Korean Chemical Engineering Research

The Korean Institute of Chemical Engineers (한국화학공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Performance and Economic Analysis of Domestic Supercritical Coal-Fired Power Plant with Post-Combustion CO2 Capture Process

국내 초임계 석탄화력발전소에 연소 후 CO2 포집공정 설치 시 성능 및 경제성 평가

  • Lee, Ji-Hyun (Technology Commercialization Office, KEPCO Research Institute) ;
  • Kwak, No-Sang (Technology Commercialization Office, KEPCO Research Institute) ;
  • Lee, In-Young (Technology Commercialization Office, KEPCO Research Institute) ;
  • Jang, Kyung-Ryoung (Technology Commercialization Office, KEPCO Research Institute) ;
  • Shim, Jae-Goo (Technology Commercialization Office, KEPCO Research Institute)
  • 이지현 (한전전력연구원, 사업화기술개발실) ;
  • 곽노상 (한전전력연구원, 사업화기술개발실) ;
  • 이인영 (한전전력연구원, 사업화기술개발실) ;
  • 장경룡 (한전전력연구원, 사업화기술개발실) ;
  • 심재구 (한전전력연구원, 사업화기술개발실)
  • Received : 2012.01.21
  • Accepted : 2012.02.16
  • Published : 2012.04.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this study, Economic analysis of supercritical coal-fired power plant with $CO_2$ capture process was performed. For this purpose, chemical absorption method using amine solvent, which is commercially available and most suitable for existing thermal power plant, was studied. For the evaluation of the economic analysis of coal-fired power plant with post-combustion $CO_2$ capture process in Korea, energy penalty after $CO_2$ capture was calculated using the power equivalent factor suggested by Bolland et al. And the overnight cost of power plant (or cost of plant construction) and the operation cost reported by the IEA (International Energy Agency) were used. Based on chemical absorption method using a amine solvent and 3.31 GJ/$tonCO_2$ as a regeneration energy in the stripper, the net power efficiency was reduced from 41.0% (without $CO_2$ capture) to 31.6% (with $CO_2$ capture) and the levelized cost of electricity was increased from 45.5 USD/MWh (Reference case, without $CO_2$ capture) to 73.9 USD/MWh (With $CO_2$ capture) and the cost of $CO_2$ avoided was estimated as 41.3 USD/$tonCO_2$.

국내 초임계 석탄화력발전소에 연소 후 $CO_2$ 포집공정을 설치하였을 경우에 예상되는 발전단가와 $CO_2$ 저감비용(Cost of $CO_2$ avoided)을 산출하였다. 본 연구에서 고려된 연소 후 $CO_2$ 포집기술은 이미 상업적으로 적용이 가능하고, 기존의 화력발전에 적용이 용이한 아민 화합물을 이용한 화학 흡수법을 기초로 하였으며, 경제성 평가를 위해 연간 발생하는 비용 및 발전량을 연간 균등화(Levelized)하여 발전단가를 산정하는 수명기간 중 발전단가 분석(LCCA: Life Cycle Cost Analysis) 방식을 활용하여 분석하였다. 경제성 평가에서 가장 중요한 항목 중 하나인 설비 투자비(건설비 등) 및 운영비 산출을 위해, 기존의 $CO_2$ 포집 설비가 없는 기준 석탄화력발전소의 건설비는 IEA(국제에너지기구)에서 제시하는 국내 초임계석탄화력 발전소(순출력 767 MW급)의 데이터를 활용하였으며, 석탄화력발전소에 $CO_2$ 포집설비가 추가된 경우에도 IEA에서 제시하는 기준 석탄화력발전소와 $CO_2$ 포집설비 설치 후의 OECD 평균 순공사비(Overnight cost) 증감분을 참조하여 계산하였다. 상기 데이터를 이용하여 기존 석탄화력발전소 및 $CO_2$ 포집 설비 설치 후의 발전단가 및 $CO_2$ 포집비용을 분석한 결과 $CO_2$ 포집설비 설치 후 발전 효율은 기존 초임계 석탄화력발전소의 발전효율 41%에서 31.6%로 약 9.4%가 저하되었으며, 발전단가는 기존의 45.5 USD/MWh에서 73.9 USD/MWh로 약 62%가 증가되었고 $CO_2$ 포집비용은 41.3 USD/$tCO_2$로 산출되었다.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 한국에너지기술평가원(KETEP)

References

  1. Rao, A. B. and Rubin, E. S., "A Technical, Economic and Environmental Assessment of Amine-based $CO_2$ capture Technology for Power plant Greenhouse Gas Control," Environ. Sci. Technol., 36, 4467-4473(2005).
  2. An Interdisciplinary MIT study, "The Future of Coal," (2007).
  3. International Energy Agency, "Projected Costs of Generating Electricity," (2010).
  4. Lee, J. H., Kim, J.-H., Lee, I. Y., Jang, K. R. and Shim, J.-G., "Performance and Economic Analysis of 500MWe Coal-Fired Power Plant with Post-Combustion $CO_2$ Capture Process," Korean Chem. Eng. Res. (HWAHAK KONGHAK), 49(2), 244-249(2011). https://doi.org/10.9713/kcer.2011.49.2.244
  5. Rubin, E. S., Chen, C. and Rao, A. B., "Cost and Performance of Fossil Fuel Power Plants with $CO_2$ Capture and Storage," Energy Policy, 35, 4444-4454(2007). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2007.03.009
  6. International Energy Agency, "Cost and Performance of Carbon Dioxide Capture from Power Generation," (2011).
  7. DOE/NETL, "Cost and Performance Comparison of Fossil Energy Power Plants," (2007).
  8. Bolland, O. and Undrum, H., "A Novel Methodology for Comparing $CO_2$ Capture Options for Natural Gas-fired Combined Cycle Plants," Adv. Environ. Res., 7, 901-911 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1093-0191(02)00085-0

Cited by

  1. Process Design and Cost Estimation of Carbon Dioxide Compression and Liquefaction for Transportation vol.50, pp.6, 2012, https://doi.org/10.9713/kcer.2012.50.6.988
  2. Solvent (KoSol-4) vol.51, pp.2, 2013, https://doi.org/10.9713/kcer.2013.51.2.267
  3. Economic Evaluations for the Carbon Dioxide-involved Production of High-value Chemicals vol.52, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.9713/kcer.2014.52.3.347
  4. Performance and economic analysis of commercial-scale coal-fired power plant with post-combustion CO2 capture vol.32, pp.5, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11814-014-0267-0
  5. Utilization (NCCU) Technology vol.53, pp.5, 2015, https://doi.org/10.9713/kcer.2015.53.5.590
  6. Capture Studies with New Absorbent (KoSol-5) vol.27, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.14478/ace.2016.1046
  7. Performance Analysis of Upgrading Process with Amine-Based CO2 Capture Pilot Plant vol.4, pp.1, 2012, https://doi.org/10.18770/kepco.2018.04.01.033
  8. 금속 유기 골격체를 활용한 사용 가능한(Usable capacity) 이산화탄소 포집 연구 vol.27, pp.4, 2012, https://doi.org/10.5855/energy.2018.27.4.080