United States Energy Association Theresa Pugh April 22 2014 Coal Plant Retirement Estimates as of Fall 2013 2 Graphic used with permission from Scott Madden Timing 2033 2020 2016 2040 2020 ID: 1040131
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Workshop on Technology Pathways Forward ..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
1. Workshop on Technology Pathways Forward for Carbon Capture & Storage on Natural Gas Power SystemsUnited States Energy AssociationTheresa PughApril 22, 2014
2. Coal Plant Retirement Estimates as of Fall 20132Graphic used with permission from Scott MaddenTiming2033202020162040202020152015Sources: SNL; industry news; corporate announcementsNotes: † 59 GWs “ripe for retirement” in addition to estimated 41 GWs announced; *includes ~9 GWs retired in 2012
3. CCS Adequately Demonstrated?3
4. More to CCS Than Separation Technologyhttp://www.publicpower.org/files/HTM/ccs.html
5. Storage and recycling of CO2 for EOR and sequestering from power plants under CCS are similar but not at all the same.5
6. Sequestration requires addressing many unknowns including:Laws to separate mineral rights vs. surface rights in most statesAddress western water law-- drilling is depth limited and first in right issuesCERCLARCRCAUIC system does not address other water and liability issuesProducts liabilities lawsTrespass laws 6
7. http://naruc.org/Grants/Documents/Final-ICF-Project-Report071213.pdfMap of Existing CO2 Pipelines7
8. http://naruc.org/Grants/Documents/Final-ICF-Project-Report071213.pdfMap of Possible CO2 Pipeline Corridors for a High CCS Case with Greater Use of EOR
9. Holland Board of Public Works(a case study about natural gas combined cycle and a BACT analysis for CCS in 2013)CCS for NGCC CHP Plant is theoretical as it has not been adequately demonstrated and did not meet 5 part Top Down BACT testCapital cost of $183 million for geologic sequestration for the proposed 114 MW plant nearly equates to the cost of the NGCC plants without CCSInclusion of $37 million ANNUALLY in operating costs for geologic sequestration would exceed expected revenues without significant rate increases to customers
10. Holland Board of Public Works(a case study about natural gas combined cycle and a BACT analysis for CCS in 2013)CO2 from NGCC is only 1/4 the concentration of coal fired power plant and not easily captured CCS on a NGCC with higher renewables makes the operation too complexNo large scale CCS has been demonstrated in Midwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership region and that process in Northern Niagara Pinnacle Reef is expected to not be finished until 2015Water usage for separation and sequestration
11. Comparison of CCS Cost for Coal and Gas-fired EGUs
12. Comparison of 90% CCS Cost for Coal and Gas-fired EGUs
13. Comparison of 90% CCS Cost for Coal and Gas-fired EGUs(550 MW nominal net)
14. Contact InformationTheresa PughDirector, Environmental Servicestpugh@publicpower.org(202)467-2900