Safety tip for the day SAFETY FIRST
TAMPA ELECTRIC GENERATION • BIG BEND STATION 1900 MW • 4 Coal fired steam units • BAYSIDE POWER STATION 1800 MW • Repowered NGCC • One 3 on 1 • One 4 on 1 • POLK POWER STATION 650 MW • One IGCC • Two Peaking CT’s • PHILLIPS POWER STATION 36 MW • Two slow speed diesels ________ • TOTAL CAPACITY (approx) 4400 MW
POLK POWER STATION • UNIT 1 IGCC, Base load on syngas, intermediate on oil • Combined cycle, GE 7F, 7221 192MW • GE D11, steam 120MW • Dual fuel, Syngas/Distillate Oil • DOE Clean Coal Technology co-funding $120M • In service 1996 • UNIT 2, 3, 4 & 5 Simple Cycle CT, Peaking • Simple cycle GE 7FA+E, 7241 165 MW each • 2 & 3 Dual fuel, Nat gas/Distillate Oil; 4 & 5 Nat Gas only • Unit 2 in service 2000, Unit 3 2002, Units 4&5 2007 • Total site over 4000 acres (previously mined for phosphate) • 750 acre cooling pond • 80 Tampa Electric employees
POLK 1 – Technology Summary • Gasification technology originally developed by Texaco, now owned by General Electric • Oxygen blown, slurry fed, entrained flow gasifier • Operating pressure 400 psi nominal • Gasifier vessel refractory lined (largest built) • Radiant plus convective syngas coolers for heat recovery • Single train configuration (one gasifier supplying one CT) • CT is GE 7F w/ MNQC combusters, larger 1st stage nozzle • Diluent N2 plus syngas saturation for NOx control • Modest air extraction rate from CT to ASU • Feedstock is 2200 tons/day coal and petroleum coke blend • ASU by Air Products, 2100 tons/day oxygen production • Sulfuric acid plant by Monsanto, (unique to Florida) • Acid gas removal via MDEA and COS hydrolysis
SULFURIC ACID PLANT OXYGEN PLANT GASIFIER STRUCTURE COAL SILOS SLURRY PREPARATION UNIT 1 CT STEAM TURBINE UNIT 2 CT HRSG YOU ARE HERE UNIT 3 CT UNDER CONSTRUCTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION AERIAL PHOTO N ,
IGCC DRIVER LOW EMISSIONS FROM LOW COST FEEDSTOCKS FOR LOW COST ELECTRICITY
POLK 1 PERFORMANCE ENVIRONMENTAL • Polk rated the “Cleanest Coal Fired Power Plant in North America” by the Energy Probe Research Foundation • (total emissions from 2002 TRI data)
LOW EMISSIONS Typical Emissions (Lb/MMBTU) PolkPolk Expected (Permit) (Steady State) New IGCC SO2 0.14 0.12 0.02 NOx 0.055 0.04 0.02 (w/SCR) Particulate 0.007 <0.004 0.007 Mercury NA NA 90% removal (New IGCC values are basis 8,800 hhv btu/kwh net)
OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ADVANTAGES • Beneficial Reuse of Sulfur – H2SO4 at Polk • Beneficial Reuse of Slag • Low Water Use (2/3 that of PC unit) • Minimal solid waste (no gypsum from FGD) • Zero Process Water Discharge
ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES • Mercury - Cost-Effective Removal on IGCC using small activated carbon bed • ( $0.25/MWh vs. $3.10/MWh for PC) • Testing done at Polk • Commercially at Eastman to 95+% • Other Volatile Metals – Will also be removed by carbon bed
ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES CO2 Removal Solvents used for sulfur removal can also remove CO2 (more cost effective due to <1% volume) For New Solid Fuel Power Plants (EPRI estimates) 25% Higher COE with IGCC 50% + Higher COE with PC CO2 Sequestration Saline aquifer injection – USF feasibility study
FUEL FLEXIBILITY • Polk has operated on over 20 different fuels including: Coals Coal Blends Coal/Pet Coke Blends • Coal/Coke/Biomass Blends • Slagging gasifier requires somewhat higher fusion temps (Polk targets 2350 – 2700 F T-250 temps) • Low rank fuels can be used in slurry fed gasifiers, but hurt efficiency • Power block can operate on syngas or distillate oil
LOW COST FEEDSTOCKS RELATIVE FUEL PRICES AT POLK • 40% Coal/60% Pet Coke Blend 1.0 • Pet Coke 0.7 • Coal 1.5 • Natural Gas 3.6 • Low Sulfur Oil 6.0
RENEWABLE FUELS • BIOMASS CO-UTILIZATION TESTS • Eucalyptus Biomass Test - December, 2001 • Bahiagrass Biomass Test - April, 2004 (Bahiagrass Harvest and Storage Test started approximately one year prior) • No impact on syngas quality or emissions • Minor issues with material handling
REPRESENTATIVE COSTS Fuel processing costs per mmbtu fuel input (Excludes combined cycle costs) Fuel $1.62O&M $0.96 “Controllable Expense” $2.58 A&G, Depreciation, Taxes, etc $1.06 Solid Fuel Processing Cost $3.64 For Natural Gas Comparison, Multiply by heat rate ratio: $3.64 X 9,500 / 7,000 = $4.93 Current Natural Gas Price: $8.00 +/-
TEC’s ADVANCMENTS of IGCC • Refractory life extension to 3 years • Successful integration of fines recycle • NOx below 15ppm with diluent N2 and saturation • Successful zero process water discharge system • Air extraction/integration with GE 7F turbine • IGCC use with sulfuric acid plant with variable % • Leader in clean coal power production > 13M gwhrs • IGCC ambassadors, 4000+ visitors
PERCEPTIONS AND MISPERCEPTIONS REGARDING IGCC • HIGHER INSTALLED COST – TRUE • Current estimates are 10 – 20% higher than SCPC unit with scrubber and • SCR. This is offset by lower fuel cost and reduced emissions. • NO SINGLE SUPPLIER OR OVERALL PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE – NO LONGER TRUE • Alliances GE/Bechtel and Conoco/Phillips-Fluor are offering comprehensive • EPC contracts with performance guarantees. • NO FINANCIAL REWARD FOR SUPERIOR ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE – SOMEWHAT TRUE • IGCC is capable of lower emissions than other coal based technologies and • will be the most cost effective at mercury and CO2 removal. Anticipated • environmental regulations will define financial value.
PERCEPTIONS AND MISPERCEPTIONS REGARDING IGCC (cont’d) • IGCC HAS LOW AVAILABILITY – NOT TRUE • Overall reliability of the power block is higher than other “coal-fired” units • (95%). The dual fuel capability of IGCC adds significant value. Gasifier • reliability (currently low 80%), will be higher for next generation, dual train • plants. • IGCC IS EXPERIMENTAL AND REQUIRES UNIQUE SKILLS • – NOT TRUE • Gasification has been used since the 1800’s and there are hundreds of gasifiers • operating worldwide. The first generation IGCC plants have now been in • service for 10 years. • Tampa Electric (a modest size electric utility) has successfully operated and • maintained the Polk Unit 1 IGCC since 1996.
POLK UNIT 6 • TEC is planning for the addition of a 630 MW IGCC • unit in 2013. • Preliminary engineering and preparations for • permitting and regulatory approval are in progress. • TEC has been awarded a $133.5M tax credit under • the Energy Policy Act of 2005 for Polk 6. • Expected configuration is two gasifiers feeding two • CT’s with one ST. Minimum scale up (same size • gasifiers as Polk 1). • Allowances made in design for addition of CO2 • capture and sequestration equipment.