The Future of Coal
Matt Jahnke February 13, 2006
Thoughts That Come to Mind
Negative Perceptions
Dirty Mines Old Technology CO2, SOx, NOx, and other Pollutants Dangerous Mines Smog and Suit Poor Working Conditions Politics (Relaxing Clean Air Standards)
Positive Perceptions
Abundant Supply in U.S. Cheap No Foreign Reliance New Clean Technologies American Jobs in Plants, Mines, and Transportation Electricity Politics (R&D for Clean Air Research)
Coal is Here to Stay
U.S. Consumes 1.1 Billion Tons of Coal Annually
Types of Coal
Anthracite 86-98% Carbon --15,000 BTU/lb
Small segment of Coal Market – Near Pennsylvania
Most U.S. Coal – Electricity – Coke – Industrial Steam Western States and Alaska (PRB) – Lower in Sulfur Young Coal, “Brown Coal”
Bituminous 45-86% Carbon -- 10,500-15,000 BTU/lb
Sub-bituminous 35-45% Carbon --8,300-13,000 BTU/lb
Lignite 25-35% Carbon – 4,000-8,300 BTU/lb
Powder River Basin
Low-Cost Electricity From Coal
Cost Per kWh & Percent of Coal Generation
5.6¢ 10% 6.1¢ 9% 6.1¢ 64% 5.0¢ 1% 4.9¢ 96% 8.6¢ 51% 11.3¢ 1% 5.8¢ 94% 6.9¢ 78% 6.5¢ 75% 7.6¢ 42% 6.6¢ 7.3¢ 88% 7.8¢ 39% 11.3¢ 8% 15.3¢ 15% 61% 6.2¢ 85% 5.8¢ 50% 7.2¢ 26% 8.1¢ 31% 4.6¢ 92% 6.2¢ 60% 6.2¢ 56% 6.7¢ 63% 5.7¢ 94% 6.6¢ 44% 6.6¢ 5.8¢ 69% 85% 7.0¢ 47% 6.4¢ 65% 6.9¢ 70% 7.1¢ 61% 6.9¢ 5.6¢ 94% 92% 8.1¢ 55% 5.1¢ 98% 6.5¢ 50% 7.0¢ 58% 6.2¢ 40% 7.0¢ 44% 12.0¢ 17% 9.6¢ 3%
¢ = average price per kilowatt hour through September 2004 % = percent of total generation from coal for 2003
NH VT MA RI CT NJ DE MD
11.4¢ 11.1¢ 10.8¢ 10.8¢ 10.1¢ 10.4¢ 7.3¢ 7.1¢
22% 0% 23% 0% 13% 16% 54% 56%
< 7.0¢ < 7.0¢ - 8.5¢ >8.5¢ Hydro
Source: Energy Information Administration, May 2004 and December 2004.
2
Current Pollution from Coal
60% of U.S. Sulfur Dioxide Emissions 33% of U.S. Mercury Emissions 33% of U.S. NOx Emissions 33% of U.S. Carbon Dioxide Currently further reeducation in admissions is at a stalemate. 5 Billion has been spent by the Federal Government for Clean-Coal Technologies
Alternatives to Coal
Availability Coal Hydro Abundant Moderate Environmental Cost High Minor Low Low
Wind & Solar Unreliable
Oil Natural Gas Nuclear Scarce Moderate Abundant
Minor
Moderate Moderate Minor or Catastrophic
Moderate
Higher Moderate and Rising Same as Coal
Coal vs. Nuclear
Cost Element
Fuel O&M and Labor Pensions, Insurance, Taxes Regulatory Fees Property Taxes Capital Decommissioning & Waste Administrative Total
Nuclear $/MW-hr 5 6 1 1 2 9 5 1 30.0
Coal $/MW-hr 11 5 1 0.1 2 9 0 1 29.1
Coal vs. Natural Gas
Coal
Natural Gas
Best Long Term Economic Option In reality only 4% of the new large power plants in the last 12 years were coal. In order to regain public support, new technologies need to be perused.
Advanced Pulverized Coal (PC) Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) FutureGen Fluidized Bed Combustion (FBC)
Has been the best compromise for Energy Companies and Environmentalists in the 1990‟s. If continued the next few decades will see, for the first time, the US depend on foreign nations for its fuel used for production of electricity. Capital Investment is about half $500/ kW compared to coal‟s $1,000 conventional Coal plant. Less CO2 due to fewer C-C bonds
FutureGen
"Today I am pleased to announce that the United States will sponsor a $1 billion, 10-year demonstration project to create the world's first coal-based, zero-emissions electricity and hydrogen power plant..." President George W. Bush February 27, 2003
What is FutureGen?
Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) Acts as a Chemical Plant rather than a Coal plant. Removes impurities mainly sulfur prior to combustion – making exhaust much cleaner. Currently 2 IGCC plants exist in the U.S.
CO2 is only slightly reduced do to the higher efficiency in IGCC plants 33% to 38%
FutureGen‟s Goal is to reach 50% efficiency by attempting to capture all H2 and use it in Fuel Cells Hopes for Sequestering CO2 in the ground
Current IGCC
IGCC – How Low Can We Go
Will it Ever Happen
Requires 15% higher capital investment. R&D and Tax incentives. No mandatory requirement. FutureGen is still 8 years away assuming that it stays fully funded. No Private Energy Companies have constructed an IGCC plant.
The Reality
U.S. can not agree on its source of energy. Clean Air policies are in limbo. Future Coal emissions are uncertain. Even the oldest coal plants are cheaper to run with a low efficiency than building a newer more efficient one. Natural gas is currently the compromise taken. By 2025 the U.S. will need 50% more electricity. Will the U.S. suffer an electrical energy crisis?
http://energy.senate.gov/conference/coalconference.cfm http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/2005/05/clean_coal.html http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/futuregen/ http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/pdf/pages/sec3_2.pdf http://www.nei.org/documents/Nuclear_Powering_Americas_Future.pdf EPA‟s Emissions Scorecard 2001; Prairie State Energy air permit, IndeckElwood draft air permit, and U.S. Department of Energy 2002 Annual Energy Outlook. http://www.appaltree.net/aba/coaltypes.htm http://www.marathon.com/content/released/HM8860_PRB_FactSht_final. pdf#search='Powder%20River%20Basin' http://www.powerfrontiers.com/coal.html http://www.chemetron.com/GetFile/3D1CC5F1990E83D780256CF700575 BF7/bltn0320.pdf#search='pulverized%20coal„ Chemical and Engineering News, “Coal – Can it ever be clean?” February 23, 2004 http://www.unitedconveyor.com/bulletins/images/PowerGenPaper.pdf#sea rch='subbituminous'