Download CEO Report Executive Session

Survey
yes no Was this document useful for you?
   Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project

Document related concepts

IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia, lookup

Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment wikipedia, lookup

Politics of global warming wikipedia, lookup

Mitigation of global warming in Australia wikipedia, lookup

Business action on climate change wikipedia, lookup

Low-carbon economy wikipedia, lookup

Years of Living Dangerously wikipedia, lookup

Climate change mitigation wikipedia, lookup

Energiewende in Germany wikipedia, lookup

Fossil fuel phase-out wikipedia, lookup

Open energy system models wikipedia, lookup

Carbon capture and storage (timeline) wikipedia, lookup

Transcript
FutureGen
Project
Update
Presentation to Washington Coal Club
Mike Mudd, CEO
April 11, 2007
Outline
• Energy Trends
• Energy Technology
– Role in a Climate Change Strategy
– Coal-fueled Power and Sequestration
• FutureGen
–
–
–
–
–
Concept
Partners
Federal Role
Technology
Progress
• Summary
Energy and economic growth are
inextricably intertwined
More People Living Longer and Better Lives
275
GDP +149%
Indexed to 1974 (100)
250
225
200
Electricity Use +111%
175
150
Per Capita Income +80%
125
Coal Use +77%
100
75
50
1974
72
1980
73.9
1985
1990
1995
2000
2004
74.7
Life Expectancy
75.1
75.7
76.7
77.6
Source: Energy Information Administration Annual Energy Review 2005; U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic
Analysis.
Billion kWhs
Coal has been – and will continue
to be a critical part of USA’s energy
supply
Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2007
Global energy system projected
to grow at an extraordinary pace
• A growing global energy
system
• Fossil fuels account for
85% of the increase
• Developing world accounts
for two thirds of the
increase in global coal use
– Ever-increasing CO2
concentrations in the
atmosphere
History and Reference Case
1600
History
.
Global Primary Energy 1850-2100 (Exajoules)
– Sustained economic growth
– By 2025, world primary
energy consumption
increases 60%
World primary energy consumption
Business As Usual Case
Future
1400
Renew
Nuc
Biomass
1200
1000
Coal
800
600
Gas
400
200
0
1850
Oil
1900
1950
2000
2050
2100
Serious climate strategies
require major advances in technology
• Overwhelming evidence that:
– The scale of the global energy system is immense and growing
– Energy conversation is an incredibly important tool, which society must use,
but it is well-proven that it is physically impossible to “conserve” our way to
a complete solution
– Fossil fuels are affordable, abundant, and, on a global basis, will be used
– Advanced technology can substantially reduce the cost of managing CO2
emissions
– None of the commonly discussed technologies--renewables, biomass,
nuclear, fossil with sequestration, or others can address the challenge
alone. All options are required at a megascale
– RD&D are required to reduce the cost and improve the performance of new
technologies
– The next ten years is a critical window in which to prove advanced
technologies
Coal-fueled power coupled with
sequestration offers great promise
• Carbon capture and sequestration recognized as a key
part of the solution
– 2005 IPCC technical report concluded it is highly probably that, on a
global basis, there are adequate geologic formations to store centuries
worth of CO2
– Leading environmental groups have been strongly supportive of the
technology
– National Energy Policy Commission recommended large-scale
demonstrations
• However, it must be proven:
– at a commercial-scale
– in multiple places around the globe
– immediately
FutureGen
Right Technology at the Right Time
•
World’s first, near-zero emission coalfueled power plant
•
More than one million tons of CO2
captured and sequestered annually in
a deep saline geologic formation
•
“Living laboratory” to test and validate
cutting-edge power, sequestration,
and monitoring technologies
•
Global public-private partnership
•
Stakeholder involvement
FutureGen
Right Partners
• Industry
– Twelve leading companies with operations on six continents
– Investing $250M* in project with no expectation of financial return
• Governments
– United States, China, India, South Korea, and Japan
• Uniquely positioned to build global acceptance of near-zero
emission coal technology
*1Q 2004$
FutureGen
Importance of the Government Role
• Public benefit project
– Could help fundamentally transform the global energy system and
address the public’s climate change concerns
– Will lay the technical foundation for monitoring CO2 sequestration, its
long term effects, and permanency
– Industry’s participation is on a non-profit basis
• Research on a first-of-a-kind technology
– No IGCC plants currently with carbon capture and sequestration in the
world.
– Widely recognized that governments have an important cost-sharing
role in pre-competitive research
• Global applicability of the technology is critical
– Governments are uniquely positioned to build international partnerships
that will strengthen acceptance of near-zero emission coal technology
FutureGen Technology
Advances IGCC Technology
•
Designed to gasify eastern and western
U.S. coals, and test other coals, which
expands the global applicability of
environmentally-friendly IGCC technology
•
Advances gasification, hydrogen turbine,
and other clean-coal technologies
•
Integrates CO2 capture at a commerciallyrelevant scale into a IGCC power plant
•
Addresses power plant operation with CO2
capture, transport, and sequestration
integration
FutureGen Technology
Advances Sequestration Technology
•
Focused on deep geologic formations
which are globally available
•
Extensive modeling and monitoring
program planned to verify the safety
and permanence of CO2 storage
11,000 Gigatons of potentially
available CO2 storage
capacity
FutureGen Progress
Fast Tracked Schedule
• DOE and the Alliance have met every major milestone over
the past 14 months.
• Project is on-schedule for a 2012 on-line date
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
FutureGen Summary Schedule
Siting, NEPA, & Permitting
Project
Development
& Initial
Conceptual
Design
Design Phase 2
DOE/Alliance
Limited Scope
Cooperative
Agreement
Design
Phase 3
Facilities Construction
DOE/Alliance
Cooperative
Agreement
Plant
Start-up
&
Testing
NEPA ROD, July 2007
Initial Full-Scale Plant Operations
Final Site Selected
September 2007
BP0-14 months
BP1-16 months
BP2-10 months
Continuing Plant Operations
Site Monitoring After Initial
Operations
BP3-44 months
BP4-36 months
BP5-24 months
FutureGen
Site Selection
12 Sites in 7 States Proposed
4 Sites in 2 States on
Candidate List
Candidate Sites
FutureGen Progress
Site Selection
• First-of-a-kind siting methodology developed
• Can be extended to future commercial near-zero emission
power plant projects around the world
• Final site to be selected by September
Mattoon, IL
Tuscola, IL
Brazos, TX
Odessa, TX
FutureGen Progress
Conceptual Design
• Multiple alternative power plant design options evaluated
• Facility concept that is fuel-flexible developed
• Conceptual engineering designs and costs estimates on three power
plant configurations prepared
• Engineering Construction Manager on board
• Open competition to purchase major equipment currently being
developed
FutureGen Progress
Environmental Impact Statement
• Three volume, 2200-page analysis of the
potential environmental impacts
– Summary
– Volume I – Introduction, Alternatives, Summary
of Conclusions
– Volume II – Affected environment and
environmental consequences at each site
FutureGen
Draft Environmental
Impact Statement
• Draft EIS concludes no significant
adverse impacts
• Public hearings and comment during April
May
March 2007
FutureGen Progress
Independent Cost Estimate
•
Selected Power Plant Material Escalation vs.
General Inflation
Fabricated, Structural,
& Misc Steel
60
50
Steel Pipe, Tube and
Fittings
40
Copper and Brass Mill
Shapes
30
20
GDP
10
0
-10
-20
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
•
•
•
70
% Change Between 2000 and 2005
•
Inflation reflects the normal up-anddown fluctuations in materials, labor,
and services over time.
Controlled by market forces
(supply/demand), not the Alliance or
DOE
Power plant inflation has been
greater than general inflation.
2005
Alloys, Steel, Concrete, He
Wall, Refinery Work, etc.
•
Engineers, Suppliers, Fab
Shop Space, Specialty Tra
•
China, International Suppl
Definition #2: Scope Growth
Definition #1: Inflation
•
•
Would include project mission
expansion, and additional
project complexity, or additional
equipment.
Discretionary decision; could be
justified if something of value is
added to the project and only if
funding is available by both the
Alliance and the DOE.
Alliance/DOE have control over
scope growth.
FutureGen Progress
Independent Cost Estimate
Construction Cost Indices
(Source: Chemical Engineering Magazine, November 2006)
540
1,400
Chemical Engineering Plant Cost Index
520
1,350
Marshall & Swift Equipment Cost Index
500
1,300
480
1,250
460
1,200
440
1,150
420
1,100
400
1,050
380
1,000
360
Jun-98
Jun-99
Jun-00
Jun-01
Jun-02
Jun-03
Jun-04
Jun-05
Jun-06
•
•
•
Plant Construction Costs Escalating
950
Jun-07
Marshall & Swift Equipment Cost Index
•
Inflation reflects the normal up-anddown fluctuations in materials, labor,
and services over time.
Controlled by market forces
(supply/demand), not the Alliance or
DOE
Power plant inflation has been
greater than general inflation.
Chemical Engineering Plant Cost Index
•
Alloys, Steel, Concrete, He
Wall, Refinery Work, etc.
•
Engineers, Suppliers, Fab
Shop Space, Specialty Tra
•
China, International Suppl
Definition #2: Scope Growth
Definition #1: Inflation
•
•
Would include project mission
expansion, and additional
project complexity, or additional
equipment.
Discretionary decision; could be
justified if something of value is
added to the project and only if
funding is available by both the
Alliance and the DOE.
Alliance/DOE have control over
scope growth.
FutureGen Progress
Project Cost
DOE 2004
Estimate
Project Cost
(1Q 2004$)
Scope Growth
(1Q 2004$)
Inflation Multiplier
$950M
$954M
--
Zero
--
1.56
Project Cost
$1,484M
(future-year dollars thru 2017)
DOE/FG Cost Share %
DOE/FG Cost Share $M
Alliance 2006
Estimate
74/26
$900/$250
74/26
$1,100/$384
FutureGen
Summary
• Supports a technology-based climate change strategy
– Mitigates the financial risks of carbon dioxide emissions
• Validates the cost and performance of an integrated
near-zero emission coal-fueled power plant
– Advances IGCC technology
– Advances carbon capture, sequestration, and hydrogen-production technologies
– Sets groundwork for CO2 sequestration siting and licensing
• Creates the technical basis to retain coal in U.S. and
global energy mix with a long-term goal of zero
emissions.
• Enables the public and private sector to share the cost
and risk of advanced technology demonstration.
– Platform for emerging technology demonstration.
Contact Information:
Michael J. Mudd
Chief Executive Officer
FutureGen Alliance
[email protected]
(614) 716-1585
www.FutureGenAlliance.org