SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
This report presents the findings of a year-long pre-FEED study into the feasibility of a CO 2 intermodal hub in Port Tampa Bay which would collect, store, and liquify captured CO 2 from major emitters across the State of Florida for marine transport out of the state. The proposed hub is called the Tampa Regional Intermodal Carbon Hub (T-RICH).
As the nation continues to encourage, through market structures and financial incentives, the proliferation of intermittent renewable electricity, how to optimize the ever-changing electric grid and identify means to retain and improve resilience, while ensuring continued reductions in GHG emissions, will be critical. According to Bloomberg, wind & solar generated 10.5% of US electricity in 2020 and that percentage continues to grow. In support of expanding renewable energy use, and to address its intermittent nature, this project will develop the Hydrogen Storage for Flexible Fossil Fuel Power Generation platform that is dispatchable, reliable, repeatable and have the ability to produce zero or negative carbon power while interfacing with geology capable of CO2 and hydrogen storage. GTI Energy (GTIE) and team members Illinois State Geological Survey (ISGS), Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America (MHIA), Ameren Illinois, Hexagon Purus, and the Low Carbon Resources Initiative (LCRI) completed a Phase I Conceptual Study under contract DE-FE0032012 for Hydrogen Storage for Flexible Fossil Fuel Power Generation: Integration of Underground Hydrogen Storage with Gas Turbine. The Hydrogen Storage for Flexible Fossil Fuel Power Generation platform addresses the intermittent nature of the expanding use of Variable Renewable Energy (VRE) generation. The low cost of the electricity (COE) generated results in greater dispatch and more operation at higher power levels (higher efficiency), fewer short intervals, and fewer start/stop cycles. The reliable, resilient system can produce zero carbon power and store hydrogen. It will demonstrate hydrogen storage in geologic formations like those used in natural gas underground storage thus enabling large scale storage of hydrogen in sedimentary strata across the United States rather than in geographically restricted salt caverns. The Phase I study confirmed the system is feasible and generates power at lower cost than other low carbon approaches. The demonstration defines the pathway for broad commercial application and will accelerate the development of larger systems suitable for centralized utility scale electricity production. The study advanced the maturity of the H 2 storage-based system with flexible power generation by completing a Pre-FEED study (Phase II). The Pre-FEED focused on the selected Energy Farm on the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) site that includes above ground and underground hydrogen storage, low-carbon hydrogen production (GTI’s Compact Hydrogen Generator, CHG) with underground CO2 sequestration, and a 40-MW class gas turbine. The Pre-FEED addressed the entire system and its interconnection to the natural gas and electric grid and mitigation of key risks, such as storage behavior, load-following, and system operation. During Phase 1 of the project, the team completed key tasks, which moved the entire demonstration project, specific components and approaches closer to commercialization. These Phase I Accomplishments include: Completing System Requirements Review; Completing System Layout and Modeling - Heat & Mass Balance and Process Flow Diagram; Completing modelling of 9 turbine performance cases; Evaluating rock strata for underground storage of hydrogen and sequestration of carbon dioxide; Completing initial modelling of underground storage of hydrogen and withdrawal with evaluation of loss and water production; Identifying roadable storage for above ground hydrogen storage; Identifying existing electrical infrastructure for receiving/delivering electricity; Identifying existing gas supply infrastructure for receiving natural gas; Document concept design/development plans in required reports. Conclusions: The 12-month Feasibility study in Phase I study was completed and confirmed the system is feasible and generates power at lower cost than other low carbon approaches and even lower cost than the reference NGCC plant without carbon capture when taking advantage of 45Q carbon credits. The study enabled the fidelity of the concept to be improved and allowed identification of the requirements for the system. Defining the individual system and component requirements was performed via the system requirements review with the whole team. These requirements were then incorporated into and iterated with our Heat & Mass Balance process model and process flow diagrams were generated to reflect the overall system. This information was then used to complete the TEA and show economic feasibility. Large scale non-salt geologic storage of hydrogen is an enabling technology for a hydrogen-fired turbine that can be retrofitted into large-scale electric generating units (EGU). Our demonstration will include 428 MWh or ~4 hours full load of hydrogen storage (above and underground). Carbon capture inherent to the CHG process can capture 90% CO 2 (with upgrades to >98%). This system provides a COE of 23% savings relative to an NGCC with a post combustion amine system. Our proposed storage system decouples carbon capture and hydrogen production from power production; therefore, we expect our proposed system’s efficiency and variable COE to be superior resulting in overall higher dispatch and reduced deep cycling. Our demonstration will be full to multi-day hydrogen storage and has the potential for longer (seasonal) duration commercially. The demonstration defines the pathway for broad commercial application and will accelerate the development of larger systems suitable for centralized utility scale electricity production.
The 12-month Feasibility study in Phase I study was completed and confirmed the system is feasible and the proposed system is an improvement over alternate low carbon dispatchable power options. Our demonstration will include 54 MWh of hydrogen storage. CO 2 capture inherent to the CHG process can capture 90% of the CO 2 (with upgrades to >98%) in a commercial system (~300 MWth) for sequestration or other uses. The hydrogen will be utilized in a duct burner in a Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) integrated with the existing Southern Company fossil asset. Here, the firing rate of the duct burner is varied to let the plant respond to fluctuations of electrical load. However, H 2 production is relatively constant by storing H 2 , and revenues are improved by arbitrage between use of low-cost off-peak variable electricity generation or use of stored H 2 under peak demand. The study enabled the fidelity of the concept to be improved and allowed identification of the requirements for the system. Defining the individual system and component requirements was performed via system requirements review with the whole team. These requirements were then incorporated into/iterated with our Heat & Mass Balance models and process flow diagrams were generated to reflect the overall system. This information was then used to complete the TEA and show economic feasibility. Our system generates power at 17.4% lower cost than other low carbon approaches for the H 2 generation, H 2 compression and storage, carbon sequestration, and HRSG added electricity production for a large-scale duct-fired system. Our team recommends completing the Phase II Pre-FEED study for the proposed system as the next step for the project and its tasks will achieve the overall objective and be ready to launch the FEED. The Pre-FEED tasks include updating the requirements, Concept of Operations, plant scope/process description, component modeling, system modeling, performance estimates, emission estimates, block flow diagrams, fluid/process conditions (PFD), utility usage, and facility sizing/definition. The approach will be to complete these updates in a greater level of detail for the selected site. The approach for developing the EIV is to use the updated results, including model outputs, for carbon dioxide and waste streams.
As the next phase of Project Tundra, Minnkota Power Cooperative (MPC) completed a front-end engineering and design (FEED) study to install a post-combustion CO 2 capture system (CCS) at the MPC operated (Square Butte Electric Cooperative-owned) Milton R. Young Station (MRYS) Unit 2 (MRY2), a 477-MW power plant fueled by North Dakota lignite. The project team completed the FEED with Fluor’s Econamine FG Plus℠ (EFG+) technology and is taking the next steps leading up to start of construction. Team members included FEED technical lead Fluor Enterprises (Fluor); owner’s engineer and balance of plant (BOP) engineer Burns & McDonnell (BMcD); leading carbon capture consultants (David Greeson Consulting, Hunt International Energy Services); environmental consultants (AECOM, Agora Environmental), other BOP engineering consultants (Golder Associates, Nels); cost-share funding agency, the North Dakota Industrial Commission (NDIC); and the Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC). Project Tundra’s goal is to implement carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) in North Dakota, while preserving the use of lignite. Future options could lead to revitalizing legacy oil fields and creating a new CO 2 enhanced oil recovery (EOR) industry. The topic of this report is the FEED study for the carbon dioxide capture portion of Project Tundra. Building on the findings of a pre-FEED study for MRY2, the key deliverables contained in this FEED study are: a) design, costing, and performance data needed to commence project financing activities; b) engineering and material balances required to file for all project permits; and c) a final project schedule. Based on the results of the previous pre-FEED study, MPC and its team evaluated two options to provide the large amount of steam needed to operate the CCS: 1) installation of new natural gas package boilers and a new pipeline to supply natural gas to the facility and 2) extraction of steam from the existing MRYS steam turbine generator. The FEED study was performed using the package boilers option, as it was deemed to have the lowest technical risk, overall cost, and cost uncertainty. A key feature of the design, however, was the mixing the natural gas boilers’ flue gas with the MRY2 flue gas. This increased the size of the CCS system. This design also enabled the tie-in of Unit 1 flue gas for times when Unit 2 is offline. The CCS was designed to capture a combined 12,978 short tons per day (STPD) of CO 2 from the flue gases produced by the existing MRY Unit 2 along with flue gas produced by the new boiler package within the CCS. The 12,978 STPD CO 2 capture is achieved by normally processing 100% of the total available MRY Unit 2 flue gas (considering full load operation) and 100% of the boiler package flue gas, then removing 90% of the CO 2 available from the processed flue gas streams.
Dastur International Inc. has prepared a DOE-funded Pre-front-end engineering design (Pre-FEED) study to capture up to 2.8 mtpa of CO 2 from the available Blast Furnace (BF) gases at the Burns Harbor steel plant operated by Cleveland Cliffs in Burns Harbor, Indiana. The project consists of an amine solvent based pre-combustion carbon capture system, along with a unique BF gas conditioning process which significantly optimizes the project design and architecture in terms of higher volumes (2.8 mtpa vis-à-vis 1.6 mtpa without conditioning) & concentration (32 vol% in conditioned gas vs. 22% in raw BF gas) of CO 2 , which can be captured using a single train, resulting in reduced size and capital cost of the CO 2 capture island, and improved overall economics on a $\$$/tCO 2 captured basis.
The National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) has previously reported on learnings from 7 FEED studies examining retrofitting power plants with capture. This presentation builds on this effort by highlighting learnings from 3 additional FEED studies examining retrofitting power plants with capture and 7 FEED and pre-FEED studies examining retrofitting industrial plants with capture. This includes a discussion of the design, performance, and cost implications associated with (1) site-specific considerations such as water availability, land availability, and site accessibility, and (2) host-plant-specific factors such as flue gas specifications, operational mode, and allowable degree of integration between the capture system and host plant.
The Phase I of this project confirmed the technical feasibility of a Combined Cycle integrated Thermal Energy Storage “CiTES” system, calculated the key performance parameters like power efficiency and costs, and proved its commercial value with full-year simulations for several US electricity markets with high degree of variable renewable generation and volatile hourly electricity prices. The core element of this project is the Electro Thermal Energy Storage (ETES) technology from Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy GmbH, using thermally stable and inexpensive volcanic rocks as storage material and air as heat transfer medium. This technology is backed by more than 10 years of experience and a 440MMBTU (130MWh-th) pilot plant in Hamburg, Germany, which is in operation since 2019. The integration of this thermal storage in an existing combined cycle power plant (CCPP) is typical power plant technology without any major technology risks. It allows the storage of inexpensive renewable energy during times of surplus renewable generation and the discharge of this energy in times of high energy demand when the fossil plant is in operation. This supplements the fossil power generation with CO2-emission-free energy. The secondary effect of the CiTES system is that a small part of the stored thermal energy is used to keep the heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) and steam turbine (ST) of the combined cycle power plant in hot and ready-to-start condition. This enables the plant to start rapidly when fossil generation is required to satisfy demand as soon variable generation drops off in the evenings or during cloud cover and calm wind periods. Without pre-warming of the HRSG and ST, the CCPP would need several hours for a cold or warm start, burn a lot of gas and release high NOx emissions during start and wouldn’t be able to use the short times of high energy prices in an efficient or economical manner. The economic parameters of CiTES were determined by a full year “8760” simulation using a data set calculation for each of the hours of the year, and historical electricity and gas prices. For consistency, the simulations were focused on the pre-COVID year 2019. The financially most attractive markets were in the Energy Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) region, which allowed substantial value generation with arbitrage (charge with cheap energy during renewable surplus times and discharge when energy is needed and expensive). The improvement of flexibility with the CiTES system by pre-heating and warm-keeping of the CCPP allowed for additional power generation during short time periods when demand is high but renewable generation is down; when the hourly energy prices are highest in these markets. The simulations are based on 2019 data, when ERCOT had 27GW of installed photovoltaic (PV) and wind generation. They showed that the created revenue with the prototypically sized CiTES system of 1,000MMBTU (300MWh-th) falls a little bit short of what is expected from a commercially viable investment. The system has optimization opportunities for cost reduction and increased effectiveness which will be realized during a potential Phase II Pre-FEED study following this project. Furthermore, it is safe to assume that a lot of renewable generation capacity will be added all over the US in the coming years. As an example, ERCOT is predicting to more than double its renewable generation from 27GW in 2019 to a forecasted 63GW in 2023. This will increase the amount of renewable overproduction exponentially. This rapid increase of local overproduction and the need to curtail renewable generation is well documented by the California ISO (www.CAISO.com / managing oversupply). However, the simulations also revealed a weakness in the structure of the electricity markets in the US. More specifically, when electricity prices are very low and approaching negative levels, the owners of Variable Renewable Energy (VRE) will curtail a part of their facility to stabilize the price by reducing supply. This results in a situation in which storage facilities, which are integrated in existing fossil assets and don’t have the behind-the-meter benefit of a VRE, won’t be able to purchase low cost – otherwise curtailed – renewable energy off the grid. A special tariff, which motivates VRE owners to sell otherwise curtailed renewable energy to storage facilities (Hydrogen, thermal, pumped hydro, etc.) can solve this issue. The implementation of such a regulating tariff by Independent System Operators, thus avoiding renewable curtailment, is a pre condition for successful commercialization for renewable energy storage technologies. With this advancement of design and technology and improvements in the market environment, it can be expected that the Combined Cycle integrated Thermal Energy Storage proves itself as an important innovation to keep highly efficient, natural gas-based power generation economically successful and relevant for the power industry in the United States of America.
Linde carried out an initial engineering design study for a Linde-BASF advanced post combustion CO 2 capture technology to be installed at a commercial-scale steam methane reforming (SMR) hydrogen plant located in the US Gulf Coast. This pre-FEED equivalent study included following: (1) basic design, including specific project scope definition and design basis, (2) basic engineering, including development of process flow diagrams and heat & material balances, (3) inside the battery limit (ISBL) equipment and systems specification, (4) balance of plant outside the battery limit (OSBL) equipment and systems specifications, (5) technology maturation plan, (6) hazard and operability (HAZOP) review, (7) environmental, health and safety (EH&S) assessment and environmental permitting analysis, (8) constructability review, (9) ISBL and OSBL EPC cost estimation, and (10) commercial-scale techno-economic analysis including capital expenditures (CAPEX) and operating expenditures (OPEX) and CO 2 capture cost estimates.
The objective of Electricore’s pre-FEED project “LH CO 2 MENT COLORADO PROJECT” is to accelerate the implementation of a 1.5 million tonnes per year (TPY), and first-of-a-kind (FOAK) at world scale, Svante VeloxoTherm™ carbon capture plant. This project represents a quantum leap to a large-scale facility that will launch Svante’s carbon capture technology into the next era of accomplishments and market acceptance. By completing the Front-End Loading (FEL) Feasibility Study Report (FEL-2) for a fit-for-purpose design at the HOLCIM cement plant, located near Florence Colorado, USA, this technology can be proven as the future of large-scale deployment for carbon capture and storage. This carbon capture plant was designed with the goal of reaching a target of near Net Zero Emissions by capturing 90% of the carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions from the HOLCIM cement plant and from the boiler which produces steam required to regenerate the adsorbent. Additionally, this project will be leveraging a renewable Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) using solar energy to acquire power at the target price of 0.04 $/kWh or less. In its current configuration CO 2 emissions from the HOLCIM cement plant is around 700 – 800 kg/ton of clinker produced. The proposed new carbon capture plant will allow a reduction of CO 2 emissions to about 100 kg/ton of clinker produced. The scope of work consists of the process design and capital & operating cost estimation (Class IV) for a total plant capacity of 4,750 TPD of pipeline grade CO 2 . The Svante VeloxoTherm™ technology is comprised of a Rotary Adsorption Machine (RAM) for intensified Thermal Swing Adsorption (TSA) using Structured Adsorbent Beds (SABs) and related Balance of Plant (BOP), including CO 2 compression. A business case (financial analysis) evaluation has been undertaken for the Owner’s management review. Recommendations on how best to proceed to the next stage of the project have been conveyed and are documented within this report. This analysis has relied on a detailed and comprehensive Project Financial Model, evaluating the Total Project IRR (after tax, unlevered, and including all forecast 45Q PTCs and 100% tax efficiency) – the project financial analysis (as opposed to standard TEA analysis) only considered a 12 year plant economic lifetime as a result of 45Q being the sole driver considered at this stage. The Total Project IRR was evaluated across a large number of potential scenarios. The evaluation demonstrated that if the 45Q PTD is increased to $85/MT for sequestration, there are a large number of feasible scenarios which demonstrate economic returns.
An initial engineering design study was performed for an advanced post combustion CO 2 capture (PCC) technology to be installed at a commercial-scale steam methane reforming (SMR) hydrogen plant located in the US Gulf Coast. The PCC process integrated the VeloxoTherm™ structured adsorbent technology from Svante for the CO 2 separation and CO 2 compression and purification and balance of plant systems provided by Linde. This pre-FEED equivalent study included following: (1) design basis, (2) basic engineering, including development of process flow diagrams and heat & material balances, (3) inside the battery limit (ISBL) equipment and systems specification, (4) balance of plant outside the battery limit (OSBL) equipment and systems specifications, (5) technology maturation plan, (6) hazard identification (HAZID) review, (7) environmental, health and safety (EH&S) assessment and environmental permitting analysis, (8) constructability review, (9) ISBL and OSBL EPC cost estimation, and (10) commercial-scale techno-economic analysis including capital expenditures (CAPEX) and operating expenditures (OPEX) and CO 2 capture cost estimates.
GTI Energy (GTI) and team members Southern Company Services (SCS), Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) and the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) performed a Phase II Pre-Feed Study under contract DE-FE0032008 for Hydrogen Storage for Load-Following and Clean Power. The configuration of the proposed system consists of subsystems for on-site H 2 production, on-site H 2 storage (up to 54 MWth in commercial vessels) and H 2 combustion in a duct burner in a Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG) integrated with an existing fossil asset. Here, the firing rate of the duct burner is varied to let the plant respond to fluctuations of electrical load and H 2 production is relatively constant by storing H 2 . The proposed system is an improvement over alternate low carbon dispatchable power options. Technoeconomic analyses show H 2 produced with GTI’s patented Compact Hydrogen Generator (CHG) with inherent carbon capture will be lower cost (Levelized Cost of Hydrogen, LCOH) relative to hydrogen produced with a Steam Methane Reformer (SMR) with an amine system for carbon capture. This lower cost hydrogen enables our integrated system to deliver electricity (Levelized Cost of Electricity, LCOE) at 17.4% lower cost relative to a SMR sourced H 2 -fired HRSG (with an amine system for carbon capture) – Steam Turbine Generator (STG). Our analysis using EPRI’s US REGEN macroeconomic model shows our system will have significant demand in the power market and therefore require significant capacity expansion (CHG plants built to deliver hydrogen) to deliver low cost, low carbon power. In Phase II, our Team has completed a detailed system definition including the development of process models, definition of battery limits, Process Flow Diagrams (PFDs), Piping and Instrumentation Drawings (P&IDs), and a plant layout. A preliminary design for the key components of the CHG was developed including component lists & specifications. An evaluation of environmental and permitting considerations was completed and included the development of an Environmental Information Volume (EIV). The duct burners, which are flexible and can burn hydrogen and/or natural gas, were defined and initial CFD analyses were completed.
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management of U.S. Department of Energy under Funding Opportunity Announcement Number DE-FOA-0002332 “Energy Storage for Fossil Power Generation”. The work aimed to explore and advance an innovative hydrogen energy storage system – the synergistically integrated hydrogen energy storage system (SIHES) – that has the following characteristics: • Compatible with existing or new coal and gas fuel electricity generation units, • best suited for intermediate to long duration energy storage, from 12 hours to weeks even months, and • capable of storing energy at the utility scale – hundreds of MWh to GWh energy storage with power output level in tens to hundreds of MW. Preliminary front-end engineering design (Pre-FEED) studies was carried out to develop and refine a site-specific SIHES as peaking power generation units (so named as HyPeaker) as the first market entry point, to demonstrate both the technical feasibility and the economic viability to integrate the HyPeaker “within the fence” of a fossil power plant. This specific site was TVA’s Johnsonville Combustion Turbine Plant. The HyPeaker was designed and engineered to integrate with a 60MW aeroderivative gas turbine unit already available at TVA’s Johnsonville site. This site-specific HyPeaker consists of an alkaline electrolyzer to produce hydrogen from CO 2 free electricity sources, an innovative low-cost high-pressure hydrogen storage system (Big-Ton) and the aero gas turbine to generate electricity using blend of hydrogen and natural gas. A holistic system level technoeconomic analysis tool specific to HyPeaker was developed to optimize the engineering design of the Johnsonville site-specific HyPeaker for cost and performance. The optimal design and specification of the Johnsonville site-specific HyPeaker are the following: • Alkaline electrolyzer: 3MW • Big-Ton storage vessel: 11,000kg H 2 at 3000psi. • 4-stage diaphragm hydrogen compressor: 55kg-H 2 /hr from 150psi to 3000psi. The HyPeaker is designed to provide sufficient hydrogen for 90% continuous operation of the HyPeaker. All major components have design life of 30 years. The capex of HyPeaker is estimated at $\$$7.1M. This included $\$$1.5M for the electrolyzer, $\$$5.6M for the storage vessel and compressor. The cost of aero gas turbine was included as it is already available at the site. Key findings are: • HyPeaker can be designed, manufactured, installed and integrated with the fossil power plants, with sub-systems and components commercially available on the market today, even when it is scaled up to an order of magnitude larger than the one at the Johnsonville site. HyPeaker is a technologically viable solution to cover a wide range of energy storage duration needs, from daily peaking operation to seasonal shifting for fossil fueled assets. • The cost advantage of SCCV based Big-Ton H 2 storage vessel made it possible to “oversize” the H 2 storage subsystem to achieve overall system level cost optimization. The benefits are two-fold. First, it allows to significantly reduce the capacity and cost of electrolyzer by spreading H 2 production over a much longer period of time when the fuel cost for electricity production is low. Second, it allows to balance the hydrogen production and usage shift over weeks to months to meet the peak demands. As such, the capital cost of HyPeaker system using the Big-Ton was less than half of the cost of a system with today’s steel tube based H 2 storage system. The HyPeaker has even better cost advantage Li-ion battery based energy storage system. The estimated capital cost of Li-Ion battery system would be at $\$$38M, under the same projected 20-year electricity generation profile of the Johnsonville site. This is over 5 times more expensive than the HyPeaker system. • Since industry scale energy storage systems do not have 100% energy conversion and storage efficiency, energy storage systems using fossil fuel generated electricity would increase the CO 2 emission. This is particularly the case for HyPeaker due to its low round trip efficiency. Therefore, a more sensible solution would be to the excessive or curtailed electricity from CO 2 emission free sources such as solar farms, wind farms or nuclear power plants, to produce hydrogen, and integrate them with the HyPeaker. Electricity from TVA’s nuclear power plants was used for the Johnsonville HyPeaker. • The economic viability of HyPeaker is expected to be further improved when global supply chains are taken into consideration. For the same Johnsonville site specific HyPeaker, the capex would be reduced to ~$\$$3.6M from ~$\$$7.1M, and the added LCOE is reduced to ~$\$$85/MWh. With the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the cost of domestically produced HyPeaker sub-systems would be at the level of today’s global suppliers. Since the peaking units generally operate at peak usage period, thereby demanding higher price, the projected $\$$85/MWh LCOE would be within the realm of financial viability for utility operators.
Operation of Carbon Fuels, LLC’s (“CF”) existing, permitted 18 TPD pilot plant located in Golden, Colorado using two individually ranked (ASTM D 388) coal types (two campaigns), employing the novel Charfuel® coal refining process to produce an upgraded coal product and a number of high-valued organic and inorganic coproducts (for which there presently exists large commercial markets) in order to produce engineering and product data which will then be utilized toward the design of a commercial scale integrated facility (pre-feed document). Carbon Fuels, LLC has developed the Charfuel® Coal Refining Process which refines domestically abundant, raw coal (in the same manner as crude oil is refined) to produce the identical, high value co-products that are refined from crude oil. Thus, gasoline, jet fuel, “green diesel”, fuel oil, and marine fuels, as well as petrochemicals such as benzene, toluene, xylene, and methanol are refined from raw coal using this process. The Charfuel® Coal Refining Process is not a coal conversion process, like pyrolysis, or indirect liquefaction. Nor is it an alternative energy system. Rather it is a coal refining process that has the ability to economically produce products traditionally associated with the refining of crude oil but using only abundant, raw coal as the refinery feed stock. The Charfuel® Coal Refining Process is more economical than crude oil refining and is environmentally benign. Therefore, this value added process yields a return on investment well above 50% for a commercial facility. Furthermore, the Charfuel® process, unlike alternatives such as ethanol and hydrogen, can utilize the existing transportation, delivery, and other petroleum based systems. Hence, there is no need for new engines, pipelines, tankers, or product acceptance. As a result, the profitability of the process is increased. Objectives: (1) Operation of the integrated 18 tpd pilot plant, using two coal types (ranks); (2) Demonstration of process flexibility in being able to produce different products (gas, liquid, and char), as well as determination of operating parameters for identifying scale up criteria for two coal types (ranks); (3) Generation of engineering and design information (process specifications) for use in designing a commercial scale plant (scale-up); (4) Determination of important environmental issues surrounding the process and the products such as fate of trace elements (mercury and other heavy metals) and distributions of SO2, NOx, and CO 2 by analysis of effluent streams; (5) Production of sufficient product to allow reliable commercial economic evaluation of both the refined coal product and the coproducts; and, (6) Assessment of longer-term reliability of unit operations. Period 1: reconfiguration of the 18 TPD plant to meet specific FOA requirements and to qualify the facility for operation; and, Period 2: operation of the 18 TPD plant for two campaigns using two coals types (ranks) which are widely commercially used and abundant - the first being a subbituminous (Powder River Basin (“PRB”)) coal, and the second a bituminous (Illinois #6) coal.
The Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC) is Alaska’s natural gas infrastructure development corporation established in 2013. AGDC’s mission is to maximize the benefit of Alaska’s vast North Slope natural gas resources for Alaskans through the development of infrastructure necessary to move the gas into local and international markets. AGDC was identified for a Congressionally Directed Spending (CDS) project for funding in the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2023 under the heading: “Congressionally Directed Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Projects.” The CDS included $\$$4,000,000 of direct funding, with required match funds, to move the project forward. Alaska’s North Slope holds America’s largest proven and conventional natural gas supply. The integrated Alaska LNG Project will deliver 3.5 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day from Alaska’s North Slope gas fields to Alaskans as well as to a marine terminal located at tidewater in Cook Inlet. Alaska LNG is an integrated gas infrastructure project with three major components: a gas treatment plant (GTP) located at Prudhoe Bay, an 807-mile (1,287 km) gas pipeline (Mainline Pipeline) to Southcentral Alaska with interconnections for in-state gas use, and a natural gas liquefaction facility (LNG Facility) in Nikiski, Alaska. The integrated Alaska LNG Project has several strategic advantages including proven gas resources, existing upstream infrastructure, an advantageous arctic climate for LNG production, proximity to LNG markets, a track record of reliability from a state that first began exporting LNG to Japan in 1969, and broad support from Alaskans. North Slope natural gas is a conventional resource and can be produced with minimal drilling at a fraction of the carbon dioxide emissions of shale gas from the Lower 48 states. Through the development of the Alaska LNG Project, Alaska can provide energy security to Alaskans and a stable source of LNG to the Asia-Pacific region for generations. The Alaska LNG Project has been progressed through Pre-Front-End Engineering Design (Pre-FEED) and has obtained all major federal and State of Alaska permits and authorizations to construct the project, including the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Order Granting Authorization Under Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act. On September 5, 2024, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) awarded Project No. DE-FE0032307 to AGDC with the objective to progress the project to Front-End Engineering Design (FEED) entry for the Alaska LNG Project Phase 1 Pipeline. The award Start Date was made effective July 1, 2023, with a Period of Performance through June 30, 2025. On March 27, 2025, AGDC announced the execution of definitive commercial agreements with Glenfarne Alaska LNG, LLC, an affiliate of Glenfarne Group, LLC, (together as “Glenfarne”), to lead the development of the Alaska LNG Project and enter FEED for the Phase 1 Pipeline. Project activities are now funded and directed by this private sector partner who holds a 75% interest in 8 Star Alaska, LLC (8 Star). 8 Star holds the assets of the Alaska LNG Project. As planned, AGDC continues to hold 25% minority interest in 8 Star and will play a governance role moving forward with Alaska LNG. This definitive commercial agreement milestone led to the successful completion of AGDC’s Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO) for FEED entry and led to the completion of DOE Project No. DE-FE0032307. At conclusion of the SOPO, AGDC also reached the award’s maximum federal cost share of $\$$4,000,000. AGDC is, therefore, providing Final Technical Report to close out DOE Project No. DE-FE0032307.
The overall objective of this work is to perform a pre-Front End Engineering Design (pre-FEED) study of the conversion of associated gas produced at an active oil pad of a Bakken oil field producer, to high value carbon black and hydrogen using the Microwave Plasma Pyrolysis of Associated Gas (MPP-AG) process developed by H Quest Vanguard, Inc (HQV). The University of North Dakota’s Center for Process Engineering Research (CPER) collaborated with HQV to complete a design and techno-economic analysis for the MPP-AG deployed at an active Bakken well site flaring an average of 54,000 standard cubic feet per day of AG. The proposed design consists of: • A Microwave Pyrolysis Unit (MPU) which consists of H Quest’s proprietary MPP technology • A patent-pending Gas Conditioning Unit (GCU) designed by the University of North Dakota to condition intermittent and variable flow gas prior to pyrolysis. • An auxiliary unit running on the associated gas to power the GCU and MPU in an “island mode” configuration.
This paper describes the development of a coal and biomass-fed plant concept to co-produce electric power and hydrogen with net-negative CO2 emissions under the aegis of the 21st Century Power Plant initiative of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), whose goal is to advance innovative power plant concepts that are capable of flexible, net-zero carbon emission operations while producing cost-effective “blue” hydrogen to support economy-wide decarbonization goals. The proposed standalone plant will be in Nebraska, USA. The specified design feedstock is a hybrid blend of Powder River Basin (PRB) subbituminous coal from Wyoming and local Nebraska biomass (corn stover), 50 wt.% each (dry basis). Other potential feedstocks, including woody biomass (eastern red cedar) and waste plastic (auto shredder residue) were evaluated or reviewed as alternates. The proposed process block comprises a high-pressure, oxygen-blown fluidized bed gasifier (GTI Energy U-GAS® process) coupled with water gas shift, the Selexol process for acid gas (H2S and CO2) removal, and pressure-swing adsorption (PSA) to yield 8,500 kg/h of high-purity hydrogen. The off gas from the PSA unit is used in the power block (gas turbine combined cycle) to generate electric power to support the gasification process, hydrogen production, and 50 MWe net electric power to the grid. All major plant equipment including the gasifier, gas cleanup system, and power generation are commercially available and proven in other applications and considered at TRL 8-9. However, gasification of corn stover biomass is considered at TRL 6. Overall thermal efficiency of the plant is 50% (net HHV) with net atmospheric CO2 removal at a rate of 250-300,000 tpa. Design activities necessary to provide input to a FEED study (Phase II of the project), including the development of the Environmental Information Volume (EIV) for the host site, and an investment case, based on a pro-forma pre-FEED level cost estimate, have been completed and are described in detail in this paper.
Initial engineering design studies examining the application of state-of-the-art carbon capture technology at industrial plants contain generally overlooked real-world design considerations for near-term deployment of point source capture (PSC). The implementation of PSC across a wide range of industrial applications presents unique challenges associated with fluctuating CO<sub>2</sub> concentrations, flue gas composition, and utility and land availability. In this article, seven recent industrial retrofit PSC projects are reviewed to investigate the impact of site-specific factors on project design and cost. Across the seven projects, three capture technology classes and four industrial applications are considered, allowing insight into industry-specific opportunities for PSC technology synergy. Common challenges across projects and proposed design solutions are highlighted to propagate ideas and solutions to close the technology gaps and accelerate learning rates.
NETL has devised a methodology for normalizing FEED study metrics of interest and allowing cautious quantitative comparison across FEED studies. This presentation introduces the novel quantitative comparison methodology and presents results from utilizing this methodology to examine data presented in recent FEED study reports. The quantitative methodology developed for the examination of FEED study performance and cost also allows comparison of real-world performance and costs against NETL TEA model predicted performance and cost. Learnings from examining NETL model predicted performance and cost versus real world reported values are highlighted. These learnings provide insight into NETL TEA model uncertainty and highlight opportunities for further model development.