Docstoc

Progressive energy

Document Sample
Progressive energy Powered By Docstoc
					         Progressive energy                                                            BOC


                                Gasification Technologies 2002
                                  San Francisco, California
                                     October 27-30, 2002


                    DEVELOPMENT OF A VERSATILE IGCC
                        TO MEET THE UK MARKET


     Rob Smith, BOC Process Solutions                 David Hanstock, Progressive Energy
     Guildford, Surrey, GU30 7XD, UK              Stonehouse, Gloucestershire, GL10, 7RF, UK

    Brian Keenan, BOC Process Solutions               Peter Whitton, Progressive Energy
     Guildford, Surrey, GU30 7XD, UK              Stonehouse, Gloucestershire, GL10 7RF, UK




SYNOPSIS

The recent UK Energy Review recognises the strong likelihood that the UK will need to make
very large carbon emission reductions over the next century. It also concludes that the focus of
UK policy should be to establish new sources of energy and energy conversion, which are, or
can be, low carbon. While the immediate priorities suggested are the promotion of energy
efficiency and renewable energy schemes, there is also a recognition that practical measures are
required to establish the option of cleaner solid fuel technologies capable of achieving deep cuts
in carbon emissions through cost effective carbon capture and storage. Furthermore, following
total liberalisation of the UK market, the opportunity for new generating capacity is driven by
the combined availability of fuels, technologies and plant investments that can generate and meet
market needs at a lower cost than existing plants. The continued operation of the remaining UK
coal-fired plants will be constrained by environmental limits as well as end-of-life issues.
Meanwhile, reductions in nuclear capacity will take place over the next two decades. Therefore
the opportunity exists to introduce low cost plant, particularly if a cost base below the current
preferred natural gas CCGT new entrant plant can be achieved.

Against this background, Progressive Energy and BOC have developed an IGCC flowscheme
with key design objective to produce low cost power and H2 compared to alternative clean coal
and CCGT alternatives and which is positioned to provide the lowest cost route to CO2 capture.

In this paper, the authors will:
♦ expand on the current energy and environmental drivers affecting the UK
♦ discuss the flexible IGCC flowscheme
♦ compare the relative costs for the flowscheme against competing technologies in the UK
    environment




                                                                                     Page 1 of 12
             Progressive energy                                                                               BOC
           DEVELOPMENT OF A VERSATILE IGCC TO MEET THE UK MARKET


1        UK MARKET CONTEXT

1.1      Historical Background

It is generally recognised that the UK led the way in electricity deregulation and that this has had
fundamental impact on power prices as well as the structure and operation of the UK electricity
market. To fully appreciate the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead it is worth
summarising the route by which the UK arrived at its current position.

     Pre 1988 State owned integrated utility (CEGB) responsible for electricity generation,
              transmission and supply throughout UK
         1988 Announcement by UK Government of intention to privatise electricity industry
         1990 CEGB divided into separate entities covering England & Wales:
                - Generation       (National Power, PowerGen & Nuclear Electric)
                - Transmission (National Grid, initially owned by Supply Companies)
                - Supply           (12 Regional Electricity Companies)
              Generating / Supply companies prevented from cross-ownership, but for Scotland
              two integrated entities are formed (Scottish Power & Scottish Hydro-Electric)
         1991 Initial Public Offerings in privatised entities
              Start of electricity trading through the ‘Pool’
      1992/94 Period of relative stability as new market settles in
      1994/95 Start of M&A activity with first hostile bid for a supply company
    1995/2000 Increased M&A activity particularly with influx of American investors (most
              subsequently withdrawn) and relaxation of cross-ownership rules
         2001 Introduction of New Electricity Trading Arrangements (NETA) to eliminate
              perceived weaknesses in the Pool system
         2002 Continued M&A activity (PowerGen purchased by E.On while RWE purchases
              domestic business of National Power [Innogy])
              UK Government Energy Review and Kyoto

                            Figure 1 – Privatisation of the UK Electricity Industry

Over the 12-year period, since deregulation, prices have dropped by 30%, while in the year alone
since the introduction of NETA, base load prices fell by 20%1 . Currently, wholesale electricity
prices stand at $25.00-$28.00 / MWh, compared to natural gas prices of $3.00-$3.25 / MMBtu
(excluding transmission and distribution costs in each case). Figure 2 shows the long-term spot
price trends for the UK 2 . While it is generally agreed that current electricity prices are untenable
in the long term, few are prepared to predict when they may start to rise. Equally, it is not
expected that natural gas prices will significantly fall. In the meantime current market pricing is
causing severe financial disruption to the major generators with, notably British Energy,
PowerGen, TXU Energi and AES all having to make provisions against poor revenues.

1
    The review of the first rear of NETA, Published by the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets, July 2002
2
    Ibid.



Gasification Technologies 2002                                                                         Page 2 of 12
                      Progressive energy                                                                                                                                          BOC
          DEVELOPMENT OF A VERSATILE IGCC TO MEET THE UK MARKET



Clearly, in the near to medium term, the differential between natural gas and electricity prices
weighs heavily against conventional CCGT new builds. Conversely, long term stability in coal
prices suggests that new clean coal technology could offer competitive new entrant generation
once electricity prices start to rise.


                                      50.00
           $/MWh (Basis April 2001)




                                      45.00


                                      40.00


                                      35.00


                                      30.00


                                      25.00


                                      20.00
                                               1990/91


                                                         1991/92


                                                                    1992/93


                                                                              1993/94


                                                                                         1994/95


                                                                                                   1995/96


                                                                                                             1996/97


                                                                                                                             1997/98


                                                                                                                                       1998/99




                                                                                                                                                                  2000/01


                                                                                                                                                                              2001/02
                                                                                        Pool        NETA                                              1999/2000

                                                         Figure 2 – UK Long-term Spot Price Trends

1.2     Thermal Generation Drivers

Following liberalisation there was a significant change in the generation mix as shown below3,4 :

                                              Coal            Nuclear             Natural Gas                          Oil             Imports                    Renewables

         1990                                 68%                  20%                   0%                            5%                        2%                         5%

         2000                                 29%                  26%                  37%                            1%                        3%                         4%

                                                                     Figure 3 – UK Generation Mix

Clearly, the UK generating industry changed from one that was predominantly coal and nuclear
based to one that is now based almost equally on coal, nuclear and natural gas (the so called

3
    DTI Energy Paper 68 – Energy Projections for the UK
4
    2000 figures extracted from figure 4.1 of The Energy Review: Performance and Innovation Unit



Gasification Technologies 2002                                                                                                                                              Page 3 of 12
           Progressive energy                                                                         BOC
         DEVELOPMENT OF A VERSATILE IGCC TO MEET THE UK MARKET


‘dash-for-gas’) with coal being the clear loser in this shift. The drivers behind this change were
several and included:

§     the development of high efficiency, low capital cost CCGT plant
§     the availability of low cost gas as a fuel for power generation
§     tightening environmental requirements (emissions of NOX and SOX in particular)
§     the age and performance profile of the tranche of coal- fired stations.

The recent Energy Review, undertaken on behalf of the UK Government, by the Performance
and Innovation Unit, published in January 2002 5 foresees the continuing growth and dominance
of natural gas for power generation. However, it also predicts that by 2020 the UK may need to
import 90% of its natural gas requirements and could experience gas shortages as early as 2005/6
should there be a severe winter. Unsurprisingly, some critics have expressed concern at the
potential risk of relying so heavily on a single imported fuel source 6 .

The Energy Review also recognises the strong likelihood that the UK will need to make very
large carbon emission reductions over the next century and concludes that the focus of UK
policy should be to establish new sources of energy and energy conversion, which are, or can be,
low carbon. The immediate suggested priorities are the promotion of energy efficiency and
renewables, but there is also a recognition that practical measures are required to establish the
option of cleaner solid fuel technologies, capable of achieving deep cuts in carbon emissions
through cost effective carbon capture and storage. The introduction of cleaner solid fuels
technologies is also of universal relevance given that 38% of the world’s electricity needs are
currently met by coal, wit h no CO2 abatement 7 and that coal’s share of the energy market looks
set to be unchanged over the next 20 years.

Finally the UK, as a member of the European Union, ratified the Kyoto Protocol on 31 May
20028 . Signatories have accepted a legal obligation to reduce emissions and the Protocol draws
specific attention to the increased use of CO2 sequestration technologies 9 .

1.3    Economic Considerations

In a competitive market, the opportunity for new generating capacity is driven by the combined
influences of fuel availability, technology and plant investments that can meet market needs at a
lower cost than existing plants and / or alternate, competing schemes.

For the UK (and many other countries) the continued operation of existing coal- fired plants will
be constrained by environmental limits as well as end-of- life issues. Further tightening of EU
environmental limits in 2005 means some plants will need to justify investment in abatement
technology to continue operating. Meanwhile, reductions in the UK’s nuclear capacity will take

5
  Executive Summary of the Energy Review, Performance and Innovation Unit, January 2002
6
  Royal Academy of Engineering response to the Energy Review, September 2002
7
  IEA World Energy Statistics 2001
8
  EU Ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, New York, 31 May 2002 Secretary-General, United Nations
9
  Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Article 2, Section 1(a) (iv)



Gasification Technologies 2002                                                                    Page 4 of 12
           Progressive energy                                                                  BOC
         DEVELOPMENT OF A VERSATILE IGCC TO MEET THE UK MARKET


place throughout the next two decades as the Magnox and Advanced Gas Cooled Reactors are
progressively closed. In any event, the opportunity will exist for the introduction of low cost
plant, particularly if a cost base below the current preferred natural gas CCGT new entrant plant
can be achieved. Further, the convergence of UK and EC gas prices, associated with increased
European gas infrastructure interconnection, has started to open up a price differential in favour
of solid carbonaceous fuels versus natural gas. This is particularly true for high sulphur fuels,
which can more easily be accommodated by gasification plant in an environmentally acceptable
way.

Finally and as noted above, the Energy Review promotes the adoptio n of renewable energy
sources and the Government has targeted 10% renewable electricity by 2010 and proposed a
further target of 20% by 2020. Once again, these targets are regarded by most as extremely
challenging and it is difficult to envisage that even in the medium term, and assuming success in
reducing electricity demand, renewable energy will completely meet the need for new capacity.

1.4    Low Carbon Generation and the H2 Economy

Statoil is currently demonstrating the viability of CO2 capture and offshore storage in the
Sleipner West gas production field and an international programme is underway to demonstrate
the safety and reliability of this CO2 storage as a viable greenhouse gas mitigation option. It is
estimated that this approach is capable of the cost-effective capture of around 2 x 106 Te / annum
of CO2 from a station of 480 MW size, while the North Sea is capable of providing CO2 storage
equating to several hundred years of adjacent power station emissions, through:

§     Enhanced Oil Recovery
§     injection into abandoned gas fields
§     injection into saline aquifers

Hence, there is the prospect of this technology making a significant contribution to UK and EC
emissions reductions although it is recognised this will require widespread support from:

a) Government        - through provision of a legislative and commercial framework
b) Public            - through recognition of the safety and reliability of this approach
c) Industry          - through provision of cost effective technology

The UK Government has set a target of 8-12% of new vehicles to be powered by alternative
fuels by 2010 and all major car manufacturers are preparing to introduce commercial clean
energy vehicles within the decade. Many of them rely on the availability of H to ensure this
                                                                               2
adoption and the availability of large scale economic sources of low cost, competitively priced
H2 is likely to enable the earlier uptake of H powered vehicles in what is foreseen to be a
                                                2
growing market.




Gasification Technologies 2002                                                              Page 5 of 12
           Progressive energy                                                                 BOC
         DEVELOPMENT OF A VERSATILE IGCC TO MEET THE UK MARKET


2      THE FLEXIBLE IGCC

2.1    Company Backgrounds

Originally formed in 1998 to progress the non-nuclear activities of Magnox Electric, the state
owned electricity generator, Progressive Energy (PE) is now a totally independent specialist
energy project development company with particular focus on IGCC power projects (unique
within the UK ene rgy sector). PE’s core competencies are in the electricity and energy markets,
particularly power project concept, definition and development.

BOC is a world-renowned industrial gases company and significant energy user. It is a major
on-site generator with 550+ MW of installed capacity and is also a supplier to and operator of
gasification facilities. BOC’s core competencies are in the supply of H2 , CO, syngas and
industrial gases; energy & process studies; plant optimization; process engineering and plant
operation.

2.2    The Flexible IGCC Flowscheme

Commencing in 1998 and building upon the projected requirements for future UK generation
plant, PE and BOC have jointly developed a flowscheme for gasification of solid carbonaceous
feedstocks that is designed to produce “Green energy from coal and other carbonaceous
materials” and was first shown at Gasification Technologies 2001. The key design objectives
have been to develop a flexible and cost competitive flowscheme. Flexibility is necessary to be
able to meet current and future energy demands within a changing regulatory and commercial
environment. Cost competitiveness is necessary in order to ensure economic operation against
competing plant by producing low cost power and H2 while also being positioned to provide the
lowest cost route to the capture of CO2 . This flowscheme offers the prospect of commercially
viable CO2 capture once the value of carbon through emissions trading reaches a level consistent
with future price forecasts and which is sufficient to justify the additional investment in CO2
capture equipment, and the associated pipeline transport and injection infrastructure.

Key design features of the flowscheme are:

§     Utilization of medium pressure, quench gasifiers, generally matched to the gas turbine fuel
      pressure requirements. While it is recognized that higher-pressure cycles offer some
      efficiency benefit, it is considered that the simpler arrangement of a medium pressure cycle
      (without the need to balance pressures across the gasifiers and gas turbine) provides greater
      reliability and hence maximizes plant uptime. A sour shift has been adopted since it
      maximizes steam production and, given water availability concerns, avoids the use of a
      saturator.

§     Flexibility to include H2 co-production and / or CO2 co-production at a later date. As noted
      in Section 1, the UK / European electricity market is very dynamic with expectations of both
      an H2 economy and CO2 storage, although it is not possible to predict when this may
      materialize. It is essential, therefore, to maintain flexibility to meet these future expectations



Gasification Technologies 2002                                                             Page 6 of 12
         Progressive energy                                                              BOC
       DEVELOPMENT OF A VERSATILE IGCC TO MEET THE UK MARKET


    if the long-term security and profitability of the plant is to be assured. Provision has been
    allowed within the layout of the plant for retrofitting of H2 / CO2 abstraction from the clean
    syngas stream. Equipment that cannot be easily retrofitted (e.g. HRSG) has been verified to
    ensure best practical performance following retrofit.

§   Integration of the GT and ASU air compressor is not anticipated, since it appears
    economically neutral for the 9FA class GT and eliminates concerns over added complexity
    and operational flexibility. However, some air bleed from the GT will be required under
    selected operating conditions and energy will be recovered to power non-essential drives.

§   GT selection is based on the use of proven, high-efficiency 9FA-class technology. The GT
    will be capable of operation on syngas, natural gas or a mixture of the two, thereby providing
    high fuel flexibility. In addition, the GT will be capable of ready conversion between
    operation on syngas with and without CO2 removal. This will enable the GT to cover a wide
    range of operating scenarios i.e. syngas supply interruptions, CO2 sequestration, potential
    load following through flexing of natural gas use and capitalization of any short term natural
    gas price advantages.

    Diluent injection to control NOX formation to UK regulatory requirements of <25 ppmvd and
    enable power boost up to the maximum torque rating of the GT will be used, as follows:

    For operation on Syngas without CO2 removal     - CO2 acts diluent
    For operation on Syngas with CO2 removal        - N2 injection
    For operation on Natural Gas                    - Steam injection only
    For mixed Syngas / Natural Gas operation        - Some N2 injection

    The general use of steam injection has been avoided due to its high relative cost and low
    availability at the index site.

§   Development of the HRSG / STG cycle design, has required the same consideration with
    respect to fuel flexibility and consequent effect on exhaust gas conditions as the GT.
    Overall, a proven triple pressure reheat cycle has been adopted. Careful selection of cycle
    pressures has been taken to ensure optimum integration with the gasifier plant, while not
    compromising steam turbine selection. A high degree of integration of the steam flows
    within the HRSG has been avoided so as to allow flexible operation on natural gas alone
    without significant impact on the heat balance through the unit.

The Flexible IGCC Flowscheme is shown in Figures 4 and 5:




Gasification Technologies 2002                                                       Page 7 of 12
                     Progressive energy                                                                                                                                                                                             BOC
                DEVELOPMENT OF A VERSATILE IGCC TO MEET THE UK MARKET

   Raw                                                            H2 Co-products                         CO2 Co-products
   Feed                                                                                                   / Sequestration
    Gasifier




                                                                                                                                                                                         Deaerator
                      Raw
                     Syngas                          Pre Shift       Sour               IP                                                            N2
                              Scrubber




                                                      Heater         Shift             Boiler                                                        Heater




                                                                             IP Feed             LP
                                                                                                                           AGR
                                                                              Heater            Boiler


                                                                                                          LP Steam




                                                                                                                                                                                                   LP Feedwater
                                                                                                                                                                                    IP Feedwater




                                                                                                                                                                                                                  D/A Water
                                                                                                         Clean Syngas
                     GASIFIER                        GAS CONDITIONING
                      BLOCK                              BLOCK                                               N2


                                         N2                                                         GTG NOx Control Steam
    Ash
                                         O2

                                                                                                                                      Steam Turbine Generator
                               ASU                                CCGT
     Tonnage /                BLOCK                               BLOCK
     Merchant                                  ASU
    Co-products

                                                                                                 IP Steam                                                                  Condensate                                          Cond
               Air                                                                                                                                                                                                            Preheat
                                                                                                                                       Cold Reheat
                                                                                                                         Hot Reheat
                                                                                                              HP Steam




                                                                                                                                                       LP Steam
       Natural Gas

    Process Steam
                                                                                                                                                                  Heat Recovery Steam Generator
   Electrical Power
                                                                      Gas Turbine Generator




                                                                 Figure 4– Flexible IGCC Flowscheme




                                              Figure 5 – Typical Photomontage of Flexible IGCC Scheme



Gasification Technologies 2002                                                                                                                                                                                                Page 8 of 12
             Progressive energy                                                                  BOC
          DEVELOPMENT OF A VERSATILE IGCC TO MEET THE UK MARKET



2.3      Indicative Performance

Indicative performance, under the three principle operating scenarios is shown in Figure 6:


               Operating Condition                   Gross / Net Power        Gross / Net Efficiency

         Syngas without CO2 Extraction              517 MW / 450 MW                45 % / 39 %
                                                                         10
           Syngas with CO2 Extraction               517MW / 405 MW                 45 % / 35 %

                    Natural Gas                     406 MW / 394 MW                54 % / 52 %

                             Figure 6 – Flexible IGCC Indicative Performance


3.0      COMMERCIALISATION IN A UK ENVIRONMENT

3.1      Commercial Factors

Progressive Energy has evaluated a number of opportunities for IGCC in the UK. As with any
power station development, there are a number of key criteria that lead to the most favorable
location and, hence, competitive power price:

§     Land availability
§     Local planning support for proposed use of the site
§     Availability of local, competitive coal
§     Utilities access for import gas and export power
§     Good Road, Rail and Seaport access

In addition there are certain factors that are more UK specific and have significant additional
economic benefit:

§     New capacity requirement due to closure of nearby power stations
§     Potential for minemouth power station to reduce transport & handling costs
§     Location on the National Transmission System where negative Transmission use of System
      Charges can be secured
§     Politically supportive environment:
      − European Regional Development Funding
      − Local political support that recognises potential for supporting clean coal stations
      − Strong encouragement to attract new industry and support existing industry
§     Growth potential for development of site to supply additional services

10
     Includes provisional allowance for CO2 drying and compression



Gasification Technologies 2002                                                               Page 9 of 12
                           Progressive energy                                            BOC
                          DEVELOPMENT OF A VERSATILE IGCC TO MEET THE UK MARKET



3.2             Commercial Evaluation

Natural gas CCGT has historically been the preferred replacement plant but has become less
competitive since the second “dash for gas” in the UK market as gas prices have risen towards
European levels and UK sourced gas is projected to become more scarce.

At current and expected forward UK gas prices, and achievable solid feedstock prices, the base
IGCC concept described here is cost competitive with the lowest cost alternative CCGT new
entrant.

Figure 7 shows the base comparison of equity returns projected from this IGCC, compared with
an equivalent CCGT on the same site. This is based on the following main assumptions:

§     20% equity, 80% senior debt / loan stock
§     3 year construction IGCC, 2 year construction CCGT
§     Dual fuelled IGCC
§     Baseload operation of 8,000 hours / year (including operation on natural gas)
§     Gas price of around $3.00 / MMBtu
§     No optimisation of tax or support packages
§     Total Capital Requirement of around $620 / kW net for CCGT and $1,450 / kW net for IGCC
      (without CO2 extraction; inclusive of Owners’ costs)

                          70.0

                          60.0
      Equity Return - %




                          50.0

                          40.0

                          30.0

                          20.0

                          10.0

                           0.0
                                 24   26   28      30      32        34     36      38           40

                                           Baseload Electricity Price - $/MWh

                                                   CCGT         Base IGCC




Gasification Technologies 2002                                                     Page 10 of 12
                         Progressive energy                                                        BOC
                        DEVELOPMENT OF A VERSATILE IGCC TO MEET THE UK MARKET


                                         Figure 7 - Comparison of Base IGCC and CCGT

The analysis shows that the base IGCC project is more resilient to lo w electricity prices than the
CCGT project, with equity returns being less sensitive to electricity and fuel prices. However
both the above base projects would require UK electricity prices to increase significantly from
current levels of around $26.00 / MWh in order to proceed.

However, there is scope within the UK market to optimise the tax and support packages that are
accessible to an appropriate IGCC project. The UK Government supports the introduction of
environmentally benign plant and has a package of support measures in place. Concurrently,
Energy Policy gives general encouragement to moving to a low carbon economy, and to projects
that are positioned to capture and store CO2 (which provide local benefits) and contribute to
security of supply. Whilst there is no current explicit generic support package it is possible to
secure project specific support.

Assuming that support packages can be obtained, the expected equity returns are considerably
improved from the commercially optimised IGCC project as demonstrated in Figure 8:


                        70.0

                        60.0
    Equity Return - %




                        50.0

                        40.0

                        30.0

                        20.0

                        10.0

                         0.0
                               24       26       28       30        32       34        36     38        40

                                                 Baseload Electricity Price - $/MWh

                                               CCGT        Base IGCC        Optimised IGCC

                                    Figure 8 - Comparison of Optimised IGCC with base CCGT

It can be seen that commercially attractive equity returns may be achieved at much lower
electricity prices, comparable to the recent very low prices that have been experienced in the UK
market. There is also a much greater cost differential with the CCGT project.



Gasification Technologies 2002                                                               Page 11 of 12
         Progressive energy                                                             BOC
       DEVELOPMENT OF A VERSATILE IGCC TO MEET THE UK MARKET


4      SUMMARY

§   The UK electricity industry has been transformed in just 12 years from a single, monopolistic
    entity to a highly competitive, diversified and multi- national industry. The most visible
    result of this change has been the overall reduction in wholesale electricity prices.

    While natural gas may be the dominant fuel source in the short-to- medium term, the UK
                                                    o
    government and the EU recognises the need f r alternate cleaner coal technologies, which
    would also alleviate concerns of over cost and security of a single fuel source.

    Current ‘spark spread’ prices indicate that new build CCGT plant is not viable, however,
    there is an opportunity for new entrant IGCC plants, with their increased capital, but lower
    fuel costs to offer a lowest cost new entrant option, while also presenting a credible
    alternative to renewable power schemes.

    Overall, the market fundamentals in the UK have moved in favour of IGCC. The
    introduction of modern IGCC plant able to contribute to the provision of economic energy
    supplies in the UK, in Europe and in the wider international market will depend on the policy
    framework, fixed by Government within which all investment decisions have to be judged.

§   The UK recognises the need for a deep cut in anthropogenic CO2 production as part of its
    commitments to limit global climate change. IGCC is well recognised as being able to
    provide cost effective CO2 capture and competitive H2 production and therefore, is ideally
    positioned to meet the combined needs of low carbon energy generation and clean transport
    fuels.

    Pre-combustion capture of CO2 in an IGCC power station is cost-effective and recognised as
    a simpler route to CO2 capture than post-combustion technologies. If suitable long-term
    storage sites are available, IGCC could provide a bulk “green generation” option.

    In addition, IGCC offers a key potential step towards an UK hydrogen economy when
    coupled to CO2 removal, capture and sequestration.

§   The flexible IGCC design is based upon proven equipment while exploiting the advances in
    CCGT technology and feedstock flexibility, leading to excellent operational and
    environmental performance.

§   A commercially competitive application of the flexible IGCC design is possible, that takes
    advantage of UK incentives and thus produces electricity at costs equivalent to or below that
    of new entrant natural gas CCGT plants and potentially at levels sustainable in the current
    UK electricity market.




Gasification Technologies 2002                                                     Page 12 of 12