air
Unit
Steam Turbine
Feed
Water

Boiler
Oxygen

Recycle
Damper

Oxygen
Recycle
Heater

Coal

Gas
Cooler

FGD

CPU

Fabric
Filter
Stack
Fabric
Filter

DCCPS

Coal Prep
and Feed

Gas
Heater

Recycle
Damper

figure 2. Typical oxycombustion power plant block diagram. DCCPS stands for direct contact cooler-polishing scrubber.

Combustion
The most important design parameters affecting power
plant efficiency are the turbine inlet steam temperature and pressure. The efficiency benefits resulting from
increasing steam cycle temperatures and pressures are
nearly an order of magnitude greater than any other efficiency-improving option for any combustion-based coal
power plant.

Most plants currently in service employ subcritical cycles with an average net efficiency of about 33%.
SC steam cycles, which have been deployed frequently
in the last 20 years, achieve efficiencies of about 38%.
USC plants in commercial operation in Europe and
Japan, and more recently China, have efficiencies of up
to 42%, which also reduces CO2 production compared to
subcritical units by about 10%. In the United States, the

Steam
Sulfur
Sulfur
Recovery
Unit
Tail
Acid
Gas
Gas

Air
Water Gas
Shift

Air
Separation
Unit
Oxygen
Coal

Gasification
Island

COS
Hydrolysis

Syngas Cooling
and Hg Removal

H2S
Acid Gas
Removal
Unit

CO2
Acid Gas
Removal
Unit
CO2
to
CO2 Pipeline
Compression

Slag
Syngas Diluent (N2)
Syngas
Conditioning

Extraction
Air

HRSG
Air

Gas Turbine

Steam Turbine

figure 3. Block diagram of an IGCC power plant with CO2 capture.

may/june 2013

11mpe03-maxson-2245580.indd 49

ieee power & energy magazine 49

04/04/13 3:04 PM

first new USC PC plant, American Electric Powers John

W. Turk, Jr. Power Plant, began commercial operation in
December 2012.
The use of higher steam temperatures and pressures has
always been constrained by the availability of materials
that can withstand higher temperatures. Japan and Europe
have taken the lead in the development and manufacture of
the materials for the new USC generating units. Increasing
steam temperatures and pressures beyond the levels currently used in USC plants, so-called advanced USC (A-USC)
steam conditions, requires the qualification and use of a new
class of metal alloys for coal-fired boilers and turbines that
retain their strength at very high temperatures and resist corrosion, creep, and other aging mechanisms. These materials
also must be cost effective to manufacture and fabricate into
boiler and turbine components. The current goal is to achieve
steam temperatures up to 760 C with an associated net plant
efficiency of 48%. It is anticipated that these A-USC plants
will become commercially available after 2020, following
the successful operation of a demonstration plant.

Gasification
The most important parameter impacting IGCC plant efficiency is the firing temperature of the gas turbine. The five
coal-based IGCC plants now in operation worldwide have

1990s vintage gas turbines with firing temperatures ranging

from 1,100 to 1,260 C.
Projects now under construction or close to construction typically have been selecting syngas versions of stateof-the-art F-class turbines with firing temperatures at
1,370 C. For plants coming online after 2015, the larger
size G-class turbines operating at firing temperatures of
1,430 C may improve plant efficiency by one to two percentage points while also decreasing capital cost per kilowatt capacity. H- or J-class gas turbines, coming online
later, will have firing temperatures as high as 1,480 C and
provide a potential one to two percentage points further
increase in capacity and efficiency.

CO2 Capture
The technologies used to capture CO2 from coal-fueled
power plants depend on the power generation technology
used. Three primary approaches to CO2 capture are being
investigated, as illustrated in Figure 4:
PCC removes CO2 from the flue gas produced by airfired PC boilers and FBC after the combustion takes
place.
Precombustion capture is applied to the pressurized
shifted syngas produced in IGCC plants prior to
combustion in the gas turbine.

Postcombustion (PC)
Flue Gas

Air
Gas Cleanup

Power and Heat

CO2 Separation

CO2

Coal

Precombustion (IGCC)

CO2

Steam

Flue Gas

Air/O2

Shift, Gas Cleanup

+ CO2 Separation

Gasification
Coal

CO2
Compression

Power and Heat

Air

Oxycombustion
Air

Air Separation

N2
Vent Gas

Power and Heat

Gas Cleanup

Coal

CO2 Purification

CO2

figure 4. Technical options for CO2 capture from coal power plants.
50

ieee power & energy magazine

11mpe03-maxson-2245580.indd 50

may/june 2013

04/04/13 3:04 PM

The technologies used to capture CO2 from

coal-fueled power plants depend on the power
generation technology used.
Oxycombustion fires the coal in a mixture of oxygen

and recycled flue gas, producing a flue gas containing primarily CO2 and water, allowing for relatively
simple purification by cooling and condensing.

Post-Combustion Capture
Absorption processes are the most mature PCC technologies. A typical process passes flue gas through a packedtower type absorber, where a chemical solvent selectively
absorbs CO2. The CO2-laden rich solvent passes to a
regenerating column (also called a stripper), where it is
heated to release a nearly pure CO2 stream. The lean (in
CO2) solvent is then returned to the absorber. The steam
and auxiliary power requirements for solvent capture and
CO2 compression may reduce net power plant output by
2030% and reduce net plant efficiency by about 11 percentage points. Amine-based solvents have been used for
this purpose in chemical and natural gas plants. The use of
an ammonia-based solvent has also recently demonstrated.
The primary objective of absorption PCC process development is substantial reductions in costs and energy use.
Many of the approaches focus on the development of new
solvents, particularly with greater absorption capacity, less
energy required for regeneration, and greater ability to
accommodate contaminants.
Southern Company is currently testing Mitsubishi Heavy
Industries KM-CDR process at Alabama Powers Plant
Barry. A slipstream PCC system equivalent to about 25 MWe
is capturing up to 550 tons CO2/day using KS-1, an advanced
amine-based solvent. Over 100,000 tons of CO2 have been
captured to date. Alstoms chilled ammonia process underwent testing at a 20-MWe (~110,000 tons CO2/year) pilot plant
at American Electric Powers Mountaineer Station in West
Virginia. The plant started CO2 capture in September 2009
and captured ~50,000 tons of CO2 during its operation, with
8090% capture efficiency achievable and 99.9% CO2 purity.
While numerous larger-scale PCC demonstrations are in
various stages of development, SaskPowers Boundary Dam
project in Canada is the only commercial-scale PCC actually under construction anywhere in the world. The retrofitted PCC will capture 1 million tons/year of CO2 from one
of Boundary Dams refurbished coal units, which has a net
generating capacity of 110 MWe.
Novel PCC processes under development include:
Adsorption: Novel designs of packed and fluidized
beds are being investigated in parallel with solid
may/june 2013

11mpe03-maxson-2245580.indd 51

sorbent materials that can adsorb CO2, such as those

based on carbon or metal organic frameworks.
Membranes: Developers are working on polymer
membranes that remove CO2 from flue gas with
both high selectivity and permeability. While largely
untested, membranes have potential to reduce the
energy required to achieve separation.

Precombustion Capture
Precombustion capture in the IGCC power application has
two major steps:
converting the CO in the raw syngas to CO2 with the
water-gas shift (WGS) reaction, producing a gas mixture consisting primarily of CO2 and hydrogen
removing the CO2 from the mixture using AGR processes; the resulting hydrogen-rich syngas is supplied
to the gas-turbine-based power block.
Precombustion capture has the advantage of capturing CO2 under pressure, which reduces CO2 compression
requirements and incurs a lower energy penalty (~2024%)
than does current PCC technology. Research continues to
further reduce this penalty.
The precombustion capture of CO2 employs mature chemical processes, and there are numerous proposed applications for coal-fired IGCC plants with precombustion capture.
However, the only project under construction is Mississippi
Powers Kemper County 524-MWe IGCC project.
The improvement plan for precombustion capture on
IGCCs primarily focuses on syngas processing techniques
that improve efficiency. Technologies include:
Hydrogen transport membranes (HTM): Selective membranes that separate hydrogen from the syngas, yielding a higher pressure CO2 product, have the
potential to improve the efficiency of precombustion
CO2 capture. A recent U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE) evaluation showed that using HTM could
increase efficiency by 2.9 percentage points.
Warm-gas clean-up (WGCU): Precombustion capture would be more efficient with separation systems
that operate at temperatures closer to those of the
WGS reaction (260370 C). WGCU removes contaminants at high temperatures, eliminating the need
for syngas cooling and expensive heat recovery systems. Studies done by the U.S. DOE show a potential
improvement in efficiency of one percentage point
with WGCU.
ieee power & energy magazine 51

04/04/13 3:04 PM

IGCC plants with high rates of CO2 capture require gasturbine combustion systems that can burn high hydrogencontent syngas. Although there is extensive commercial
experience with firing hydrogen-rich fuel gas in gas turbines, most of this experience is with older turbines that
fire refinery fuel gas in which methane is the other main
component.
The U.S. DOE is supporting two projects (one by GE and
one by Siemens) to design large-scale, high-temperature turbines capable of firing hydrogen-rich fuels and achieving net
plant efficiencies of 4550%.

Oxycombustion
The primary justification for considering oxycombustion
is that it results in a flue gas rich in CO2 (7090%, dry
basis), reducing the costs of producing CO2 suitable for
geologic storage. While oxycombustion power plants have
a lower net efficiency (due to the high auxiliary power of
the ASU), when compared to an air-fired plant with CO2
capture, they can be two to three percentage points higher
in efficiency.
The first fully operational oxycombustion system is a
30-MWe demonstration at CS Energys Callide A Station
in Australia that began commissioning in April 2011. In
the United States, the DOE-funded FutureGen 2.0 project
plans to repower Meredosia Unit 4 located in Illinois with
a 168 MWe (gross) oxycombustion plant and to construct
a CO2 pipeline and geological storage facility. The project
plans to capture over 90% of the CO2 and sequester 1.1 million tons/year. The schedule calls for construction beginning
in early 2014 and operations to begin in 2017.
The improvement plan for oxycombustion largely
involves improving the CPU, which is the least mature
system. For CPUs where a partial condensation process
is included, the CO2 vented along with the noncondensable gases can be captured, achieving an overall CO2 capture greater than 98%. Technologies under development to
accomplish this include:
pressure-swing absorption processes used to capture
CO2 from the vent gas and recycle it back to the inlet
of the CPU
polymeric membranes selective for CO2/oxygen that
might separate and recycle the majority of these
gases back to the boiler. These membranes might
also reduce the size and power demand of the ASU
by 5%.

CO2 Compression,
Transport, and Storage
Although as much as 80% of the cost of CCS is attributable
to the capture process, most of the uncertainties surround the
means of permanently storing CO2. The industry and public
need confidence in the ability to safely inject and store CO2
in underground formations over very long periods with no
undesirable side effects.
52

ieee power & energy magazine

11mpe03-maxson-2245580.indd 52

Compression
CO2 transport via pipelines is commercially mature.
However, energy requirements for CO2 compression are
substantial. Most commercial storage applications pressurize CO2 to inject as a SC fluid. Compressors required
to raise CO2 pressure to such a state consume significant
power requiring as much as 8% of the host power plants
net power output.
Southwest Research Institute is investigating two novel
compression systems with the potential to reduce CO2 compression power by 35%. One concept is a semi-isothermal
compression process, where the CO2 is continually cooled
using an internal cooling jacket, rather than using conventional interstage cooling; the other concept involves the use
of refrigeration to liquefy the CO2, so that its pressure can be
increased using a cryogenic pump rather than a compressor.

Transportation
The storage of CO2 from some power plants may require transportation over long distances to suitable injection locations.
Although CO2 may be transported by truck, train, or barge,
pipelines are likely to be the only economical mode of transportation for the large quantities of CO2 resulting from CCS.
The technical, economic, and permitting aspects of CO2
pipeline transport are generally well understood. However,
the pipeline transport of CO2 may require a minimum purity
specification to prevent pipeline corrosion and reduce hazards in the event of an accidental release. This will have an
impact on the cost of CO2 capture as higher purity standards
require more CO2 purification.

Storage
The storage of captured CO2 in underground or undersea
locations remains a significant issue for implementing a
large-scale CCS program worldwide. Options for geologic
storage include depleted gas-bearing formations, saline formations, and deep, unminable coal seams as well as storage
in oil-bearing formations and as a side benefit to enhanced
oil recovery, which is widespread in some regions.
Four large-scale geologic projects have been in place
for some time and have successfully stored significant
amounts of CO2. The Weyburn-Midale project in Saskatchewan, Canada, began in 2008 and stores ~2.4 million tons
CO2/year. The Sleipner saline aquifer CO2 storage project in
the North Sea began injecting CO2 from natural gas purification in 1996 at an injection rate of ~1 million tons CO2/year.
The Snhvit project began injection in the Barents Sea in
2008, with a capacity of ~0.7 million tons CO2/year. The In
Salah project in Algeria began injection in 2004 and stores
~1.2 million tons CO2/year.
In the United States, the seven regional partnerships of
DOEs Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships program are conducting pilot-scale CO2 injection validation
tests in differing geologic formations. These pilot-scale tests
are to be followed by larger volume tests, involving storage
may/june 2013

04/04/13 3:04 PM

of ~1 million tons of CO2 or more, along with post-injection

monitoring. In the ongoing Southern PCC demonstration
at Plant Barry, the captured CO2 is being transported by
pipeline ~16 km and injected into a saline formation. Over
40,000 tons have been stored to date.
Site characterization and monitoring are critical to successful storage operations. While storage opportunities are
present in many areas in the world, some regions do not have
suitable storages sites, which may require developing pipeline transportation networks.
Unresolved barriers include regulatory, legal, and long-term
liability issues associated with storage; addressing these will be
critical to timely commercialization. Additional storage demonstrations are likely to be required to gain public acceptance.

Near-Zero Emissions
A critical element in research for future coal generation is
the approach to NZE coal-fired power plants. A number of
factors drive the need for NZE R&D. In the short term, coal
plants will need to meet increasingly restrictive emission
regulations for NOX, sulfur dioxide (SO2), sulfur trioxide
(SO3), mercury, selenium, PM, and a number of organics. In
the longer term, the need for NZE technologies for air-fired
plants is linked to PCC processes as several CO2 capture
technologies require inlet flue gas with extremely low levels
of SO2 and NOX.
Current environmental controls are able to reduce emissions
of NOX, SO2, SO3, and mercury to very low levels but usually
not to NZE levels on all coals consistently throughout the year.
Technology advances, enhanced instrumentation, and a final
polishing step may be required to attain NZEs.
Perhaps the greatest promise of oxycombustion is the prospect of a true NZE. This would be accomplished by injecting
the entire flue gas flow into geological storage resulting in no
flue gas emissions at all, accepting that some underground
volume will be occupied by gases other than CO2.

Mercury
The leading technology for removing mercury from coalderived flue gas or syngas is ACI, which utilizes extremely
porous carbon particles capable of adsorbing mercury. ACI
has been applied to existing PC power plants to reduce mercury emissions by up to 90%. A number of researchers are
investigating technologies by which the suitable carbonbased mercury sorbents might be manufactured on site using
coal as the raw material. Mercury control cost reductions of
50% might be achieved by these technologies.
In IGCC units, ACI can remove 95% or more of the
mercury in syngas prior to combustion.

NOX Emissions
For PC plants, state-of-the-art NOX controls in boilers combine low-NOX firing techniques that limit NOX formation
with chemical reduction technology that destroys NOX after
it has formed. In a boiler, staged combustion can reduce
may/june 2013

11mpe03-maxson-2245580.indd 53

NOX formation by 3555%. SCR technology can reduce flue

gas NOX to 8590% below SCR inlet levels. These technology combinations yield a net overall reduction in NOX of
9095%.
FBC boilers operate at lower temperatures, which inhibit
the formation of NOX and typically use selective noncatalytic reduction systems (which also use an ammonia-based
reagent but are located in regions where the higher temperature window causes the reduction reactions to proceed without the need for catalysts). Consistently achieving ultra-low
NOX emissions in PC and FBC systems will depend on technology advancements for combustion flame control (NOX
production) and improvements in NOX reduction catalysts
and associated regent distribution control.
During gasification in an IGCC plant, fuel-bound nitrogen
is converted primarily to molecular nitrogen or ammonia.
The ammonia is removed by water washing. Consequently
the only NOX production mechanism in an IGCC plant is
thermal NOX formed in high-flame temperature zones of
the gas turbine. State-of-the-art NOX controls in IGCC gas
turbines combine low-NOX firing techniques to limit thermal
NOX formation with chemical reduction to destroy NOX after
it has formed. In syngas-fired gas turbines, low-NOX combustors typically reduce NOX production by 7090%. SCR
systems can reduce flue gas NOX concentrations to 8590%
(or more) below SCR inlet levels. These technology combinations yield a net overall reduction in gas-turbine NOX
emissions of 9599%.

PM Emissions
Options for PM control are a fabric filter (bag house) or an
ESP, which uses high-voltage electrodes to impart a negative
charge to the particles entrained in the flue gas. The particles are then collected by and removed from a grounded surface. These technologies can reduce PM emissions to under
15 mg/Nm3, a reduction of more than 99%.
Wet ESPs are increasingly being used as a polishing
control device to further reduce levels of fine particulate
and condensable particulate (primarily sulfuric acid mist)
downstream of a wet FGD absorber. These could potentially
reduce PM to near zero levels.
PM in syngas can be removed by dry processes such
as a pulse-cleaned, rigid barrier filter or by wet processes
using venturi scrubbers (referred to as gas scrubbing). Both
methods achieve over 99% particulate removal. Particulate
formation in the gas turbine and HRSG are minimized by
sulfur removal and by combustor designs that achieve thorough fuel burnout.

Sulfur Emissions
SOX emissions from coal-fired PC boilers are controlled by
wet or dry FGDs or scrubbers. These systems inject alkaline reagents (typically finely ground limestone, lime, or soda
ash) into flue gas to react with SO2, reducing emissions by
9598%. A substantial portion of SO3 and sulfuric acid in the
ieee power & energy magazine 53

04/04/13 3:04 PM

Advanced Fuel Cells

Compressor

Turbine

Generator

Fuel cells, which have been the focus of

a decades-long development process, continue to hold the promise of providing a
step change in efficiency for coal-based
~
power plants. The basic electrochemical cells operate near 1-V dc, depending
Flue Gas
on the electrochemistry employed and
other operating conditions. Cell current
Air
flow is generally proportional to fuel use.
The individual cells must be stacked to
produce useful voltages for inversion to
SOFC Cathode
Combustor
+
utility-grade power. The cell electrochemInverter ~
SOFC Anode
istries under consideration for coal-fueled
Syngas
- CH4
fuel cell power are generally high tem- CO
perature leading to major mechanical and
- H2
Cathode Reaction: O2 + 4 e2 O2material challenges in designing the fuel
- CO2
Anode Reactions: CH4 + H2O
3 H2 + CO
- H2O
cell stacks and the electrical connections.
CO + H2O
H2 + CO2
Solid oxide fuel cells are leading candiH2O + 2eH2 + O2dates
for high-efficiency integrated gasifiCO + O22 CO2 + ecation fuel cell (IGFC) power plants. Such
plants are similar to gas-turbine combined
figure 5. Solid oxide IGFC power plant schematic.
cycle plants with the fuel cell replacing
the gas turbine combustor as shown in
flue gas is also removed by the FGD. The reduction of SOX Figure 5. The U.S. DOE has estimated that an IGFC with CO2
emissions in PC and FBC systems to near-zero levels will capture could achieve a net thermal efficiency of 56.3%. The
require a better design and operation management of FGDs U.S. DOE goal is to have a 5-MWe system operating by 2015.
to provide macrocontrol of gas-sorbent contact and microThe durability of the electrochemical components is the
conditions at the sorbent surface that facilitate sulfur capture. primary technical challenge. In addition, development of
During gasification, coal-bound sulfur is converted pri- economical, durable, and maintainable designs for air and
marily to hydrogen sulfide (H2S) and a small amount of syngas supply to individual cells (without leakage/bypass)
carbonyl sulfide (COS). Regenerable solvents are used to and electrical connections that are durable at the high temremove H2S and other acid gases from the syngas prior to peratures remain challenges.
combustion. Such processes are very effective, often removing 99.5% or more of the H2S. A hydrolysis catalyst converts Chemical Looping
most of the COS to H2S upstream of the AGR process.
Chemical looping combustion (CLC) is a technology that
uses a reversible chemical reaction to separate oxygen from
air. Suitable solids are oxidized in an air reactor and then
Multipollutant Control Emissions Systems
The footprint of the individual AQCS components typically transferred to a fuel reactor where the solid-oxygen reaction is
included in a new coal-fired power plant is often greater reversed and the fuel burned. The process is shown schematithan the boiler and turbine block footprint. There are active cally in Figure 6. Selected metal oxides are candidate carriers
development efforts underway to reduce the cost of environ- as is a chemical system using calcium sulfide/calcium sulfate.
A successful CLC process would dramatically reduce
mental controls by employing technologies that can control
auxiliary power use in air separation by replacing the air
more than one of the emissions at once.
For emissions with newly proposed regulations (e.g., sele- compressors in a cryogenic ASU with fluidizing blowers in
nium and organics), R&D initially will focus more on the the CLC process. The use of A-USC steam conditions in a
underlying mechanisms, as well as independent assessments CLC power plant with CO2 capture could achieve net effiof emerging controls.
ciencies near 41%.
The largest coal-based CLC process development unit
deployed to date is Alstoms 3-MWth prototype in WindFuture Technologies
More advanced future technologies aiming at significant sor, Connecticut, in operation since early 2011. It is being
improvements in coal power plant performance, several used to develop solids handling schemes and to characterize
of which represent different platforms for coal power gen- overall process performance of the calcium sulfide/sulfate
eration, are in earlier stages of development and might be system. Pilot-scale facilities might be deployed in the 2015
time frame.
available commercially in the 20252030 timeframe.
54

ieee power & energy magazine

11mpe03-maxson-2245580.indd 54

may/june 2013

04/04/13 3:04 PM

Fired Heater

Air Reactor (Oxidizer)

Steam
Ox

Air

Me

N2 + O2

Compressor

Recuperator

Turbine

MeO
Cooler

Fuel
Red

CO2 + H2O

figure 7. Simplified closed Brayton cycle.

Conclusions
Fuel Reactor (Reducer)

figure 6. Simplified schematic for chemical looping using

a metal oxide carrier.

Closed Brayton Power Cycles

The Rankine power cycle is the backbone of the electricity industry in most of the world. Over the last ten years,
a number of organizations have conducted analytical and
process development work to advance closed Brayton power
cycles using SC CO2 as the working fluid in lieu of the Rankine cycle. The prospect of higher efficiency is the primary
motivation for considering this power cycle for coal-fueled
applications. Variations of the SC CO2 closed Brayton cycle
have been proposed for generating electricity from nuclear,
fossil fuels, solar thermal, geothermal, heat sources, and as
an alternative to the Rankine bottoming cycle commonly
deployed in natural gas combined cycle plants. The technology might also be suitable for repowering as a topping cycle
added to existing subcritical Rankine cycles to increase
plant output and efficiency.
A simplified version of a closed Brayton power cycle is
shown in Figure 7. The working fluid does not change phase;
it is compressed, heated, and expanded through a turbine.
In a closed Brayton cycle, the working fluid exiting the
turbine is cooled and sent to the compressor, and heating
the working fluid is done by indirect heat exchange rather
than by direct combustion. SC CO2 (pressure greater than
73.9 bar) is available at modest cost, does not change phase,
and has high density/low compressibility, which minimizes
compression power, making it an attractive candidate for the
closed Brayton cycle.
This cycle offers the prospect of a higher efficiency of
two to four percentage points (at comparable turbine inlet
pressures and temperatures), an associated reduction in CO2
emissions, and lower turbo-machinery costs as compared to
the incumbent Rankine power cycle.
Complete cycles have been constructed at lab scales
of ~200 kW. Multiple pilot deployments in the range
725 MWe level are anticipated in 20132014.
may/june 2013

11mpe03-maxson-2245580.indd 55

There are numerous technical options available and under

development to improve coal power plant efficiency, reduce
conventional emissions to near-zero levels, and capture CO2
for geological storage. However, many of the technologies
are not yet at the level of developmental maturity required
for affordable widespread deployment, and time is needed
to test and validate new technologies. Achieving these goals
will require an acknowledgment of the urgency of the challenges and a sustained commitment to a broad program of
aggressive public- and private-sector R&D.

For Further Reading

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Carbon
Dioxide Capture and Storage. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge
Univ. Press, 2005.
B. Miller, Clean Coal Engineering Technology. Burlington, VT: Elsevier, 2011.
CO2 capture technologies: Report sponsored by the
GCCSI, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA, 2011.
D. Gray, J. Plunkett, S. Salerno, C. White, and G. Tomlinson, Current and future technologies for gasification-based
power generation, National Energy Technology Laboratory,
U.S. Department of Energy, Pub. No. DOE/NETL-2009/1389,
revision 1, 2010.
M. Shah, N. Degenstein, M. Zanfir, R. Solunke, R.
Kumar, J. Bugayong, and K. Burgers, Purification of oxycombustion flue gas for SOX /NOX removal and high CO2
recovery, in Proc. 2nd IEAGHG Oxyfuel Combustion
Conf., Yeppoon, Queensland, Australia, 2011.
Babcock and Wilcox Co., Steam: Its Generation and Use,
41st ed. Whitefish, MT: Kessinger, 2005.
D. Zhang, ed., Ultra-Supercritical Coal Power Plant.
Cambridge, U.K.: Woodhead Publishing, 2013.

Biographies
Andrew Maxson is with the Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, California.
David Thimsen is with the Electric Power Research
Institute, Palo Alto, California.


p&e
ieee power & energy magazine 55

04/04/13 3:04 PM