Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Diesel By
Ajie Ekpere Reuben-Denzel {IAPM-CIPM,PMP} Project Controls Director HydroEssence Inc.
3/22/13
11
Cost Analysis & Attractiveness Thank You UCG Development & Process Advancement in UCG 3/22/13
22
technology?
Benefits?
o What is driving the UCG technology?
3/22/13 o What 33 is the possibility that we aim too low or
underground coal gasification was in 1868, when Sir William Siemens in his address to the Chemical Society of London suggested the underground gasification of waste and slack coal in the mine. Russian chemist Dmitri Mendeleyev further developed Siemens' idea over the next couple of decades
3/22/13
Source:(Fire in the
55
gaseous form (syngas) through the same chemical reactions that occur in surface gasifiers
The economics of UCG look promising as capital expenses
cost economics
o Costing of a UCG Project and economic calculations thereof 66 are 3/22/13 a challenge to all first timers
Underground Gasification
Underground coal gasification (UCG) is the in-situ conversion of coal into combustible . gases (CO, H2 & CH4) A complex process involving o chemical reactions o heat and mass transfer o complex flow dynamics & o growing cavity dimensions Advantages over conventional process are Low dust and noise No ash handling at power stations No coal stocking and transportation Larger coal resource exploitation Converts sulphur (S) to H2S and nitrogen (N) to NH3 instead of SO2 and Nox Disadvantages Surface subsidence Aquifer water contamination
Technology?
3/22/13
77
UCG in Action
88
be used in many applications, such as the production of chemicals (e.g., hydrogen, ammonia, or methanol), or liquid fuels, the primary use is for electricity generation
(Bechtel and General Electric, 2005), the cost of a supercritical pulverized coal (SCPC) power plant ranges from 1200 to 1460 $/kW. The same study estimates that the next generation of IGCC power plants will be about 10% more expensive than the SCPC plants (vs. the current 20 to 25 % premium)
current technology, and 1320 to 1600 $/kW (advanced 3/22/13 99 technology). Dalton has estimated the cost of an IGCC plant
3/22/13
Source: Rembrandt
1010
the cost of electricity (COE). Dalton has estimated the COE for SCPC and IGCC plants at $46.6/MWh and $49.9/ MWh, respectively (Dalton, 2004)
Exergy (Blinderman, 2002), UCG-based plants are significantly cheaper to build, and they have a lower COE. The costs presented by Blinderman shows that the capital cost of an 3/22/13 1111
injection upfront, with operators having to wait several years for any return on investment. With UCG, the capital invested for the recovery of the gas should be much lower and will tend to be phased throughout the project as new panels are developed. Coal transportation costs are also eliminated
It is estimated that the upfront capital
requirement will be typically only around 10% of that required for traditional mining, while the 1212 3/22/13
separation
No particulates or NOx; sulfur management
straightforward
1313
3/22/13
Source: Rembrandt
1414
UCG Development
There has been significant developments in New generation of UCG:
o Horizontal well technology o Adoption of oil and gas technology for reliability
and repeatability
o Increased resource recovery and generator life o Oxygen enrichment o Increased capital efficiency.
3/22/13 1515
process takes place underground, generally below 1,200 feet. The underground setting provides both the feedstock source, as well as pressures comparable to that in an aboveground gasifier.
With most UCG facilities, two wells are drilled on either side
of an underground coal seam. One well is used to inject air or oxygen (and sometimes steam) into the coal seam to initiate the gasification reactions.
that is formed from the gasification reactions and to pipe it 1616 to the surface for additional processing and use. A pair of
3/22/13
Source: Rembrandt
1717
3/22/13
1818
Portman Energy wherein a method called SWIFT (Single Well Integrated Flow Tubing) using a single vertical well for both Syngas recovery and oxidant delivery.
The design has a single casing of tubing strings enclosed,
filled with an inert gas to allow for leak monitoring, corrosion prevention and heat transfer.
A series of horizontally drilled lateral oxidant delivery lines
into the coal and a single or multiple syngas recovery pipeline(s) allow for a larger area of coal to be combusted at one time. The developers claim this method will increase the syngas production by up to ten (10) times prior design approaches and the single well design mean development costs are significantly lower and the facilities and wellheads 3/22/13 1919 are concentrated at a single point reducing surface access
3/22/13
Source:frack-
2020
3/22/13
2121
coal to energy and products, utilizing resources that otherwise would be too deep, of poor quality, or simply not economical to mine
recoverable coal reserves by as much as 300%-400% (Accelerating Development of Underground Coal Gasification, Dr. S Julio Friedman, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 2007)
that is, the amount of the syngas energy recovered at the 2222 surface is about 80% of the original heating value of the
There are a number of significant economic benefits associated with UCG that include:
reactor
No need for disposing of ash or slag No need for an above ground gasification
3/22/13
plant
2323
or freshwater
water supplies
2424
produce substitute natural gas (SNG) from coal. Using a methanation reaction, the coal-based syngas- mostly carbon monoxide and hydrogen are convertible to methane.
resulting SNG can be transported in existing natural gas pipeline networks and be used to generate electricity, produce chemicals/fertilizers, or heat homes and businesses. Increased production of SNG will enhance domestic fuel security by displacing imported natural gas that is likely to be supplied through Cross Country pipelines or in the form of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)
3/22/13 2525
UCG Market
Today, the most UCG activity is occurring in
Australia, China, and South Africa - with China having the largest UCG program worldwide. Canada and the U.S. In addition, India and New Zealand have begun the initial efforts to explore UCG. Several of these projects involve carbon capture and sequestration.
2626
for efficient production of fertilizer and its competitive cost. Natural Gas is preferred Feed Stock because it is a clean and efficient feed / fuel as compared to liquid fuels.
The total reserves of Natural Gas in the world are 6040 TCF.
With the present reserve to production ratio the reserves will last up to 70 years
Natural Gas. It is no longer news that it is in short supply to many fertilizer plants globally.
2727
3/22/13
plants exist worldwide, regionally and nationally as most national governments are struggling today with managing the allocation of available gas resources sector wise.
This has given rise to continued search for commercially
sustainable alternative gas supply sources as feedstock to fertilizer plants to meet its sectorial demand and to remain optimally functional and competitive.
3/22/13
2828
commercial experiments with UCG provides enough information to begin to distill a few key learnings. These are meant to advise potential investors, operators, regulators, and decision makers in planning, approving, and ultimately operating UCG sites.
discussion points:
o Geological characterization of a site is central to technical
surface facilities, operational programs, and environmental due diligence 3/22/13 2929
Conclusion
The technologies of UCG have been
technically proven to work at numerous locations and different depths ranging from several hundred metres up to 1.4 km of depth.
competitive to natural gas and coal markets. Furthermore, a combination with gas-to-liquids technology would enable the production of fairly cheap synthetic diesel. These possibilities together with the potential to unlock vast new coal seams unavailable via 3/22/13 3030 conventional mining make UCG an important
References
Blinderman, M.S., 2005a, UCG History.
http://www.ergoexergy.com/eUCG_his.htm www.ergoexergy.com/eucg.htm
Blinderman, M.S., 2005b, UCG. http:// Bechtel and General Electric, 2005, About IGCC Power.
http://www.cleanenergy.us/facts/igcc.htm
Beyer, L., et al., 1986, Large Scale Apparatus for Simulating UCG,
Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Underground Coal Gasification Symposium, DOE/FE/60922-H1. Stephens, 1980, Highlights of the LLL Hoe Creek No. 3 Underground Coal Gasification Experiment., Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA. UCRL-83768.
3/22/13
3131
THE END