Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
González Díaz, A.; Sánchez Fernández, E.; Gibbins, J.; Lucquiaud, M. (2016)
Publisher: Elsevier
Languages: English
Types: Article
Combined cycle gas turbine power plants with sequential supplementary firing in the heat recovery steam generator could be an attractive alternative for markets with access to competitive natural gas prices, with an emphasis on capital cost reduction, and where supply of carbon dioxide for Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) is important. Sequential combustion makes use of the excess oxygen in gas turbine exhaust gas to generate additional CO2, but, unlike in conventional supplementary firing, allows keeping gas temperatures in the heat recovery steam generator below 820 °C, avoiding a step change in capital costs. It marginally decreases relative energy requirements for solvent regeneration and amine degradation. Power plant models integrated with capture and compression process models of Sequential Supplementary Firing Combined Cycle (SSFCC) gas-fired units show that the efficiency penalty is 8.2% points LHV compared to a conventional natural gas combined cycle power plant with the same capture technology. The marginal thermal efficiency of natural gas firing in the heat recovery steam generator can increase with supercritical steam generation to reduce the efficiency penalty to 5.7% points LHV. Although the efficiency is lower than the conventional configuration, the increment in the power output of the combined steam cycle leads a reduction of the number of gas turbines, at a similar power output to that of a conventional natural gas combined cycle. This has a positive impact on the number of absorbers and the capital costs of the post combustion capture plant by reducing the total volume of flue gas by half on a normalised basis. The relative reduction of overall capital costs is, respectively, 15.3% and 9.1% for the subcritical and the supercritical combined cycle configurations with capture compared to a conventional configuration. For a gas price of $2/MMBTU, the Total Revenue Requirement (TRR) - a metric combining levelised cost of electricity and revenue from EOR - of subcritical and supercritical sequential supplementary firing is consistently lower than that of a conventional NGCC by, respectively, 2.2 and 5.7 $/MWh at 0 $/t CO2 and by 4.9 and 6.7 $/MWh at $50/t CO2. At a gas price of $4/MMBTU and $6/MMBTU, the TRR of a subcritical configuration is consistently lower for any carbon selling price higher than 2.5 $/t CO2 and 37 $/t CO2 respectively.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • COPAR, 2013. (Costos y parámetros de referencia para la formulación de proyectos de inversion del sector eléctrico) Costs and Benchmarks for the Development of Investment Projects in the Electricity Sector, 32nd ed. Mexican Federal commison of electricity (version in Spanish).
    • CTF/TFC, 2009. Clean Technology Fund Investment Plant for Mexico. Meeting of the CTF Trust fund Committee. January 29-30 2009. Washington, D.C. Climate Investment Funds CTF/TFC.2/8.
    • Cziesla, F., Kremer, H., Much, U., Riemschneider, J., Quinkertz, R., 2009. Advanced 800+ MW Steam Power Plants and Future CCS Options, Siemens AG, Energy Sector. COAL-GEN Europe 2009 -Katowice, Poland September 1-4, 2009.
    • Ditaranto, M., Hals, H., Bjørge, T., 2009. Investigation on the in-flame NO reburning in turbine exhaust gas. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute.
    • DOE/NETL, 2007. Carbon dioxide capture from existing coal-fired power plant.
    • DOE/NETL, 2012. Quality Guidelines for Energy System Studies. CO2 Impurity Design Parameters. DOE (United States Department of Energy)/NETL (National Energy Technology Laboratory).
    • DOE/NETL, 2013a. Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 1: Bituminous Coal and Natural Gas to Electricity. US Dept of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Pittsburgh, PA.
    • DOE/NETL, 2013. Carbon dioxide transport and storage cost in NETL studies.
    • Franco, F., Anantharaman, R., Bolland, O., Booth, N., Van Dorst, E., Ekstrom, C., Fernandes, E.S., Macchi, E., Manzolini, G., Nicolic, D., Pfeffer, A., Prins, M., Rezvani, S., Robinson, L., 2012. European best practice guidelines for assessment of CO2 capture technologies.
    • Ganapathy, V., ABCO Industries, 1996. Heat-Recovery Steam Generators: Understand the Basics. Chemical Engineering progress.
    • Gas Turbine World, 2013. GTW Handbook, vol. 30. Pequot Publishing INC.
    • Goff, G., Rochelle, G., 2004. Monoethanolamine degradation: O2 mass transfer effects under CO2 capture conditions. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 43, 6400-6408.
    • Gorset, O., Knudsen, J.N., Morten, O.B., Askestad, I., 2014. Results from testing of Aker Solutions advanced amine solvents at CO2 Technology Centre Mongstad. 12th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, GHGT-12, Austin, TX. Energy Procedia 63.
    • Hendriks, C., Wildenborg, T., Feron, P., Graus, W., Brandsma, R., 2003. EC-case carbon dioxide sequestration, TNO/ECOFYS.
    • IEAGHG, 2010. Corrosion and materials selection in CCS system. Report 2010/03.
    • IEAGHG, 2011. Retrofitting CO2 capture to existing power plants.
    • IEAGHG, 2012. CO2 capture at gas fired power plants, Cheltenham, UK.
    • Innovative Steam Generator IST, 2012. An Aecon company. http://otsg.com/about/ about-otsg/.
    • Kehlhofer, P., Hannemann, F., Stirninmann, F., Rukes, B., 2009. Combined-Cycle Gas and Steam Turbine Power Plant, 3rd ed. PennWell corporation.
    • Kiameh, P., 2003. Power Generation Handbook: Selection, Applications, Operation, and Maintenance. McGraw-Hill.
    • Kjaer, S., 1993. The advanced pulverized coal fired power station. Background, status and future. In: UNIPEDE/IEA Conference on Thermal Power Generation and Evironment, Hamburg.
    • Knudsen, J.N., 2011. Results from test campaigns at the 1 t/h CO2 post-combustion capture pilot-plant in Esbjerg under the EU FP7 CESAR project. In PCCC1 Abu Dhabi, 2011.
    • Kohl, A., Nielsen, R., 1997. Gas Purification, fifth ed. Gulf Professional Publishing.
    • Lacy, R., Serralde, C., Climent, M., Vaca, M., 2013. Initial assessment of the potential for future CCUS with EOR projects in Mexico using CO2 captured from fossil fuel industrial plants. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 19, 212-219.
    • Li, H., Ditaranto, M., Yan, J., 2012. Carbon capture with low energy penalty: supplementary fired natural gas combined cycles. Appl. Energy 97, 164-169.
    • Liebenthal, U., Kather, A., 2011. Design and off-design behaviour of a CO2 compressor for a post-combustion CO2 capture process. In: 5th International Conference on Clean Coal Technologies, Saragoza, Spain, 8-12 May 2011.
    • McCauley, K.J., Weitzel, P.S., McDonald, D.K., Poling, C.W., 2012. Deploying Advanced Steam Plants and Integrating Carbon Capture Technologies. Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group, Inc. Power-Gen Europe Cologne, Germany, June 12-14.
    • Mexican Ministry of Energy, 2012. Mexican electric sector prospective 2012-2026. In: Annually Revision of the Mexican Electricity Sector, http://www.sener.gob. mx/res/PE y DT/pub/2012/PSE 2012 2026. pdf (Version in Spanish).
    • Mexican Ministry of Energy, 2014. CCUS technology road map in Mexico. http:// www.sener.gob.mx/portal/Default intermedia.aspx?id=2860.
    • National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), 2010. Storing CO2 and Domestic Crude Oil with Next Generation CO2-EOR Technology: An Update; NETL: Pittsburgh, PA; Report DOE/NETL-2010/1417.
    • National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), 2012. Fossil Energy RD&D: Reducing the Cost of CCUS for Coal Power Plants, Revision 1; NETL: Pittsburgh PA2; Report DOE/NETL-2012/1550.
    • Razi, N., Svendsen, H.F., Bolland, O., 2013. Validation of mass transfer correlations for CO2 absorption with MEA using pilot data. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 19, 478-491.
    • Reddy, S., Scherffius, J., Freguia, S., Fluor's Econamine, F.G., 2003. PlusSM Technology: An Enhanced Amine-Based CO2 Capture Process. In: Second National Conference on Carbon Sequestration National Energy Technology Laboratory/Department of Energy, Alexandria, VA, May, pp. 5-8.
    • Regulatory Commission of Energy, 2016. Daily report prices of natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas, fuel and oil, http://www.cre.gob.mx/documento/ 3084.pdf (version in Spanish).
    • Rezazadeh, F., Galea, W., Hughesb, K., Pourkashania, M., 2015. Performance viability of a natural gas fired combined cycle power plant integrated with post-combustion CO2 capture at part-load and temporary non-capture operations. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 39, 397-406.
    • Rochelle, G.T., 2009. Amine scrubbing for CO2 capture. Science 325, 1652.
    • Rubin, E.S., Rao, A.B., 2002. A Technical, Economic and Environmental Assessment of Amine-Based CO2 Capture Technology for Power Plant Greenhouse Gas Control. USDOE.
    • Rubin, E.S., Short, C., Booras, G., Davison, J., Ekstrom, C., Matuszewski, M., McCoy, S., 2013. A proposed methodology for CO2 capture and storage cost estimates. Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control 17, 488-503.
    • Salazar-Pereyra, M., Lugo-Leyte, R., Zamora-Mata, J., Ruiz-Ramírez, O., González-Oropeza, R., 2011. Análisis termodinámico de los ciclos rankine supercríticos y subcríticos. CIBIM 10, Oporto, Portugal.
    • Sanchez Fernandez, E., Heffernan, K., van der Ham, L., Linders, M., Eggink, E., Schrama, F., Brilman, D.W.F., Goetheer, E., Vlugt, T., 2013. Conceptual design of a novel CO2 capture process based on precipitating amino acid solvents. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 52 (34), 12223-12235.
    • Sanchez Fernandez, E., Goetheer, E.L.V., Manzolini, G., Macchi, E., Rezvani, S., Vlugt, T.J.H., 2014. Thermodynamic assessment of amine based CO2 capture technologies in power plants based on European Benchmarking Task Force methodology. Fuel 129, 318-329.
    • Satyanarayana, I., Gupta, S., Rajulu, K., 2011. Second law analysis of super critical cycle. Int. J. Eng. 4 (1).
    • Siemens, 2009. CO2-Taking the bull by the horns. http://www.energy.siemens. com/co/pool/hq/energy-topics/venture/downloads/ Compression%20solution%20for%20carbon%20capture%20and%20storage.pdf.
    • Steam its generation and use, 2005. The Babcock & Wilcox Company, Edition 41.
    • Thermoflow, 2013 Inc, http://www.thermoflow.com, 2013.
    • World steel prices, 2013. http://worldsteelprices.com/index.htm and http://www. alibaba.com/product-detail/Incoloy-825-UNS-N08825-pipe-tube 2014421910. html.
    • Wylie, R., 2004. Supercritical combined cycle for generating electric power, U.S. Patent 20040148941 A1, August 05, 2004.
    • Yagi, T., Shibuya, H., Sasaki, T., 1992. Application of chemical absorption process to CO2 recovery from flue gas generated in power plants. Energy Convers. Manage. 33 (5-8), 349-355.
    • Zhai, Haibo, Rubin, Edward S., 2013. Comparative performance and cost assessments of coal- and natural-gas-fired power plants under a CO2 emission performance standard regulation. Energy Fuels 27, 4290-4301.
  • No related research data.
  • Discovered through pilot similarity algorithms. Send us your feedback.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article