Articles & Issues
- Language
- English
- Conflict of Interest
- In relation to this article, we declare that there is no conflict of interest.
- Publication history
-
Received August 9, 2011
Accepted December 9, 2011
-
This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/bync/3.0) which permits
unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright © KIChE. All rights reserved.
All issues
Cost of energy analysis of integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) power plant with respect to CO2 capture ratio under climate change scenarios
1School of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Seoul National University, Seoul 151-742, Korea 2Department of Chemical Engineering, Myongji University, Yongin, Gyenggi-do 449-728, Korea 3Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Korea National University of Transportation, Chungju, Chungbuk 380-870, Korea 4ASRI, Automation and Systems Research Institute, Seoul 151-742, Korea
Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering, September 2012, 29(9),
10.1007/s11814-011-0295-y
10.1007/s11814-011-0295-y
Download PDF
Abstract
This paper presents the results of the cost of energy (COE) analysis of an integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) power plant with respect to CO2 capture ratio under the climate change scenarios. To obtain process data for a COE analysis, simulation models of IGCC power plants and an IGCC with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) power plant, developed by the United States Department of Energy (DOE) and National Energy Technology Laboratory(NETL), have been adopted and simulated using Aspen Plus. The concept of 20-year levelized cost of energy (LCOE), and the climate change scenarios suggested by International Energy Agency (IEA) are also adopted to compare the COE of IGCC power plants with respect to CO2 capture ratio more realistically. Since previous studies did not consider fuel price and CO2 price changes, the reliability of previous results of LCOE is not good enough to be accepted for an economic comparison of IGCC power plants with respect to CO2 capture ratio. In this study, LCOEs which consider price changes of fuel and CO2 with respect to the climate change scenarios are proposed in order to increase the reliability of an economic comparison. And the results of proposed LCOEs of an IGCC without CCS power plant and IGCC with CCS (30%, 50%, 70% and 90% capture-mole basis- of CO2 in syngas stream) power plants are presented.
References
IEA, World Energy Outlook 2008, IEA (2008)
IEA, World Energy Outlook 2009, IEA (2009)
DOE/NETL, Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants, vol. 1, DOE (2007)
Rhodes JS, Keith DW, Biomass Bioenerg., 29(6), 440 (2005)
Ordorica-Garcia G, Douglas P, Croiset E, Zheng LG, Energy Conv. Manag., 47(15-16), 2250 (2006)
Perez-Fortes M, Bojarski AD, Velo E, Nougues JM, Puigjaner L, Energy, 34(10), 1721 (2009)
Emun F, Gadalla M, Majozi T, Boer D, Comput. Chem. Eng., 34(3), 331 (2010)
Kunze C, Spliethoff H, Fuel Process. Technol., 91(8), 934 (2010)
Short W, Packey DJ, Holt T, A manual for the economic evaluation of energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies, NREL (1995)
NREL, Solar advisor model user guide, NREL (2010)
Index Mundi, http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities [accessed 15. 11. 2010]. (2010)
Zheng LG, Furinsky E, Energy Conv. Manag., 46(11-12), 1767 (2005)
Kanniche M, Bouallou C, Appl. Thermal Eng., 27, 2693 (2007)
Aspen technology, Aspen Plus IGCC Model, Aspen Technology (2008)
Chen C, Rubin ES, Energy Policy, 37(3), 915 (2009)
DOE, Evaluation of fossil fuel power plants with CO2 recovery, DOE (2002)
Chan M, Yano J, Garg S, Tikualu H, Coal gasification - final report, University of California (2008)
Allam RJ, Castle-Smith H, Air separation units, design and future development, University of Twente (2000)
Smith AR, Klosek J, Fuel Process. Technol., 70(2), 115 (2001)
IPCC, Carbon dioxide capture and storage, Cambridge University Press (2005)
Painuly JP, Renewable Energy., 24, 73 (2001)
Koroneos C, Spachos T, Moussiopoulos N, Renew. Energy., 28, 295 (2003)
Evrendilek F, Ertekin C, Renewable Energy., 28, 2303 (2003)
Pehnt M, Renew. Energy., 31, 55 (2006)
Bae HK, Kim SY, Lee B, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 28(3), 643 (2011)
IEA, World Energy Outlook 2009, IEA (2009)
DOE/NETL, Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants, vol. 1, DOE (2007)
Rhodes JS, Keith DW, Biomass Bioenerg., 29(6), 440 (2005)
Ordorica-Garcia G, Douglas P, Croiset E, Zheng LG, Energy Conv. Manag., 47(15-16), 2250 (2006)
Perez-Fortes M, Bojarski AD, Velo E, Nougues JM, Puigjaner L, Energy, 34(10), 1721 (2009)
Emun F, Gadalla M, Majozi T, Boer D, Comput. Chem. Eng., 34(3), 331 (2010)
Kunze C, Spliethoff H, Fuel Process. Technol., 91(8), 934 (2010)
Short W, Packey DJ, Holt T, A manual for the economic evaluation of energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies, NREL (1995)
NREL, Solar advisor model user guide, NREL (2010)
Index Mundi, http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities [accessed 15. 11. 2010]. (2010)
Zheng LG, Furinsky E, Energy Conv. Manag., 46(11-12), 1767 (2005)
Kanniche M, Bouallou C, Appl. Thermal Eng., 27, 2693 (2007)
Aspen technology, Aspen Plus IGCC Model, Aspen Technology (2008)
Chen C, Rubin ES, Energy Policy, 37(3), 915 (2009)
DOE, Evaluation of fossil fuel power plants with CO2 recovery, DOE (2002)
Chan M, Yano J, Garg S, Tikualu H, Coal gasification - final report, University of California (2008)
Allam RJ, Castle-Smith H, Air separation units, design and future development, University of Twente (2000)
Smith AR, Klosek J, Fuel Process. Technol., 70(2), 115 (2001)
IPCC, Carbon dioxide capture and storage, Cambridge University Press (2005)
Painuly JP, Renewable Energy., 24, 73 (2001)
Koroneos C, Spachos T, Moussiopoulos N, Renew. Energy., 28, 295 (2003)
Evrendilek F, Ertekin C, Renewable Energy., 28, 2303 (2003)
Pehnt M, Renew. Energy., 31, 55 (2006)
Bae HK, Kim SY, Lee B, Korean J. Chem. Eng., 28(3), 643 (2011)
