A techno-economic analysis of the application of continuous staged-combustion and flameless oxidation to the combustor design in gas turbines

YD Wang, Ye Huang, D McIlveen-Wright, J McMullan, Neil Hewitt, PC Eames, S Rezvani

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The impact of NOx reduction technologies upon a gas turbine power station has been investigated using the ECLIPSE process simulator. Technical, environmental and economic assessments were performed, based upon a model of the simple cycle gas turbine, fuelled by natural gas.The technologies assessed were: a) selective catalytic reduction (SCR); b) continuous staged air combustion (COSTAIR); and c) flameless oxidation method (FLOX).The SCR method produced a 90% reduction of NOx emissions, at an additional penalty to the electricity cost of 0.19–0.20 p/kWh, over the base case of simple cycle with standard combustor.The COSTAIR method reduced 80.4% of NOx emissions, at an additional electricity cost of 0.03–0.04 p/kWh, over the base case; but 0.16–0.17 p/kWh less than the SCR method at a slightly higher level of NOx emissions.The FLOX method generated 92.3% less of NOx emissions, at an additional electricity cost of 0.08–0.11 p/kWh, over the base case; but 0.09–0.11 p/kWh less than the SCR method at a lower level of NOx emissions.A sensitivity analysis of the Break-Even Selling Price (BESP) of electricity and the Specific Investment (SI) versus the cost of different burner systems shows that the SCR system had the highest values for BESP and SI; and the COSTAIR system had the lowest.The results show that the use of these non-standard burners could offer an effective method of reducing NOx emissions considerably for simple cycle gas turbine power plants with minimal effect on system capital cost and electricity selling price, and were also cheaper than using SCR.
LanguageEnglish
Pages727-736
JournalFuel Processing Technology
Volume87
Issue number8
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2006

Fingerprint

Selective catalytic reduction
Economic analysis
Combustors
Gas turbines
Electricity
Oxidation
Sales
Costs
Fuel burners
Air
Gas turbine power plants
Sensitivity analysis
Natural gas
Simulators
Economics

Cite this

@article{cfaef1511b414d1aa89e838b663a3d8b,
title = "A techno-economic analysis of the application of continuous staged-combustion and flameless oxidation to the combustor design in gas turbines",
abstract = "The impact of NOx reduction technologies upon a gas turbine power station has been investigated using the ECLIPSE process simulator. Technical, environmental and economic assessments were performed, based upon a model of the simple cycle gas turbine, fuelled by natural gas.The technologies assessed were: a) selective catalytic reduction (SCR); b) continuous staged air combustion (COSTAIR); and c) flameless oxidation method (FLOX).The SCR method produced a 90{\%} reduction of NOx emissions, at an additional penalty to the electricity cost of 0.19–0.20 p/kWh, over the base case of simple cycle with standard combustor.The COSTAIR method reduced 80.4{\%} of NOx emissions, at an additional electricity cost of 0.03–0.04 p/kWh, over the base case; but 0.16–0.17 p/kWh less than the SCR method at a slightly higher level of NOx emissions.The FLOX method generated 92.3{\%} less of NOx emissions, at an additional electricity cost of 0.08–0.11 p/kWh, over the base case; but 0.09–0.11 p/kWh less than the SCR method at a lower level of NOx emissions.A sensitivity analysis of the Break-Even Selling Price (BESP) of electricity and the Specific Investment (SI) versus the cost of different burner systems shows that the SCR system had the highest values for BESP and SI; and the COSTAIR system had the lowest.The results show that the use of these non-standard burners could offer an effective method of reducing NOx emissions considerably for simple cycle gas turbine power plants with minimal effect on system capital cost and electricity selling price, and were also cheaper than using SCR.",
author = "YD Wang and Ye Huang and D McIlveen-Wright and J McMullan and Neil Hewitt and PC Eames and S Rezvani",
note = "Reference text: [1] S. McCahey, J.T. McMullan and B.C. Williams, Techno-economic analysis of NOx reduction technologies in p.f. boilers, Fuel 78 (Nov 1999) (14), pp. 1771–1778. [2] M.J. Moore, NOx emission control in gas turbines for combined cycle gas turbine plant, Proceedings of the Institute of Mechanical Engineers, Part A–J Power Energy 211 (1997) (1), pp. 43–52. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (11) [3] Emission Standards Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Alternative control techniques document—NOx emissions from stationary gas turbines, EPA-453/R-93-007 (January 1993)http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2001/l_309/l_30920011127en00010021.pdf. [4] Robert Pettier, Gas turbine combustors drive emissions toward nil, Power 147 (March 2003) (2), pp. 23–30. [5] Thomas F. McGowan, NOx control for stationary sources and utility applications, Proceedings of the 2003 International Joint Power Generation Conference (2003), pp. 677–685. [6] European Communities, Directive 2001/80/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2001 on the Limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from large combustion plants, Official Journal of the European Communities, 27.11.2001, p. L309/1–L309/21. [7] Onsite Sycom Energy Corporation, Cost Analysis of NOx Control Alternatives for Stationary Gas Turbines (November 5, 1999) Contract No. DE-FC02-97CHIO877. [8] J. Werther, E.-U. Hartge, K. L{\"u}cke, M. Fehr, L.-E. Amand and B. Leckner, New air-staging techniques for co-combustion in fluidized-bed combustors, VGB-Conference, Research for Power Plant Technology 2000 (10–12 October 2000) D{\"u}sseldorf, Germany. [9] M. Flamme, New combustion systems for gas turbines (NGT), Applied Thermal Engineering 24 (Aug. 2004) (11–12), pp. 1551–1559. [10] M. Flamme, Low NOx combustion technologies for high temperature applications, Energy Conversion and Management 42 (2001), pp. 919–1935. [11] M. Flamme, New opportunities for improvement of energy efficiency in process technology, Gasw{\"a}rme-Institut e.V. Essen, Germany, www.metallurgi.kth.se/htc/skiva/presentations/flamme.pdf. [12] J.G. W{\"u}nning, Flameless combustion in the thermal process technology, Second International Seminar on High Temperature Combustion in Stockholm–Sweden (January 17th–18th, 2000). [13] M.D. Matovic1, E.W. Grandmaison, Z. Miao, B. Fleck, Mixing patterns in a. Multiple-jet ultra low NOx CGRI natural gas burner, fuel selection issues for industrial combustion processes achieving sustainability, environmental and economic objectives, 2002 AFRC Spring International Combustion Symposium 8th–10th May, 2002 Ottawa, Canada. [14] Yeshayahou Levy, Valery Sherbaum and Patric Arfi, Basic thermodynamics of FLOXCOM, the low-NOx gas turbines adiabatic combustor, Applied Thermal Engineering 24 (August 2004) (11–12), pp. 1593–1605. [15] Yeshayahou Levy, Valery Sherbaum, Vladimir Erenburg, Chemical aspects of the flameless oxidation applied for gas turbine combustor, http://fluid.ippt.gov.pl/ictam04/text/sessions/docs/FM3/12199/FM3_12199.pdf. [16] L. Trento and P.L. Smabastian, Development and assessment of an advanced flameless oxidation burner for very low NOx emissions, Fourth Year Seminar Proceedings (2001). [17] J.T. McMullan, B.C. Williams, P. Campbell and D. McIlveen-Wright, Techno-economic assessment studies of fossil fuel and fuel wood power generation technologies, Joule II — Programme R and D in Clean Coal Technology, European Commission (1995) ISBN 84-7834-280-X. [18] B.C. Williams, The development of the ECLIPSE simulator and its application to the techno-economic assessment of clean fossil fuel power generation systems, DPhil Thesis, Energy Research Centre, University of Ulster, Coleraine, N.I., 1994. [19] J.T. McMullan and B.C. Williams, Development of computer models for the simulation of coal liquefaction processes, International Journal of Energy Research 18 (1994) (2), pp. 117–122. [20] B.C. Williams and J.T. McMullan, Techno-economic analysis of fuel conversion and power generation systems — the development of a portable chemical process simulator with capital cost and economic analysis capabilities, International Journal of Energy Research 20 (1996) (2), pp. 125–142. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (25) [21] B.C. Willams and J.T. McMullan In: Bemtgen Imariso, Editor, Progress in Synthetic Fuels, Graham and Trotman, London (1988), pp. 183–189. [22] ECLIPSE process simulator, Energy Research Centre, University of Ulster, Jordanstown, N.I., 1992. [23] W. Jozewicz, Cost of Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) application for NOx control on coal-fired boilers, Project summary, United States Environmental Protection Agency, National Risk Management Research Laboratory Cincinnati, OH 45268, Research and Development EPA/600/SR-01/087 January 2002. [24] USA Environmental Protection Agency, Air Pollution Control Technology Fact Sheet, EPA-452/F03-032 (2003)www.epa.gov/ttn/catc/dir1/fscr.pdf.",
year = "2006",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1016/j.fuproc.2006.02.003",
language = "English",
volume = "87",
pages = "727--736",
journal = "Fuel Processing Technology",
issn = "0378-3820",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "8",

}

A techno-economic analysis of the application of continuous staged-combustion and flameless oxidation to the combustor design in gas turbines. / Wang, YD; Huang, Ye; McIlveen-Wright, D; McMullan, J; Hewitt, Neil; Eames, PC; Rezvani, S.

In: Fuel Processing Technology, Vol. 87, No. 8, 08.2006, p. 727-736.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A techno-economic analysis of the application of continuous staged-combustion and flameless oxidation to the combustor design in gas turbines

AU - Wang, YD

AU - Huang, Ye

AU - McIlveen-Wright, D

AU - McMullan, J

AU - Hewitt, Neil

AU - Eames, PC

AU - Rezvani, S

N1 - Reference text: [1] S. McCahey, J.T. McMullan and B.C. Williams, Techno-economic analysis of NOx reduction technologies in p.f. boilers, Fuel 78 (Nov 1999) (14), pp. 1771–1778. [2] M.J. Moore, NOx emission control in gas turbines for combined cycle gas turbine plant, Proceedings of the Institute of Mechanical Engineers, Part A–J Power Energy 211 (1997) (1), pp. 43–52. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (11) [3] Emission Standards Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Alternative control techniques document—NOx emissions from stationary gas turbines, EPA-453/R-93-007 (January 1993)http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/pri/en/oj/dat/2001/l_309/l_30920011127en00010021.pdf. [4] Robert Pettier, Gas turbine combustors drive emissions toward nil, Power 147 (March 2003) (2), pp. 23–30. [5] Thomas F. McGowan, NOx control for stationary sources and utility applications, Proceedings of the 2003 International Joint Power Generation Conference (2003), pp. 677–685. [6] European Communities, Directive 2001/80/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2001 on the Limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the air from large combustion plants, Official Journal of the European Communities, 27.11.2001, p. L309/1–L309/21. [7] Onsite Sycom Energy Corporation, Cost Analysis of NOx Control Alternatives for Stationary Gas Turbines (November 5, 1999) Contract No. DE-FC02-97CHIO877. [8] J. Werther, E.-U. Hartge, K. Lücke, M. Fehr, L.-E. Amand and B. Leckner, New air-staging techniques for co-combustion in fluidized-bed combustors, VGB-Conference, Research for Power Plant Technology 2000 (10–12 October 2000) Düsseldorf, Germany. [9] M. Flamme, New combustion systems for gas turbines (NGT), Applied Thermal Engineering 24 (Aug. 2004) (11–12), pp. 1551–1559. [10] M. Flamme, Low NOx combustion technologies for high temperature applications, Energy Conversion and Management 42 (2001), pp. 919–1935. [11] M. Flamme, New opportunities for improvement of energy efficiency in process technology, Gaswärme-Institut e.V. Essen, Germany, www.metallurgi.kth.se/htc/skiva/presentations/flamme.pdf. [12] J.G. Wünning, Flameless combustion in the thermal process technology, Second International Seminar on High Temperature Combustion in Stockholm–Sweden (January 17th–18th, 2000). [13] M.D. Matovic1, E.W. Grandmaison, Z. Miao, B. Fleck, Mixing patterns in a. Multiple-jet ultra low NOx CGRI natural gas burner, fuel selection issues for industrial combustion processes achieving sustainability, environmental and economic objectives, 2002 AFRC Spring International Combustion Symposium 8th–10th May, 2002 Ottawa, Canada. [14] Yeshayahou Levy, Valery Sherbaum and Patric Arfi, Basic thermodynamics of FLOXCOM, the low-NOx gas turbines adiabatic combustor, Applied Thermal Engineering 24 (August 2004) (11–12), pp. 1593–1605. [15] Yeshayahou Levy, Valery Sherbaum, Vladimir Erenburg, Chemical aspects of the flameless oxidation applied for gas turbine combustor, http://fluid.ippt.gov.pl/ictam04/text/sessions/docs/FM3/12199/FM3_12199.pdf. [16] L. Trento and P.L. Smabastian, Development and assessment of an advanced flameless oxidation burner for very low NOx emissions, Fourth Year Seminar Proceedings (2001). [17] J.T. McMullan, B.C. Williams, P. Campbell and D. McIlveen-Wright, Techno-economic assessment studies of fossil fuel and fuel wood power generation technologies, Joule II — Programme R and D in Clean Coal Technology, European Commission (1995) ISBN 84-7834-280-X. [18] B.C. Williams, The development of the ECLIPSE simulator and its application to the techno-economic assessment of clean fossil fuel power generation systems, DPhil Thesis, Energy Research Centre, University of Ulster, Coleraine, N.I., 1994. [19] J.T. McMullan and B.C. Williams, Development of computer models for the simulation of coal liquefaction processes, International Journal of Energy Research 18 (1994) (2), pp. 117–122. [20] B.C. Williams and J.T. McMullan, Techno-economic analysis of fuel conversion and power generation systems — the development of a portable chemical process simulator with capital cost and economic analysis capabilities, International Journal of Energy Research 20 (1996) (2), pp. 125–142. Full Text via CrossRef | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (25) [21] B.C. Willams and J.T. McMullan In: Bemtgen Imariso, Editor, Progress in Synthetic Fuels, Graham and Trotman, London (1988), pp. 183–189. [22] ECLIPSE process simulator, Energy Research Centre, University of Ulster, Jordanstown, N.I., 1992. [23] W. Jozewicz, Cost of Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) application for NOx control on coal-fired boilers, Project summary, United States Environmental Protection Agency, National Risk Management Research Laboratory Cincinnati, OH 45268, Research and Development EPA/600/SR-01/087 January 2002. [24] USA Environmental Protection Agency, Air Pollution Control Technology Fact Sheet, EPA-452/F03-032 (2003)www.epa.gov/ttn/catc/dir1/fscr.pdf.

PY - 2006/8

Y1 - 2006/8

N2 - The impact of NOx reduction technologies upon a gas turbine power station has been investigated using the ECLIPSE process simulator. Technical, environmental and economic assessments were performed, based upon a model of the simple cycle gas turbine, fuelled by natural gas.The technologies assessed were: a) selective catalytic reduction (SCR); b) continuous staged air combustion (COSTAIR); and c) flameless oxidation method (FLOX).The SCR method produced a 90% reduction of NOx emissions, at an additional penalty to the electricity cost of 0.19–0.20 p/kWh, over the base case of simple cycle with standard combustor.The COSTAIR method reduced 80.4% of NOx emissions, at an additional electricity cost of 0.03–0.04 p/kWh, over the base case; but 0.16–0.17 p/kWh less than the SCR method at a slightly higher level of NOx emissions.The FLOX method generated 92.3% less of NOx emissions, at an additional electricity cost of 0.08–0.11 p/kWh, over the base case; but 0.09–0.11 p/kWh less than the SCR method at a lower level of NOx emissions.A sensitivity analysis of the Break-Even Selling Price (BESP) of electricity and the Specific Investment (SI) versus the cost of different burner systems shows that the SCR system had the highest values for BESP and SI; and the COSTAIR system had the lowest.The results show that the use of these non-standard burners could offer an effective method of reducing NOx emissions considerably for simple cycle gas turbine power plants with minimal effect on system capital cost and electricity selling price, and were also cheaper than using SCR.

AB - The impact of NOx reduction technologies upon a gas turbine power station has been investigated using the ECLIPSE process simulator. Technical, environmental and economic assessments were performed, based upon a model of the simple cycle gas turbine, fuelled by natural gas.The technologies assessed were: a) selective catalytic reduction (SCR); b) continuous staged air combustion (COSTAIR); and c) flameless oxidation method (FLOX).The SCR method produced a 90% reduction of NOx emissions, at an additional penalty to the electricity cost of 0.19–0.20 p/kWh, over the base case of simple cycle with standard combustor.The COSTAIR method reduced 80.4% of NOx emissions, at an additional electricity cost of 0.03–0.04 p/kWh, over the base case; but 0.16–0.17 p/kWh less than the SCR method at a slightly higher level of NOx emissions.The FLOX method generated 92.3% less of NOx emissions, at an additional electricity cost of 0.08–0.11 p/kWh, over the base case; but 0.09–0.11 p/kWh less than the SCR method at a lower level of NOx emissions.A sensitivity analysis of the Break-Even Selling Price (BESP) of electricity and the Specific Investment (SI) versus the cost of different burner systems shows that the SCR system had the highest values for BESP and SI; and the COSTAIR system had the lowest.The results show that the use of these non-standard burners could offer an effective method of reducing NOx emissions considerably for simple cycle gas turbine power plants with minimal effect on system capital cost and electricity selling price, and were also cheaper than using SCR.

U2 - 10.1016/j.fuproc.2006.02.003

DO - 10.1016/j.fuproc.2006.02.003

M3 - Article

VL - 87

SP - 727

EP - 736

JO - Fuel Processing Technology

T2 - Fuel Processing Technology

JF - Fuel Processing Technology

SN - 0378-3820

IS - 8

ER -