Technically fascinating area of technology. Main advantages seem to be much lower environmental footprint, beneficial ash, less water consumption, was considered to be easier to separate CO2 compared to atmospheric processes under the assumption of using amine process but latest EU research into nano particles-based membranes suggest an efficient process to premove CO2 may be at hand for atmospheric processes. Also can be configured to produce chemicals and liquid fuels .
Problems are much higher first cost, much lower equivalent availability when configured as a standalone / dedicated ASU-gasifier-CTG-HRSG-STG==> a failure in any one of these 5 items will take the entire plant down- the product of the availability of each of 5 items yields the plant overall availability. A better business model ( a la Lucadia)is to locate the gasifer local to both a nat gas pipeline and a CO2 pipeline for EOR , configure the gasifier to produce SNG synthetic nat gas , and use this SNG as a hedge against the price of nat gas consumed at the distant power plant 2000 miles away. This uncouples the reliability of the 5 components and leverages the value of existing interstate pipelines.
Co2 pipelines are extremely rare, so there maybe a few places on the face of the earth where CO2 and Natural gas cross (actually I'm at one of them and we don't need any more power here). Any model that includes CO2 recovery will have to develope their own market or sink point for that CO2.
Is there any IGCC installed for the refinery use? Fyi,we are in the feasibility study phase to install IGCC to supply power, steam, and H2 for our new 200,000 BPSD refinery. Expected power production is 160 MW, excluding power for ASU
being demonstrated in Alberta Oil sands region using waste pet coke.
Their technology does not require air or O2- uses only steam +coal /coke + catalyst pellets. The catalyst pellets are fluidized via a steam medium at elevated pressures to crack the coke and form pure methane +CO2 + SO2/ H2SO3. No ASU !
Process seems similar to those used in the 1950's as described by Philip Zenz in "Fluuidization and Fluid particle systems".
Plants to be located near interstate gas pipelines to market the pure methane , needs an industrial or gov't supported CO2 pipeline to the EOR fields. As per US DOE, there is a large potential market for EOR CO2 in formerly written off US oilfields. Perhaps the real money is in obtaining the mineral rights for these old fields.
DOE announced 2 days ago they will cancel futuregen IGCC, many angry replies from participants. Dazed and confused may be a correct term for the industry reaction.
Maybe the new direction will be as I suggested above- remote SNG plants dishargin methane to the interstate pipeline and CO2 to the EOR market.
