22 IPMA World Congress "Project Management To Run" 9 - 11 November 2008, Roma, Italy

22nd IPMA World Congress
“Project Management to Run”

9 - 11 November 2008, Roma, Italy
ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION WITH AND WITHOUT CO2 CAPTURE:

AN EFFECTIVE APPROACH TO FEASIBILITY STUDY PROJECT MANAGEMENT
R. Domenichini
Technical Director, Power Division
Foster Wheeler Italiana Spa
Via Caboto 1, 20094 Corsico – Milan, Italy
telephone no.: +39 024486.2485
Rosa_Maria_Domenichini@fwceu.com
L. Mancuso
Process Manager, Power Division
Foster Wheeler Italiana Spa
Via Caboto 1, 20094 Corsico – Milan, Italy
telephone no.: +39 024486.2670
Luca_Mancuso@fwceu.com
Keywords
Climate Change, Low Carbon Economy, CCS (CO2 capture & Sequestration), Power, Feasibility study
1. Introduction
During recent years, significant changes in the power generation industry have been caused by the increase in gas
prices and material costs, leading to a growing interest in clean coal technologies. Further, the world energy demand
is predicted to dramatically increase over the next years and the challenge of implementing Carbon Capture and
Sequestration (CCS) in the fossil fuel power industry represents the bridge to sustainable economic growth. Around
the world there are many CCS projects in different phases involving the most important energy companies and the
Independent Power Producers.
Foster Wheeler has developed feasibility studies, basic design and FEED of power plants with CO2 capture since
2000. Clients were international organizations like IEA GHG (International Energy Agency Greenhouse Gas
Research & Development Programme) and EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute), as well as main Oil & Gas
companies. Due to the innovative technology and new scenario, the Feasibility Study step is very important to
establish the bases of a continuous and fruitful cooperation with the Client in the subsequent project phases up to the
plant commercial operation. The Feasibility Study needs to be executed combining excellent technical capabilities
with an effective project management.
The main focus of this article is to describe the drivers of this business opportunity and the success factors of an
effective management of the first step of a CCS project: the Feasibility Study. Further, the outcome of a recently
completed feasibility study is presented . The study evaluates the up-to-date performance and cost data for a wide
range of power generation plants, on a consistent set of design bases. For each technology and fuel type, the study
also presents the cost of electricity increase and the cost of carbon dioxide avoidance, when making the pre- or post-
combustion capture of the CO2, and concludes with a sensitivity analysis relating to fuel price.
2. Vision of a Low Carbon Economy

The correlation between increasing anthropogenic GHG emissions and climate change is today generally
recognized, even if a few tenacious opponents still remain. The issue is deeply integrated with other topics, like
increasing energy demand vs sustainable economic growth and energy security. There are many studies, reports, and
forecasts showing different scenarios that can be more or less catastrophic and/or likely. Foster Wheeler looks at the
various scenarios in order to be ready to explore all the business opportunities associated with o the energy
challenge.
Several areas have been identified as possible contributions towards mitigating climate change and a delivering low-
carbon economy. It is universally agreed that all of these should be be developed in order to meet the envisaged
targets, with single stakeholders that are focusing on one or some of those areas, according to their vision and
business. In addition to CCS that will be described in the next paragraphs, the following interventions are
mentioned:
energy saving: there is room for a significant reduction of CO2 emissions from refineries, petrochemical and
chemical process plants by means of heat recovery and process optimization, as well as installation of high
efficiency electric motors;
1
• improvement of energy production efficiency by means of optimization of cogeneration and power plants
design applying the Best Available Technology (BAT); renewable energy: Foster Wheeler activities range
from wind nd solar power plants which are developed as BOO (Build Own and Operate) projects, to biomass.
Foster Wheeler has proprietary technologies that are applied in both power productionfor ‘difficult’ biomass
combustion, and synthetic fuels, chemicals and hydrogen production by means of biomass gasification.
3. CCS: Available Technologies to sustain Power Generation from Fossil Fuels

Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) consists of capturing carbon dioxide (CO2) from large sources, like fossil
fuel power stations, natural gas processing and chemical production plants, compressing and transporting it to a
suitable location, and injecting it into deep geological formations for long-term/ultimate storage. In some cases
geological sequestration is associated with a fruitful use of CO2 in Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR, i.e further
extraction of crude oil from mature or declining fields) or Coal Bed Methane Recovery (CBMR, i.e. substitution of
methane entrapped in unminable coal layers with CO2). Most available geological storage sites are deep saline
aquifers with an estimated capacity adequate to store for more than 60 years the total CO2 emitted due to human
activities.
With reference to the CO2 capture process, three categories of technology are available:
- post-combustion capture: CO2 is removed from the exhaust gas generated by a conventional power plant. The
disadvantage is the exhaust gas dilution due to the high nitrogen content;
- pre-combustion capture: it consists of the preparation of a decarbonised fuel which does not produce CO2 when
it is burnt. Starting from any potential fuel, a synthetic gas is generated through a process such as partial
oxidation, steam reforming or autothermal reforming. Syngas containing carbon monoxide (CO), hydrogen
(H2), carbon dioxide (CO2) and other minor components (H2S, N2, Ar etc.) is subjected to a shift reaction to
transform it into CO & H2O into H2 & CO2. The resulting CO2 can be captured by means of a solvent washing.
The clean stream is a hydrogen-rich fuel that is burnt, producing water as a combustion product;
- oxy-combustion: the oxidant is oxygen or enriched air instead of air. The flue gas stream is CO2-concentrated
making the downstream treatment easier. In order to control at acceptable values the combustion temperature,
part of the flue gas is re-circulated to the boiler. The disadvantage of this alternative is the need for an Air
Separation Unit presently based on a cryogenic process which is very expensive both for the investment cost
and for the high electrical consumption.
Foster Wheeler is performing a R&Dprogram to apply oxy-combustion to its own boiler designs, both
pulverized coal (PC) and circulating fluidized bed (CFB) combustion technology.
4. Project Management approach to a CCS Feasibility Study
4.1 Introduction
A project with a CCS plant demands deep technical knowledge, relevant experience, highly qualified resources,
innovation and flexibility during all the project phases, starting from the Feasibility Study.
Because of the “flagship” nature of the Project it is vital for the Feasibility Study to integrate business and technical
considerations to achieve a technically well defined and economically viable facility. This requires an experienced
Engineering Contractor, , that is familiar with the critical issues related to the involved technologies and able to
work effectively as an integral part of the overall project team.
The following factors are critical to the success of the CCS project.
4.2 Achieving HSE Objectives

Aa high standard of care is required in design to address potential effects on the environment and achieve HSE
objectives. This requires early focus on identifying and addressing HSE factors from commencement of Feasibility
Study. A continuous effort is required to minimise the potential adverse impact of the project on the local and
global environment by implementing mitigation measures and recommendations identified in the definition phase.
At appropriate times during the Feasibility Study execution the design is subject to reviews, including HAZID, plot
plan and constructability
4.3 High Performance Project Team

A high performance integrated team needs to be built by providing committed and enthusiastic staff that are selected
based on qualifications and experience.. An effective coordination is ensured by means of regular weekly progress
meetings handled mainly through webcasts and teleconferences and a limited number of periodicl trips.
2
4.4 Technological Excellence in Critical Process Units

Foster Wheeler offers unique capabilities in the critical units of all the alternatives under evaluation, having a proven
track record in similar projects involving IGCC with and without CO2 capture, Acid Gas Removal applying all the
suitable chemical and physical solvents, supercritical and ultrasupercritical power station applying both PC and CFB
boilers, oxycombustion boilers, natural gas combined cycles.
A deep technical knowledge is necessary in order to execute the Feasibility Study paying the required attention to all
the critical aspects (like process selection, required sparing capacity, design margins etc.) that have an impact on the
investment cost estimate and on the performance evaluation.
4.5 Alignment
Alignment is a top priority driver through each stage of project execution as the “cement” that brings together and
integrates the different technologies involved and focuses attention to project completion. This entails a range of
issues such as:
• Ensuring early agreement on project strategies, quality objectives and procedures;
• Establishing and maintaining effective communication channels;
• Developing common project standards and specifications;
• Implementing an agreed and coordinated project execution plan;
• Applying team work to problem solving and value engineering;
• Managing interfaces and recognising the importance of proprietary data;
• Producing aligned project deliverables, schedule and estimates;
• Coordinating and aligning licensors’ schedules and data.
4.6 Effective Interface Management and Technology Licensors’ selection

A complex project of this nature, with several licensed process units, requires effective management of the technical
and commercial interfaces among Principal, Contractor, licensors and third parties.
Interface co-ordination and development of the interface plan in consultation with the Principal are necessary to
identify the critical issues and establish the information requirements and responsibilities. This is part of the overall
project execution plan and remains a live document to be used as a vehicle to review progress and identify interface
issues.
To ensure this issue the necessary attention and managerial support to this issue, often an Interface Coordinator is
appointed, reporting to the Process Manager.
It is good praticeto undertake preparation of definitive design basis documents for each licensor and technology
provider and to prepare the ‘Instructions to Licensors’ document. This enables technology providers to work
consistently to an agreed set of generic design criteria, and to follow established and proven procedures.
After receiving the technical and economic information an exhaustive conditioning and tabulation of the Licensors ‘
documents is done in order to collect all the data required to select the most suitable technology for the specific
project.
4.7 High Reliability and Availability

The design and operating strategy should result in a high degree of reliability of the power plant with CCS. Iit is
important to establish in the feasibility study phase the operating philosophy of the plant to ensure a safe, efficient
operation with high reliability and availability.
4.8 Long Lead Items

Based on previous experience, current market conditions and increasing lead times, many items not normally
considered long lead are starting to fall within this definition. Aa key activity during the Feasibility Study is the
identification of the long lead items.
4.9 Robust Cost Estimates and Manning Level Estimates

It is important to have well developed systems and data bases for estimating both capital and operating costs for all
the systems that are required for the project, and extensive experience of commissioning facilities to minimize the
time and cost to start-up. This expertise and knowledge is brought to the project to optimize the design through the
Feasibility Study and is shared with Principal to ensure delivery of a commercially viable facility. A ±30% accuracy
investment cost estimate is generally prepared. A major input to develop the operating cost estimate is the manning
3
levels required to operate the facility. Based upon an extensive database of similar facilities, these manning levels
are established in consultation with Principal.
4.10 VIP including Value Engineering, Benchmarking and Risk Management

Opportunities to apply Value Improving Processes (VIPs) occur throughout the project but the biggest benefit is
typically achieved in the early phases, as illustrated by the figure below. Therefore a VIP Plan is prepared defining
which VIPs are appropriate during Feasibility Study.
The project team provides assistance in setting project goals and analysing the potential cost savings and resultant
impact on Net Present Value (NPV). The Estimating group can produce reports detailing the status of current VIPs,
progress against VIP objectives, expenditure and savings achieved.
It adds considerable value to apply a well-developed Value Engineering methodology based on established best
practice. The methodology can be tailored to suit the particular needs of the project and incorporates phases of
information gathering, idea generation, evaluation, investigation, recommendation and implementation. Idea
generation is accomplished by brainstorm sessions involving project team members focused on reliably achieving
the necessary functionality for the lowest cost. These sessions include personnel from previous projects to ensure the
lessons learned from other projects are captured. Ideas are ranked, rated and managed through to implementation. It
is essential that these activities are started very early in the Feasibility Study to maximise the opportunity to enhance
the final plant design.
Formalised benchmarking is then done during the FEED phase using qualitative analysis to compare the project
with key project parameters, identify high risks and associated outcomes, and recommend changes to enhance its
execution.
The following is compared to industry norms and best practice:
• Use of value improvement practices;
• The projected total installed cost (TIC);
• Engineering as a percentage of TIC;
• An analysis of the contingency required based on project scope;
• Overall Project schedule and Construction schedule;
• Schedule risks and mitigations: management of risk is a key element in order to ensure successful delivery of
the project.
5. A typical CCS Feasibility Study: Technical and Economical results

This section presents the results of a typical feasibility study that compares performance and cost data for a wide
range of power generation plants. The main focus of this study is to select the Best Available Technology (BAT)
and the optimum configuration of a new power plant, given a site-specific set of basis of design data.
5.1 Bases of Design

The power plants are designed to process, in an environmentally acceptable manner, three different fuel types and
produce electric energy to deliver to the National Grid. The main characteristics of the three fuels are the following:
• Natural Gas (NG): Low Heating Value (LHV) equal to 46,270 kJ/kg.
• Bituminous Coal (BC): LHV equal to 25,870 kJ/kg and a sulphur content of 1.1% wt (dry, ash free).
• Lignite (Li): LHV equal to 10,500 kJ/kg, inherent moisture (proximate analysis) of 50.7%
and a sulphur content of 0.48% wt (dry, ash free).
4
For each power plant alternative, the power production is targeted at approximately 600-800 MWe. Cases with CO2
capture assume CO2 compression to 140 barg. The location for cost estimation purposes is a European coastal site.
The overall gaseous emissions are significantly lower than those defined by the applicable European directive and
are set in order to minimize the emissions and not penalizing significantly the plant efficiency and investment cost.
The main reference ambient conditions for performance evaluation are 15°C and a seawater temperature of 15°C.
5.2 Alternative Power Plant Schemes

For each fuel type, three different power plant configurations are investigated:
• Power production without CO2 capture.
• Pre-combustion CCS.
• Post-combustion CCS.
For each of the above configuration, the power plant-based technology is selected as the representative of the most
performing and/or the less costly alternative between the currently available stat-of-the art technologies.
The main characteristics of the nine power plant technologies are the following:
• Case 1.1: Combined Cycle Gas Turbine (CCGT), natural gas fed and production of electric energy.
• Case 1.2: CCGT, natural gas fed and production of electric energy, with post-combustion CO2 capture.
• Case 1.3: Auto Thermal Reforming (ATR) of the natural gas, with pre-combustion capture of the CO2 and
CCGT fed with s hydrogen rich fuel.
• Case 2.1: Conventional coal power station, fed by bituminous coal, with an Ultra –Super-Critical Pulverized
Coal (USCPC) steam cycle and production of electric energy.
• Case 2.2: Conventional coal power station, fed by bituminous coal, with an Ultra –Super-Critical Pulverized
Coal (USCPC) steam cycle and post combustion CO2 capture using MEA solvent scrubbing.
• Case 2.3: Gasification combined cycle using oxygen blown, Slurry Feed (SF), with Water Quench (WQ), fed by
bituminous coal, sour shift conversion and pre-combustion CCS by physical solvent scrubbing.
• Case 3.1: Circulating Fluidized Bed (CFB) boiler, fed by lignite, with a Super Critical (SC) steam cycle and
production of electric energy.
• Case 3.2: Circulating Fluidized Bed (CFB) boiler, fed by lignite, with a Super Critical (SC) steam cycle and post
combustion CO2 capture using MEA solvent scrubbing.
• Case 3.3: Gasification combined cycle using oxygen blown, Dry Feed (DF), with Waste Heat Boiler (WHB),
fed by lignite, sour shift conversion and pre-combustion CO2 capture by physical solvent scrubbing.
5.3 Performance and Cost Data

The most important performance and cost data of the nine cases are summarized in the Table 1.
Case Fuel Net Power CO2 capture Net Electrical TOTAL cost, Specific cost
t/h Output, MWe efficiency, % Efficiency, % MM Euro Euro/kWe
1.1 111.3 829.5 - 58.0 470 567
1.2 111.3 667.4 90 46.7 829 1,243
1.3 138.9 730.5 87 41.0 977 1,337
2.1 297.9 976.2 - 45.6 1,247 1,277
2.2 297.9 768.1 90 35.9 1,639 2,133
2.3 312.0 762.3 87 34.0 1,758 2,306
3.1 592.9 769.4 - 44.5 930 1,209
3.2 592.9 596.5 90 34.5 1,309 2,192
3.3 616.1 646.9 87 36.0 1,626 2,512
Table 1 – Performance and cost data
For each power plant configuration (no capture, pre and post combustion CCS), the alternatives using natural gas as
main feedstock have the highest net electrical efficiency. For the cases having coal as main feedstock, either
bituminous or lignite coal, the net electrical efficiency of each power plant configuration falls in a narrow range of
variation, despite the differences of the various technologies involved. Amongst the two gasification technologies,
case 2.3 and 3.3, the efficiency difference between the two cases is due to the type of coal feed system, DF-WHB vs.
SF-WQ, despite the different characteristics of the two coals.
With reference to the investment cost data, since the fuel type and fuel processing capacity is not the same for all
cases, it is more important to make the comparison on the basis of the specific investment rather than the total
investment. Again, the natural gas cases show a distinct advantage with respect to the coal-fed plants.
5
5.4 Cost of Electricity (COE) and Cost of Avoiding CO2 emissions (COAC)
The COE and COAC are shown in Table 2. They are calculated on the following main assumptions:
• Fuel costs: Natural Gas = 0.21 Euro/Nm3 (9 $/MMBTU); Coals: Bituminous coal = 50.0 Euro/t (78 $/t); Lignite
= 17.5 Euro/t (27.3 $/t).
• Equivalent operating hours of plants fed by main fuel at 100% capacity as follows: Case 1.1: 94%; Case 1.2 and
1.3: 88%; Case 2.1 and 3.1: 90%; Case 2.2 and 3.2: 87%; Case 2.3 and 3.3: 85%.
• Total Investment Cost as given above in Table 1;
• 10% discount rate on the investment cost over 25 operating years;
• No selling price is attributed to the sequestered CO2.
CASE Fuel Type Power Plant technology COE COAC

cents€/kWh Euro/t
1.1 CCGT 5.18 -
1.2 Natural Gas CCGT 7.99 91
1.3 ATR + CCGT 8.97 128
2.1 USC-PC 4.59 -
2.2 Bituminous Coal USC-PC 7.33 47
2.3 SF-WQ-IGCC 7.72 56
3.1 CFB 4.34 -
3.2 Lignite CFB 7.43 44
3.3 DF-WHB-IGCC 8.02 52
Table 2 – COE and cost of avoiding CO2 emissions (COAC)
5.5 Sensitivity Analysis

To reflect the trend of the current market, a sensitivity analysis was performed to consider the different cost increase
trends of the natural gas and the coal. For a cost of the natural gas 33% higher than the assumed price (i.e. 0.28
Euro/Nm3 (12 $/MMBTU) vs. 0.21 Euro/Nm3 (9 $/MMBTU)) and a coal cost 15% higher than the assumed price
(i.e. 57.5 Euro/t vs. 50 Euro/t), than the COE of the coal power stations would be always lower than the natural gas
fuelled plants, at any hypothetical value of Carbon Tax in the range from 0 to 150 Euro per ton CO2 emitted.
5.6 Feasibility Study Major Findings

The main conclusions that can be drawn from the study are:
• For cases without CCS, the natural gas shows the highest COE.
• For the Bituminous Coal and Lignite, the cost of electricity for cases with and without CCS falls in a narrow
range of values.
• For each fuel type, the COE of the post-combustion CCS alternative is lower than the correspondent pre-
combustion case.
• In a market-base funding regime without a Carbon Tax, the conventional coal power stations have lower COE
than the natural gas fuelled combined cycles. This is due to the actual cost of the natural gas.
• For a Carbon Tax higher than 20 Euro/t, the natural gas combined cycles, without and with post-combustion
CCS, have lower COE than the correspondent conventional coal power stations.
• If the cost of the natural gas were about 33% higher than the assumed price (i.e. 0.28 Euro/Nm3 (12 $/MMBTU)
vs. 0.21 Euro/Nm3 (9 $/MMBTU)) and the coal cost were 15% higher than the assumed price (i.e. 57.5 Euro/t
vs. 50 Euro/t), than the COE of the coal power stations would be always lower than the natural gas fuelled
plants.
• Despite the differences of the various technologies and fuels involved, the convenience of one alternative with
respect to the other depends on different factors, like the local market-base funding regime, the cost of the fuel
and the final use of the CO2.
6. Conclusions
The Feasibility Study is a key step in the path forward of a project like a power plant with CCS. Due to the
economic uncertainties of the present international scenario, it is essential that the techno-economic evaluations
originated by the Feasibility Study are rigorous and credible in order to direct the Principal’s decisions.
A technical excellence and effective project management during the Feasibility Study execution are necessary pre-
conditions for the project’s ultimate success.
6
22° IPMA World Congress
ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATION WITH AND WITHOUT CO2

CAPTURE: AN EFFECTIVE APPROACH TO FEASIBILITY STUDY
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
R. Domenichini, Technical Director - Power Division, Foster Wheeler Italiana
9-11 November 2008, Roma, Italy
© Foster Wheeler. All rights reserved

22° IPMA World Congress “Project Management to Run”
9-11 November 2008, Rome, Italy
AGENDA
• Vision of Low Carbon Economy
• Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS): Available
Technologies to Sustain Power Generation from Fossil Fuels
• Project Management Approach to a CCS Feasibility Study
• Typical CCS Feasibility Study: Technical & Economic Results
• Conclusions

2
Vision of a Low Carbon Economy
• Correlation between increasing anthropogenic GHG emissions and

climate change generally recognized (despite a few tenacious opponents)
• Increasing energy demand vs sustainable economic growth and energy

security
• There are many business opportunities for industry associated with the
energy challenge
• Several areas can contribute to mitigate climate change and to deliver a

low-carbon economy. All areas should be developed to meet the targets,
with single stakeholders focusing on one or more according to their vision
and business.

3
Vision of a Low Carbon Economy (cont’d)
• Energy saving: there is room for a significant reduction of CO2 emissions

from heat recovery and process optimization, as well as installation of high
efficiency electric motors in refineries, petrochemical and chemical process
plants
• Improvement of Energy Production Efficiency by means of cogeneration

and power plants optimization of (Best Available Technology (BAT)
application)
• Renewable Energy: wind, solar, biomass and waste combustion for power
production; biomass and gasification for production of synthetic fuels,
chemicals and hydrogen
• Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS).

4
Power generation dominates CO2 emissions and the challenge of

implementing Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in the power
industry represents the bridge to a sustainable energy system

5
CCS: Available Technologies to Sustain Power Generation

from Fossil Fuels
• Capture of carbon dioxide (CO2) from large sources (fossil fuel power
stations, natural gas processing and chemical production plants),
compression, transport and injection into suitable deep geological
formations for long-term/ultimate storage.
• Potential fruitful use of CO2 in Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR, i.e. further
extraction of crude oil from mature or declining fields) or Coal Bed Methane
Recovery (CBMR, i.e. substitution of methane entrapped in unminable coal
layers with CO2).
• Large storage capacity (> 60 years of total CO2 emissions) in deep saline
aquifers

6
Potential Storage Capacity
NO
MEDIUM
LOW
HIGH

7
Relative Costs
NO
MEDIUM LOW
HIGH

8
CCS: Available Technologies to Sustain Power Generation

from Fossil Fuels
• Post-combustion capture: CO2 removed from the exhaust gas at boiler outlet.
Drawback: exhaust gas dilution by nitrogen
• Pre-combustion capture: production of a decarbonised fuel (no CO2 from

combustion)
Process Steps:
- production of synthetic gas (syngas) via partial oxidation, steam reforming or
autothermal reforming, depending on feedstock
- shift reaction (CO + H2O → H2 + CO2)
- CO2 capture by solvent washing
- hydrogen-rich fuel fed to the power plant
• Oxycombustion: oxygen or enriched air instead of air. Flue gas stream is

concentrated in CO2

9
Project Management Approach to a CCS Feasibility Study
Critical Success Factors
Achieving HSE Objectives
• High standard of care required in design to address potential effects on the

environment and achieve HSE objectives.
• Early focus on identifying and addressing HSE factors
• Continuous effort to minimise the potential adverse impact of the project on

the local and global environment by implementing mitigation measures and
recommendations
• Execution of HSE reviews during Feasibility Study, including HAZID, plot

plan and constructability reviews.

10
• High Performance Project Team selected based on qualifications,

experience and enthusiastic attitude
• Plant Complexity with several licensed units requires an Effective

Interface Management among Principal Licensors and third parties both
from technical and commercial point of view
• Effective Coordination ensured by means of regular weekly progress

meetings handled mainly through webcasts and teleconferences and a
limited number of periodic trips.
• Licensor(s) selection is a key activity of the Feasibility Study.

11
Technological Excellence in Critical Process Units
• Proven track record in similar projects involving:

– IGCC with and without CO2 capture
– Acid Gas Removal (chemical and physical washing)
– supercritical (US) and ultrasupercritical (USC) power stations applying
both PC and CFB boilers
– Oxycombustion boilers, natural gas combined cycles
• Attention to critical aspects (like process selection, required sparing

capacity, design margins etc.) impacting investment cost estimate and
performance evaluation.

12
Long Lead Items (LLI)
Due to current market conditions and increasing lead times, many items not
normally considered long lead are starting to fall within this definition. A key
activity of the Feasibility Study is LLI identification.
High Reliability and Availability
• Design and operating strategy aimed at meeting a high degree of reliability

and availability of the power plant with CCS
• Set-up of the plant operating philosophy during the Feasibility Study to

ensure a safe, efficient operation

13
Robust Cost Estimates and Manning Level Estimates
• Application of well developed systems and data bases for estimating both
capital and operating costs
• Preparation of ±30% accuracy investment cost estimate
• Definition of manning levels required to commissioning, start-up and operate

the facility

14
Value Engineering
The biggest benefit of Value Engineering methodology application is

typically achieved in the early phases of projects.

15
Alignment
• Ensuring early agreement on project strategies, quality objectives and
procedures;
• Establishing and maintaining effective communication channels;
• Developing common project standards and specifications;
• Implementing an agreed and coordinated project execution plan;
• Applying team work to problem-solving and value engineering;
• Managing interfaces and recognising the importance of proprietary data;
• Producing aligned project deliverables, schedule and estimates
• Coordinating and aligning licensors’ schedules and data

16
A Typical CCS Feasibility Study
• Power production only
Three fuels • Post combustion CO2 capture 9 CASES IN TOTAL

• Pre combustion CO2 capture
FUEL TYPE TECHNOLOGY CO2 CAPTURE

CCGT none
Natural Gas (NG) CCGT post
ATR + CCGT pre
USC-PC none
Bituminous Coal (BC) USC-PC post
Sulphur = 1.1 %wt
SF-WQ-IGCC pre
CFB none
Lignite (Li) CFB post
Water = 50.7 %wt
DF-WHB-IGCC pre

17
CCGT with post-combustion CCS
Natural gas GT Exhaust CO2 CO2 compression CO2 to storage

CCGT AGR
& Drying
Gas
Steam
ATR + CCGT with pre-combustion CCS
CCGT Fuel preparation Utilities
MP HP Clean
steam steam Syngas
NG Syngas CO2 CO2 compression CO2 to

ATR AGR & Drying storage
Air

18
USC-PC with post-combustion CCS
Air
Limestone
Coal Boiler Island Flue gas Gypsum

FGD Unit
& DeNox System
Ammonia
Clean Flue Gas
HP, MP, RH , BFW

CO2 CO2 to storage
Fly and Bottom Ash Acid Gas CO2 compression
Removal & Drying
Steam Turbine Steam
and
water pre-heating

19
IGCC with precombustion CO2 Capture
Air
Air
Separation Nitrogen
Oxygen CO2
CO2
Syngas compression
Gasification Syngas
Treatment
Island treatment
(shift reaction)
Coal Syngas Acid Gas Syngas
Syngas
Removal
Steam
Solid by-products
Gas Turbine
El.Power
Utilities Sulphur HRSG

Recovery
Steam Turbine
Sulphur

20
Bases of Design
• Power production targeted at 600-800 MWe
• For alternatives with pre-combustion CCS, design capacity is fixed to meet the
appetite of two frame F-250 MWe class GT
• Location: generic European coastal site
• Emission limits: significantly lower than European Standards
• CO2 is compressed to 140 barg and sent to plant battery limits
• Carbon Capture rate ranges from 85 to 90%
• 10% discount rate on investment cost over 25 years
• Maintenance cost: approx. 3.5% of the total capital costs
• Equivalent availability set-up according to the technology

21
Performance data
Fuel type Technology Net Power Output CO2 capture rate Net electrical efficiency
MWe % %
CCGT 829.5 - 58.0
Natural Gas CCGT 667.4 90 46.7
ATR + CCGT 730.5 87 41.0
USC-PC 976.2 - 45.6
Bituminous Coal USC-PC 768.1 90 35.9
SF-WQ-IGCC 762.3 87 34.0
CFB 769.4 - 44.5
Lignite CFB 596.5 90 34.5
DF-WHB-IGCC 646.9 87 36.0

22
Investment Costs
The overall investment cost includes:
• Direct materials (equipment and bulk materials)

• Construction (mechanical erection, instrument and electrical installation, civil
works and site preparation)
• Other costs (temporary facilities, solvents, catalysts, etc.)
• EPC services
• Land purchase
• Technology fees
• Contingencies

23
Fuel type Technology TOTAL INVESTMENT Specific Investment Cost

COST Euro/kWe
Million Euro
CCGT 470 567
Natural Gas CCGT 829 1243
ATR + CCGT 977 1337
USC-PC 1247 1277
Bituminous USC-PC 1639 2133
Coal
SF-WQ-IGCC 1758 2306
CFB 930 1209
Lignite CFB 1309 2192
DF-WHB-IGCC 1626 2512

24
Production Costs : Fuels
• Natural Gas = 0.21 Euro /Nm3

(8 $/MMBTU or 2.8 $/G)
• Bituminous coal = 50.0 Euro/t (70 $/t)

• Lignite = 17.5 Euro/t (24.5 $/t)
• No selling price to CO2

25
Cost of Electricity (COE) and Cost of avoiding CO2 (COAC)
Fuel Type Technology COE COAC

cents€/kWh Euro/t
CCGT 5.18 -
Natural Gas (NG) CCGT 7.99 91
ATR + CCGT 8.97 128
USC-PC 4.59 -
Bituminous Coal (BC) USC-PC 7.33 47
Sulphur = 1.1 %wt
SF-WQ-IGCC 7.72 56
CFB 4.34 -
Lignite (Li) CFB 7.43 44
Water = 50.7 %wt
DF-WHB-IGCC 8.02 52
Δ Electric Power Cost

COAC = [=] Euro
Δ Specific CO 2 emission t of CO 2 captured

26
Study Findings
• Despite the differences of various technologies and fuels, the convenience of

one alternative with respect to the other depends on different factors, like the
carbon market-baseb funding regime, fuel cost and final use of the CO2
• In the current market situation, COE for NG based power production plants (no
CCS) is higher than conventional coal power stations, but at low levels of
Carbon Tax the NG CCGT options w/o and with post-combustion CCS have the
lowest COE
• If NG cost increases by 33% than the assumed price, COE of coal power
stations would always be lower than NG, for a percentage cost increase less
than a half

27
Conclusions
• The Feasibility Study is a key step in the path forward of a project like a power
plant with CCS.
• Due to the economic uncertainties of the present international scenario, it is

essential that the techno-economic evaluations originated by the Feasibility
Study are rigorous and credible in order to drive the Principal’s decisions.
• A technological excellence and effective project management during the

Feasibility Study execution are necessary pre-conditions for the project’s
ultimate success.

28
THANK YOU
www.fwc.com rosa_maria_domenichini@fwceu.com
mario_giuliani@fwceu.com
www.fosterwheeler.it luca_mancuso@fwceu.com

29

22 IPMA World Congress "Project Management To Run" 9 - 11 November 2008, Roma, Italy

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

22 IPMA World Congress "Project Management To Run" 9 - 11 November 2008, Roma, Italy

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

22nd IPMA World Congress

“Project Management to Run”

ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION WITH AND WITHOUT CO2 CAPTURE:

2. Vision of a Low Carbon Economy

3. CCS: Available Technologies to sustain Power Generation from Fossil Fuels

4. Project Management approach to a CCS Feasibility Study

4.2 Achieving HSE Objectives

4.3 High Performance Project Team

4.4 Technological Excellence in Critical Process Units

4.6 Effective Interface Management and Technology Licensors’ selection

4.7 High Reliability and Availability

4.8 Long Lead Items

4.9 Robust Cost Estimates and Manning Level Estimates

4.10 VIP including Value Engineering, Benchmarking and Risk Management

5. A typical CCS Feasibility Study: Technical and Economical results

5.1 Bases of Design

5.2 Alternative Power Plant Schemes

5.3 Performance and Cost Data

Table 1 – Performance and cost data

CASE Fuel Type Power Plant technology COE COAC

Table 2 – COE and cost of avoiding CO2 emissions (COAC)

5.5 Sensitivity Analysis

5.6 Feasibility Study Major Findings

ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATION WITH AND WITHOUT CO2

R. Domenichini, Technical Director - Power Division, Foster Wheeler Italiana

9-11 November 2008, Roma, Italy

© Foster Wheeler. All rights reserved

© Foster Wheeler. All rights reserved

Vision of a Low Carbon Economy

• Correlation between increasing anthropogenic GHG emissions and

• Increasing energy demand vs sustainable economic growth and energy

• Several areas can contribute to mitigate climate change and to deliver a

© Foster Wheeler. All rights reserved

Vision of a Low Carbon Economy (cont’d)

• Energy saving: there is room for a significant reduction of CO2 emissions

• Improvement of Energy Production Efficiency by means of cogeneration

• Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS).

© Foster Wheeler. All rights reserved

Power generation dominates CO2 emissions and the challenge of

© Foster Wheeler. All rights reserved

CCS: Available Technologies to Sustain Power Generation

© Foster Wheeler. All rights reserved

Potential Storage Capacity

© Foster Wheeler. All rights reserved

© Foster Wheeler. All rights reserved

CCS: Available Technologies to Sustain Power Generation

• Pre-combustion capture: production of a decarbonised fuel (no CO2 from

• Oxycombustion: oxygen or enriched air instead of air. Flue gas stream is

© Foster Wheeler. All rights reserved

Project Management Approach to a CCS Feasibility Study

Critical Success Factors

Achieving HSE Objectives

• High standard of care required in design to address potential effects on the

• Early focus on identifying and addressing HSE factors

• Continuous effort to minimise the potential adverse impact of the project on

• Execution of HSE reviews during Feasibility Study, including HAZID, plot

© Foster Wheeler. All rights reserved

Project Management Approach to a CCS Feasibility Study

• High Performance Project Team selected based on qualifications,

• Plant Complexity with several licensed units requires an Effective

• Effective Coordination ensured by means of regular weekly progress

• Licensor(s) selection is a key activity of the Feasibility Study.

© Foster Wheeler. All rights reserved