link to presentation

Report
Power Generation
Technologies
What’s the only thing that moves slower than the a glacier?
An IOU
COAL IS KING
2005
Source EPA
Trends Shaping Supply Dynamics
• Declining generation and retirement of coal
– Increase supply from new technology, renewables and
natural gas plants
• Flat or declining electricity sales
– Declining need for base load generation
• New emissions rules steering technology choice
• State-of-the-art technology is needed to provide
solutions
• Taking new technology to market need to happen
State-of-the-Art
Combustion Turbines
New Names (again)
7F/HA gas turbine portfolio comparison
GE’s 7F / 7HA Gas Turbine Portfolio
Large 60 Hz gas turbines
(Air cooled)
GT Output (MW)
NOx/CO Emissions (ppmvd)
GT Minimum Load in Emissions Compliance
7F.04
7F.05
7HA.01
7HA.02
187
225
275
330
GT 9/9
CC 2/2
GT 9/9
CC 2/2
GT 25/9
CC 2/2
GT 25/9
CC 2/2
48%, 90 MW
36%, 81 MW
30%, 83MW
30%, 99 MW
Compressor
18-stage
14-stage
14-stage
14-stage
Combustor
DLN 2.6
DLN 2.6
DLN2.6+AFS
DLN2.6+AFS
Power Turbine
3-stage
3-stage
4-stage
4-stage
11
11
10
12
Net Plant Output (MW)
567
688
813
996
Net Plant Efficiency (%)
59%
59.5%
>61%
>61%
Plant Start-up Time (minutes)
33
33
<30
<30
Plant Ramp Rate (MW/minute)
60
80
100
120
2x1 Combined
Cycle
Simple Cycle start times (minutes)
Performance and Turndown based on Gas Turbine World conditions; Combined Cycle emissions assume SCR and CO catalyst;
Comparison of the ~275 MW turbines
GE, MPSA, Siemens, and Alstom
Turbine Make/Model
Simple Cycle
GT Output (MW)
GT Efficiency
NOX/CO Emissions (ppmvd)
Min Load in Emissions Compliance
Start time to min load (minutes)
Start time to full load (minutes)
Combined Cycle
Net Plant Output (MW)
Net Plant Efficiency
Plant Start-up Times (minutes)
Plant Ramp Rate (MW/minute)
Available to Ship
GE 7HA.01
MPSA M501GAC
Siemens 8000H
Alstom GT24
275
>41%
GT 25/9 CC 2/2
30%, 83 MW
7
10
2x1
813
>61%
<30
100
2016
276
39.8%
GT 15/10 CC 2/2
50%, 138 MW
<24
<31
2x1
826
59.6%
<60
18
Yes
274
40.0%
GT 25/10 CC 2/2
50%, 137 MW
<15
2x1
824
>60%
30
50
Yes
231
40.0%
GT 15/10 CC 2/2
10%, 23 MW
2x1
664
>58.4%
30
45
Yes
Energy Storage Getting Traction
Large Scale
• Pumped Hydro
• Compressed Air
• Molten Salt
Small Scale
• Batteries
• Flywheels
• Superconducting
Magnets
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, based on Energy Storage Association.
Energy Storage Projects in Development
• California 1.3 GW Energy Storage Mandate: Will require
multiple large and small installations on both sides of meter.
• Puerto Rico: Energy storage and backup required on all new
wind and solar projects (mostly batteries with diesel backup)
• Pumped Hydro: FERC has issued preliminary permits to 45
projects for over 43,000 MW.
• CAES: APEX Bethel (Texas); Chamisa Energy (Texas); PG&E
(California).
• Utility Scale Batteries: Large manufacturers (ABB, GE, Hitachi,
Tesla) jumping into the space to compete with smaller already
in the space (AES Energy Storage, A123, NGK, Xtreme)
Conclusions
• Change has been tremendous over the past
ten years
• Coal retirements will likely accelerate
• Renewables, advancements in technology and
new technologies will be required to fill the
coal gap
• We all get to be a part of modernizing the
nations power supply system

similar documents