IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v157y2015icp851-860.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Coproduction of transportation fuels in advanced IGCCs via coal and biomass mixtures

Author

Listed:
  • Chen, Qin
  • Rao, Ashok
  • Samuelsen, Scott

Abstract

Converting abundant fossil resources of coal to alternative transportation fuels is a promising option for countries heavily dependent on petroleum imports if plants are equipped with carbon capture for sequestration and cofed with biomass (30% by weight of the total feed on a dry basis), an essentially carbon neutral fuel, without penalizing the process economics excessively. A potential exists to improve both thermal efficiency and economics of such plants by taking advantage of the synergies of coproducing electricity using advanced technologies under development. Three types of transportation fuels are considered. Fischer–Tropsch (F–T) liquids consisting predominantly of waxes could be processed in existing refineries while displacing petroleum and the refined products introduced into the market place at the present time or in the near term without requiring changes to the existing infrastructure. Ethanol could potentially serve in the not so distant future (or phased in by blending with conventional liquid fuels). Hydrogen which could play a dominant role in the more distant future being especially suitable to the fuel cell hybrid vehicle (FCHV). Two types of coal along with biomass cofeed are evaluated; bituminous coal at $42.0/dry tonne, lignite at $12.0/dry tonne, and switchgrass at $99.0/dry tonne. The calculated cost for F–T liquids ranged from $77.8/bbl to $86.6/bbl (or $0.0177 to 0.0197/MJ LHV) depending on the feedstock, which is comparable to the projected longer term market price of crude oil at ∼$80/bbl when supply and demand reach a new equilibrium [Lafakis. Moody’s Analytics. (accessed on 12.01.15)] [32] (or ∼$0.0172/MJ LHV). It should be noted, however, that F–T liquids contain no sulfur or nitrogen compounds and no inorganics. The calculated cost of fuel grade ethanol ranged from $4.84 to 4.91/gal (or $0.0566 to 0.0582/MJ LHV), while the price of gasoline in the U.S. amounted to $0.0240 to 0.0279/MJ LHV when crude oil was at ∼$80/bbl. Ethanol coproduction may not appear to be as attractive as the other options at these scales, primarily due to the much lower plant efficiency. However, from a life cycle greenhouse gas emissions standpoint, ethanol produced with biomass cofeeding and CCS, have a lower carbon footprint than gasoline or diesel, especially when derived from petroleum. The calculated cost of hydrogen ranged from $1.87 to 2.13/kg (or $0.0156 to 0.0177/MJ LHV), which is significantly lower than the DoE announced goal of $3.00/kg in 2005.

Suggested Citation

  • Chen, Qin & Rao, Ashok & Samuelsen, Scott, 2015. "Coproduction of transportation fuels in advanced IGCCs via coal and biomass mixtures," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 851-860.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:157:y:2015:i:c:p:851-860
    DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.069
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261915001051
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.069?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Li, Mu & Rao, Ashok D. & Scott Samuelsen, G., 2012. "Performance and costs of advanced sustainable central power plants with CCS and H2 co-production," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 43-50.
    2. Cory, Karlynn S. & Swezey, Blair G., 2007. "Renewable Portfolio Standards in the States: Balancing Goals and Rules," The Electricity Journal, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 21-32, May.
    3. Chen, Qin & Rao, Ashok & Samuelsen, Scott, 2014. "H2 coproduction in IGCC with CCS via coal and biomass mixture using advanced technologies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 258-270.
    4. Rao, Ashok D. & Francuz, David J., 2013. "An evaluation of advanced combined cycles," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 1178-1186.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bhave, Amit & Taylor, Richard H.S. & Fennell, Paul & Livingston, William R. & Shah, Nilay & Dowell, Niall Mac & Dennis, John & Kraft, Markus & Pourkashanian, Mohammed & Insa, Mathieu & Jones, Jenny & , 2017. "Screening and techno-economic assessment of biomass-based power generation with CCS technologies to meet 2050 CO2 targets," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 481-489.
    2. Jiang, Yuan & Bhattacharyya, Debangsu, 2016. "Process modeling of direct coal-biomass to liquids (CBTL) plants with shale gas utilization and CO2 capture and storage (CCS)," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 1616-1632.
    3. Zhang, Qian & Li, Qingfeng & Zhang, Linxian & Yu, Zhongliang & Jing, Xuliang & Wang, Zhiqing & Fang, Yitian & Huang, Wei, 2017. "Experimental study on co-pyrolysis and gasification of biomass with deoiled asphalt," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 301-310.
    4. Qin, Shiyue & Chang, Shiyan & Yao, Qiang, 2018. "Modeling, thermodynamic and techno-economic analysis of coal-to-liquids process with different entrained flow coal gasifiers," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 229(C), pages 413-432.
    5. Rosner, Fabian & Chen, Qin & Rao, Ashok & Samuelsen, Scott & Jayaraman, Ambal & Alptekin, Gokhan, 2019. "Thermo-economic analyses of IGCC power plants employing warm gas CO2 separation technology," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 541-553.
    6. Bassani, Andrea & Pirola, Carlo & Maggio, Enrico & Pettinau, Alberto & Frau, Caterina & Bozzano, Giulia & Pierucci, Sauro & Ranzi, Eliseo & Manenti, Flavio, 2016. "Acid Gas to Syngas (AG2S™) technology applied to solid fuel gasification: Cutting H2S and CO2 emissions by improving syngas production," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 1284-1291.
    7. Moon, Dong-Kyu & Lee, Dong-Geun & Lee, Chang-Ha, 2016. "H2 pressure swing adsorption for high pressure syngas from an integrated gasification combined cycle with a carbon capture process," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 760-774.
    8. Chen, Qin & Rosner, Fabian & Rao, Ashok & Samuelsen, Scott & Jayaraman, Ambal & Alptekin, Gokhan, 2019. "Simulation of elevated temperature solid sorbent CO2 capture for pre-combustion applications using computational fluid dynamics," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 237(C), pages 314-325.
    9. Chen, Qin & Rosner, Fabian & Rao, Ashok & Samuelsen, Scott & Bonnema, Michael & Jayaraman, Ambal & Alptekin, Gokhan, 2020. "Simulation of elevated temperature combined water gas shift and solid sorbent CO2 capture for pre-combustion applications using computational fluid dynamics," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 267(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Chen, Qin & Rao, Ashok & Samuelsen, Scott, 2014. "H2 coproduction in IGCC with CCS via coal and biomass mixture using advanced technologies," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 258-270.
    2. Sahu, Mithilesh Kumar & Sanjay,, 2017. "Comparative exergoeconomics of power utilities: Air-cooled gas turbine cycle and combined cycle configurations," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 42-51.
    3. Olateju, Babatunde & Kumar, Amit, 2013. "Techno-economic assessment of hydrogen production from underground coal gasification (UCG) in Western Canada with carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) for upgrading bitumen from oil sands," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 428-440.
    4. Kotowicz, Janusz & Brzęczek, Mateusz, 2019. "Comprehensive multivariable analysis of the possibility of an increase in the electrical efficiency of a modern combined cycle power plant with and without a CO2 capture and compression installations ," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 1100-1120.
    5. Biegel, Benjamin & Westenholz, Mikkel & Hansen, Lars Henrik & Stoustrup, Jakob & Andersen, Palle & Harbo, Silas, 2014. "Integration of flexible consumers in the ancillary service markets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 479-489.
    6. Blumsack, Seth & Xu, Jianhua, 2011. "Spatial variation of emissions impacts due to renewable energy siting decisions in the Western U.S. under high-renewable penetration scenarios," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 6962-6971.
    7. Inzunza, Andrés & Muñoz, Francisco D. & Moreno, Rodrigo, 2021. "Measuring the effects of environmental policies on electricity markets risk," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    8. Dang, Chengxiong & Xia, Huanhuan & Yuan, Shuting & Wei, Xingchuan & Cai, Weiquan, 2022. "Green hydrogen production from sorption-enhanced steam reforming of biogas over a Pd/Ni–CaO-mayenite multifunctional catalyst," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 201(P1), pages 314-322.
    9. Barelli, L. & Bidini, G. & Ottaviano, A., 2017. "Integration of SOFC/GT hybrid systems in Micro-Grids," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 716-728.
    10. Rountree, Valerie, 2019. "Nevada's experience with the Renewable Portfolio Standard," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 279-291.
    11. Pan, Ming & Aziz, Farah & Li, Baohong & Perry, Simon & Zhang, Nan & Bulatov, Igor & Smith, Robin, 2016. "Application of optimal design methodologies in retrofitting natural gas combined cycle power plants with CO2 capture," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 695-706.
    12. Huang, Yu-Fong & Cheng, Pei-Hsin & Chiueh, Pei-Te & Lo, Shang-Lien, 2017. "Leucaena biochar produced by microwave torrefaction: Fuel properties and energy efficiency," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 1018-1025.
    13. Bruce Tonn & Paul Frymier & Jared Graves & Jessa Meyers, 2010. "A Sustainable Energy Scenario for the United States: Year 2050," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(12), pages 1-31, November.
    14. Bespalova, Olga Gennadyevna, 2011. "Bespalova, Olga Gennadyevna (2011): Renewable portfolio standards in the USA: experience and compliance with targets. Published in: K-State Electronic Theses, Dissertations, and Reports No. May 2011 (," MPRA Paper 117672, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 22 Apr 2011.
    15. Rossi, Iacopo & Sorce, Alessandro & Traverso, Alberto, 2017. "Gas turbine combined cycle start-up and stress evaluation: A simplified dynamic approach," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 880-890.
    16. Taufiq, Bin Nur & Kikuchi, Yasunori & Ishimoto, Takayoshi & Honda, Kuniaki & Koyama, Michihisa, 2015. "Conceptual design of light integrated gasification fuel cell based on thermodynamic process simulation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 486-499.
    17. Zhou, Shan & Solomon, Barry D., 2020. "Do renewable portfolio standards in the United States stunt renewable electricity development beyond mandatory targets?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    18. James Buthman, 2015. "Institutionalizing renewable electricity: the long-term potential for policy learning," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 5(4), pages 526-536, December.
    19. Barelli, L. & Bidini, G. & Ottaviano, A., 2013. "Part load operation of a SOFC/GT hybrid system: Dynamic analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 173-189.
    20. Mah, Daphne Ngar-yin & Cheung, Darren Man-wai & Leung, Michael K.H. & Wang, Maggie Yachao & Wong, Mandy Wai-ming & Lo, Kevin & Cheung, Altair T.F., 2021. "Policy mixes and the policy learning process of energy transitions: Insights from the feed-in tariff policy and urban community solar in Hong Kong," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:157:y:2015:i:c:p:851-860. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.