fuel cells and hydrogen joint undertaking work package 5 · fuel cells and hydrogen joint...
TRANSCRIPT
A project financed in the frame of Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking
Work package 5
28.11.2013 Brussels
Marjut Suomalainen
VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
Conceptual and Techno-economic study of combined gasification plant and SOFC system
(100 kWth – 1 MWth)
THE AIM OF THE WP5
Conceptual and Techno-economic study of a combined gasification plant and a SOFC system
Analysis of the best structure and best operating conditions of the plants
Technical, economic and environmental evaluation
Partners: VTT, TUM, EPFL
TASKS AND MILESTONES UNTIL MID-TERM
• Task 5.1: GASIFICATION PLANT AND SOFC SYSTEM
Deliverable 5.1 Optimal process concepts for gasification combined SOFC processes
SUBMITTED IN DUE TIME M14
Results will be presented here
Deliverable 5.2 rescheduled from M12 to M30
MS3 rescheduled M12 to M30
Task 5.1: Gasification plant and SOFC system
Technical analysis carried out with ASPEN PLUS simulation software = > Output to WP7 (Demo /Helsinki)
Economical input data from commercial gasifier manufacturers will be used in the models and evaluation work Volter Oy
Hs Energieanlagen
• Techno-economical evaluation will be finalised for case studies in different EU countries
GASIFICATION TECHNOLOGIES Air gasification
1. Viking gasification
2. Downdraft gasification
Indirectly heated steam gasification
1. Heat pipe reformer (HPR)
2. Fast Internal Circulating Fluidised Bed (FICFB)
Downdraft gasification
DISTRICT HEATING
SOFC
POST-COMBUSTION
Flue gases
Air
Air
Electricity
Biomass
DOWNDRAFT GASIFICATION
GAS COOLER
FILTER
H2S ADSORBER
GAS HEATERFILTER
Biomass
FARM DIGESTION PLANT
GAS COOLERAIR
HEATER
Viking gasifier
Heat pipe reformer
Fast internally circulating fluidised bed gasifier (FICFB)
Comparison of gasification technologies
Operation and performance data
Air blown gasification Indirect steam gasification
Viking gasifier Downdraft
gasifier FICFB BioHPR gasifier
Economically and technically feasible in stand alone operation
MWth 0.6 - 3 < 2 8 - 20 0.5 - 8
Typical main producer gas composition
% (vol dry) H2 23 15 26 44
% (vol dry) CO 19 22 9 20
% (vol dry) CO2 12 10 15 19
% (vol dry) N2 33 51 0.07 7
% (vol dry) CH4 0.3 2 6 7
Lower heating value of producer gas
MJ/m3n 7 3-7 9-10 approx. 11
Maximum operation pressure
bar atmospheric atmospheric 1-7 1 - 5
Typical tar content g/m3n 1
low (around 1 or below)
10 2-20
Mature of the technology - New technology Old technology New technology New technology
Developer - University of
Denmark
Old technology. different
developers. different solutions.
commercialised
Vienna University of Technology
TUM
State of commercialising - Not yet Commercialised Commercialised Commercialised
GASIFICATION IMPURITIES
Gasification impurities
Raw gas
SOFC limit
Tars Downdraft < 1 g/m3n
CFB ̴ 10 g/m3n
HPR 2 – 20 m3n
Updraft 50 g/m3n
Not known
Sulphur compounds H2S COS
50 – 200 ppm 10-20 ppm
1 ppm
Alkalimetals Na, K < 50 ppm (max) Not known
Halogens HCl <10-20 (max) 1 ppm
GAS CLEANING OPTIONS
Impurities Gas cleaning methods
Hot Cold
Tars and hydrocarbons
Catalytic reforming high temperature (up to 950 oC)
Scrubbing (for example RME)
Particles Filter up to 500 oC Scrubbing Filter
Sulphur Adsorption (ZnO)
up to 400-450 oC Adsorption (for example metal oxide) Scrubbing (for example with CuSO4)
Alkalimetals Filter below 500 oC Filter
Halogens
Adsorber or Filter with Ca-based sorbent injection
Scrubbing Filter with Ca-based sorbent injection Adsorber
COMPOSITION OF PRODUCER GAS IN DOWNDRAFT GASIFIER
GAS CLEANING SECTION OF HPR
Parameter Before gas cleaning After gas cleaning
PG composition (wet)
H2O vol-% 35.8 33.7
H2 vol-% 27.3 29.3
CO vol-% 14.8 12.7
CO2 vol-% 13.4 15.5
CH4 vol-% 6.8 6.8
N2 vol-% 1.9 1.9
H2S ppm 91.4 1
COS ppm 2.2 0
HCl ppm 84.7 0.1
NH3 ppm 5.2 5.2
Carbon particles kg/h 0.857 9.23*10-4
Ash particles kg/h 0.064 3.85*10-4
Tars g/Nm3 4 0.45
Hot and cold composite curves of FICFB and Viking gasifier
SUMMARY OF DIFFERENT SYSTEMS
Downdraft VK-SMR-SOFC-GT
FICFB-SMR-SOFC-GT
Heat pipe reformer
Thermal energy input kW 235 90 90 500
Net power output kW 64 54 58 180
Net Electrical efficiency of the plant (LHV)
% 27 60 65 36
District heating kW 88 - - -
CONCLUSIONS
• Planned work has been succesfully completed
Deliverable 5.1 submitted in M14
• Further work progressing well and in schedule
– Task 5.1 will be finalised in report D5.2 in M30
MS3 in M30
– Tasks 5.2 and 5.3 (potential impact and LCA) will be based on the results from task 5.1
Deadlines D5.3 and D5.4 in M36
Progress after mid-term
• Task 5.1 will be finalised in report D5.2 in M30
• Progress after mid-term in task 5.1
– Agreement on the common features
– Cases to be studied
– Cost of gasifiers
– Subsidies
• Tasks 5.2 and 5.3 (exploitation and LCA) will be based on the results from task 5.1 and Helsinki demo (WP 7) – D5.3 and D5.4 are due in M36
Cases to be studied
Scale Case ID
Gasification technology
Power
[MWth]
Pressure
[bar]
Hot gas cleaning
Tar removal Particle removal
Sulphur removal
SMALL
1 Downdraft 0.1 Atm Not
required
Ceramic filter
Adsorption (ZnO)
2 Viking 0.1 Atm Steam
reforming
Ceramic filter
Adsorption (ZnO)
3 FICFB 0.1 Atm Steam
reforming
Ceramic filter
Adsorption (ZnO)
MEDIUM
4 FICFB 8 atm – 7 bar Steam
reforming
Ceramic filter
Adsorption (ZnO)
5 Heat pipe reformer
8 atm – 5 bar Steam
reforming
Ceramic filter
Adsorption (ZnO)
6 CFB + O2 8 15 - 30 Steam
reforming
Ceramic filter
Adsorption (ZnO)
Basic subsidies for biomass gasification combined SOFC
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000
Bas
ic s
ub
sid
y, €
/MW
h
Power kW
Germany Italian Switzerland Finland
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION
• Questions?