Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Cycle Innovations

Exergetic Assessment of a Syngas-Redox-Based IGCC Plant for Generating Electricity

[+] Author and Article Information
M. Sorgenfrei

e-mail: sorgenfrei@iet.tu-berlin.de

G. Tsatsaronis

e-mail: tsatsaronis@iet.tu-berlin.de
Institute for Energy Engineering,
Technische Universität Berlin,
Marchstrasse 18,
Berlin 10587, Germany

Contributed by the Cycle Innovations Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received May 8, 2013; final manuscript received October 15, 2013; published online November 22, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Paolo Chiesa.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 136(3), 031702 (Nov 22, 2013) (9 pages) Paper No: GTP-13-1122; doi: 10.1115/1.4025885 History: Received May 08, 2013; Revised October 15, 2013

Carbon capture from advanced integrated gasification combined-cycle (IGCC) processes should outperform conventional coal combustion with subsequent CO2 separation in terms of efficiency and CO2 capture rates. This paper provides a thermodynamic assessment, using an exergy analysis of a syngas redox (SGR) process for generating electricity. The power island of the proposed process uses syngas produced by coal gasification and is then cleaned through a high-temperature gas desulfurization (HGD) process. Hematite (Fe2O3) is used as an oxygen carrier to oxidize the syngas. To achieve a closed-cycle operation, the reduced iron particles are first partially re-oxidized with steam and then fully re-oxidized with pressurized air. One advantage of this design is that the resulting hydrogen (using steam in the re-oxidation section) can be utilized within the same plant or be sold as a secondary product. In the proposed process, diluted hydrogen is combusted in a gas turbine. Heat integration is central to the design. Thus far, the SGR process and the HGD unit are not commercially availiable. To establish a benchmark, the rate of exergy destruction within the SGR process was compared to a coal-fed Shell gasification IGCC design with Selexol-based precombustion carbon capture. Some thermodynamic inefficiencies were found to shift from the gas turbine to the steam cycle and redox system, while the net efficiency remained almost the same. A process simulation was undertaken, using Aspen Plus and the engineering equation solver (EES).

Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2011, “International Energy Outlook,” http://www.eia.gov/pressroom/presentations/howard_09192011.pdf
U.S. Department of Energy, 2010, “Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants. Volume 1: Bituminous Coal and Natural Gas to Electricity,” Report No. DOE/NETL-2010/1397.
Knoche, K. F. and Richter, H., 1968, “Improvement of the Reversibility of Combustion Processes (Verbesserung der Reversibilitt von Verbrennungsprozessen),” Brennst.- Waerme-Kraft, 20(5), pp. 205–210.
Jin, H. and Ishida, M., 2004, “A New Type of Coal Gas Fueled Chemical-Looping Combustion,” Fuel, 83, pp. 2411–2417. [CrossRef]
Fan, L.-S., 2010, Chemical-Looping Systems for Fossil Energy Conversions, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ.
Blazek, C. F., Baker, N. R., and Tison, R. R., 1979, “High-BTU Coal Gasification Processes,” Institute of Gas Technology, Chicago, IL, Technical Report.
Giuffrida, A., Romano, M. C., and Lozza, G. G., 2010, “Thermodynamic Assessment of IGCC Power Plants With Hot Fuel Gas Desulfurization,” Appl. Energy, 87, pp. 3374–3383. [CrossRef]
Gupta, P., Velazquez-Vargas, L. G., and Fan, L.-S., 2007, “Syngas Redox (SGR) Process to Produce Hydrogen From Coal Derived Syngas,” Energy Fuels, 21, pp. 2900–2908. [CrossRef]
Mattisson, T., Garcia-Labiano, F., Kronberger, B., Lyngfelt, A., Adanez, J., and Hofbauer, H., 2007, “Chemical-Looping Combustion Using Syngas as Fuel,” Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Conf., 1, pp. 158–169. [CrossRef]
Velazquez-Vargas, L. G., Thomas, T., Gupta, P., and Fan, L.-S., 2004, “Hydrogen Production Via Redox Reaction of Syngas With Metal Oxide Composite Particles,” Proceedings of the AIChE Annual Meeting, Austin, TX, November 7–12.
Perry, R. H. and Green, D. W., 2008, Perry's Chemical Engineers Handbook, 8th ed., McGraw-Hill, Columbus, OH.
Wolf, J. and Yan, J., 2005, “Parametric Study of Chemical Looping Combustion for Tri-Generation of Hydrogen, Heat, and Electrical Power With CO2 Capture,” Int. J. Energy Res., 29, pp. 739–753. [CrossRef]
Chiesa, P., Lozza, G., Malandrino, A., Romano, M., and Piccolo, V., 2008, “Three-Reactors Chemical Looping Process for Hydrogen Production,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 33, pp. 2233–2245. [CrossRef]
Xiang, W., Chen, S., Xue, Z., and Sun, X., 2010, “Investigation of Coal Gasification Hydrogen and Electricity Coproduction Plant With Three-Reactors Chemical Looping Process,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 35, pp. 8580–8591. [CrossRef]
Chen, S., Xue, Z., Wang, D., and Xiang, W., 2012, “Hydrogen and Electricity Co-Production Plant Integrating Steam-Iron Process and Chemical Looping Combustion,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 37, pp. 8204–8216. [CrossRef]
Cormos, C.-C., 2010, “Evaluation of Iron Based Chemical Looping for Hydrogen and Electricity Co-Production by Gasification Process With Carbon Capture and Storage,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 35, pp. 2278–2289. [CrossRef]
Cormos, C.-C., 2012, “Evaluation of Syngas-Based Chemical Looping Applications for Hydrogen and Power Co-Generation With CCS,” Int. J. of Hydrogen Energy, 37, pp. 13371–13386. [CrossRef]
Anheden, M. and Svedberg, G., 1996, “Chemical Looping Combustion in Combination With Integrated Coal Gasification,” 31st Intersociety Energy Conversion Engineering Conference (IECEC 96), Washington, DC, August 11–16, pp. 2045–2050. [CrossRef]
Xiang, W. and WangS., 2008, “Investigation of Gasification Chemical Looping Combustion Combined Cycle,” Energy Fuels, 22, pp. 961–966. [CrossRef]
Erlach, B., Schmidt, M., and Tsatsaronis, G., 2011, “Comparison of Carbon Capture IGCC With Pre-Combustion Decarbonisation and With Chemical-Looping Combustion,” Energy, 36, pp. 3804–3815. [CrossRef]
Aspen Plus, 2013, Aspen Technology, Burlington, MA, http://www.aspentech.com/
F-Chart, 2013, “EES: Engineering Equation Solver, Professional Version,” F-Chart Software, Madison, WI, http://www.fchart.com/ees/
Barin, I., 1989, Thermochemical Data of Pure Substances, VCH, Weinheim, Germany.
Chase, M. W., 1998, NIST-JANAF Thermochemical Tables, 4th ed., American Chemical Society, Washington, DC.
Knacke, O., Kubaschewski, O., and Hesselmann, K., 1991, Thermochemical Properties of Inorganic Substances, 2nd ed., Springer-Verlag, New York.
Lechner, C. and Seume, J., 2010, Stationäre Gasturbinen, Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg.
Kail, C., 1998, “Analysis of Power Plant Processes Using Gas Turbines Under Energetic, Exergetic And Economic Aspects (Analyse von Kraftwerksprozessen mit Gasturbinen unter energetischen, exergetischen und ökonomischen Aspekten),” Ph.D. thesis, Technische Universität, München, Munich, Germany.
Zheng, L. and Furinsky, E., 2005, “Comparison of Shell, Texaco, BGL and KRW Gasifier as Part of IGCC Plant Computer Simulations,” Energy Convers. Manage., 46, pp. 1767–1779. [CrossRef]
Ullmann, 1998, Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry, 6th ed., Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany.
Wheeler, F., 2003, “Potential for Improvements in Gasification Combined Cycle Power Generation With CO2 Capture,” IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, Cheltenham, UK, Report No. PH4/19.
Doctor, R. D., Molburg, J. C., and Thimmapuram, P. R., 1996, “KRW Oxygen-Blown Gasification Combined Cycle-Carbon Dioxide Recovery Transport and Disposal,” Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL.
Burr, B. and Lyddon, L., 2008, “A Comparison of Physical Solvents for Acid Gas Removal,” 87th Annual Gas Processors Association Convention, Grapevine, TX, March 2–5, pp. 100–113.
Tennant, J., 2011, “Gasification Technologies Program Overview,” National Energy Technology Laboratory, U.S. DOE, Washington, DC.
Aysel, T. A., 2001, “Cleaner Energy Production With Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle Systems and Use of Metal Oxide Sorbents for H2S Cleanup From Coal Gas,” Clean Prod. Processes, 2, pp. 197–208. [CrossRef]
Göke, S., Terhaar, S., Schimek, S., Göckeler, K., and Paschereit, C. O., 2011, “Combustion of Natural Gas, Hydrogen and Bio-Fuels at Ultra-Wet Conditions.” ASME Paper No. GT2011-45696. [CrossRef]
Seiser, R. and Seshadri, K., 2005, “The Influence of Water on Extinction and Ignition of Hydrogen and Methane Flames.” Proc. Combust. Inst., 30, pp. 407–414. [CrossRef]
Frenkel, M., Chirico, R., Diky, V., Yan, X., Dong, Q., and Muzny, C.2005, “ThermoData Engine (TDE): Software Implementation of the Dynamic Data Evaluation Concept,” J. Chem. Inf. Model., 45, pp. 816–838. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Nelder, J. and Mead, R., 1965, “A Simplex Method for Function Minimization,” Comput. J., 7, p. 308. [CrossRef]
Bejan, A., Tsatsaronis, G., and Moran, M., 1996, Thermal Design and Optimization, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.
Tsatsaronis, G., 2007, “Definitions and Nomenclature in Exergy Analysis and Exergoeconomics,” Energy, 32, pp. 249–253. [CrossRef]
Szargut, J., Morrison, D., and Steward, F., 1988, Exergy Analysis of Thermal, Chemical and Metallurgical Processes, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Tsatsaronis, G. and Cziesla, F., 2002, “Thermoeconomics,” Encyclopedia of Physical Science and Technology, 16th ed., Academic Press, New York, pp. 659–680.
Morozyuk, T. and Tsatsaronis, G., 2009, “Advanced Exergy Analysis for Chemically Reacting Systems Application to a Simple Open Gas-Turbine System,” Int. J. Thermodyn., 12, pp. 105–111. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Flow diagram of the conventional IGCC plant with CO2 capture

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Temperature profiles of the BASE case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Flow diagram of the SGR-based IGCC plant with inherent CO2 capture (SGR case)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Temperature profiles of the SGR case

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Exergy destruction ratios at the subsystem level for both cases

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Exergy destruction ratios of the redox cycle within the SGR process

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Exergy destruction ratios of the steam cycle for both cases




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In