GASIFICATION & IGCC NEWS

China to build compact
coal gasification demo
unit for P&W Rocketdyne

After decades of US development 
Chinese agree to take on commercial 
demonstration of rocket-based coal
gasification technology.

From Pratt&Whitney Rocketdyne Press Release

CANOGA PARK, Calif., Feb. 2, 2012 – Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne (PWR) has signed a negotiation framework agreement with two Chinese energy industry companies to design, construct and operate a commercial-scale advanced gasification demonstration plant in China’s central eastern Henan Province. 

PWR, developer of the so-called "advanced compact gasification technology", says that the agreement is a "key step toward commercializing technology designed to lower the cost of coal gasification and provide an alternative fuel source that reduces water use and carbon dioxide emissions."

Under the framework agreement, Zhongyuan Da Hua Group Company Ltd. and East China Engineering Science & Technology Company will share development costs for construction and operation of a demonstration plant with PWR.

Zhongyuan Da Hua Group Company Ltd is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Henan Coal Chemical Industry Group Co. Ltd., a state-owned enterprise in China Henan Province. Henan Coal, the 2nd largest coal company in China specializes in coal-to-gas projects. 

East China Engineering Science & Technology Company, has more than 40 years of experience in coal/chemical production facility engineering, procurement and construction, and has completed more than 2,000 projects throughout China and 10 other countries.
 

According to PWR, its advanced rocket-based gasification technology provides a higher-efficiency and lower-cost alternative to current gasification systems.  Estimates are that the capital cost using PWR technology would be 10 to 20 percent less than conventional gasification plants .  In addition, it is expected that carbon dioxide emissions would be reduced by up to 10 percent and water usage by up to 30 percent. 

The PWR technology has been under development for decades.  Early phases of R&D enjoyed the support of the US government.  More recently, PWA  has collaborated with ExxonMobil Research and Engineering Company, with Canada’s Alberta Innovates – Energy & Environmental Solutions (EES) and the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunities (DCEO).   PWR has also granted a worldwide license to Zero Emission Energy Plants, Inc. (ZEEP) to use the technology in the development of commercial facilities.

PWR, a part of Pratt & Whitney, a United Technologies Corp. company and a world leader in the design, manufacture and service of aircraft engines, space propulsion systems and industrial gas turbines. United Technologies, based in Hartford, Conn., is a diversified company providing high technology products and services to the global aerospace and commercial building industries.

For more information, go to: www.PrattWhitneyRocketdyne.com. 

 

Gasification and IGCC in the news

A bright spot for IGCC:

DOE moves to release funding 
for Texas Clean Energy Project

According to today's Fossil Energy Techline, the US DOE issued a Record of Decision (ROD) that – along with a signed cooperative agreement – will allow federal funding to be used to help build the Summit Power Texas Clean Energy Project - an advanced first-of-a-kind clean coal power plant.

The ROD and cooperative agreement between DOE’s Office of Fossil Energy (FE) and Summit sets in motion continued federal cost-shared funds for the project, to be built just west of Midland-Odessa, Texas.

The 400MW facility is a "poly-generation" plant, combining IGCC power generation, urea production, and CO2 capture for use in enhanced oil recovery in nearby oil fields.

The project will be partially funded with $450 million from Fossil Energy's Clean Coal Power Initiative.  About half of this will come from the funds allocated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 for such projects.

DOE’s action to issue the ROD was reached after considering, among other things, the project’s potential environmental impacts and the options for mitigation of the impacts.

"The Texas Clean Energy Project is vitally important...... and a significant step forward that demonstrates the US commitment to developing clean energy technologies and reducing emissions of greenhouse gases," said Chuck McConnell, FE’s Chief Operating Officer.

The plant will convert sub-bituminous coal into hydrogen-rich syngas and CO2. The syngas and high-quality steam will be fed to the combined-cycle plant to produce electricity.  The facility will integrate Siemens' IGCC technology and Linde Rectisol® acid-gas removal technology to capture 90 percent of the CO2 from the syngas—about 3 million tons per year.

A portion of the captured CO2 will be used to produce urea for fertilizer while most of it will be used for enhanced oil recovery  with monitoring, verification, and accounting to demonstrate the permanence of geologic storage. The CO2 will be transported through existing regional pipelines to the oil fields of the west Texas Permian Basin, the largest CO2-EOR region in the world.

Of the 400MW of electrical power generated by the combined cycle plant, about half will be used on site and the other half will be delivered to the power grid. The plant will also produce sulfuric acid, argon, and inert slag as minor products for sale in commercial markets.

According to Summit, sale of CO2  will generate about one-third of the project's gross revenues.

The project is expected to create an average of 650 jobs during construction, with a peak of 1,500 workers. The project’s operational workforce is expected to be approximately 150 workers.

The current schedule is for TCEP to become operational late in 2014 or early in 2015.  This assumes that financial closing will take place early in 2012.

Gasification & IGCC in the news:

Texas Clean Energy
IGCC Still on Track

Summit close to PRB coal

deal for Texas IGCC plant

Summit Power Group, developer of the Texas Clean Energy Project,  is "probably within a month" of closing on Powder River Basin coal supplies for its $2.7 billion Texas Clean Energy Project near Odessa.  So said a company official Wednesday, Aug. 24, at the American Coal Council's Coal Market Strategies conference in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

The TCEP involves a 400-MW integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) power plant -- scheduled to start construction next year and enter service in 2015.  It will use 2  million ton/year of PRB coal, says Barry Cunningham, Summit managing director of project development.

Summit is talking with three PRB producers for supplies and is finalizing a contract with one of them, Cunningham said, declining to disclose names.

The business plan for the "polygen" project relies heavily on revenue from the production of byproducts, what Cunningham termed a "diversified revenue stream."

Revenue will come from 2.7 million ton/year of compressed CO2 to be sold for oil production at nearby wells, he said. The plant will capture 90% of its CO2, making it one of the world's highest CO2-capturing plant projects, Cunningham said.

One ton of CO2 yields 2.5 to 3 barrels of additional oil production, he said.

But urea production for agricultural fertilizer is expected to be the biggest component of the plant's revenue stream at 46%, he said.

All told, the plant will yield 190 MW net for power sales to the grid, Cunningham said, elaborating on the high cost of using self-generated power for the plant's CO2-capture system. This process "cannibalizes about 50% of the electricity" production, one conference participant remarked.

 Last month, Gas Turbine World reported that someone close to the project commented that the key issue for TCEP is to keep capital costs in check as it approaches the banking community for project finance.   This positive news about a pending coal supply contract should also help move it in the right direction.

---

With CCS on back burner what happens to coal-based IGCC ?

AEP pullout from large-scale CCS demo is setback for coal-plant retrofit program, and for hopes of IGCC becoming competitive.

Bloomberg Business Week's July 21 issue features a must-read article entitled "What's Killing Carbon Capture?". It reports on the decision by AEP to cancel plans to demonstrate ammonia-based post-combustion CO2 capture at their 1300MW Mountaineer coal-fired power plant in West Virginia.

Citing the high cost of the project and given the fact that the US government has yet to come up with any policy related to carbon capture and sequestration (or "CCS"), AEP announced that they would not go beyond the current $100 million proof-of-concept pilot project at the plant.

Without the requirement for power plants to employ means of reducing CO2 emissions, what can be said about the future for IGCC technology as the preferred form of coal-based power generation in a carbon-constrained world?

As summarized in past issues of Gas Turbine World magazine, numerous industry and government studies have shown that the cost impact of employing post-combustion CCS on conventional coal plants is so great that IGCC + CCS technology (with pre-combustion CO2 removal) would be elevated to the status of the lowest-cost option for future coal-based power generation.

However, if there is no regulatory requirement, or even some significant cost incentive such as a CO2 tax, to coerce power generators to employ CO2 capture,  the apparent 20+ percent cost premium for the use of IGCC vs. conventional PC  technology would be very difficult to justify.

To many, the high cost of current coal-based IGCC projects such as Duke's Edwardsport and the Mississippi Power Kemper County plant has already spelled the end of IGCC as we knew it.

For a while it appeared that the concept of a 'hybrid IGCC' plants was a winning idea,  where coal-derived SNG would be produced for either power generation or injection into the natural gas pipeline.  The associated power plant would be a stand-alone gas-fired combined cycle unit.

But even those projects (for example, Tenaska's Taylorville "IGCC" in Illinois) are proving too expensive, and with the growth of shale gas production and the precipitous fall of natural gas prices, there is no way for SNG from coal to be competitive in the foreseeable future.

Perhaps the answer is "polygneration" - such as being employed at Summit's 400MW Texas Clean Energy Project, where the sale of plant byproducts, including chemicals and CO2 for enhance oil recovery, appears to be making the project economically viable.  This is yet to be seen, however,  as the project developers pursue bank financing.

To this writer, CCS in any shape or form always seemed to be too expensive  - both in capital costs and in its impact on operating costs - for it to be commercially acceptable.   If there were going to be constraints on CO2 emissions, alternative cheaper ways to reduce CO2 emissions would have to come along
.   

With natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) plants emitting only half the CO2 of coal-based generation, and costing only a fraction to build, they have emerged as the clear winner.  This is particularly true in the US under currently depressed natural gas costs, and is making a lot of sense in Europe too, where there is a cost placed on CO2 emissions and shale gas is beginning to come into play.

The Business Week article on the sorry state of CCS does not come as any surprise, especially, as it points out, with the US government putting any specific climate-change regulations on the back burner. Without a clear government policy, industry will only act in its own best interest.
  

The big question still on the table, however,  is whether or not the US EPA will issue CO2-reduction rules for existing and new coal plants.
  

The agency has already dug a huge hole for itself with its new rules regarding hazardous pollutant emissions and new interstate pollution rules, which together threaten to shut down a large portion of the US coal fleet.
  

As I see it, any ruling regarding CO2 emissions, effectively mandating either CCS retrofit or plant closure, has been put off for at least several years.
  

As AEP has pointed out, they have done their share to host a pilot project to demonstrate that the technology works, now they owe it to their stake holders to put CCS on the shelf while the rules of the game are clarified.  (Recall that AEP also made a big run at IGCC a few years back, only to cancel efforts on several announced projects due to high costs.)

Yes, the requirement to add CCS to coal-based power generation was supposed to "level the playing field" for IGCC to compete.   For now, as long as that requirement doesn't exist, and use of natural gas in a new combined cycle plant is the cheapest way to reduce carbon emissions, IGCC will again have to wait its turn.  Whether or not it ever makes another comeback, is not at all clear.

As described in the May-June issue of Gas Turbine World, this is all points to a sustained period of growth for the gas turbine industry.  Some of the largest coal-based utilities in the US, including AEP, Xcel,  Duke and TVA, are already making plans to shut down their obsolete 50-year old PC plants and replacing them with new high-efficiency NGCC plants.
   

Even if natural gas prices are to increase by 50% or more from where they are today, studies show that a new combined cycle plant would still make a lot more economic sense than to invest billions in retrofitting those old coal plants to clean them up.

COAL GASIFICATION NEWS:
Texas Clean Energy IGCC being readied for financing

TCEP reaches major milestone with signing MOU for PPA

The Texas Clean Energy Project (TCEP) is nearing the point of lining up a group of banks to arrange project financing.

So says one industry leader close to the project.

"The key to achieving the next big step will be keeping capital costs in line,"  he said.

Last week, TCEP took an important step forward with the signing of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for the purchase of half of the electricity produced by what will be one of the world’s most advanced and cleanest coal-based power plants. 

Under the 25-year agreement, CPS Energy – a municipally owned utility serving San Antonio, Texas – will purchase electricity generated by the first-of-a-kind commercial clean coal power plant starting in mid 2014.

TCEP, a 400MW IGCC facility located near Odessa, TX will capture 90% of its CO2 – approximately 3 million tons annually – more than any power plant of commercial scale operating anywhere in the world.

The project was originally proposed as the losing candidate from Texas for the ill-fated FutureGen IGCC project, which was to be built in Matoon, IL.

In January 2010, DOE awarded a cooperative agreement to Summit Texas Clean Energy to design, construct, and demonstrate an IGCC power plant that can co-produce high-value products and capture CO2.

The CO2 captured from TECP will be used for enhanced oil recovery (EOR) in the West Texas Permian Basin. EOR is a way to squeeze additional hard-to-recover oil from older fields, and is an increasingly important contributor to U.S. oil supplies.

Additionally, the plant will produce urea, a high-value chemical, and smaller quantities of commercial-grade sulfuric acid, argon, and inert slag, all of which will also be marketed.

Summit has selected Siemens gasification and combined-cycle technology for the project, and Fluor was awarded the EPC contract.

CPS Energy signed the MOU to purchase 200MW from Summit Energy's TCEP, or half of the plant's electric energy output. In announcing the agreement CPS Energy President and CEO Doyle Beneby stated that the IGCC plant will be cleanest coal-fueled power project ever permitted in Texas.

Ironically,  five years ago, the utility decided against building its own IGCC plant and instead invested $1 billion in a new 750MW conventional coal-steam plant that was just completed.  At the time, the utility commented that IGCC was "not ready for prime time".

U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said in a statement released at the signing ceremonies that  “San Antonio is stepping up to lead Texas and our nation into a clean energy future....."

On the same day CPS announced that it plans to shut down its two-unit late-1970s vintage  JT Deely coal station  to avoid spending as much as $3 billion for environmental equipment needed to upgrade the 871MW plant to comply with pending EPA regulations.


From DOE Fossil Energy TECH LINE and other sources

Kemper County IGCC plant "on schedule and budget"

GULFPORT, Miss.

Construction of Mississippi Power Co.'s Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) power plant in Kemper County is on schedule and on budget, the company's head says.

Last year, the Mississippi Public Service Commission approved the company's proposal for the project and in December, ground was broken.

As a result of a law the Mississippi Legislature passed in 2008, the cost of the plant will be passed on to ratepayers in stages while the project is being built. In its approval for the project, the PSC set a cap for the cost of the plant at $2.88 billion.

In a recent speech given by Mississippi Power chief executive Ed Day he said the company aims to keep the cost below the cap. The goal is to have the plant operating in 2014.

"Internally, we really only talk about $2.4 billion," Day said.

The plant has been fought by the Mississippi Sierra Club, which has concerns over environmental aspects of the project, along with the company's plans to pass construction costs on to ratepayers. The Sierra Club contends the plant is dirty, expensive and unnecessary and that natural gas would have been a better fuel source.

The company contends that the price of natural gas is much less predictable than that of lignite coal, which the plant will use. The company says lignite is abundant in Mississippi and represents the best option.

Day said there's a chance large fuel cost savings by using the coal could result if natural gas prices rise substantially over the next few years. Typically, about 50 percent of a ratepayer's power bill goes toward fuel costs.

"We know what (price) the coal will be mined at, within a small tight range, it's just now a matter of what will gas do, and how high will it go," Day said. "There's got to be a natural fuel savings to the customer over long periods of time. That's kind of what wins the day."

The increase on a customer's power bill could range from as much as 33 percent, according to the company, to as high as 48 percent, according to the Sierra Club.

Mississippi Power has said those increases could be phased in over 10 years.

Editor's note: At $2.4 billion, the nominal 600MW Kemper County plant will cost $4000/kW to build. A new natural gas fired combined cycle plant would cost less than one-quarter of that amount. For the total cost of energy (covering investment, fuel cost and other operating expenses) to be the same, natural gas price would have to climb from the current $4 per million Btu to about four times that level. Although those high prices are paid for natural gas today in places like Japan, plentiful supplies in the US are expected to keep the price low for the foreseeable future.

April 7, 2011Amsterdam  Nuon postpones implementation of 
IGCC technology at Magnum plant
 

Nuon has decided to postpone its plans for the possible gasification of biomass and coal at its new 1200MW "Nuon Magnum" power plant at Eemshaven. The construction of the gas-fired power station, being built around three Mitsubishi (MHI) M701F4 combined cycle trains, is progressing well. This power station will be ready at the end of 2012 and will supply electricity to two million households.

The company says that commercial reasons, such as the trend in raw material prices, play a significant role in the decision not to make an investment decision at this time about the application of gasification technology. This technology would consist of a coal and biomass gasification element combined with the capture and storage of CO2.

In addition, this decision is the result of a long-running dialogue between Nuon and various environmental organizations, among others.  An agreeement has been reached with these organizations under which Nuon states that it will not bring the gasification part of the power plant on stream before 2020. 

Other important elements of the agreement relate specifically to CO2 emissions. Once the gasification part is ready, these emissions will not exceed 360g/kWh, or about 800 lb/MWh (equivalent to the emissions from a modern gas-fired power plant). This will require removal of approximately 50% of the CO2 that would otherwise be produced by that type of gasification-based combined cycle plant. 


At the same time, the environmental parties involved are withdrawing their legal objections to the gas-fired power station currently under construction.

 “As an energy company, Nuon is leading the way with this approach and is setting the bar high for the reduction of CO2 emissions from the coal-fired part of this power plant”, says Ron Wit from the Netherlands Society for Nature and the Environment. “This approach sets a good example for energy companies and should be replicated in the Netherlands and Europe.”

Recent discussions about CO2 capture and storage have shown that there is currently insufficient support for this technology, in particular for onshore storage. The postponement of the investment decision for the expansion is in line with the strategy previously adopted by Vattenfall not to build new coal-fired capacity without the possibility of CO2 capture and storage.

“The use of coal and the capture and storage of CO2 is part of a wider debate in society”, says Huib Morelisse, CEO of N.V. Nuon Energy. “There are many perspectives and opinions involved in this discussion and we do not want to be constrained by the time pressure of permit or subsidy processes. This is why we have entered into this agreement with the parties involved. It is a postponement of the use of gasification technology based on biomass and coal. Because we are also contributing to the reliable supply of energy at an affordable price with Nuon Magnum, it is simply too early to exclude this multi-fuel gasification technology at this point.”

From Nuon website

2010 GTC Conference Wrap-up:

IGCC on the move
despite obstacles

Five US IGCC power projects under construction or being developed will add almost 2500MW over the next 3-5 years.


Once again, a large and far-reaching turnout was attracted by the annual Gasification Technologies Council/EPRI conference attesting to the continued broad interest in the status of project and technology development connected with gasification of coal and other feedstock. 

More than 600 attendees gathered from all over the world attended the 3-day Washington DC event.  The range of topics presented over covered the gamut - from the booming commercial coal-to-chemicals industry in China to the emergence of new gasification-based technologies for the conversion of biomass to synthetic natural gas and liquid fuels.

The November-December issue of Gas Turbine World magazine features comprehensive coverage of  key presentations made at the conference, with focus on major commercial-scale projects under construction and actively under development.  A copy of this convenient wrap-up is now available at this link.

Gasification & IGCC Industry News

Illinois Senate vote could
derail Taylorville coal project

Yesterday, the Illinois state Senate voted against apporoval of proposed rate subsidies for Tenaska's planned Taylorville power project by a vote of 18 to 33. The proposal had been previously approved by the Illinois state House, which voted (63 to 50) on it last November.

Tenaska planned to commence construction on the $3.5 billion project in mid 2011. Without the Senate approval, Tenaska will need to reconsider its plans.

The project design incorporates Siemens' technology to gasify Illinois coal to produce a synthetic gas ("syngas"), which would be used as fuel to generate electricity in the 602MW combined cycle facility.

Tenaska expects to include pre-combustion processing of the syngas to capture more than 50 percent of the CO2 produced, thereby making the CO2 emissions similar to a natural gas fired power plant. The captured CO2 would then be sequestered, either by storing the CO2 underground in Illinois or transporting the CO2 via pipeline to Gulf Coast states, where it would be injected into oil fields to enhance oil recovery.

Tenaska plans to rely upon federal support for the project, which is sited approximately 200 miles south of Chicago in Christian County. The company has stated that it is waiting for final approval on a $2.579 billion federal loan guarantee and that it plans to use a $417 million federal tax credit.

There has as yet been no statement from Tenaska as to the impact of the state Senate vote to deny the state-subsidized rates for the power to be sold from the project.

Summit Clean Energy Texas
coal-based IGCC / Polygen
plant gets air-quality permit

First-of-a-kind project passes
major regulatory hurdle


The proposed $2.2 billion "clean coal" plant in West Texas has passed a major regulatory hurdle, receiving approval from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality for an air-quality permit earlier this week.

Summit Power Group's project is to use Wyoming coal while employing integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) technology to convert the coal to a clean "syngas", which will be used to produce electricity and other products, such as urea for fertilizer production. The plant is also designed to capture 90 percent of carbon dioxide emissions from the process and will be a "first-of-a-kind" plant in Texas, Summit said in announcing the permit.

"This is a milestone moment for America's energy economy and this project," said Summit Chairman Donald Hodel, who was energy secretary during the Reagan administration.

"We are delighted to be building this project in Texas, where federal, state and local elected officials have all worked effectively toward the same objective, namely to bring near-zero-emissions coal technology to the world marketplace," Hodel said.

Construction to start 2nd half 2011

The plant is to be built on 600 acres in Penwell, 15 miles southwest of Odessa. Construction is to begin in the second half of 2011 and operations should start in late 2014, said Laura Miller, Texas projects director for Summit and the former Dallas mayor.

The project "will be an economic boon to West Texas, creating more than 1,500 jobs at the peak of construction, 150 high-wage permanent jobs when the plant is operational, and 200 additional jobs in periods of major maintenance," Summit said.

The project has had a high profile because of the advanced technology it will employ. It has received $450 million in federal grants and therefore must undergo an environmental impact assessment, which is under way.

Earlier this year, Summit announced that the West Texas plant will employ technology and equipment for both the gasification process and the combined cycle power generating unit to be supplied by Siemens Corp.

"Overall cleanest" coal plant

Summit said the plant will be "overall the cleanest coal-fueled power project ever permitted in Texas," capturing not only the bulk of CO2 emissions, but also 99 percent of the sulfur, more than 95 percent of the mercury and more than 90 percent of nitrogen oxides.

Chemical processes will convert coal into clean-burning industrial gases used to generate electricity. The process creates a "pure stream" of CO2 that will be captured and sequestered, according to Summit.

The captured CO2 will be diverted to West Texas oil fields to boost oil recovery. This will complement or replace naturally occuring CO2 currently being supplied by pipeline from outside of the area. Reportedly, approximately one-third of the project's operating revenue will be derived from the sale of CO2 for this purpose.

The Summit plant is rated at 400MW gross generating capacity, but that is reduced to 214MW net output as a result of the heavy on-site plant power consumption to support the conversion process and the processing of plant byproducts. That still is enough capacity to power more than 200,000 homes, based on an often-cited yardstick of each megawatt providing enough power for 1,000 homes, Miller said.

Source: Ft. Worth Star Telegram
jzsmith@star-telegram.com

GTW ANNUAL HANDBOOK
NOW AVAILABLE ONLINE

Includes up-to-date
IGCC reference data


Gas Turbine World's annual Handbook, the Power Industry's standard reference guide for gas turbine pricing data and performance specifications, is now available online from Industrial Info Resources (Sugar Land, Texas).

A feature contained in the Handbook that is of special interest to the Gasification & IGCC community is an up-to-date reference for IGCC plant performance specifications and a listing of currently active IGCC and gasification projects under development.

"Now, for the first time, power project developers, original equipment manufacturers, plant owners, and engineering and construction firms can easily and rapidly access critical performance parameters and prices for gas turbines," said Ed Lewis, president and chief executive at Industrial Info Resources.

"Existing subscribers to Gas Turbine World will be able to access the current annual Handbook for no added cost. And non-subscribers can purchase online access to this vital reference guide," he said.

"Power plant developers, equipment suppliers, and project owners will benefit by having instant access to this widely used reference guide," Lewis added. "Now, subscribers will never have to worry about a colleague accidentally walking off with their copy of this important industry guide."

Gas Turbine World has published an annual Handbook since 1976. This is the first time it will be available in an online version.

"People may be surprised to learn how often we get calls for a copy of the prior year's Handbooks," said Vic deBiasi, founder, editor, and publisher of Gas Turbine World.

"The GTW Handbook is an essential resource for anyone in the power business. The gas turbine pricing information we have is unavailable anywhere else. Our equipment performance specifications are used by firms around the world. We are delighted that our partnership with Industrial Info will make this authoritative, objective Handbook available to anyone in the world when they need it."

This year's GTW Handbook has detailed sections on engineering & operations, turbine inlet cooling, projected equipment prices, equipment performance specifications, Gasification & IGCC power, and global orders and installations. A company directory and list of technical project support resources also are provided for easy reference.

The Online version of the GTW Handbook will also contain quick links to access performance and pricing for simple-cycle generators, combined-cycle generators, and mechanical drives.

Making the GTW Handbook available in a PDF format is Industrial Info's first step toward digitizing the market-critical data contained in that annual publication. In 2011 Industrial Info will introduce a searchable, interactive database of all information contained in previous GTW Handbooks, Lewis noted.

"Bringing this critical information to the market in a digital format will make this industrial project data instantly available to market participants so they can more effectively develop budgets for capital projects," Lewis said. "This is another demonstration of our commitment to providing global market intelligence that constantly moves forward. We have worked closely with Vic deBiasi and his outstanding GTW team and we share a commitment to objective, verified data as the foundation for success in the power business."

Buyers of the current 2010 GTW Handbook can access the current edition of the Handbook at no extra charge, plus previous editions going back to 2006. They also can access the gas turbine design ratings and pricing sections of earlier Handbooks that were published starting in 1982. Subscribers should click here to access their copy of the Handbook.

Non-subscribers can access the 2010 GTW Handbook for $499, which includes a subscription to the GTW magazine, which is published bi-monthly. They, too, will be able to access prior annual Handbooks published since 1982 at no extra charge. Click here to request access to the Gas Turbine World magazine online.

Miss. Power breaking ground
on Kemper County IGCC plant

Source: WLOX DeKalb, MS

Mississippi Power will break ground today on its next generation of power plants.

The company touts the $2.4 billion Kemper County Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle ("IGCC") Plant as a step toward energy independence in Mississippi.

The company fought a long battle to get to this stage, including questions from the state Public Service Commission and protests from environmental groups. One of the big issues was how Mississippi Power would pay for the plant.

The company had originally proposed that it be allowed to pass along construction costs to customers right away. After hearings with the PSC, the company reached an agreement to delay adding those costs to power bills until 2012.

Mississippi Power selected Kemper County for the plant site because it has huge lignite coal reserves that remain largely untapped. Mississippi Power will take the lignite and turn it into a gas to be used to produce electricity.

Construction of the Kemper County plant will create about 1,000 jobs. Mississippi Power expects to create 260 permanent jobs. The first two stages of construction are scheduled to take all of 2011, with construction of the plant in 2012 and 2013. The Kemper County plant is expected to begin operations in 2014.

Miss. Power's website says "the local lignite will provide decades of low-cost fuel and avoid huge price swings associated with uncontrollable fuel markets. It is the lower cost fuel available - and with a 4 billion ton reserve in Mississippi - we Mississippi Power can secure a stable fuel source while reducing our dependence on foreign fuel for future generations, due to its abundance and affordability."

Ed note: The nominal 600MW (net) IGCC plant will utilize the Southern Co/KBR "TRIG" air-blown gasifier integrated with two Siemens SGT6-5000F gas turbine generators, the hot exhaust of which produces steam to drive a steam turbine generator. Southern Co. is the parent company of Mississippi Power. The project will enjoy a substantial financial boost from Federal tax credit incentives. The South Mississippi Electric Power Association has agreed to take a minor equity stake in the project.

The plant will include capture of 65% of the carbon in the lignite feedstock, giving it a carbon footprint approximately equal to that associated with a natural-gas fired combined cycle plant. The captured CO2 is expected to be fed into a pipeline for use in enhanced oil recovery or other uses.

2010 Gasification Technologies Council
Annual Conference Papers Now Available On Line

The 2010 GTC conference is now history, and quite an event it was. It took place November 1-3 in Wash DC and there were plenty of important project updates and technology developments that highlighted jam-packed program.

The event attracted more than 600 attendees from all over the world, and from a myriad of industries related to the growing application of gasification technologies as a preferred way to utilize a variety of energy feedstock.

With permission of the GTC, we are providing a copy of the conference program and direct links to all of the presentations.

Look for special coverage of the conference highlights in the upcoming issue of Gas Turbine World Magazine.

Conferences Conference Presentations

Jump to a date:
Monday, November 1	Tuesday, November 2	Wednesday, November 3

Sunday, October 31
1:00 - 3:30 pm	GTC Fall Membership Meeting
4:00 - 7:00	Conference Registration - Registration Desk
5:00 - 7:00	Opening Reception - Exhibit Hall
top ↑

Monday, November 1
7:00 am	Conference Registration and Check-In - Registration Desk Continental Breakfast - Exhibit Hall
8:00 am	Opening Sessions & Introductions - Marriott Ballroom
8:30 am	Keynote Address
Matthew L. Wald The New York Times
9:00 am	Project & Technology Updates I Session Chair: Lee Schmoe, Bechtel Corporation
E-Gas Technology 2010 Outlook Phil Amick, ConocoPhillips Updates on Key Projects on Three Continents Keith White, GE Energy - Gasification Heavy Residue Gasification in Today's World Michiel Mak, Shell Gasificaion & Clean Coal Energy Siemens Technology Advances and Project Development Activities Harry Morehead, Siemens Energy, Inc. KBR’s Transport Gasifier - Technology Advancements & Recent Successes Siva Ariyapadi, Kellogg Brown & Root
10:30 am	Break - Exhibit Hall
11:30 am	Project & Technology Updates II Session Chair: David Denton, Eastman Chemical
Further Developments and Commercial Progress of the BGL Gasification Technology Hans Hirschfelder, Envirotherm GmbH Update on New Projects & Design Development with the Lurgi FBDB Gasifier Max-Michael Weiss, Lurgi GmbH Technical Update of the MHI Air Blown and Oxygen Blown Gasifier Hiromi Ishii, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Overview of the Kemper County IGCC Project Using Transport Integrated Gasification Randall Rush, Southern Company Gasification OMB Gasification - Industrial Application Updates of Slurry Feeding and Developments of Dry Feeding Prof. Haifeng Liu, Institute of Clean Coal Technology
1:00 pm	Lunch - Exhibit Hall
2:30 pm	Emerging Biomass & Secondary Materials Gasification Opportunities I Session Chair: R.A. Olliver, Aplethora Energy Services
PRB Coal and Coal/Biomass Gasification Activities at Emery Energy Company's New Pilot Facility Benjamin Phillips, Emery Energy Uhde Biomass and Coal Gasification: Applying Fluidized Bed and Entrained Flow Gasification Karsten Radtke, Uhde Corporation Biomass Gasification for the Production of SNG: A Practical Route through Available and New Technologies Rosa Domenichini, Foster Wheeler S.p.A.
4:00 pm	Break - Exhibit Hall
5:00 pm	Emerging Biomass & Secondary Materials Gasification Opportunities II Session Chair: R.A. Olliver, Aplethora Energy Services
Plasma Gasification: Integrated Facility Solutions for Multiple Waste Streams Pieter van Nierop, Alter NRG Corp. Poornima Sharma, Technip USA, Inc. TPRI Technology and Future Fuels Projects Updates William Douglas, Future Fuels LLC Coskata's Syngas-to-Ethanol Platform Ralph Corley, Coskata, Inc.
6:00 pm	Adjourn
6:00 - 8:00 pm	Reception - Exhibit Hall
top ↑

Tuesday, November 2
7:00 am	Conference Registration and Check-In - Registration Desk Continental Breakfast - Exhibit Hall
8:00 am	Keynote Address
Donald Hodel Chairman and Senior Vice President, Summit Power
8:30 am	Energy Market & Environmental Gasification Drivers Session Chair: Neville Holt, EPRI
Coal to SNG via Gasification: Efficiency, Environmental and Economic Benefits Dale Simbeck, SFA Pacific Implications of Greater Reliance on Natural Gas for Electricity Generation Catherine M. Elder, Aspen Environmental Group POSCO Gwangyang SNG Project Cliff Keeler, ConocoPhillips A New Look at Lignite: A Central European Perspective Wojtek Ksiazkiewicz, SNC Lavalin A Strategic Fuel Switch From Natural Gas to Local Lignite: Development of the Komsomolsk Gasification Project Marco Kanaar, Gasification Solutions
10:00 am	Break - Exhibit Hall
11:00 am	Gasification's Carbon Management Advantage Session Chair: Michael DeLallo, WorleyParsons
Overview of the DOE Industrial Carbon Capture & Storage Program Darren Mollot, U.S. Department of Energy, Fossil Energy Pathways to Improved IGCC Performance and Economics with Carbon Capture and Storage Ron Schoff, EPRI Advanced Hydrogen and CO2 Capture Technology for Sour Syngas Jeff Kloosterman, Air Products & Chemicals, Inc. CCS Options & Cost Reductions with New SELEXOLTM Flow Schemes Raj Palla, UOP LLC Wandoan IGCC with CCS Project - Development Challenges & Opportunities Chris Walker, Stanwell Corporation
12:30 pm	Lunch - Exhibit Hall
2:00 pm	In Situ Coal Gasification Session Chair: George Gruber, Black & Veatch
Update on the Linc Energy Chinchilla UCG Project Don Schofield, Linc Energy Swan Hills in Situ Coal Gasification and Power Generation Doug Shaigec, Swan Hills Synfuels
3:00 pm	Break - Exhibit Hall
4:00 pm	Addressing Project Economics Session Chair: Doug Todd, Process Power Plants LLC
Coal Gasification: Delivering Performance in Chinese Operations & Developing Technology Deployment Solutions Jim Volk, Shell Gasification & Clean Coal Energy The Cost Estimating Process for the Taylorville Energy Center Jim Welniak, Tenaska Revving Up Reliability, Availability & Maintainability: Applying Experience to Improve Plant Performance DeLome Fair, GE Energy - Gasification New Technologies and Projects Based on Topsoe's Knowledge of Downstream Gasification Technologies Jens Perregaard, Haldor Topsoe A/S Cleanly Unlocking the Value of Low Rank Coal Carrie Thompson, Synthesis Energy Systems Reduction of CAPEX in Coal Milling and Drying Units Tobias Korz, Loesche GmbH
5:30 pm	Adjourn (evening open)
top ↑

Wednesday, November 3
7:00 am	Conference Registration and Check-In - Registration Desk Continental Breakfast - Exhibit Hall
8:00 am	Advances in Gasification Technologies I Session Chair: Jenny Tennant, U.S. DOE/NETL
ConocoPhillips E-STR Technology Development for Lignite Gasification Albert Tsang, ConocoPhillips Scale-up of the RTI Warm Syngas Cleanup Process at the Polk Power Station IGCC Raghubir Gupta, RTI International Accelerating Commercialization and Deployment of Advanced Gasification Technology Through Multiphase Modeling Chris Guenther, U.S. DOE/NETL Ion Transport Membrane (ITM) Technology for Lower-Cost Oxygen Production Robert Steele, EPRI Building on History: the Next Generation of Technology Joe Zuiker, GE Energy, Gasification
9:30 am	Break - Exhibit Hall
10:30 am	Advances in Gasification Technologies II Session Chair: Phil Amick, ConocoPhillips
Compact Gasification Development & Test Status Alan K. Darby, Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne Results and Evaluations of the 5,000 Hour Durability Test at the Nakoso Air Blown IGCC Plant Tsutomu Watanabe, Clean Coal Power R&D Co., Ltd. Low-Swirl Combustion Technology for Advanced IGCC Systems David Littlejohn, U.S. DOE/LBNL Rectisol Wash Acid Gas Removal for Polygeneration Concepts Downstream of Gasification Thomas Haberle, Ulvi Kerestcioglu, Linde Engineering
12:00 pm	Conference Adjourns
top ↑

IGCC IN THE NEWS

Gasification Technologies Council
responds to FutureGen changes

As previously posted on this website, the DOE has announced sweeping changes in the FutureGen advance IGCC+CCS project planned for Mattoon, IL. The Gasification Technologies Council (GTC) has formally responded with a letter to DOE Secretary Chu saying that it was "deeply disappointed" and calling the decision to change technology from IGCC to oxy-combustion "a step in the wrong direction".

Meanwhile, Mattoon officials have announced that they have pulled out of the project, where their remaining role would be to provide the storage site for the CO2 captured at the new project site some 150 miles to the west. Other Illinois towns have stepped forward to show interest in replacing Mattoon.

For a view of the GTC response letter, as well as the full text of the DOE announcement, go to this link to the GTC website.

IGCC in the News

FutureGen and Politics-

Question raised whether
changes in project involved
conflict of interests

Just when it seemed that FutureGen was on track
for a new life, politics raises its ugly head with
questions of DOE integrity, and charges of conflict
of interest, in decision to change technology,
contractors and location.

How ugly is it?

James Wood, DOE Asst. Deputy for Clean Coal,
has become target of suggested impropriety.
He recently came to DOE from Babcock Power.
Yet his past association with Babcock & Wilcox,
where he was president from 1996-2001, is being
cited as possibly having influenced the DOE
decision to tap B&W as new FutureGen lead
contractor.

Although DOE has denied any conflict, issues
raised by those opposed to changes further
tarnish troubled project.

Meanwhile, Mattoon pulls out of project and
DOE is looking for new site for CO2 storage.

(Adapted from AP release)

DOE official once led firm
now redoing FutureGen
By David Mercer (AP)


CHAMPAIGN, Ill. — A top official in the Department of Energy office who oversees the FutureGen clean-coal project is a past CEO of a company newly chosen to retrofit a western Illinois power plant instead of finishing the original project in Mattoon.

Critics of the decision to change FutureGen worry that the official, James F. Wood, could benefit from his past leadership at the company and that he shouldn't have been part of the decision.

James F. Wood, who is deputy assistant secretary for clean coal in the Department of Energy's Office of Fossil Energy, was president of Babcock & Wilcox Company from 1996-2001. (Ed. note: see below for clarification regarding most recent relationship with Babcock Power not B&W.)

North Carolina-based Babcock & Wilcox is one of the companies named last week by the department to retrofit a coal-fired power plant in the western Illinois under the retooled $1.2 billion FutureGen project.

The department announced the changes last week, including a decision to scrap plans to build a new, integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) power plant in Mattoon, in eastern Illinois.

The news surprised officials in Mattoon, who this week backed out of the project and its new role as storage site for carbon dioxide from the retrofitted plant in Meredosia, Ill.

The Department of Energy did not make Wood available for an interview, but said its internal vetting process found he had no potential conflicts of interest. (Ed: See update below.)

"Jim Wood worked for Babcock and Wilcox almost a decade ago and has no financial interest in the company," agency spokeswoman Stephanie Mueller wrote in an e-mail.

Details about Wood's role in the decision to change FutureGen aren't clear but, according to the department, he oversees all Office of Fossil Energy coal research and projects, including FutureGen.

It isn't clear how much of the $1.1 billion the federal government plans to contribute to the newly defined project would go to Babcock & Wilcox.

The remainder of the project cost is intended to be covered by the Energy Department's private sector partners in FutureGen - the FutureGen Industrial Alliance - a group of coal companies and other firms who were also surprised the changes and have said little since they were announced.

Wood joined the department from Babcock Power Inc., where he was CEO. That company, in spite of the common name, isn't related to Babcock & Wilcox and actually competes with the latter in some power plant-related work, Babcock Power spokesman Jim Sims said.

Political leaders and others from the Mattoon area angered by the abrupt change in FutureGen plans last week say that at the least the Energy Department should have made clear that Woods had ties, no matter how old, to a key company that was involved.

"I think that's the real issue here"" said state Sen. Dale Righter, a Republican who lives in Mattoon and has been involved in the area's pursuit of a place in the FutureGen project for several years.

A spokesman for Illinois Sen Dick Durbin wasn't aware of Wood's past position or his role in FutureGen but also argued that there's no reason for him not to work on the project for the Department of Energy.

"They (the DOE) hire people with industry experience," Joe Shoemaker said.

The Energy Department and Durbin last week announced that Babcock & Wilcox and another firm, Air Liquide Process & Construction Inc. of Texas, will retrofit a coal-fired plant in Meredosia, Ill., that belongs to Ameren Corp.

The change ended plans to build a new plant in Mattoon intended to prove that coal could produce electricity through a technology called Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC), with the carbon dioxide from the fuel removed and safely stored underground.

Durbin and the Department of Energy say delays in Futuregen have allowed several other similar projects to bypass it, leading them to focus instead on another technology, oxy-combustion, that could be used to add life to existing coal plants.

Carbon dioxide from that process would still be stored underground, and would have been piped about 175 miles to Mattoon under the new FutureGen plan. Officials there, though, decided Wednesday to pull out of the project. The Energy Department is now looking for a new carbon storage site.

The Energy Department has said this week that it chose Babcock & Wilcox because the oxy-combustion technology it will use at Meredosia — and, if it works, hopes to use on other, older plants — belongs to the company.

Documents found on the Department of Energy's Web site indicate that the company has done work with the department and Illinois' coal industry on oxy-combustion at least as far back as 2003.

There are, though, a number of other companies working with oxy-combustion, according to the International Energy Agency. At a presentation during an agency conference on oxy-combustion technology earlier this year the agency said there were 15 "large-scale" oxy-combustion power projects in the works worldwide.


UPDATE: DOE officially denies conflict of interest
Kurt Erickson
The Quad-City Times - Springfield, Illinois - August 11, 2010

SPRINGFIELD — The official who oversees federal clean-coal programs had no conflict of interest regarding the awarding of a contract to his former company for the revamped FutureGen project, a senior adviser at the Energy Department said Wednesday.

A day after Mattoon-area officials raised questions about the role James F. Wood played in his former company, Babcock & Wilcox, gaining a stake in the FutureGen project, Matt Rogers said Wood’s relationship had nothing to do with the award.

“That is a non-issue,” Rogers said.

The engineering and industrial retrofitting company was tapped by the department last week to help upgrade a coal-fired power plant in Meredosia as part of a clean coal demonstration project.

Wood, the deputy assistant secretary for clean coal, was president of North Carolina-based Babcock & Wilcox from 1996 to 2001.

“Jim Wood worked Babcock & Wilcox almost a decade ago and has no financial interest in the company,” Rogers said. “Our general counsel has had long looks at this, and there is no conflict of interest issue here at all.”

State Sen. Dale Righter, R-Mattoon, and U.S. Rep. Tim Johnson raised questions about Wood’s role after the bulk of the FutureGen project was moved from Mattoon to Meredosia.

On Wednesday, after hearing Rogers’ explanation of Wood’s role, Johnson spokesman Phil Bloomer had no comment.

FUTUREGEN IGCC + CCS
ALIVE AND WELL - IN TEXAS
WHILE MATTOON GETS SHAFT

DOE shifts FutureGen technology to oxy-combustion
boiler retrofit and moves plant site to Meridosa IL


On August 5, the news was finally out in the open: the US DOE and the FutureGen Alliance had quietly struck a new deal that totally changes the face of the FutureGen project.

They are calling it "FutureGen2".


Enter oxy-combustion retrofit
Instead of continuing along the rocky path that effectively duplicates Summit Energy's Texas Clean Energy (IGCC) Project - already receiving some $350 million in DOE funding -and other IGCC+CCS projects, FutureGen2 will take the form of an oxy-combustion boiler retrofit of an existing 200 MWe pulverized coal-steam plant in Meridosa, IL – some 150 miles west of Mattoon.

So, what is left for little old Mattoon - the official winner of the original competition for the FutureGen IGCC project?

Well it could be worse. With FutureGen2 they get more than they would have gotten the first time the project was killed back in December, 2007.

But now, rather than providing a site for a new $2 billion state-of-the-art power plant, they get to host the end of a pipeline carrying the CO2 collected at the Meridosa plant, and to supply a place for the long-term storage deep under 400 acres of rural farmland.

The good news
Perhaps Mattoon feels otherwise, but the good news is that the announcement of FutureGen2 is a big step forward.

The announcement actually included the naming of a bona-fide host utility (Ameren Energy), and the major contractors - B&W and Air Liquide - to supply the new oxy-combustion boiler system that will produce steam to power one of the now-idle 200 MWe steam turbine generators at the Meridosa site.

The other good news - to this observer - is that the US DOE - in spite of the expected political fireworks - has shown signs of some real strategic thinking going on behind the scenes.

And for Mattoon, the region will be at the hub of a regional CO2 transportation infrastructure now being given a jump start by the project.

Change was coming
The fact that the Texas Clean Energy (IGCC) Project had received a $350 million award under Round 3 of DOE's Clean Coal Initiative, and is moving ahead nicely with a front-end engineering design (FEED) study being carried out by Siemens and Fluor - made it virtually impossible for the DOE to continue support of FutureGen as a parallel "state-of-the-art" IGCC project.

Other IGCC+CCS projects in Mississippi and California also appear to be moving ahead with DOE funding and/or other forms of government financial support.

Clearly, FutureGen missed it's window of opportunity and the choice was clear - kill it again or have it emerge in a different form. Opting for change has again saved the project.

Oxy-combustion retrofit of existing coal-steam plants is recognized globally as an important option for the future of coal-based power generation in a carbon-restrained world.

In that light, the announcement of FutureGen2, although coming as a surprise, immediately made a lot of sense to anyone keeping an eye on the situation.

US needs oxy-combustion demo
Supporters of IGCC technology (as well as those in and around Mattoon) might bemoan the loss of what might have been substantial government support of another new IGCC+CCS plant.

But, in my opinion, the change in FutureGen's direction is the right way to go.

DOE's own studies have shown the economic benefits of oxy-fuel combustion technology as a means for retrofitting existing coal plants to achieve real reductions in CO2 emissions.

Moreover, there are already a number of significant oxy-combustion demonstration projects underway in Europe, where it is widely accepted that retrofit for CO2 capture is an imperative.

Yes, Mattoon, it may be difficult to swallow yet another disappointment, but the US needs to support the development of its own oxy-combustion technology, and to support a commercial-scale demonstration of the technology.

With so many old coal-steam plants scheduled to be shut down due to their high emissions and huge carbon footprint, it could be that retrofit with new oxy-combustion boilers will prove to be the most cost effective way to keep these old plants online.

Is oxy-combustion ready?
At the very least, the parallel development of the Texas Clean Energy Project and FutureGen2 will provide an excellent way to obtain actual field data from the two main competing clean-coal technologies, operating at commercial scale, thus helping the US map out the future of coal-based power generation.

Is oxy-combustion technology ready for the scale-up to 200 MWe? Some think not - and say that FutureGen2 may be doomed to failure without more R&D. But B&W has already operated a pilot test unit, and the scale-up risk is considered to be manageable.

It looks like we'll all find out before too long - as long as FutureGen2 can get on track and avoid missing this new window of opportunity.

NETL Launches Reference Site
for Coal Gasification and IGCC
Technologies

The Office of Fossil Energy’s National Energy
Technology Laboratory (NETL) has launched a new
public website called "Gasifipedia," a comprehensive
online collection of resources to promote better
understanding of gasification and IGCC technologies.

For more details about the site, link to the Energy
Department's Fossil Energy website at: TechLine

For a direct link to the new reference site go to Gasifipedia

Dr. David H. Archer
Father of coal-based IGCC
1928-2010

Dave Archer, IGCC Pioneer - Westinghouse R&D
Adjunct Professor - Carnegie Mellon University

I guess that it's a personal thing with me, but the way I see it was Westinghouse's Dave Archer ("Dr. Dave") who should be considered as the father of the IGCC power plant concept.

And I'm saddened by the passing this past Thursday of an old friend, a nice guy and a technology pioneer.

Coal in gas turbines?
It was fall, 1973, when I joined the Westinghouse Gas Turbine Systems Division, and the Arab Oil Embargo was just taking effect. My first assignment, I soon learned, was to join the marketing effort that was going to save our business.

The days of cheap oil were over, and the buzz was all about "alternative fuels" for gas turbines. I was told to call Dr. David Archer at our R&D Center and learn all about the one idea that was going to save us. I soon learned that he was working on new ways to use coal in gas turbines!

Coal in gas turbines? Of course. What else? Cheap and plentiful domestic coal.


Combined cycles just taking hold
Ironically, the nascent concept of combined cycle power generation using large oil- or gas-fired gas turbines was just beginning to take hold. Record levels of orders were rolling in from all over the country. But almost all of these orders were now being canceled due to uncertainties in the global fuels market.

At the same time, the Clean Air Act of 1972 had just been passed, and the pressure was on the industry to find a way to cleanly use high sulfur coals. The use of scrubbers on exhaust stacks was seen as technically unsound, and much too expensive.

Were these parallel major developments to mean the end for both large coal-fired steam plants and for combined cycle plants at the same time?

Was nuclear power really the only answer? (Anyone remember "Power too Cheap to Meter"?)

Was my career in gas turbines going to be a short one?

Luckily, there were believers
Luckily for Westinghouse gas turbines (and for Siemens some 25 years later?) there were at least a few in upper management who strongly believed in the future of the combined cycle power plant. Even if traditional fuel sources were now in question, they saw ways for the concept to survive and grow. (Remember, this was even before the word "cogeneration" was invented.)

At the same time, these foresighted people saw how the combined cycle power plant could even provide an alternative way - through the use of gasification - to use high sulfur coal and still meet the tough new emission standards that were about to be promulgated under the Clean Air Act.

Enter Dr. David Archer - and IGCC
At the time Dave Archer, a manager at the Westinghouse R&D Center, was heading a group of mostly chemical engineers working on advanced concepts of integrating both fluidized bed coal combustion and air-blown fluidized bed coal gasification with combined cycle power generation.

When I called him to learn about the alternative fuels path for survival I felt that I was talking with the guru - and the creator of a great new concept that was not only going to save Westinghouse gas turbines but also give my new job a whole new meaning.

Although this all happened well before the coining of the term Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle, and the acronym "IGCC" (by EPRI? GE? both?), we were there - almost 40 years ago - at the beginning of a great idea.

Westinghouse was already testing low-BTU syngas fuel in modified W501B combustors, with DOE support, and we really thought that we were onto something very special.

A marketing strategy was developed to convince customers to stick to their plans to install our new PACE combined cycle plants. Our theme (sound familiar, even for today?):

• Gas or Oil - Now
• Syngas from Coal - Later

An idea that has come and gone - and come again
Well, a lot of water has flowed over the dam since then - and the idea of IGCC has come and gone and come again as the greatest thing since who-knows-what for improving the technology of coal-based power generation.

Entire careers in IGCC development and commercialization have also come and gone since I was first introduced to the idea by Dave Archer.

My own career with Westinghouse gas turbines lasted some 30 years. Unexpectedly, and thanks to Gas Turbine World, it returned to the promotion of IGCC about 5 years ago, shortly after I retired from Siemens-Westinghouse.

Happily, I heard again from Dave Archer when he saw the series of articles that we were publishing in support of gasification and IGCC. He was still working as adjunct professor at CMU teaching advanced power generation to graduate students.

In fact, it was only a few months ago that I last heard from him.

We had just posted the news item on the EPA putting pressure on the developers of the Kemper County (KY) IGCC project to consider natural gas as the primary fuel for their power plant, and their announcement that their IGCC plant was going "hybrid" - that is, separating the coal-to-gas plant from the gas-fired combined cycle plant.

Dave's comment - some 40 years after he fathered the concept as an answer to the Clean Air Act:

"It seems that EPA really wants to strangle IGCC before it takes a real breath.
Keep the faith?"

Fondly remembering Dr. Dave.

Harry Jaeger
Gasification Editor
Gas Turbine World Magazine


The following is reprinted from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

ARCHER DR. DAVID H.
On Thursday, June 24, 2010, age 82 of Ross Township formerly of West View.

Beloved husband of the late Justine (Garnic) Archer. Loving father of Catherine Archer, Miriam (Mac) McCann, Amy Archer & Marsi (Lance) Thrash; brother of Miriam Jeske, proud grandfather of Charles, Andy, Justine & Vivian McCann, and Jordan David, Tim & Bailey Thrash; also survived by 6 great-grandchildren; longtime friend & companion of Myrna Rombach.

Family will welcome friends Monday 2-4 & 6-8 p.m. at the SCHELLHAAS FUNERAL HOME, INC., 388 Center Ave., West View 15229. Service will be in Emanuel's Ev. Lutheran Church, 10 N. Fremont Ave., Bellevue 15202 on Tuesday at 11:00 a.m.

Dr. Archer was retired, Westinghouse Electric Corp.; Adjunct Professor, Carnegie Mellon University; Organist and Music Director, Emanuel's Ev. Lutheran Church; Member, National Academy of Engineers; Member, American Guild of Organists.

If desired memorials may be made in Dr. Archer's name to the Intelligent Workplace Program, Carnegie Mellon University, P.O. Box 371525, Pgh., PA 15251-7525 or Emanuel's Ev. Lutheran Church.