Feasibility Study - Pressurized Oxy-Fuel Approach To Carbon Capture

Technical and Economic Feasibility Study of a
Pressurized Oxy-fuel Approach to Carbon Capture

Part 1 – Technical Feasibility Study and Comparison of the
ThermoEnergy Integrated Power System (TIPS) With a
Conventional Power Plant and Other Carbon Capture Processes
Ligang Zheng, Richard Pomalis and Bruce Clements
March 2, 2007
Combustion Optimization Group

CANMET Energy Research Centre
Natural Resources Canada
Technical and Economic Feasibility Study of a Pressurized Oxy-fuel Approach to Carbon Capture – Part 1
Table of Contents
Table of Contents............................................................................................................. i
1. Introduction................................................................................................................ 1
2. Objectives ................................................................................................................... 2
3.1. The Amine Scrubbing Method for CO2 Capture ................................................ 4
3.2. The Product Recovery Train............................................................................... 5
3.3. PRT Operating Ranges ....................................................................................... 6
4. Impact of Operating Pressure on Plant Efficiency..................................................... 9
5. Baseline Conditions and Assumptions .................................................................... 11
6. Air and Oxy-fuel Ambient Case Study.................................................................... 17
6.1. Design Considerations ...................................................................................... 17
6.2. Oxy-fuel Ambient Case Recycle Schemes ....................................................... 18
6.3. Boiler Performance Results .............................................................................. 20
7. TIPS Case Study I – Existing Turbine..................................................................... 30
7.1. Design Considerations and Fuel Delivery System............................................ 30
7.2. Condensing Heat and Boiler FWH System ...................................................... 30
7.3. Boiler Performance Results ............................................................................... 31
8. TIPS Case Study II – New Turbine ......................................................................... 41
8.1. Design Considerations for FWH System.......................................................... 41
8.2. Boiler Performance Results .............................................................................. 41
8.3. PRT Performance Results ................................................................................. 47
9. Key Findings and Analysis of Technical Aspects ................................................... 48
10. Conclusions............................................................................................................ 49
11. Suggestion for Further Work ............................................................................. 49
12. Acknowledgements................................................................................................ 50
13. References.............................................................................................................. 50
List of Figures
2.1 Pressure-temperature phase diagram for pure CO2. ………………………….. 6

CO2 stream vapour fraction as a function of oxygen and nitrogen impurity
2.2 7
concentration. ……………………………………………………………….....
2.3 CO2 recovery rate as a function of temperature and pressure. ……………….. 8
2.4 CO2 purity as a function of temperature and pressure. ……………………….. 8
CO2 purity as a function of temperature and pressure for a recovery rate
2.5 9
greater than or equal to 90%. ……………………………………….................
5.1 Schematic of the boiler steam/water cycle. …………………………………... 16
6.1 The oxy-fuel process with dry recycle. ……………………………………….. 19
List of Tables
5.1 Proximate analysis of coals (% by weight). ………………………………... 11

5.2 Ultimate analysis of coals (% by weight). ………………………………….. 11
5.3 Coal properties. …………………………………………………………….. 11
5.4 Air and oxygen analyses. …………………………………………………... 12
Part 2
6.1 Key furnace information for air case and ambient oxy-fuel case. …………. 17
6.2 Key plant performance data firing at ambient pressure. …………………… 20
6.3 Plant auxiliaries power consumption at ambient pressure (kW). …………... 21
6.4 Key boiler performance data firing at ambient pressure. …………………... 22
6.5 Furnace outlet flue gas properties firing at ambient pressure. ……………... 22
Flue gas and steam temperatures (°C) for Wyoming PRB firing at ambient
6.6a 23
pressure. ……………………………………………………………………..
Flue gas and steam temperatures (°C) for Illinois No. 6 firing at ambient
6.6b 23
pressure. ……………………………………………………………………..
6.7 Steam/water pressure (bar) firing at ambient pressure. …………………….. 24
6.8 Main steam/water mass flow (kg/s) firing at ambient pressure. …………… 25
6.9 FWH bleed steam inlet conditions firing at ambient pressure. …………….. 25
6.10 FWH main water outlet inlet conditions firing at ambient pressure. ………. 26
6.11 Section heat duties firing at ambient pressure (kJ/h). ……………………… 27
6.12 Flue gas velocities (m/s) firing at ambient pressure. ………………………. 27
6.13a Wyoming PRB air heaters performance firing at ambient pressure. ……….. 28
6.13b Illinois No. 6 air heaters performance firing at ambient pressure. …………. 28
6.14 Final flue gas (entering the PRT) properties firing at ambient pressure. …... 29
7.1 Key plant performance data for TIPS configuration No. 1. ………………... 31
7.3 Key boiler performance data for TIPS configuration No. 1. ……………….. 33
7.4 Furnace outlet flue gas properties for TIPS configuration No. 1. ………….. 33
7.5 Temperatures (°C) for TIPS configuration No. 1. ………………………….. 34
7.6 Steam/water pressures (bar) for TIPS configuration No. 1. ………………... 34
7.7 Steam/water mass flow (kg/s) for TIPS configuration No.1. ………………. 35
7.8 FWH bleed steam inlet conditions for TIPS configuration No. 1. …………. 35
7.9 FWH main water outlet inlet conditions for TIPS configuration No. 1. …… 36
7.10 Section heat duties (kJ/h) for TIPS configuration No. 1. …………………... 37
7.11 Flue gas FWH performance for TIPS configuration No. 1. ………………... 37
7.12 Final flue gas (entering the PRT) properties for TIPS configuration No. 1. .. 38
7.13 PRT condensing heater No. 1 performance for TIPS configuration No. 1. ... 39
7.14 PRT condensing heater No. 2 performance for TIPS configuration No. 1. ... 40
Final flue gas (after PRT condensing heater No. 1) properties for TIPS
7.15 40
configuration No.1 with oxygen purity at 95%. …………………………….
8.3 Key boiler performance data for TIPS configuration No. 2. ……………….. 43
8.4 Furnace outlet flue gas properties for TIPS configuration No. 2. ………….. 43
8.5 Temperatures (°C) for TIPS configuration No. 2. ………………………….. 44
8.6 Steam/water pressure (bar) firing at TIPS configuration No. 2. …………… 44
8.7 Steam/water mass flow (kg/s) for TIPS configuration No. 2. ……………… 45
8.8 Section heat duty (kJ/h) for TIPS configuration No. 2. ……………………. 45
8.11 PRT condensing heater performance for TIPS configuration No. 2. ………. 47
ii
Glossary of Acronyms
AH Air heater
ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers
ASU Air separation unit
CBM Coal bed methane
CCPC Canadian Clean Power Coalition
COE Cost of electricity
CW Cooling Water
CETC – Ottawa CANMET Energy Technology Centre – Ottawa
ECON Economizer
EOR Enhanced oil recovery
ESP Electrostatic precipitator
FGD Flue gas desulphurization
FOT Furnace outlet temperature
FWH Feed water heater
HHV Higher heating value
HP High pressure
HTSH High temperature superheater
IGCC Integrated gasification combined cycle
IP Intermediate pressure
ITM Ion transport membrane
LHV Lower heating value
LP Low pressure
LTSH Low temperature superheater
NBS National Bureau of Standards
OFA Over fire air
O&M Operating and maintenance
PFBC Pressurized fluidized bed combustion
PRB Powder River Basin
PRIMRH Primary reheater
PRT Product recovery train
RH Reheater
RSH Radiant superheater platen
SECDRH Secondary reheater
TEPS ThermoEnergy Power Systems
TIPS ThermoEnergy Integrated Power System
iii
Abstract
This study was conducted to investigate the technical feasibility of the ThermoEnergy
Integrated Power System (TIPS) [1] which is a pressurized oxy-fuel fired process using
Wyoming PRB (PRB) and Illinois No. 6 coals in a 100 MWe (net) boiler.
In order to fully investigate the technical and economic advantages of the TIPS process,
comparable air-fired pulverized coal plants and various oxy-fuel configurations operating
at ambient pressure as well as at elevated pressures are reported. Results from TIPS
plants optimized for CO2 recovery using different oxygen purities are also investigated.
It was found that the TIPS process has significantly higher plant thermal efficiency with
full CO2 capture than the air-fired and ambient oxy-fuel cases. With CO2 capture, the
plant thermal efficiency of TIPS process is at about 30% while the corresponding air-
fired case is at about 25% and the ambient oxy-fuel case at 24%.
The TIPS process can handle a very wide range of fuels. The process can utilize the full
energy potential of the fuel by almost completely condensing out the water vapor in the
flue gas and by making the water vapor in the flue gas a useful heat source. It was further
found that the amount and quality of the heat of condensation can be used to significantly
reduce the requirements for extraction steam from the turbine used for the boiler feed
water heating (FWH) system requirements. Hence, the TIPS process allows for a
considerable thermal efficiency gain when compared with most conventional combustion
processes that only use the low heating value of the fuel.
By operating at elevated pressure, TIPS also has the advantage of high CO2 recovery at
ambient temperatures if oxygen of high purity is employed for combustion. For example,
for PRB coal, it was discovered that the TIPS can have essentially 100% CO2 recovery
with more than 95% purity. Furthermore, the recovery can be carried out at plant
operating pressure and ambient temperature. Thus, in such a case, the need for a CO2
recovery system involving multi-stage compression and refrigeration is eliminated,
resulting in significant energy, capital, and operating and maintenance savings compared
with other CO2 recovery systems.
Like other oxy-fuel systems, the TIPS process is advantageous over air-fired systems
because it allows for the integration of an emission control approach [1]. In addition, the
condensation steps of the TIPS process scrubs out particles eliminating the need for an
electrostatic precipitator (ESP) and/or baghouse, normally required in other oxy-fuel
systems.
The benefits of the TIPS process are particularly advantageous when high moisture fuels
are utilized. In these cases, the gain in plant thermal efficiency is high as is the CO2
content in the final flue gas. It is important to point out that these advantages are not
shared by other oxy-fuel combustion systems due to the presence of infiltration air, and
their inability to utilize (or fully utilize) the heat of condensation.
iv
1. Introduction
At the request of ThermoEnergy Power Systems (TEPS) LLC of Hudson, Massachusetts,

the CANMET Energy Technology Centre-Ottawa (CETC-Ottawa) undertook a technical
and economic feasibility study of the ThermoEnergy Integrated Power System (TIPS)
process. TIPS is a patented [1] process developed by TEPS LLC that uses oxygen instead
of air for combustion (known as oxy-fuel combustion) at elevated pressure, thus
eliminating nitrogen from the feed gas to the combustor and producing a highly enriched
CO2 stream ready for sequestration and industrial applications such as enhanced oil
recovery (EOR) and coal bed methane (CBM).
Many advanced and conceptually new power generating processes firing coal have been
proposed as answers to the climate change problem facing electrical utilities. Oxy-fuel
combustion has been viewed as a simple and elegant method to solve the CO2 emission
problem for utilities and other combustion related industries. It can be applied to both
new and existing units. Furthermore, the key technology components in oxy-fuel
combustion are mostly “off the shelf” technologies that have been widely used for a long
period of time. In addition, the existing work force has rich experience with these
technologies. Therefore, this ensures that operating staff would be able to perform their
duties with a minimum of additional training. As a consequence, oxy-fuel technology has
attracted worldwide attention as one of the key technologies for the capture and
sequestration of CO2 from fossil fuel combustion. In Europe and the USA, major
developments have been underway for the demonstration of this technology at the
industrial level. In fact, Vattenfall Europe AG has been working on a 30 MWe oxy-fuel
power plant demonstration project in Germany ready for operation by 2008 and Jupiter
Oxygen of Chicago has started to retrofit a 25 MWe at Orrville, Ohio for oxy-fuel
operation for 2008 as well.
The TIPS process is an advanced concept of oxy-fuel combustion, and as such, is quite
different from atmospheric oxy-fuel combustion. By operating at pressure, the TIPS
plant also has the potential to be more compact than conventional atmospheric
combustion systems of similar capacity. By pressurizing the entire process, it enables the
plant operating points to be shifted from those of the conventional areas to a pressure and
temperature range where gas to liquid phase change can occur. As a consequence, water
vapor in the flue gas can be condensed out at much higher temperatures making it useful
for heating the boiler feed water (BFW) or condensate return. Thus, compared with a
conventional boiler operating at ambient pressure, the TIPS process almost fully utilizes
the energy content of the fuel. TIPS uses the higher heating value (HHV) of the fuel
rather than the lower heating value (LHV). Given the fact that the TIPS process has this
advantage, it is not surprising that it can use a very wide range of fuels including low
rank coal, lignite, Orimulsion®, biomass and municipal solid waste.
The TIPS process can not only utilize the latent heat of the fuel by operating at elevated
pressure, but, more importantly it can also condense the CO2 in the flue gas at ambient
heat sink temperatures. In the authors’ view, this is far more beneficial than the
efficiency gain due to latent heat recovery. It is well established that the oxy-fuel process
Part 2
operating at ambient pressure requires the use of multi-staged compression together with
inter-stage cooling, typically termed the product recovery train (PRT), for CO2 capture
and recovery [2], [3]. The final PRT operating conditions are usually in the neighborhood
of 28 bar and -60°C in order to ensure high CO2 capture rates with high product purity.
Clearly, the PRT is an energy intensive process particularly because of the considerable
refrigeration requirements. Yet, in the TIPS process, CO2 capture may occur at ambient
temperatures resulting in significant capital, and operating and maintenance (O&M) cost
savings.
Another key advantage of the TIPS process is that of integrated emissions control. It is
known that for a typical coal-fired power plant, the emissions control percentages of
capital and annual costs are at about 25% and 38% of the total plant costs [4]. Yet, the
TIPS process, operating at elevated pressure, can scrub particles out from the flue gas,
and condense acid gases (SO2 and SO3) and mercury into the product stream. It is also
worth mentioning that a small amount of sulphur compounds helps in improving oil
miscibility, and there is little concern regarding corrosion due to the dry CO2 stream.
Hence, significant capital and annual savings can be achieved in this respect by using the
TIPS process.
2. Objectives
The objectives of this study were to:
1. Establish Design Basis and Configuration

Set up major operating parameters and establish a plant configuration the TIPS
process operation with Rankine cycle.
2. Flow Sheet Development
Based on the design parameters and configuration, a flow sheet, including all
major unit operations and material and energy flows, was developed. A steady-
state computer model was built to simulate the performance of the basic TIPS
process based on the detailed flow sheet layout. The computer model consisted of
all major components of the boiler. These included the furnace, superheaters,
reheaters, economizer, air heaters (as applicable), condensing heat exchanger,
mill, and auxiliary parts.
3. Technical Feasibility Study
For each of the unit operations, heat duty, mass flows, temperatures, estimated
heating surface areas, and other engineering considerations/specifications were
established.
4. Major Equipment Sizing Analysis
The combustor, SH/RH/Econ, and the condensing heater exchange was sized
based on the process data from the technical feasibility study. The sizing analysis
will mainly relied on information gathered from a literature survey together with
some manufacturers’ specifications.
Part 1 2
Two coals, Illinois No. 6 and Wyoming PRB, were selected as fuels for TIPS technical
and economic feasibility study. An air-based coal-fired power plant at 100 MWe (net)
was designed, sized, and cost for each fuel. The design was optimized for the plant
thermal efficiency rather than the capital cost.
Based on the air case for each fuel, an oxy-fuel power plant operating at ambient pressure
was studied. This analysis provided many insights about how to size and operate the
oxy-fuel plant. For example, the recycle rate, heat transfer rates, tube bank velocities,
and so on, were studied.
For each fuel, the ambient pressure oxy-fuel case was further developed and the model
converted to a TIPS plant. Several configuration scenarios were investigated for the
TIPS concept and the impact on plant performance using 99.5% and 95.0% oxygen as
well as the PRT was explored.
All technical studies include detailed mass and energy balances of all major components
such as furnace, air heater, pulverizer, etc. Also included are detailed steam/water
arrangements and a feed water heating (FWH) system analysis. Thermal efficiencies of
the boiler as well as total plant efficiency were calculated. A detailed conceptual design
for the CO2 recovery in the air case was not performed; however, amine scrubbing
technology was chosen to estimate typical energy consumption and costs, based on data
from literature [5].
The well known Peng-Robinson Equation of State was used in this study to calculate all
necessary thermodynamic properties for all fluids other than steam and water. Properties
of steam and water were computed using the American Society of Mechanical Engineers
(ASME) and National Bureau of Standard (NBS) steam tables. Aspen HYSYS1
simulation software was used throughout this study.
1
Aspen HYSYS is a registered trademarks of Aspen Technology, Inc., Cambridge, MA, U.S.A.
Part 1 3
3. CO2 Recovery Options for Combustion Processes
There are two major methods for capturing CO2 from combustion processes, namely
amine scrubbing and the use of a PRT as described above. The recovery rate of CO2 is
defined as the percentage of the mass flow of CO2 in the final product stream, ready for
industrial application or geological sequestration, compared to the mass flow of CO2 out
of the combustion process. The CO2 purity is defined as the volume percentage of the
CO2 in the final product stream.
It is not clear what the optimum product CO2 purity is from economic and geologic points
of view. Few studies have addressed this important issue. Certainly, the required purity
depends on the product application and geological properties of the specific site. For
example, in some EOR applications, the purity of CO2 for pipeline delivery is specified at
95% [6]. However, it is known that streams with lower than 95% CO2 purity are routinely
injected at other sites [7]. It is clear, though, that sequestration of low CO2 concentration
streams is not particularly economical and may not, in fact, be geologically feasible.
Additionally, the CO2 purity issue has a substantial impact on the CO2 capture processes.
The impact is not only on energy consumption but also on the process operating ranges
since it is known that there is a reciprocal relationship between the product recovery rate
and product purity [2].
Since the rationale for oxy-fuel combustion is almost exclusively for the capture and
sequestration of the CO2 from the flue gas, it may be that any process with a lower than
90% recovery rate may not be acceptable. It is also felt that any value added CO2
application will dominate the CO2 market at earlier stage. Hence, a technology that can
produce higher purity CO2 has much better market potential than those that cannot.
3.1. The Amine Scrubbing Method for CO2 Capture
The CO2 concentration in the flue gas of an air-fired combustion process is very low,
usually below 15% by volume. The dominant component in the flue gas is nitrogen,
mainly from the combustion air, at levels close to 70%. It is difficult to separate the CO2
from the rest of flue gas. Currently, the most well established method of carbon capture
from air-fired combustion systems is the so called amine scrubbing method. Amine
scrubbing is a chemical absorption process using amine solvents to capture the CO2. The
amine scrubbing process has a very stringent limit with respect to flue gas impurities.
Species such as NOx, SOx and hydrocarbons must be removed before the gas can be sent
into the amine scrubbing process. Clean flue gas is passed through an absorption column
in which the amine reacts with the CO2 and selectively absorbs it from the gas stream.
The CO2-rich amine is then heated, upon which the CO2 is released as nearly pure CO2
gas. In fact, the purity of the CO2 gas is so high that the gas can be used in food industry
applications.
The energy consumption of the amine scrubbing process is very high. The energy input
needed to regenerate the amine is about 2756 kJ/kg of CO2 [5]. In addition, the amine
scrubbing process has a large footprint requiring a very large plant area. It is estimated
Part 1 4
that for a 400 MWe coal-fired power plant, the square footage needed for the amine
scrubbing process is nearly two or three times as big as the power plant itself [8].
3.2. The Product Recovery Train
The motivation of oxy-fuel is to obtain a highly enriched CO2 flue gas stream by using
oxygen instead of air for combustion. By eliminating nitrogen from the combustion
medium, the major components in the flue gas out of the oxy-fuel system are CO2 and
H2O. In most oxy-fuel configurations, part of the flue gas is recycled back into the
combustion chamber to quench the high flame temperature. The remainder of the flue
gas is sent to the CO2 capture system. Due to the high flue gas concentration of CO2 in
oxy-firing cases, there is no need to use a chemical process to separate the CO2 from the
flue gas. All that is required is that the flue gas be compressed and cooled. The multi-
stage compression and cooling of CO2 for capture is generally referred as the product
recovery train (PRT). The PRT was thoroughly studied and investigated in a paper
presented at the 2005 Clearwater Coal Conference [2].
The energy requirement for the PRT is significant, but not as great as that for the ASU.
In general, it is believed that about 7 to 10% of the total output of the power plant is
consumed by the PRT [4]. This is mainly due to the compression shaft power and
refrigeration duty necessary to achieve sufficiently high recovery rates and product
purities [2]. In general, the refrigeration duty is always greater than the compression duty.
As a result, CANMET’s studies have been constrained so that excessive cooling is not
employed. In fact, attempts to avoid refrigeration entirely have been considered in
previous work on the PRT. In subsequent work the lowest cooling temperature for the
PRT was artificially set at –20°C. However, it was found that under such a constraint,
the recovery rate of CO2 for some gases from the oxy-fuel process were unacceptably
low [2].
The CO2 concentration in the product flue gas in a typical oxy-fuel pulverized coal boiler
ranges from 75% to 90% on a dry volumetric basis [9]. CO2 gas stream impurity is largely
due to infiltration air leaking into the furnace and boiler sections and impurities
consisting of nitrogen and argon associated with the reactant oxygen stream,
uncondensed water vapor, excess oxygen, and oxidation products (SOx, NOx, etc.) in the
flue gas. The flue gas must be further processed to increase its CO2 concentration in
order to produce a liquid product stream with a CO2 purity of 95% or higher for enhanced
oil recovery (EOR) or coal bed methane (CBM) applications.
The performance of the PRT and its energy requirements are closely associated with the
ASU and the combustion unit. Since the presence of nitrogen and oxygen makes the
thermodynamic behavior of the flue gas very complicated, a high purity of oxygen from
ASU and little infiltration air are desired. In general, boilers are operated under slightly
negative pressure; however, this practice must be revisited in oxy-fuel operation since it
tends to introduce too much air leakage into the flue gas, making it very difficult for the
PRT to produce high purity CO2 with high recovery rates. Due to this consideration,
most oxy-fuel pilot facilities are operated under slightly positive pressure [10, 11].
Part 1 5
Operating at high pressure with CO2 gas as the circulating fluid, infiltration air is not a
concern in the TIPS process. However, as it was shown in the detailed case studies in
subsequent sections of this report, oxygen purity can have a dramatic impact on the
operating ranges and configurations of the PRT. As a consequence, oxygen purity also
leads to significant capital and operational costs differences.
3.3. PRT Operating Ranges

The thermodynamic properties of CO2 are well studied. Fig. 2.1 is a pressure-
temperature plot for CO2. The liquid phase exists in the region above the curve. This
figure provides information for choosing the PRT operating conditions. For example, if
the temperature of final liquid product stream leaving PRT is desired to be at -20°C, then
the pressure must be greater than approximately 20 bar. Similarly, if the PRT is operated
at more than 60 bar, the vapor to liquid phase change can occur at ambient heat sink
temperatures.
80
60
Pressure (bar)
40
20
0
-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40
Temperature (°C)
Figure 2.1 – Pressure-temperature phase diagram for pure CO2.
It is important to emphasize that the information provided by Fig. 2.1 can only be used as
a reference point. Flue gas compositions are different from that of pure CO2 gas.
Therefore, a flue gas may have considerably different thermodynamic properties.
Consequently, flue gas composition has a significant impact on the performance of the
PRT in terms of the recovery rate and the product stream purity. Failing to realize this
key point has led to many wrong assumptions and conclusions in various studies.
Part 1 6
For example, from Fig. 2.1, it is easy to see that CO2 is in the liquid phase at 20°C and
70 bar. This temperature-pressure point lies far away from the critical line dividing the
liquid and vapor regions. As consequence, it should be a stable point with regards to
small amounts of gas impurities. Figure 2.2 shows how gas impurities can profoundly
change the phase equilibrium of a CO2-rich stream. In the CO2-rich stream under
consideration, the only impurities are oxygen and nitrogen. For example, when 3.0%
oxygen and 3.5% nitrogen are present in the CO2 stream, the vapor fraction of the stream
is more than 50% on a molar basis. This means that with these impurities the recovery
rate of CO2 will decrease from 100% to less than 50%. This reduction of the recovery
rate caused by such small amounts of impurities is truly remarkable.
Figure 2.2 – CO2 stream vapour fraction as a function of oxygen and nitrogen
impurity concentration.
On the other hand, choosing an even higher pressure and lower temperature does not
necessarily guarantee that the liquid product will meet the desired standards. For
example, at 80 bar and 5°C, all the CO2 in a flue gas composed of 90% CO2, 4% O2, and
6% N2 will be condensed. However, at such conditions, the whole stream is in the liquid
phase: that is, the CO2 component will not separate from the other species.
Part 1 7
Figure 2.3 – CO2 recovery rate as a function of temperature and pressure.
Figure 2.4 – CO2 purity as a function of temperature and pressure.
Part 1 8
80
70
60
50
Pressure (bar)
88%
40 89%
90%
91%
92%
30
93%
94%
95%
20
10
-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20
Te mpe rature (°C)
Figure 2.5 – CO2 purity as a function of temperature and pressure for a recovery
rate greater than or equal to 90%.
Figures 2.3 and 3.4 illustrate how the recovery rate and product purity are affected by
temperature and pressure for a typical oxy-fuel flue gas. As the temperature decreases
and the pressure increases, more CO2 condenses resulting in higher recovery rates. In
general, CO2 purity follows a similar trend. However, after a certain point, as the
pressure continues to rise and/or the temperature drops further, other gas species begin to
condense with the CO2. The result is a reduction in the purity of the product CO2.
Figure 3.5 is an intersection of Figs. 2.3 and 2.4 at 90% or higher recovery rates. This
figure demonstrates the effect of pressure and temperature on the purity, as noted above.
Furthermore, the operating region for a given recovery rate becomes smaller as the purity
requirement increases.
4. Impact of Operating Pressure on Plant Efficiency
The impact of plant operating pressure on plant thermal efficiency is straight forward.
With high pressure operation, the water vapor in the flue gas can be condensed out at
higher temperatures than those required at low pressures. In cases where the quantity and
quality of the condensing heat are high, the condensing heat can be used resulting in a
plant efficiency gain.
In general, in the air case operating at ambient pressure, flue gas exits the boiler island at
about 150°C. It is obvious that at such temperature, water vapor cannot be easily
condensed out. Consequently, the latent heat of the moisture from the fuel and air plus
the water from hydrogen combustion cannot be readily recovered. Thus, by definition,
the lower heating value of the fuel is utilized in the process, rather than the higher heating
value. Trying to decrease this temperature and condensing the water in an attempt to
Part 1 9
capture the heat will yield large amounts of heat at lower temperatures which are not
readily useable within the power generation cycle.
In typical pressurized combustion systems using air, such as pressurized fluidized bed
combustion (PFBC) boilers, an expansion turbine is used to generate additional power.
When CO2 recovery is required, it makes no sense to expand the pressurized flue gas
since the final CO2 product must be in a pressurized liquid state. More importantly, it is
difficult to obtain significant efficiency gains with the pressurized air case by utilizing a
condensing heat exchanger. This is due to the large volume of nitrogen in the flue gas
(about 70%), making the water vapor fraction small. Thus, because of the low
condensing temperatures needed, the heat of condensation is of a low grade.
However, the situation is very different in the oxy-fuel case, in which the flue gas water
vapor content is much higher. In fact, the water vapor content is dependent on the fuel of
choice. In the case of PRB and lignite coals, the water vapor fraction in the flue gas may
easily be more than 25% by volume. Such high water vapor fractions make it much easier
to condense the water out at higher temperatures in a condensing heat exchanger when
high pressure is employed. This is one of the key advantages of the TIPS process.
At a given condensing temperature, it is easy to see that the higher the pressure, the more
water will condense out of the flue gas. However, after a certain point, increasing the
pressure results in diminishing amounts of water condensation. For example, for flue gas
with 65% CO2 and 27% H2O at 25°C and 3.5 bar, more than 97% of the water condenses
out; resulting in a flue gas water vapor volume of less than 1%. Hence, while the
potential to recover more water at this pressure still exists, it is rather small. In other
words, the water recovery efficiency difference as one moves from ambient to high
pressure is significant but flattens out at higher pressures.
As the operating pressure increases the condensing temperature rises. Use of the
appropriate pressure will ensure that the condensing heat can be used in the process. The
question is how much benefit exists in employing high operating pressures. Without
considering the cost and energy penalties, a quick back-of-the-envelope calculation may
be carried out with the higher to lower heating value ratio.
Interestingly, high pressure operation also has a negative impact on the boiler efficiency.
This is due to the fact that high pressure causes the flue gas high heat capacity to
increase. As a result, assuming that all other factors are the same, the dry flue gas losses
become greater at higher pressures given the same temperature.
Part 1 10
5. Baseline Conditions and Assumptions
5.1. Fuels
Two coals, Wyoming PRB sub-bituminous and Illinois No. 6 bituminous, were selected
for this study due to their wide use and because they are representative over a range of
different fuels. Illinois No. 6 coal is a high volatile C bituminous coal which has been
used in many technical feasibility studies as a reference coal. Wyoming PRB is a
particularly unique fuel. It has very high moisture content, making its heating value
small compared to most other coals. However, it has very low sulfur content. Both coals
have similar ash softening temperatures. Illinois No. 6 coal has high fouling
characteristics; therefore, it is important to make sure that the furnace outlet temperature
of the flue gas is below the ash softening temperature of the coal if a dry ash combustor is
employed. Proximate and ultimate analyses and other properties of the two coals are
given in Tables 5.1 through 5.3.
Table 5.1 – Proximate analysis of coals (% by weight).
Wyoming PRB Illinois No. 6

Moisture 31.63 12.00
Volatile Matter 29.73 33.00
Fixed Carbon 34.08 39.00
Ash 4.57 16.00
Table 5.2 – Ultimate analysis of coals (% by weight).

Moisture 31.63 12.00
Carbon 46.59 55.35
Hydrogen 3.38 4.00
Sulfur 0.37 4.00
Nitrogen 0.63 1.08
Oxygen 12.84 7.47
Ash 4.57 16.00
Table 5.3 – Coal properties.

High Heating Value (kJ/kg) 18955 23492
Low Heating Value (kJ/kg) 17443 22326
Ash softening temperature (°C) 1135 1182
Ash initial deformation temperature (°C) 1087 1126
Part 1 11
5.2. Air, Oxygen, and Ambient Conditions
The ambient conditions for this study were:
Ambient temperature at 25°C,

Ambient pressure at 1.0135 bar,
Cooling water (CW), from either lake or river sources, available at 15°C.
Table 5.4 – Air and oxygen analyses.
Air analysis % by volume

Nitrogen (N2) 77.2646
Oxygen (O2) 20.7273
Carbon dioxide (CO2) 0.0310
Water (H2O) 1.0500
Argon (Ar) 0.9272
Oxygen from ASU @ 99.5% purity % by volume

Oxygen (O2) 99.5000
Argon (Ar) 0.5000
Oxygen from ASU @ 95% purity % by volume

Oxygen (O2) 95.0000
Argon (Ar) 2.5000
The cost of oxygen production is one of the single biggest factors in plant thermal
efficiency decreases and the resultant increase in the cost of electricity (COE) for oxy-
fuel due to significant parasitic energy needs for a cryogenic air separation unit (ASU).
Many novel oxygen production technologies are rapidly developing to meet the need of
supplying large quantities of oxygen at high purity. Most notable are the ion transport
membrane (ITM) technology developed by Air Products, Inc. and Praxair, Inc. and the
ceramic autothermal recovery oxygen generation technology developed by the BOC
Group. Whether the cost of oxygen production will be reduced remains to be seen. It
has been suggested that the ITM technology cost is 35% lower than that of cryogenic air
separation [12].
Oxygen purity also has a significant impact on process energy requirements and the cost
of CO2 recovery. The CO2 recovery process is typically known as a product recovery
train (PRT) [2], [3]. In this study, 99.5% and 95% oxygen purities were chosen. Several
well-known oxy-fuel technology studies employed 99.5% oxygen from cryogenic ASUs.
Most notably, the study done by Clean Coal Power Coalition (CCPC) of Canada in 2003
Part 1 12
employed 99.5% oxygen, even though the use of 95% oxygen is more economical for a
cryogenic ASU.
Infiltration air can have serious impact [2], [4], [9] on the performance of the product
recovery train and adds significant cost to the ambient oxy-fuel system. Ideally, the oxy-
fuel unit should be well sealed to minimize air infiltration. It is believed that a new unit
could have air infiltration levels as low as 1%. However, infiltration air in a retrofitted
unit could be as high as 5 to 6%. Part of the infiltration air leaks into the furnace while
the remainder enters the backend system. In this study, it was assumed that the
infiltration air was 3% and was well distributed in both the furnace and the backend
system.
Because the TIPS process is operated at elevated pressure inside a pressurized vessel, no
air can infiltrate. CO2 gas is employed as the fluid between the pressure vessel shell and
the boiler to keep the shell temperature low. Approximately 2% of the shell CO2 gas may
be assumed to leak into the boiler system; however, it was decided that no CO2 gas
leakage credit be given in order to fully investigate the TIPS technical and economic
aspects.
The oxygen purity’s impact on oxy-fuel operation and economics is well understood [10].
In this study, an oxygen purity of 99.5% was chosen. It should be noted that the oxygen
purity has little impact on the performance of the boiler. However, the oxygen purity has
a big influence on PRT performance both in terms of plant configuration and economics.
This point will be further discussed in later sections.
5.3. Steam Turbine and Boiler
A particularly common steam turbine was selected for this study: it is a single reheat
condensing steam turbine rated at 3600 + 3600/3600 rpm. The main steam conditions are
specified to be 540.2°C and 103.5 bar while those of the reheat steam are 540°C and
25.31 bar. The turbine consists of high pressure (HP), intermediate pressure (IP), and
low pressure (LP) sections. The design exhaust steam pressure of the LP section is
0.04826 bar with vapor fraction at about 90%. The net turbine output in the air case is
rated at 100 MWe (net). The steam conditions were optimized for the two selected coals.
The boiler designed for this study is a pulverized coal-fired tower boiler with twin cell
furnaces. The convective components consist of one radiant superheater platen section
(RSH), a primary reheater section (PRIMRH), a secondary reheater section (SECDRH), a
high temperature superheater (HTSH) section, a low temperature superheater section
(LTSH), and an economizer (ECON). The economizer is equipped with a by-pass
control. The main steam temperature is controlled with attemperating spray and the
reheat steam temperature is controlled with tilting burners. A trisector regenerative air
heater (AH) in the baseline air and ambient oxy-fuel cases was used to preheat the
primary and secondary air/recycle gas upstream of the milling system and wind box.
Part 1 13
For the TIPS process, as noted later, instead of heating the recycle gas in air heaters, the
flue gas is used to heat the water in the steam/water side through a condensing heat
exchanger. Therefore, air heaters were not required in the TIPS case.
The TIPS system results in a much smaller furnace configuration and in order to take
advantage of this there are a few variations that have been examined. Furnaces are
generally sized for ash content and handling as well as heat transfer to the walls for steam
generation. Using the TIPS approach can minimize the furnace size if the ash
characteristics are managed. The two methods of doing this are using a wet furnace that
runs the slag (also called a slagging furnace) similar to some gasification systems or
using a fluid bed that is run at a temperature less than the ash deformation temperatures
and therefore handles only dry ash. For the purposes of this study the first approach
(slagging reactor) was used. This type of furnace is more similar to the baseline
configurations and therefore was used to get better comparison with the baseline systems.
Examination of the second approach of using a fluid bed has many advantages and should
be considered for further study. Using the slagging furnace approach may necessitate
the use of spaced generating sections for steam generation which can be accommodated
within the furnace shell or convective pass. Because using this approach reduces the ash
load to the convective pass to approximately 30% there is the possibility of using a tighter
spacing within the convective passes for the same coal at the same flue gas temperature.
To keep a conservative design flue temperatures entering the convective passes using the
slagging furnace were maintained at similar temperatures to those employed in the
baseline dry furnace situations.
5.4. Pollution Control System and Auxiliaries
The pollution control equipment for this boiler in the baseline air case includes a dry
electrostatic precipitator (ESP), a flue gas desulphurization (FGD) unit, and low NOx
burners together with over fire air (OFA). Due to the potential advantage of integrated
emission control [13] in the oxy-fuel process and the TIPS process ability to scrub out
particles, no emissions control equipments were included in the TIPS scenarios.
Plant auxiliaries include boiler primary and secondary air fans, and the boiler induced
draft fan. Pumps for boiler forced circulation, condenser cold water flow, condensate
return, boiler feed, boiler feed booster and feed water drainage are included in the
auxiliaries.
5.5. Feed Water Heater System and Steam Cycle
The feed water heater (FWH) system consists of five steam-water heaters. They are of
type D-D-C-D-P where the first heater is of type P. For each heater, steam drawn
(termed bleed steam) from the turbine is used to heat the condensate return.
The third heater, of type C, is really a mixer. First, the condensate return water, the
steam, and any condensing water from any other heaters are heated by the steam by
Part 1 14
mixing them together. Then the resulting water is pumped to high pressure and sent to
other heater for further heating.
The type D heaters (second, fourth, and fifth heaters) are essentially condensing heater
exchangers. The condensing steam, with any condensed water from other heaters, is used
to heat the main water.
The first heater of type P is rather interesting. It is usually used as the first heater to heat
the main water from the condensate return pump. The steam is drawn before the final
stage of the LP section. The main water is heated by the steam and condensing water
from other heaters. The condensed water from the heater is then pumped to high pressure
and mixed with the main water.
Water out of the FWH system enters the inlet of the economizer inlet after a small
amount is used to desuperheat the main steam. Water out of the economizer is
evaporated in the furnace water wall tubes. The main steam is further heated in the
radiant superheater (RSH), low temperature superheater (LTSH), and high temperature
superheater finish (HTSH Finish). The main steam is then expanded in the HP section of
the steam turbine. A small part of the steam leaving the HP section of steam turbine is
used to heat the main water in the last FWH heater and the rest is reheated in the primary
reheat (Primary RH) and reheat finish sections (RH finish) of the boiler. The reheated
steam is then expanded in the IP section of the steam turbine while a small amount of
steam is taken out in the middle of the IP section for use in the second last FWH. The
outlet of the IP section is further expanded in the LP section while three streams of steam
are taken out for various FWH heaters. The partially condensed (about 10%) LP steam is
then condensed and pumped back into the first FWH heater. Figure 5.1 is a detailed
schematic of the steam cycle.
Part 1 15
Main Steam
Reheat Steam
Boiler
HP LP LP
Turbine Turbine Turbine
Desuperheating Condenser
Spray
Condensate
Pump
Heater Heater Heater Heater Heater

5 4 3 2 1
Feed Water Feed Water

Pump 2 Pump 1
Figure 5.1 – Schematic of the boiler steam/water cycle.
Part 1 16
6. Air and Oxy-fuel Ambient Case Study
6.1. Design Considerations
Two initial cases were studied in which the boilers were fired with either air or oxygen
under ambient pressure. These scenarios are referred to as the air and oxy-fuel ambient
cases. Key furnace data are listed in Table 6.1a and Table 6.1b.
Table 6.1a – Key furnace information for air case.

Furnace Plan Area (m2) 101.42 92.89
Furnace Height (m) 44.32 38.56
Furnace Volume (m3) 4495 3581
Table 6.1b – Key furnace information for ambient oxy-fuel case.

2
Furnace Plan Area (m ) 105.89 98.13
Furnace Height (m) 45.26 39.62
3
Furnace Volume (m ) 4793 3888
The furnace is designed to ensure that the furnace outlet temperature (FOT) is lower than
the fuel ash softening temperature. In the case where a slagging furnace is employed, the
FOT may be higher than the ash softening temperature as long as the flue gas temperature
entering the first convective section is lower than the ash softening temperature.
In an oxy-fuel system, part of the flue gas is recycled back to the furnace for temperature
control. Generally, enough gas is recycled such that the furnace outlet temperature (FOT)
is below the ash softening temperature to avoid fouling on the convective sections. In
one paper [14] presented at the 2005 Clearwater Conference, the authors examined some
aspects of boiler sizing under oxy-fuel operation. They pointed out that the key is how to
avoid slagging and ash deposition in the lower and upper furnace.
The oxy-fuel flue gas exiting the AH is further cooled in a condensing heat exchanger
before a portion is recycled back to the furnace. Since the heat of condensation is low-
grade heat, it was not credited as a useful heat source. In fact, CANMET has been put
considerable effort to examine methods to use this heat in new and retrofit cases, but to
date no feasible solution has been found.
In simulations, care was taken to ensure that the primary gas entering the pulverizer had
sufficiently high enough temperature and heat capacity to guarantee adequate drying of
the coal for proper ignition. The air/recycle gas leakages into the flue gas side in the air
Part 1 17
and oxy-fuel ambient cases were assumed to be at the same ratio for both the primary and
the secondary air heaters.
6.2. Oxy-fuel Ambient Case Recycle Schemes
Several ways exist to recycle flue gas back to the boiler for the purpose of controlling the
FOT. In the past, CANMET has studied the various ways of recycling flue gas for this
purpose [9], [15].
The dry recycle scenario, in which the flue gas coming out of the air heaters is cooled to a
selected temperature (typically close to the ambient temperature), was selected for the
ambient oxy-fuel case study. In this scenario the flue gas water vapor is condensed and
the dry flue gas is split into recycle gas and raw product gas for the product recovery train
process. Figure 6.1 illustrates the oxy-fuel process with dry recycle. One of the obvious
advantages of the dry recycle scheme is improved performance of pulverizers because hot
dry gas certainly helps to drive off the moisture from the coal. Wet recycle gases could
be used to do the same task; however, using wet gases requires much higher temperatures
into the pulverizers.
Part 1 18
Economizer Bypass
Raw Product
Gas
Flue Gas Recycle
Boiler Economizer
Water
Furnace
Flue Gas
SAH PAH
Condenser
ESP
O2 ASU
Water
Tempering Bypass
Coal
Pulverizers
Figure 6.1 – The oxy-fuel process with dry recycle.
Part 1 19
CETC-Ottawa Prote
6.3. Boiler Performance Results
The boiler’s performance for the air cases and the oxy-fuel ambient case for the two
selected coals are presented in this section. Key plant performance data are given in
Table 6.2. As expected, Illinois No. 6 coal has better plant gross efficiency than the PRB
coal due to the latter’s high moisture content and lower high heating value. The oxy-fuel
cases have slightly higher gross efficiencies than the air cases. This is consistent with
previous oxy-fuel research [9]. The energy cost for ASU is not included in the oxy-fuel
cases when plant gross efficiencies and net efficiencies without capture were calculated.
However, all energy consumptions, such as ASU, PRT, Amine & Scrubbing, CO2
compression, were all included in the net efficiencies calculation in the captured cases.
Table 6.2 – Key plant performance data firing at ambient pressure.

Parameter
Air-fired Oxy-fuel Air-fired Oxy-fuel
Plant net efficiency (%, HHV),
24.06 22.38 25.63 24.07
with capture
33.20 33.30 35.37 35.82
without capture
Plant gross efficiency (%, HHV),
36.39 36.51 38.77 39.27
without capture
Plant net power output (kW) 100000 100000 100000 100000
Plant gross power output (kW) 151804 163669 151286 163110
HP turbine power output (kW) 40160 43298 40490 43650
IP turbine power output (kW) 37381 40298 36110 38930
LP turbine power output (kW) 74263 80063 74710 80560
Fuel heat input (kJ/h, LHV) 1.377 × 109 1.480 × 109 1.335 × 109 1.421 × 109
Fuel heat input (kJ/h, HHV) 1.497 × 109 1.608 × 109 1.405 × 109 1.495 × 109
Net plant heat rate (kJ/kWh, LHV) 13772 14801 13350 14211
Net plant heat rate (kJ/kWh, HHV) 14966 16084 14047 14954
Coal mass flow (kg/s) 21.932 23.570 16.610 17.682
Air mass flow (kg/s) 171.36 164.83
Oxygen mass flow (kg/s) 34.156 31.925
The plant net efficiencies with capture for the air cases were slightly higher than those of
the oxy-fuel cases. This is due to the significant energy consumptions of the oxy-fuel
cases for the ASU and PRT. CO2 capture would result a relative 34% reduction of the
plant net efficiency for the air case using amine & scrubbing while for the oxy-fuel it is
about 39%.
Draft Copy
n
Table 6.3 – Plant auxiliaries power consumption at ambient pressure (kW).

Parameter
Amine Scrubbing and Compression 37713.1 37413.3
ASU 28603.5 28773.0
FGR-cooling 3302.0 3387.8
FGR-fan 161.9 166.1
PRT 17843.7 18307.1
Total CO2 Capture Use 37713.1 49911.1 37413.3 50634.0
Total CO2 Capture Use
24.84 30.50 24.73 31.04
(% of plant gross output)
SCR 881.7 0.00 886.9 0.00

ESP 517.2 564.9 520.2 579.6
FGD 3043.8 3374.7 3061.6 3461.0
PAC 23.7 25.9 23.9 26.6
In furnace NOx control 50.0 0.00 50.0 0.0
Total Emission Control Use 4516.4 3965.5 4542.6 4067.2
Total Emission Control Use
2.98 2.42 3.00 2.49
Boiler primary air fan 380.7 410.6 279.4 300.9

Boiler secondary air fan 398.8 431.1 447.6 484.2
Boiler induced draft fan 2142.4 1755.3 2016.4 1608.3
Boiler fuel delivery 1741.0 1875.6 1318.3 1417.3
Ash handling 159.0 171.3 421.9 453.5
Condenser cold water pump 850.7 935.7 824.6 904.5
Condensate pump 142.9 157.7 146.1 158.9
Boiler feed pump 2980.6 3215.1 3097.7 2242.2
FW heater drain pump 22.4 24.6 22.3 24.3
Miscellaneous plant auxiliaries 756.6 815.6 756.6 813.9
Total Boiler Use 9575.1 9792.6 9330.9 8408.0
Total Boiler Use
6.31 5.98 6.16 5.15
Energy requirements of the plant auxiliaries are presented in Table 6.3. CO2 capture for
the air cases are about 25% of the plant gross output. For the oxy-fuel case, it counts
more than 30%. No NOx control equipment was used for the oxy-fuel case given the well
established fact that the oxy-fuel has significant low NOx emissions [4]. The emission
control part would consume about 2.5 to 3% of the plant gross output. For the boiler part,
Part 1 21
n
the major ones are the fuel delivery blower, boiler induced draft fan, and the boiler feed
pump.
Key boiler performance data are given in Table 6.4. The adiabatic flame temperature has
little application significance but it does give some indication of the flame characteristics
under various modes of operation. The FOTs in the four cases studied were all below or
very close to the value of fuel ash softening temperature with the exception of the air case
firing Illinois No. 6 coal. Consequently, increased furnace slagging and ash deposition in
convective sections is not expected in the ambient pressure oxy-fuel cases. The furnace
residence times of the oxy-fuel cases were longer than those of the air-fired cases;
therefore, the carbon burn out rates should be at least as great as those of the air-fired
cases.
Table 6.4 – Key boiler performance data firing at ambient pressure.

Parameter
Boiler efficiency (%, HHV) 83.39 83.59 87.05 87.84
Adiabatic flame temperature (°C) 1906 1914 2020 1875
Furnace outlet temperature (°C) 1112 1141 1178 1119
Recycle rate (%) 72.00 76.00
Recycle flue gas mass flow (kg/s) 123.18 139.42
Table 6.5 – Furnace outlet flue gas properties firing at ambient pressure.

Parameter
Temperature (°C) 1112 1141 1178 1119
Mass flow rate (kg/s) 175.60 169.79 166.99 174.67
Specific heat (kJ/kg-°C) 1.342 1.433 1.306 1.374
Actual volumetric gas flow (m /h) 3
2.465 × 10 6
1.936 × 10 6
2.411 × 10 6
1.862 × 106
Density (kg/m3) 0.2565 0.3158 0.2493 0.3378
Composition (% by volume)
CO2 14.1509 65.3716 13.6498 69.8086
H 2O 13.4312 21.4739 8.8229 14.9713
O2 2.6945 4.8632 3.3146 3.9120
N2 68.8588 7.6304 72.9726 8.9029
SO2 0.0420 0.1927 0.3687 1.8788
Ar 0.8227 0.4682 0.8715 0.5263
From Table 6.5, it can be seen that the mass and volumetric flows of the oxy-fuel cases
were similar to those of the air cases. This indicates that boiler retrofit for oxy-fuel
Part 1 22
n
operation is feasible. The current approach to ambient oxy-fuel combustion is to design

a system capable of operating in both air-fired mode as well as oxy-fuel mode and
therefore retrofit and new boiler design approaches are in fact essentially the same. This
current attitude enables power generation utilities the use of an oxy-fuel system without
major concern for system availability. It also minimizes the risk of purchasing newly
designed equipment specific to oxy-firing. Along with these current advantages comes
the penalties associated with the higher costs associated with these systems. As systems
transition to oxy-firing there will be a comfort level reached within the industry. At that
time the technical and economic advantages of second generation approaches such as
TIPS will be realized. The perceived risks to utilities of adopting this newer technology
will be minimized after gaining operating experience comfort levels with first generation
oxy-firing technology.
Table 6.6a – Flue gas and steam temperatures (°C) for Wyoming PRB firing at
ambient pressure.
Wyoming PRB
Air-fired Oxy-fuel
Section Flue Gas Steam Flue Gas Steam
In Out In Out In Out In Out
Superheater platen 1112 1003 331.9 384.5 1141 1026 331.9 384.5
High temperature finish 1003 870.5 445.4 540.2 1026 886.8 445.4 540.2
Reheater finish 870.5 765.2 445.9 540.0 886.8 775.4 445.9 540.0
Low temperature superheater 765.2 628.1 367.1 445.4 775.4 629.4 367.1 445.4
Primary reheater 628.1 524.7 359.7 445.9 629.4 518.5 359.7 445.9
Economizer 524.7 341.7 229.8 294.4 518.5 318.5 229.8 294.4
Table 6.6b – Flue gas and steam temperatures (°C) for Illinois No. 6 firing at
ambient pressure.
Illinois No. 6
Air-fired Oxy-fuel
Reheater finish 922.3 812.6 446.0 540.0 866.3 756.8 446.0 540.0
Economizer 547.7 353.1 229.8 295.8 489.3 287.7 229.8 295.8
Tables 6.6a and 6.6b give detailed performance data for the convective pass sections. By
using the appropriate amount of attemperating spray, it was possible to obtain the desired
Part 1 23
n
main steam (high temperature finish) temperature. The reheat steam temperature was
controlled by the burner tilt.
It is also interesting to point out that the temperatures of the flue gas leaving the
economizer in all four cases were similar. The economizer was equipped with a flue gas
bypass for air heater temperature control.
Tables 6.6a, 6.6b, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 give complete performance data of the steam/water
cycle. It is no surprise that the largest heat duty occurs at the furnace water walls where
the evaporation takes place. The next biggest heat duty exists in the FWH system. The
fact that the low temperature superheater section and the high temperature finish section
heat duties are similar implies that the convective pass is well designed and balanced.
This point is again confirmed when the heat duties of the primary reheat section and the
secondary reheat section are compared. The heat duty of the FWH was split amongst five
heaters by using bleed steams with similar flow rate. The pressure drops across the
convective sections were well controlled. The condensate pump and boiler feed pumps
maintain the required cycle pressure.
Table 6.7 – Steam/water pressure (bar) firing at ambient pressure.

Economizer inlet 112.5 112.5 115.7 115.7
Furnace wall inlet 112.0 112.0 114.0 114.0
Superheater platen inlet 105.1 105.1 107.1 107.1
Low temperature superheater inlet 104.1 104.1 106.2 106.2
High temperature finish inlet 103.6 103.6 104.6 104.6
Primary reheater inlet 26.72 26.72 26.72 26.72
Reheater finish inlet 25.82 25.82 26.09 26.09
LP steam out of turbine 0.04826 0.04826 0.04826 0.04826
Main water out condense 0.04826 0.04826 0.04826 0.04826
Main water out pump to FWH 9.894 9.894 9.894 9.894
Main water out FWH 112.5 112.5 115.7 115.7
Condensing water inlet 2.401 2.401 2.401 2.401
Condensing water outlet 1.611 1.611 1.611 1.611
One of the key functions of the recycled flue gas was to avoid radically altering the tube
bank velocities of the oxy-fuel cases as compared with the air-fired cases for maintaining
convective heat transfer rates and minimizing erosion. It is clear from Table 6.12 that in
all oxy-fuel cases, the tube bank velocities were lower, but still within an acceptable
range, than in the air-fired case.
Part 1 24
n
Table 6.8 – Main steam/water mass flow (kg/s) firing at ambient pressure.

Economizer 118.36 127.61 114.27 123.20
Furnace wall 118.36 127.61 114.27 123.20
Superheater platen 118.36 127.61 114.27 123.20
Desuperheater water 3.66 3.95 4.04 4.35
Low temperature superheater 122.02 131.56 118.30 127.55
High temperature finish 122.02 131.56 118.30 127.55
Primary reheater 112.95 121.78 109.46 118.01
Reheater finish 112.95 121.78 109.46 118.01
LP steam out of turbine 87.33 94.16 84.21 90.80
Main water out condense 87.33 94.16 84.21 90.80
Main water out pump to FWH 87.33 94.16 84.21 90.80
Main water out FWH 122.02 131.56 118.30 127.55
Condensing water 4781.63 5155.37 4541.51 4896.48
Table 6.9 – FWH bleed steam inlet conditions firing at ambient pressure.

Bleed steam to heater (kg/s)
- heater No. 1 6.6239 7.1416 5.8171 6.2717
- heater No. 2 5.8670 6.3256 6.7141 7.2389
- heater No. 3 7.3566 7.9316 7.1347 7.6923
- heater No. 4 5.7789 6.2306 5.5788 6.0148
- heater No. 5 9.0662 9.7749 8.8401 9.5311
Temperature of bleed steam to heater (°C)
- heater No. 1 108.8 108.8 87.97 87.97
- heater No. 2 246.9 246.9 231.4 231.4
- heater No. 3 373.4 373.4 373.4 373.4
- heater No. 4 457.4 457.4 457.4 457.4
- heater No. 5 359.7 359.7 353.6 353.6
Pressure of bleed steam to heater (bar)
- heater No. 1 0.449 0.449 0.449 0.449
- heater No. 2 2.135 2.135 2.135 2.135
- heater No. 3 6.895 6.895 6.895 6.895
- heater No. 4 13.67 13.67 13.67 13.67
- heater No. 5 26.72 26.72 26.72 26.72
Part 1 25
n
Tables 6.13a and 6.13b present the primary and secondary air heater performance data.
Pulverizer performance is one of the key factors for the smooth operation of the boiler.
The amount of the moisture to be driven off in a pulverizer is a stringent performance
requirement for proper ignition in the furnace.
The final raw flue gases were sent to the amine scrubbing unit and the PRT for CO2
recovery processing. The detailed performance of these CO2 recovery technologies were
not studied here since extensive data are available in the literature [2], [3], [5]. Infiltration air
contributed to the high nitrogen and oxygen contents in the flue gas of the oxy-fuel cases.
The two oxy-fuel gases have very similar compositions with respect to the major species
(carbon dioxide, nitrogen, oxygen, and water). However, the sulfur dioxide fractions
were very different because of the different fuel sulphur contents. For the air case, the
high water vapor present in the PRB flue gas is attributed to the water content of the fuel.
Table 6.10 – FWH main water outlet conditions firing at ambient pressure.

Main water from heater (kg/s)
- heater No. 1 87.329 94.155 84.219 90.801
- heater No. 2 99.820 107.62 96.750 104.31
- heater No. 3 122.02 131.56 118.30 127.55
- heater No. 4 122.02 131.56 118.30 127.55
- heater No. 5 122.02 131.56 118.30 127.55
Temperature of main water from heater (°C)
- heater No. 1 76.27 76.27 78.18 78.18
- heater No. 2 112.9 112.9 112.9 112.9
- heater No. 3 163.7 163.7 163.7 163.7
- heater No. 4 192.0 192.0 192.0 192.0
- heater No. 5 229.8 229.8 229.8 229.8
Pressure of main water from heater (bar)
- heater No. 1 9.344 9.344 9.351 9.351
- heater No. 2 6.895 6.895 6.895 6.895
- heater No. 3 6.895 6.895 6.895 6.895
- heater No. 4 113.1 113.1 116.3 116.3
- heater No. 5 112.5 112.5 115.6 115.6
Part 1 26
n
Table 6.11 – Section heat duties firing at ambient pressure (kJ/h).

Economizer 1.360 × 10 8
1.466 × 10 8
1.343 × 10 8
1.448 × 108
Furnace wall 6.432 × 108 6.935 × 108 6.139 × 108 6.618 × 108
Superheater platen 9.240 × 107 9.962 × 107 9.037 × 107 9.744 × 107
Low temperature superheater 1.087 × 108 1.172 × 108 1.105 × 108 1.191 × 108
High temperature finish 1.098 × 108 1.184 × 108 1.080 × 108 1.164 × 108
Primary reheater 7.971 × 107 8.594 × 107 8.278 × 107 8.925 × 107
Reheater finish 9.240 × 107 9.235 × 107 8.306 × 107 8.955 × 107
FWH (total) 3.170 × 108 3.418 × 108 3.103 × 108 3.334 × 108
- heater No. 1 5.690 × 107 6.135 × 107 5.812 × 107 6.267 × 107
- heater No. 2 5.527 × 107 5.959 × 107 5.360 × 107 5.779 × 107
- heater No. 3 8.044 × 107 8.672 × 107 7.796 × 107 8.405 × 107
- heater No. 4 4.986 × 107 5.375 × 107 4.833 × 107 5.210 × 107
- heater No. 5 7.454 × 107 8.036 × 107 7.224 × 107 7.788 × 107
Total Duty (including FWH) 1.579 × 109 1.695 × 109 1.533 × 109 1.653 × 109
Total Duty (without FWH) 1.262 × 109 1.354 × 109 1.223 × 109 1.318 × 109
Table 6.12 – Flue gas velocities (m/s) firing at ambient pressure.

Economizer 7.79 5.94 7.35 5.50
Furnace wall 13.41 10.35 14.30 10.79
Superheater platen 8.52 6.69 9.05 6.99
Low temperature superheater 10.44 8.11 9.70 7.41
High temperature finish 10.24 8.03 10.17 7.84
Primary reheater 10.99 8.47 9.72 7.35
Reheater finish 9.81 7.65 9.83 7.54
Part 1 27
n
Table 6.13a – Wyoming PRB air heaters performance firing at ambient pressure.
Wyoming PRB
Air-fired Oxy-fuel
Flue Gas Air Flue Gas Recycle Gas
Temperature of primary air heater
341.7 160.8 25 300.0 318.5 230.7 37.78 300.0
(°C)
Temperature of secondary air
341.7 162.9 65.56 273.9 318.5 149.0 37.78 273.9
heater (°C)
Mass flow of primary air heater
43.901 47.945 35.471 31.427 59.426 62.814 25.865 22.477
(kg/s)
Mass flow of secondary air heater
131.70 144.34 35.89 123.25 110.36 119.22 97.303 88.448
(kg/s)
Table 6.13b – Illinois No. 6 air heaters performance firing at ambient pressure.
Illinois No. 6
Air-fired Oxy-fuel
Flue Gas Air Flue Gas Recycle Gas
Temperature of primary air heater
353.1 164.7 25 330.0 287.7 220.7 37.8 250.0
(°C)
Temperature of secondary air
353.1 159.7 65.6 273.9 287.7 90.34 37.8 250.0
heater (°C)
Mass flow of primary air heater
35.067 37.815 25.681 22.933 73.363 77.217 28.341 25.497
(kg/s)
Mass flow of secondary air heater
131.92 140.97 139.17 130.11 101.31 111.35 110.37 100.33
(kg/s)
Part 1 28
n
Table 6.14 – Final flue gas (entering the PRT) properties firing at ambient pressure.

Parameter
Temperature (°C) 153.7 37.78 154.1 37.78
Mass flow rate (kg/s) 192.28 47.903 178.78 44.026
Specific heat (kJ/kg-°C) 1.087 0.9234 1.062 0.9160
Actual volumetric gas flow
8.317 × 105 1.097 × 105 7.612 × 105 9.971 × 104
(m3/h)
Density (kg/m3) 0.8323 1.571 0.8455 1.589
CO2 12.9141 76.1095 12.7272 75.2368
H 2O 12.3467 6.6660 8.2964 6.6718
O2 4.2740 6.0623 4.4942 4.5711
N2 69.5952 10.3758 73.2634 10.9164
SO2 0.0383 0.2235 0.3437 2.0209
Ar 0.8315 0.5630 0.8750 0.5831
Part 1 29
n
7. TIPS Case Study I – Existing Turbine
7.1. Design Considerations and Fuel Delivery System
As in any other current conceptual and pilot scale oxy-fuel combustion system, TIPS
recycles part of the flue gas back to the furnace to moderate the combustion temperature.
As discussed previously, the amount of flue gas to be recycled was determined by the
coal ash softening temperature.
In this study, TIPS is particularly advantageous in that the process is also an integrated
emissions control system. While ambient oxy-fuel systems require particulate control
systems (ESP and/or baghouse), TIPS can scrub out the particulate matter without such
technologies. Compared with the air case, this leads to significant capital and operating
and maintenance cost savings. The energy savings attributed to the air case ESP and
FGD are about 1.2 MWe when a similar amount of coal is fired.
Since the TIPS process operates at elevated pressure, a slurry coal-water mixing and
pumping system are required to transfer the fuel to the burners. The slurry solid
concentration was set at 55% by mass.
7.2. Condensing Heat and Boiler FWH System
As noted above, TIPS high pressure operation allows for flue gas water vapor
condensation at higher temperatures. As a consequence, it may be possible to make good
use of the heat of condensation and, thus, to increase the boiler efficiency.
For example, for the PRB coal, the water vapor content in the flue gas exiting the furnace
is at about 30% by volume. This flue gas will begin to condense at about 69°C at
ambient pressure. As a result, it is difficult to effectively use this heat in the
boiler/steam/water system. However, at 80 bar, the condensation point is raised to
208°C. At such a high condensing temperature, the heat available from the condensate
can be more readily used within the power cycle resulting in a subsequent increase in the
plant efficiency.
Indeed, the use of the flue gas condensing heat is a main advantage of TIPS. A major
thrust of this work is to quantify the amount and the temperature of the heat and develop
strategies to use it effectively within the power cycle.
Since the water vapor only begins to condense at about 208°C at 80 bar, it was decided
that instead of using the gas exiting the economizer to heat the air/recycle gas in an AH it
would be better to use it to heat water as part of FWH system. The challenge is to adjust
the bleed steams in the FWH system and replace part of the steam’s heat duty with the
flue gas condensing heat. It turns out that for both PRB and Illinois No. 6 coals there is
enough condensing heat for use in the FWH system.
Part 1 30
n
Two designs were carried out to investigate the potential use of the condensing heat in
the FWH system. The designs were based on turbine mass flow specifications. The first
design consisted of maintaining the steam mass flow through HP, IP, and LP sections as
close as possible to original values in order to use the same turbine. This approach also
ensures that the turbine load and output of each of the sections is similar. The second
design was based on a new turbine with no restrictions on mass flow and load. The first
design as discussed in this section while the second design is presented in the subsequent
section.
Table 7.1 lists the key plant performance data using the TIPS configuration. As shown,
the plant thermal efficiency increased for both coals when compared to the air and
ambient oxy-fuel cases. This result is mainly due to the use of condensing heat in the
FWH, resulting in steam savings for turbine output.
Table 7.1 – Key plant performance data for TIPS configuration No. 1.
Parameter
80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2

30.37 29.96
with capture
Plant net efficiency (%, HHV) 37.07 37.14
Plant gross efficiency (%, HHV) 39.17 39.37
Plant net power output (kW) 100000 100000
Plant gross power output (kW) 128982 131441
HP turbine power output (kW) 32320 33920
IP turbine power output (kW) 30032 30740
LP turbine power output (kW) 66630 66781
Fuel heat input (kJ/hr, LHV) 1.091 × 10 9
1.142 × 109
Fuel heat input (kJ/hr, HHV) 1.186 × 109 1.202 × 109
Net plant heat rate (kJ/kWh, LHV) 10909 11422
Net plant heat rate (kJ/kWh, HHV) 11855 12018
Coal mass flow (kg/s) 17.374 14.210
Slurry water mass flow (kg/s) 4.2244 8.504
Slurry mass flow (kg/s) 21.598 22.714
Slurry concentration (%) 55 55
Part 1 31
n
The energy cost for ASU is not included when plant gross efficiencies and net
efficiencies without capture were calculated. However, it is included in the net
efficiencies calculation in the captured cases. It is interesting to notice that the net
efficiencies without capture of the TIPS cases are significantly higher than those of air
and oxy-fuel cases (Table 6.2).
Due to the facts that the TIPS process can utilize almost all latent heat of fuel and CO2
can be condensed at ambient temperature (Tables 7.13 and 7.14), the TIPS process has
very high net efficiency with CO2 capture. Most of the increase in efficiency for the
TIPS case results from the elimination of PRT processes required by the ambient oxy-
fuel case.
Table 7.2 – Plant auxiliaries power consumption for TIPS configuration No. 1(kW).
Parameter
80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
ASU 20830.72 22712.53
FGR-fan 120.23 131.09
Oxygen & FWH pumps 945.39 950.11
Slurry pump 177.80 186.97
Total CO2 Capture Use 22074.14 23980.69
Total CO2 Capture Use,
17.11 18.24
Boiler primary air fan 242.39 261.78

Boiler secondary air fan 254.57 274.93
Boiler induced draft fan 1037.99 1121.00
Boiler fuel delivery 1107.35 1195.91
Electrostatic precipitator 502.23 542.40
Flue gas desulphurization 511.30 552.20
Ash handling 101.16 109.25
Condenser cold water pump 510.79 551.64
Condensate pump 71.26 76.96
Boiler feed pump 1184.32 1279.04
Boiler feed booster pump 9.42 10.17
FW heater drain pump 10.80 11.66
Miscellaneous plant auxiliaries 1364.00 1473.08
Total Boiler Use 6907.84 7460.30
Total Boiler Use,
5.36 5.68
Part 1 32
n
Plant auxiliary power consumptions are presented in Table 7.2. CO2 capture, mainly on
ASU, takes about 18% of the plant gross output. For the boiler part, it is very similar to
the ambient oxy-fuel case.
Table 7.3 – Key boiler performance data for TIPS configuration No. 1.
Parameter Wyoming PRB Illinois No. 6

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
Boiler efficiency (%, HHV) 98.70 98.74

Adiabatic flame temperature
1974 1942
(°C)
Furnace outlet temperature (°C) 1138 1131
Recycle rate (%) 67.00 69.00
The boiler efficiency is very high as result of the utilization of a condensing FWH heater.
The flue gas recycle rate for TIPS is lower than the ambient oxy-fuel cases because the
water added in the pressurized slurry fuel feeding system.
Table 7.4 – Furnace outlet flue gas properties for TIPS configuration No. 1.

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
Temperature (°C) 1138 1131
Mass flow rate (kg/s) 109.61 115.15
Specific heat (kJ/kg-°C) 1.514 1.482
Actual volumetric gas flow (m /h) 1.641 × 10
3 4
1.674 × 104
Density (kg/m3) 24.05 24.76
CO2 66.2254 67.0233
H 2O 30.6119 28.1394
O2 2.2239 2.3405
N2 0.3855 0.5637
SO2 0.1690 1.5289
Ar 0.3842 0.4042
Part 1 33
n
Table 7.5 – Temperatures (°C) for TIPS configuration No. 1.

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
Reheater finish 859.0 736.3 445.9 540.0 854.8 735.9 446.0 540.0
Economizer 456.4 248.3 229.8 294.4 447.6 240.4 229.8 295.8
Table 7.6 – Steam/water pressures (bar) for TIPS configuration No. 1.

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
Economizer inlet 112.5 115.7
Furnace wall inlet 112.0 114.0
Superheater platen inlet 105.1 107.1
Low temperature superheater inlet 104.1 106.2
High temperature finish inlet 103.6 104.6
High temperature finish outlet 103.5 103.5
Primary reheater inlet 26.72 26.72
Reheater finish inlet 25.82 26.09
Reheater finish outlet 25.21 25.21
LP inlet 6.895 6.694
LP steam out of turbine 0.04826 0.04826
Main water out condense 0.04826 0.04826
Main water out pump to FWH 6.895 6.694
Main water out FWH 112.5 115.7
Condensing water inlet 2.401 2.401
Condensing water outlet 1.611 1.611
Part 1 34
n
Table 7.7 – Steam/water mass flow (kg/s) for TIPS configuration No.1.

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
Desuperheating water 2.96 3.38
LP inlet 85.91 86.83
Table 7.8 – FWH bleed steam inlet conditions for TIPS configuration No. 1.

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
Bleed steam to heater (kg/s)
- heater No. 1 N/A N/A
- heater No. 3 0.0000 0.0000
- heater No. 4 5.6408 4.4980
- heater No. 5 6.9946 7.7909
Temperature of bleed steam to heater (°C)
- heater No. 1
- heater No. 2
- heater No. 3 373.4 370.1
- heater No. 4 457.4 457.4
- heater No. 5 359.7 353.6
Pressure of bleed steam to heater (bar)
- heater No. 3 6.895 6.694
- heater No. 4 13.67 13.67
- heater No. 5 26.72 26.72
Part 1 35
n
Table 7.9 – FWH main water outlet inlet conditions for TIPS configuration No. 1.

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
Main water from heater (kg/s)
- heater No. 3 98.54 99.12
- heater No. 4 98.54 99.12
- heater No. 5 98.54 99.12
Temperature of main water from heater (°C)
- heater No. 1
- heater No. 2
- heater No. 3 162.8 162.8
- heater No. 4 193.5 190.0
- heater No. 5 229.6 229.8
Pressure of main water from heater (bar)
- heater No. 3 6.895 6.694
- heater No. 4 113.1 116.3
- heater No. 5 112.5 115.7
Part 1 36
n
Table 7.10 – Section heat duties (kJ/h) for TIPS configuration No. 1.

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
Economizer 1.098 × 108 1.125 × 108

Furnace wall 5.195 × 108 5.143 × 108
Superheater platen 7.462 × 107 7.571 × 107
Low temperature superheater 8.782 × 107 9.254 × 107
High temperature finish 8.869 × 107 9.046 × 107
Primary reheater 6.460 × 107 6.907 × 107
Reheater finish 6.942 × 107 6.930 × 107
Flue gas FWH 1.557 × 108 1.628 × 108
FWH (total, steam side) 1.016 × 108 1.023 × 108
- heater No. 1
- heater No. 2
- heater No. 3
- heater No. 4 4.404 × 107 3.868 × 107
- heater No. 5 5.751 × 107 6.366 × 107
Total Duty
1.170 × 109 1.187 × 109
(including Flue gas FWH)
Table 7.11 – Flue gas FWH performance for TIPS configuration No. 1.

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
Parameter Flue Gas Main Water Flue Gas Steam
Temperature (°C) 248.3 139.0 32.29 151.6 240.4 123.4 32.29 155.6
Pressure (bar) 80 80 6.895 6.895 80 80 6.694 6.694
Vapor fraction 1.0000 0.7445 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.7516 0.0000 0.0000
Mass flow (kg/s) 109.61 95.325 85.909 85.909 115.15 100.75 86.832 86.832
Compositions (mole %)
CO2 66.2254 88.7122 67.0233 88.9643
H 2O 30.6119 7.0612 100.0 100.0 28.1394 4.7784 100.0 100.0
O2 2.2239 2.9851 2.3405 3.1123
N2 0.3855 0.5177 0.5637 0.7498
SO2 0.1690 0.2077 1.5289 1.8574
Ar 0.3842 0.5161 0.4042 0.5377
Heat duty (kJ/h) 1.557 × 108 1.628 × 108
Condensing water flow (kg/s) 14.284 14.397
Part 1 37
n
Table 7.12 – Final flue gas (entering the PRT) properties for TIPS configuration No.
1.

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
Temperature (°C) 139.0 123.4

3
Actual volumetric gas flow (m /h) 979.5 893.4
3
Density (kg/m ) 115.6 125.9
Composition (% by mole)
CO2 88.7122 88.9643
H 2O 7.0612 4.7784
O2 2.9851 3.1123
N2 0.5177 0.7498
SO2 0.2077 1.8574
Ar 0.5161 0.5377
7.4. PRT Performance Results
Flue gas water vapor is condensed in the FWH resulting in an almost dry gas stream
exiting the boiler island. This gas stream is further cooled in the PRT. The amount of
water condensed in the PRT is very small compared to that condensing in the FWH. For
the two cases considered here, about 4 to 6% of the total condensed water comes from the
PRT. This condensation process is necessary for the purpose of CO2 recovery and
transportation: first, it leads to a significant increase of CO2 purity; second, it eliminates
any concerns of ice formation in the downstream process in the event that a refrigeration
system is required; and third, the presence of water vapor is a serious corrosion concern
in a gas containing sulfur oxides.
As indicated in Table 7.13, a small condensing heater exchange utilizing cold water
substantially alters the flue gas composition. With the Wyoming PRB flue gas, the CO2
concentration becomes more than 95%, already meeting the highest CO2 purity standard
for EOR applications. Thus, all that is required for recovery in this case is to condense
the resulting gas with no additional change in composition.
Part 1 38
n
Table 7.13 – PRT condensing heater No. 1 performance for TIPS configuration No.
1.
80 bar, 99.5% O2
Inlet flue gas Outlet flue gas Inlet flue gas Outlet flue gas
Temperature (°C) 139.0 50.0 123.4 50.0
Vapor fraction 1.0000 0.9335 1.0000 0.9564
Mass flow (kg/s) 31.457 30.549 31.233 30.643
CO2 88.7122 95.0085 88.9643 93.0086
H2O 7.0612 0.4711 4.7784 0.4866
O2 2.9851 3.1975 3.1123 3.2542
N2 0.5177 0.5545 0.7498 0.7840
SO2 0.2077 0.2155 1.8574 1.9043
Ar 0.5161 0.5528 0.5377 0.5623
Heat duty (kJ/h) 2.094 × 107 1.627 × 107
Cooling water Inlet Outlet Inlet Outlet
Temperature (°C) 15.00 20.00 15.00 20.00
Pressure (bar) 2.401 1.611 2.401 1.611
Mass flow (kg/s) 279.16 279.16 216.85 216.85
One of the main motivations of operating at high pressure is to enable the CO2-enriched
flue gas to condense at ambient heat sink temperatures. This eliminates the need for an
energy intensive refrigeration system that is required for CO2 recovery in ambient
pressure oxy-fuel operations. Table 7.14 demonstrates that this is indeed practical as the
flue gas for both fuels completely condense resulting in 100% CO2 recovery rates.
It is interesting to note that, if required, there is a relatively easy way to increase the CO2
purity in the Illinois No. 6 case. Examination of the compositions of the two product
streams in Table 7.14 shows that the major species difference is the SO2 concentration.
This is not surprising since Illinois No. 6 coal has almost ten times the sulphur content of
Wyoming PRB coal (Table 5.2), and this same ratio was reflected in the product
compositions (Table 7.14). However, with an FGD unit the SO2 in the final product
stream could easily be lowered to improve the CO2 purity to more than 95%. Using an
FGD unit would be far more economical than employing a costly and energy intensive
refrigeration system. The energy consumption of an FGD is several orders of magnitude
lower than a PRT refrigeration system [13], [4].
Part 1 39
n
Table 7.14 – PRT condensing heater No. 2 performance for TIPS configuration No.
1.
80 bar, 99.5% O2
Flue gas CO2 Product Flue gas CO2 Product
Temperature (°C) 50.00 -5.292 50.00 -6.609
Vapor fraction 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000
Mass flow (kg/s) 30.549 30.549 30.643 30.643
CO2 95.0085 95.0085 93.0086 93.0086
H2O 0.4711 0.4711 0.4866 0.4866
O2 3.1975 3.1975 3.2542 3.2542
N2 0.5545 0.5545 0.7840 0.7840
SO2 0.2155 0.2155 1.9043 1.9043
Ar 0.5528 0.5528 0.5623 0.5623
Heat duty (kJ/h) 2.727 × 107 2.771 × 107
Cooling Oxygen Inlet Outlet Inlet Outlet
Temperature (°C) -141.5 25.00 -141.5 25.00
Pressure (bar) 80 80 80 80
Mass flow (kg/s) 24.934 24.934 25.341 25.341
Table 7.15 – Final flue gas (after PRT condensing heater No. 1) properties for TIPS
configuration No.1 with oxygen purity at 95%.

TIPS at 80 bar using 95% O2 TIPS at 80 bar using 95% O2
3
3
Density (kg/m ) 196.1 200.4
CO2 90.2805 88.3451
H 2O 0.4450 0.4576
O2 3.0406 3.0877
N2 3.2765 3.5121
SO2 0.2062 1.8230
Ar 2.7531 2.7746
Part 1 40
n
Boiler performance does not vary much when 95.0% oxygen is used instead of 99.5%
oxygen. However, oxygen purity has a great impact on flue gas composition and, hence,
on the performance of the PRT. Table 7.15 gives the properties of the final flue gas using
95.0% oxygen after the water vapor is almost completely condensed out.
It is clear that these flue gases must be further treated in order to obtain a higher purity
CO2 product stream. The options to do this are rather limited, with refrigeration being
the only solution. The resultant energy penalty would be very high to make sense for
TIPS. Therefore, the use of higher purity oxygen in the TIPS process is preferred if high
purity product is required.
8. TIPS Case Study II – New Turbine
8.1. Design Considerations for FWH System
In this section the design aspects and detailed performance of the TIPS process are
investigated when a new turbine is used. The goal here is to eliminate all bleed steams
and use the flue gas latent heat of condensation exclusively to heat the main water out of
the steam/water condenser to the required economizer inlet conditions. A newly
designed (or retrofitted) turbine is necessary for this purpose. This is because the steam
mass flows crossing all HP, IP, and LP sections must be the same when there is no bleed
steam is used for FWH.
Elimination of the steam FWH system and replacement with a flue gas condensing FWH
system could afford considerable capital and operating and maintenance savings while
simplifying the plant layout. Details of these benefits must be further identified and
investigated. The objective of this section is to investigate the technical feasibility of this
option. The design principals and philosophy of this case is almost identical to those of
the previous section.
Table 8.1 presents plant performance data using the TIPS configuration. The data
indicate that the plant thermal efficiencies are similar to the cases using the existing
turbine as detailed in the previous section. The fuel flow rates were slightly different,
due to different recovery rates of the condensing heat in the FWH.
Since almost all of the water vapor condenses out in the FWH (Table 8.10) and the
temperature of flue gas exiting the FWH is approximately 50°C, it is expected that the
boiler efficiencies for fuel cases are close to 100% (Table 8.4). The recycle rates are
either the same or slightly higher than those given in Table 7.4 (existing turbine case)
because with a new turbine design, the flue gas water content was drier. Thus, in this
case, greater flue gas recycle mass flows are needed to cool the flame.
Part 1 41
n
Table 8.1 – Key plant performance data for TIPS configuration No. 2.

Parameter 80 bar, 99.5% O2, no bleed 80 bar, 99.5% O2, no bleed
steam steam
30.54 29.93
with capture
Plant net efficiency (%, HHV) 37.25 37.12
Plant gross efficiency (%, HHV) 39.36 39.36
Plant net power output (kW) 100000 100000
Plant gross power output (kW) 128852 131509
HP turbine power output (kW) 29370 30960
IP turbine power output (kW) 29860 30770
LP turbine power output (kW) 69622 69780
Fuel heat input (kJ/hr, LHV) 1.085 × 10 9
1.143 × 109
Fuel heat input (kJ/hr, HHV) 1.179 × 109 1.203 × 109
Net plant heat rate (kJ/kWh, LHV) 10847 11432
Net plant heat rate (kJ/kWh, HHV) 11787 12029
Coal mass flow (kg/s) 17.273 14.223
Slurry water mass flow (kg/s) 4.200 8.512
Slurry mass flow (kg/s) 21.473 22.735
Slurry concentration (%) 55 55
Table 8.2 – Plant auxiliaries power consumption for TIPS configuration No. 2 (kW).
Parameter
80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
ASU 20710.00 22733.05
FGR-fan 119.53 131.21
Oxygen & FWH pumps 978.20 990.82
Slurry pump 176.77 187.21
Total CO2 Capture Use 21984.50 24042.29
Total CO2 Capture Use,
17.06 18.28
Boiler primary air fan 180.41 196.15

Boiler secondary air fan 290.34 315.67
Boiler induced draft fan 963.19 1047.23
Boiler fuel delivery 849.85 924.00
Electrostatic precipitator 190.29 206.90
Part 1 42
n
Flue gas desulphurization 883.61 960.70

Ash handling 271.97 295.70
Condenser cold water pump 503.46 547.38
Condensate pump 72.32 78.63
Boiler feed pump 1244.43 1353.01
Boiler feed booster pump 9.94 10.81
FW heater drain pump 10.76 11.70
Miscellaneous plant auxiliaries 1397.47 1519.40
Total Boiler Use 6867.81 7467.04
Total Boiler Use,
5.33 5.68
Table 8.3 – Key boiler performance data for TIPS configuration No. 2.

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
Boiler efficiency (%, HHV) 99.850 99.760
Adiabatic flame temperature (°C) 1886 1913
Furnace outlet temperature (°C) 1136 1166
Recycle rate (%) 69.50 69.00
Table 8.4 – Furnace outlet flue gas properties for TIPS configuration No. 2.

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2

Actual volumetric gas flow (m /h) 3
1.672 × 10 4
1.706 × 104
Density (kg/m3) 24.76 24.47
CO2 70.0235 69.0409
H2O 26.6562 26.1210
O2 2.3494 2.4073
N2 0.4069 0.5797
SO2 0.1587 1.4356
Ar 0.4054 0.4156
Part 1 43
n
With the correct amount of recycle mass flow, the flue gas mass flows (Table 8.4) were
very close to those in the previous section (Table 7.4). However, the gas compositions
were somewhat different due to the fact that the recycle gas is much drier, increasing the
CO2 concentration.
Table 8.5 – Temperatures (°C) for TIPS configuration No. 2.

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
Reheater finish 890.2 774.4 445.9 540.0 915.6 798.8 446.0 540.0
Economizer 516.9 333.9 229.8 294.4 529.2 340.2 229.8 295.8
Table 8.6 – Steam/water pressure (bar) firing at TIPS configuration No. 2.

TIPS at 80 bar using 99.5% O2 TIPS at 80 bar using 99.5% O2
LP inlet 6.895 6.694
Part 1 44
n
Table 8.7 – Steam/water mass flow (kg/s) for TIPS configuration No. 2.

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
Superheater platen outlet 86.48 87.38
Desup water 3.03 3.08
LP inlet 89.51 90.46
Table 8.8 – Section heat duty (kJ/h) for TIPS configuration No. 2.

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
Economizer 9.937 × 107 1.027 × 108

Furnace wall 4.700 × 108 4.694 × 108
Superheater platen 6.751 × 107 6.910 × 107
Low temperature superheater 8.229 × 107 8.440 × 107
High temperature finish 8.056 × 107 8.256 × 107
Primary reheater 6.320 × 107 6.842 × 107
Reheater finish 6.788 × 107 6.864 × 107
Flue gas FWH 2.710 × 108 2.737 × 108
Total Duty
1.202 × 109 1.219 × 109
(including Flue gas FWH)
Part 1 45
n
Table 8.9 – Flue gas FWH performance for TIPS configuration No. 2.

TIPS at 80 bar using 99.5% O2 TIPS at 80 bar using 99.5% O2
Parameter Flue Gas Main Water Flue Gas Main Water
Temperature (°C) 333.9 52.20 33.41 229.8 340.2 51.18 33.44 229.8
Pressure (bar) 80 80 112.5 112.5 80 80 115.7 115.7
Vapor fraction 1.0000 0.7362 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.7398 0.0000 0.0000
Mass flow (kg/s) 114.98 100.02 89.510 89.510 115.95 100.96 90.464 90.464
CO2 70.0235 95.0128 69.0409 93.2153
H2O 26.6562 0.5074 100.0 100.0 26.1210 0.5036 100.0 100.0
O2 2.3494 3.1908 2.4073 3.2533
N2 0.4069 0.5527 0.5797 0.7835
SO2 0.1587 0.1857 1.4356 1.6825
Ar 0.4054 0.5506 0.4156 0.5618
Heat duty (kJ/h) 2.710 × 108 2.737 × 108
Table 8.10 – Final flue gas (entering the PRT) properties for TIPS configuration No.
2.

80 bar, 99.5% O2 80 bar, 99.5% O2
Temperature (°C) 52.20 51.18

3
3
Density (kg/m ) 205.3 212.8
CO2 95.0128 93.2153
H2O 0.5074 0.5036
O2 3.1908 3.2533
N2 0.5527 0.7835
SO2 0.1857 1.6825
Ar 0.5506 0.5618
Part 1 46
n
When bleed steam is eliminated certain restrictions on the corresponding gas side are
removed allowing for additional water vapor condensation. Table 8.9 shows that the
condensation temperature can be reduced to about 50°C compared with 120°C in those
cases in which bleed steam was required (Table 7.11). It is clear that the FWH is a very
efficient device in terms of driving water vapor from the flue gas as well as utilizing
available latent heat.
8.3. PRT Performance Results
Compared with the case in which bleed steam was needed (Table 7.12), it was easy to see
that there was virtually no water vapor in the flue gases entering the PRT (Table 8.10).
Actually, the gas is very similar in composition to that exiting PRT heater No. 1 of Table
7.13. Therefore, all that is required is to cool the flue gas to ambient temperature to
obtain the final CO2 product. CO2 product flow rates are lower than those of Table 7.14
due to the lower fuel firing rates in this configuration (Table 8.1).
Table 8.11 – PRT condensing heater performance for TIPS configuration No. 2.
80 bar, 99.5% O2
Flue gas CO2 Product Flue gas CO2 Product
Temperature (°C) 52.20 -3.187 51.18 -3.700
Vapor fraction 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000
Mass flow (kg/s) 30.505 30.505 31.298 31.298
CO2 95.0128 95.0128 93.2153 93.2153
H2O 0.5074 0.5074 0.5036 0.5036
O2 3.1908 3.1908 3.2533 3.2533
N2 0.5527 0.5527 0.7835 0.7835
SO2 0.1857 0.1857 1.6825 1.6825
Ar 0.5506 0.5506 0.5618 0.5618
Heat duty (kJ/h) 2.711 × 107 2.773 × 107
Cooling water Inlet Outlet Inlet Outlet
Temperature (°C) -141.5 25.00 -141.5 25.00
Mass flow (kg/s) 24.790 24.790 25.364 25.364
Part 1 47
n
9. Key Findings and Analysis of Technical Aspects
Based on the TIPS technical performance data and comparison with the air and ambient
oxy-fuel cases, it can be seen that:
• By operating at elevated pressure, the TIPS process is able to more fully utilize
the latent heat of flue gas water vapor condensation heat in a FWH.
• The FWH system represents the most logical place to use the latent heat from the
flue gas to be used within the power generation cycle.
• Due to the significant reduction of steam consumption for the FWH, more power
can be generated from the steam turbine, resulting in higher gross and net power
outputs when compared to the air and ambient oxy-fuel cases.
• With the ability to utilize most of the condensing heat of the flue gas, the TIPS
process has higher boiler thermal efficiencies and higher overall plant
efficiencies than those of the air and ambient oxy-fuel cases.
• The TIPS process can handle a very wide range of fuels. The advantages of the
TIPS process over other conventional processes using low rank coals, such as
PRB and lignite are particularly notable.
• Integrated emissions control together with particle scrubbing is feasible for the
TIPS process.
• The final flue gas can be condensed at ambient heat sink temperatures resulting
in complete CO2 recovery in a liquid stream. In addition, cases exist in which the
purity of the CO2 in the recovered liquid stream is higher than 95%.
• There is a significant advantage operating the combustion system at pressure
compared with ambient oxy-fired systems which release the ASU pressure for
firing, requiring considerable power consumption for compression and
refrigeration for CO2 recovery.
• Char combustion reactions in higher operating pressure environments proceed at
higher rates increasing carbon burnout and allowing for simpler processing of
difficult to burn fuels.
• Increased heat transfer rates can be achieved at these higher pressures allowing
for decreased size of convective pass sections.
• The TIPS furnace can be much smaller due to the increased pressure. The
furnace sizing strategy will be similar to that of gasifiers and can be either wet
(slagging) or of a fluid bed style.
• The major factor limiting size reduction will be the ability of the system to
manage ash removal, deposition and cleaning.
Part 1 48
n
10. Conclusions
An extensive and detailed technical assessment of the TIPS process has been completed.
The work includes analyses of 100 MWe (net) power plants firing with air and oxygen at
ambient pressure for comparison with the TIPS process. For high pressure operation, a
coal-water slurry system is used for fuel delivery. A thorough examination of the feed
water heating system reveals that the flue gas condensing heat can be used effectively in
the TIPS case. This leads to significant savings of steam for FWH usage and increases in
plant thermal efficiency. Compared with processes operating at ambient pressure, the
TIPS final product stream can be condensed at ambient heat sink temperatures
eliminating multi-stage compression and refrigeration, necessary for ambient oxy-fuel
case.
At this level of study, there appear to be no major technical obstacles in the TIPS process.
Depending on the fuel properties and purity of oxygen, the TIPS process can recover CO2
completely at high purity levels. For example, firing Wyoming PRB coal with 99.5%
oxygen allows for 100% CO2 recovery with a purity of more than 95%. The optimal
operating pressure for TIPS is dependent on the CO2 recovery rate and purity
specifications, fuel properties, and the oxygen purity.
It is interesting to compare the TIPS with IGCC with CO2 capture. IGCC is known to
have high plant thermal efficiency and excellent emissions control, especially for SOx
species. The CO2 emission rate for IGCC is about 0.75 kg/kWh [16]. IGCC utilizes the
well-known water gas shift reaction for CO2 capture at maximum 85% recovery rate [17].
However, IGCC faces many operational challenges such as plant availability and fuel
quality. And, IGCC technology can only handle high rank coals. On the other hand,
TIPS does not appear to be limited in terms of the fuel type being fired. In fact, TIPS is
particularly advantageous over other processes when high moisture fuels are fired
because of the TIPS process capability to fully utilize the latent heat of the fuel.
11. Suggestion for Further Work
a) Lower Furnace Arrangement
The details of the lower furnace arrangement must be established. It is currently

thought that the TIPS process lends itself to IGCC type furnaces and can either be
slagging or of a fluid bed type. There are associated problems and benefits associated
with each of these arrangements. Simulations of these systems are required followed
by computational fluid dynamics modeling of several different arrangements.
Eventually pilot testing should be carried out to validate the results.
b) Fluid Bed Type
If the TIPS system were to use a fluid bed, the advantages of a bubbling system must
be compared with a circulating arrangement. Circulating arrangements are typically
Part 1 49
n
used to increase residence time in ambient systems; this may not be relevant in the
TIPS process because of the higher resident times associated with pressure and the
expected higher combustion rates. Moderation of the furnace temperature could
probably be most easily accomplished with a circulating arrangement thus eliminating
the need for flue gas recycle; however, bubbling arrangements are simpler with fewer
maintenance and operational issues. Moderation of bed temperatures may be able to
be achieved using bubbling bed technology thus eliminating the erosion prevalent
with circulating systems.
c) Pilot Scale Work
Experimental work is required to validate the combustion properties of various fuels

at pressure, lower furnace heat transfer rates, ability to manage molten ash within the
slagging arrangement, radiative and convective heat transfer rates at pressure, hot-
side corrosion rates, hot-side erosion rates, condensing heat exchanger design,
operating cycles for startup and shutdown, fluid bed performance, and combustion in
general at pressure and pollutant scrubbing. Additionally, material testing must be
carried out, particularly for the hottest furnaces zones and the condenser.
d) Modeling Studies
A TIPS system should be designed in more detail in conjunction with an equipment

manufacturer and should include basic flowsheets, design specifications and
equipment sizing. Detailed computational fluid dynamics modeling work should be
done in conjunction with process simulations to better understand the specific system
performance details. Lower furnace and convective pass arrangements, burner
design, flue gas condenser and scrubber configuration, and so on, should be
investigated in the study. The models should use exact char kinetic parameters,
derived from pilot-scale work data, for specific fuels at specified operating pressures.
In addition, the optimal TIPS operating pressures, which depend upon the fuel type,
delivered oxygen quality, required CO2 recovery rate and CO2 purity, must be
established for each application.
12. Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Mr. Dave Winship and Mr. Mark Douglas for input on furnace
arrangements. Thanks are extended to Dr. Yewen Tan for providing two references on
amine scrubbing. We would also like to thank Dr. Dennis Lu and Mr. Robin Hughes for
input into pilot scale testing. The authors would also like to acknowledge the long term
support for novel power generation processes supplied by the Canadian Panel on Energy
R&D (PERD).
13. References
[1] Fassbender, A., United States Patent No: US 6,196,000 B1, March 6, 2001.
Part 1 50
n
[2] Zheng, L. “Product Recovery Train Development for CO2 Capture in Oxy-fuel
Environment,” The 30th International Technical Conference on Coal Utilization and
Fuel Systems, Clearwater, FL, April 18-22, 2005.
[3] Allam, R.J., Panesar, R.S., White, V., and Dillon, D. “Optimising the Design of an
Oxyfuel-fired Supercritical PF Boiler,” The 30th International Technical
Conference on Coal Utilization and Fuel Systems, Clearwater, FL, April 18-22,
2005.
[4] Zheng, L., Tan, Y. and Wall, T. “Some Thoughts and Observations on Oxy-fuel
Technology Developments,” The 22nd International Pittsburgh Coal Conference,
Pittsburgh, PA, September 12-15, 2005
[5] http://www.epri.com, “Evaluation of Advanced Coal Technologies with CO2

Capture,” Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Report 000000000001004880,
April, 2004
[6] Fluor Corporation, “Evaluation of CO2/O2 Combustion (Oxy-fuel) Options,”

Canadian Clean Power Coalition Study Report, July, 2003.
[7] Craigen, D. Personal communication, Weyburn, Saskatchewan, July, 2003.
[8] Douglas, M. Personal communication, Ottawa, Ontario, July, 2002.
[9] Zheng, L., Clements, B. and Douglas, M. “Simulation of an Oxy-Fuel Retrofit to a

Typical 400 MWe Utility Boiler for CO2 Capture,” The 26th International Technical
Conference on Coal Utilization and Fuel Systems, Clearwater, FL, March 5-8,
2001.
[10] Tan, Y. and Croiset, E. “Emissions from Oxy-fuel Combustion of Coal with Flue
Gas Recycle”, Proceeding of The 30th International Technical Conference on Coal
Utilization and Fuel Systems, April 18-22, 2005, Clearwater, Florida.
[11] Chatel-Pelage, F., Marin, O. et al.; “A pilot-scale demonstration of oxy-combustion

with flue gas recirculation in a pulverized coal-fired boiler”, Proceeding of The 28th
International Technical Conference on Coal Utilization and Fuel Systems, March
10-13, 2003, Clearwater, Florida.
[12] Allam, R., Foster, E., and Stein, V. ; “Improving Gasification Economics through
ITM Oxygen Integration”, Proceeding of The 5th (IchemE) European gasification
Conference, april 8-10, 2002, Noordwijk, The Netherlands.
[13] Zheng, L., Tan, Y., Pomalis, R., and Clements, B. “Integrated Emission Control
and Its Economics for Advanced Power Generation Systems,” The 31st International
Part 1 51
n
Technical Conference on Coal Utilization and Fuel Systems, Clearwater, FL, May
21-25, 2006.
[14] Zheng, C., Clements, B. and Zheng, L. “The Feasibility of Decreased Furnace Size
with Reduced Flue Gas Re-circulation in Coal-Fired Boiler Designs,” The 30th
International Technical Conference on Coal Utilization and Fuel Systems,
Clearwater, FL, April 18-22, 2005.
[15] Zheng, L., Clements, B. and Runstedtler, A. “A Generic Simulation Method for the
Lower and Upper Furnace of Coal-fired Utility Boilers Using Both Air Firing and
Oxy-Fuel Combustion with CO2 Recirculation,” The 27th International Technical
Conference on Coal Utilization and Fuel Systems, Clearwater, FL, March 4-7,
2002.
[16] Ordorica-Garcia, G., Douglas, P., Croiset, E., and Zheng, L. “Technoeconomic
evaluation of IGCC Power Plants for CO2 Avoidance,” Journal of Energy
Conversion & Management, 47 (2006) 2250-2259.
[17] Dijkstra, J., van der Marel, J., et al. “Near zero Emission Technology for CO2
Capture from Power Plant,” IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Program, Report Number:
2006/13, October, 2006.
Part 1 52

Feasibility Study - Pressurized Oxy-Fuel Approach To Carbon Capture

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Feasibility Study - Pressurized Oxy-Fuel Approach To Carbon Capture

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Technical and Economic Feasibility Study of a

Pressurized Oxy-fuel Approach to Carbon Capture

Ligang Zheng, Richard Pomalis and Bruce Clements

Combustion Optimization Group

2.1 Pressure-temperature phase diagram for pure CO2. ………………………….. 6

5.1 Proximate analysis of coals (% by weight). ………………………………... 11

At the request of ThermoEnergy Power Systems (TEPS) LLC of Hudson, Massachusetts,

The objectives of this study were to:

1. Establish Design Basis and Configuration

3. CO2 Recovery Options for Combustion Processes

3.1. The Amine Scrubbing Method for CO2 Capture

3.2. The Product Recovery Train

3.3. PRT Operating Ranges

Figure 2.1 – Pressure-temperature phase diagram for pure CO2.

Figure 2.3 – CO2 recovery rate as a function of temperature and pressure.

Figure 2.4 – CO2 purity as a function of temperature and pressure.

4. Impact of Operating Pressure on Plant Efficiency

5. Baseline Conditions and Assumptions

Table 5.1 – Proximate analysis of coals (% by weight).

Wyoming PRB Illinois No. 6

Table 5.2 – Ultimate analysis of coals (% by weight).

Wyoming PRB Illinois No. 6

Table 5.3 – Coal properties.

Wyoming PRB Illinois No. 6

5.2. Air, Oxygen, and Ambient Conditions

The ambient conditions for this study were:

Ambient temperature at 25°C,

Table 5.4 – Air and oxygen analyses.

Air analysis % by volume

Oxygen from ASU @ 99.5% purity % by volume

Oxygen from ASU @ 95% purity % by volume

5.3. Steam Turbine and Boiler

5.4. Pollution Control System and Auxiliaries

5.5. Feed Water Heater System and Steam Cycle

Heater Heater Heater Heater Heater

Feed Water Feed Water

Figure 5.1 – Schematic of the boiler steam/water cycle.

6. Air and Oxy-fuel Ambient Case Study

6.1. Design Considerations

Table 6.1a – Key furnace information for air case.

Wyoming PRB Illinois No. 6

Table 6.1b – Key furnace information for ambient oxy-fuel case.

Wyoming PRB Illinois No. 6

6.2. Oxy-fuel Ambient Case Recycle Schemes

Flue Gas Recycle

Figure 6.1 – The oxy-fuel process with dry recycle.

6.3. Boiler Performance Results

Table 6.2 – Key plant performance data firing at ambient pressure.

Wyoming PRB Illinois No. 6

Table 6.3 – Plant auxiliaries power consumption at ambient pressure (kW).

Wyoming PRB Illinois No. 6

SCR 881.7 0.00 886.9 0.00

Boiler primary air fan 380.7 410.6 279.4 300.9

Table 6.4 – Key boiler performance data firing at ambient pressure.

Wyoming PRB Illinois No. 6

Wyoming PRB Illinois No. 6

operation is feasible. The current approach to ambient oxy-fuel combustion is to design

Table 6.7 – Steam/water pressure (bar) firing at ambient pressure.

Wyoming PRB Illinois No. 6

Wyoming PRB Illinois No. 6

Wyoming PRB Illinois No. 6

Wyoming PRB Illinois No. 6

Table 6.11 – Section heat duties firing at ambient pressure (kJ/h).