Cost and Performance Baseline for 

Fossil Energy Plants

Volume 4: Coal-to-Liquids via FischerTropsch Synthesis

October 15, 2014

DOE/NETL-2011/1477

OFFICE OF FOSSIL ENERGY

National Energy 

Technology Laboratory
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

Disclaimer

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States 

Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their 

employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or 

responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, 

product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. 

Reference therein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, 

trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, 

recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views 

and opinions of authors expressed therein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United 

States Government or any agency thereof.
NETL Contact:

National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL)

Morgan Summers, General Engineer

Office of Program Performance and Benefits

Prepared By:

Energy Sector Planning and Analysis (ESPA)

Vasant Shah, Norma J. Kuehn, Marc J. Turner

Sheldon J. Kramer

Consultant

This report was prepared by Energy Sector Planning and Analysis (ESPA) for the United States 

Department of Energy (DOE), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). This work was 

completed under DOE NETL Contract Number DE-FE0004001. This work was performed 

under ESPA Task 341.02.07.

The authors wish to acknowledge the excellent guidance, contributions, and cooperation of the 

NETL staff, particularly:

Thomas J. Tarka, NETL, Team Lead, OSEAP

Kristin Gerdes, NETL, Office Director, OPPB

John Wimer, NETL, Office Director, SCC

DOE Contract Number DE-FE0004001
This page intentionally left blank.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

i

Table of Contents

Executive Summary.........................................................................................................................1

Plant Design & Constraints..............................................................................................................1

Performance Results ........................................................................................................................3

Economic Results.............................................................................................................................3

Cost Sensitivity to Financing Structures and Capital Charge Factors.............................................5

1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................7

1.1 Site Description....................................................................................................................7

1.2 Design Coal..........................................................................................................................8

1.3 Environmental Requirements...............................................................................................8

1.3.1 Carbon Dioxide....................................................................................................................9

1.3.2 Mercury..............................................................................................................................10

1.4 Raw Water Usage ..............................................................................................................10

1.5 Balance of Plant .................................................................................................................12

1.6 Economic Analysis ............................................................................................................13

1.6.1 Capital Costs......................................................................................................................14

1.6.2 Production Costs and Expenses.........................................................................................15

1.6.3 Cost of Production of Liquid Fuels....................................................................................16

2 Plant Configuration............................................................................................................18

3 System Description ............................................................................................................20

3.1 Synthesis Gas Production ..................................................................................................21

3.1.1 Air Separation Unit............................................................................................................27

3.1.2 Coal Drying........................................................................................................................28

3.1.3 Gasifier...............................................................................................................................29

3.1.4 Particulate Removal...........................................................................................................29

3.1.5 Gas Scrubbing....................................................................................................................30

3.1.6 Water Gas Shift through Acid Gas Removal.....................................................................30

3.1.7 CO2 Compression and Dehydration...................................................................................33

3.1.8 Claus Unit ..........................................................................................................................33

3.1.9 Zinc Oxide .........................................................................................................................33

3.2 Fischer-Tropsch Synthesis.................................................................................................34

3.3 Product Recovery...............................................................................................................44

3.4 Recycle Gas Loop..............................................................................................................45

3.5 Product Upgrading.............................................................................................................45

3.5.1 Naphtha Hydrotreaters.......................................................................................................45

3.5.2 Middle Distillate Hydrotreaters .........................................................................................45

3.5.3 Wax Hydrocracking...........................................................................................................46

3.6 Power Production...............................................................................................................47

3.6.1 Combustion Turbine Generators........................................................................................47

3.6.2 Steam Turbine Power Generation......................................................................................49

3.6.3 Flare Stack .........................................................................................................................50

4 Performance Summary and Mass Balances.......................................................................51

4.1.1 Carbon Balance..................................................................................................................53

4.1.2 Sulfur Balance....................................................................................................................54

4.1.3 Water Balance....................................................................................................................54

5 Cost Estimation Results.....................................................................................................56
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

ii

5.1 Capital and Operating Costs ..............................................................................................56

5.2 Cost of Production .............................................................................................................69

5.3 Cost of Carbon Capture .....................................................................................................73

6 Conclusions and Recommendations..................................................................................74

6.1 Conclusions........................................................................................................................74

6.2 Recommendations for Further Study.................................................................................74

7 References..........................................................................................................................75
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

iii

List of Exhibits

Exhibit ES-1 Plant performance summary ..................................................................................... 3

Exhibit ES-2 Capital, operating cost, and COP summary .............................................................. 4

Exhibit ES-3 TOC ($1,000) with error bars.................................................................................... 5

Exhibit ES-4 Comparison of ECO bbl and EPD bbl ...................................................................... 6

Exhibit 1-1 Site ambient conditions................................................................................................ 7

Exhibit 1-2 Site characteristics ....................................................................................................... 7

Exhibit 1-3 Design coal analysis – Illinois No. 6 ........................................................................... 8

Exhibit 1-4 BACT environmental design basis.............................................................................. 9

Exhibit 1-5 Standards of performance for electric utility steam-generating units built, 

reconstructed, or modified after February 28, 2005................................................................ 9

Exhibit 1-6 Balance of plant design requirements........................................................................ 12

Exhibit 1-7 Process and cooling water properties......................................................................... 13

Exhibit 1-8 Features of an AACE Class 4 cost estimate .............................................................. 14

Exhibit 1-9 Financial structure for fuels projects ......................................................................... 16

Exhibit 1-10 Financial assumptions for PSFM............................................................................. 17

Exhibit 3-1 Coal-to-liquids process flow diagram (red items only in sequestration case) ........... 20

Exhibit 3-2 Block flow diagram of the gasification, syngas shift, and acid gas removal area 

(sequestration only systems shown in red) ........................................................................... 22

Exhibit 3-3 Stream table for the gasification, syngas shift, and acid gas removal area – CO2

sequestration case.................................................................................................................. 23

Exhibit 3-4 Stream table for the gasification, syngas shift, and acid gas removal area – CO2 vent 

case........................................................................................................................................ 25

Exhibit 3-5 Typical ASU process schematic ............................................................................... 28

Exhibit 3-6 F-T reactor syngas operating parameters for both cases............................................ 30

Exhibit 3-7 Rectisol process flow diagram example .................................................................... 32

Exhibit 3-8 Simplified representation of the F-T synthesis section.............................................. 35

Exhibit 3-9 Block flow diagram for the F-T synthesis and product upgrading area .................... 37

Exhibit 3-10 Stream table for the F-T synthesis and product upgrading area – CO2 sequestration

............................................................................................................................................... 38

Exhibit 3-11 Stream table for the F-T synthesis and product upgrading area – CO2 vent ........... 41

Exhibit 3-12 Diesel properties...................................................................................................... 46

Exhibit 3-13 Wax hydrocracking model product yield distributions............................................ 46

Exhibit 3-14 Block flow diagram for the fuel gas preparation and power generation area.......... 48

Exhibit 3-15 Fuel gas LHV comparison between turbine and F-T models.................................. 49

Exhibit 4-1 Plant performance summary – CO2 sequestration case ............................................. 52

Exhibit 4-2 Plant performance summary – CO2 vent case ........................................................... 53

Exhibit 4-3 Elemental carbon mass balance – CO2 sequestration case ........................................ 54

Exhibit 4-4 Elemental carbon mass balance – CO2 vent case ...................................................... 54

Exhibit 4-5 Water balance – CO2 sequestration case.................................................................... 55

Exhibit 4-6 Water balance – CO2 vent case.................................................................................. 55

Exhibit 5-1 Total plant cost summary with CO2 sequestration..................................................... 57

Exhibit 5-2 Total operating and maintenance costs with CO2 sequestration................................ 62

Exhibit 5-3 Total plant cost summary – CO2 vent........................................................................ 63

Exhibit 5-4 Total operating and maintenance costs – CO2 vent ................................................... 68

Exhibit 5-5 Cost estimation results summary (CO2 sequestration) ............................................. 69
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

iv

Exhibit 5-6 COP sensitivity to market price of electricity............................................................ 70

Exhibit 5-7 Comparison of TOC per F-T bbl, ECO bbl, and EPD bbl......................................... 71

Exhibit 5-8 FT-Liquids COP sensitivity to CCF .......................................................................... 72

Exhibit 5-9 Cost summary of CTL facility with and without CCS .............................................. 73
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

v

Acronyms and Abbreviations

AEO Annual Energy Outlook

AGR Acid gas removal

ASTM formerly American Society for 

Testing and Materials

ASU Air separation unit

ATR Autothermal reformer

API American Petroleum Institute

BACT Best available control technology

bbl barrel

BEC Bare erected cost

BFD Block flow diagram

BFW Boiler feed water

bpd barrel per day

Btu British thermal unit

Btu/hr British thermal unit per hour

Btu/kWh British thermal unit per kilowatt 

hour

Btu/lb British thermal unit per pound

CBTL Coal and biomass to liquids

CBM Coal bed methane

CCF Capital charge factor

CCS Carbon capture and sequestration

CF Capacity factor

CFM Cubic feet per minute

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CH4 Methane

cm Centimeter

CO Carbon monoxide

CO2 Carbon dioxide

COP Cost of production of liquid fuels

COR Contracting Officer's Representative

COS Carbonyl sulfide

CT Combustion turbine

CTG Combustion turbine-generator

CTL Coal-to-liquids

CWR Circulating water return

CWS Circulating water system

CWT Cold water temperature

DCA Direct contact aftercooler

DOE Department of Energy

ECO Equivalent crude oil

EIA Energy Information Administration

EOR Enhanced oil recovery

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

EPC Engineer/procure/construct

EPCM Engineering/procurement/

construction management

EPD Equivalent petroleum diesel

ESPA Energy Sector Planning and 

Analysis

F-T, FT Fischer-Tropsch

ft Foot, Feet

FTL Fischer-Tropsch liquid

gal Gallon

GE General Electric

GHG Greenhouse gas

GJ Gigajoules

GJ/hr Gigajoules per hour

gpm Gallons per minute

GT Gas turbine

h, hr Hour

H2 Hydrogen

H2O Water

H2S Hydrogen sulfide

HAP Hazardous air pollutant

HCl Hydrochloric acid

Hg Mercury

HDPE High density polyethylene

HHV Higher heating value

hp Horsepower

HP High pressure

HRSG Heat recovery steam generator

HVAC Heating, ventilating, and air 

conditioning

IGCC Integrated gasification combined 

cycle

IOU Investor owned utility

IP Intermediate pressure

IRR Internal rate or return

IRROE Internal rate of return on equity

ISBL Inside battery limits 

ISO International Standards 

Organization

kg/hr Kilogram per hour

kJ Kilojoules

kJ/hr Kilojoules per hour

kJ/kg Kilojoules per kilogram

km Kilometer

kV Kilovolt

kW Kilowatt

kWe Kilowatts electric
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

vi

kWh Kilowatt-hour

kWt Kilowatts thermal

lb Pound

lb/106Btu Pounds per million British thermal 

units (also lb/MMBtu)

lb/hr Pounds per hour

lb/ft2Pounds per square foot

lb/MMBtu Pounds per million British thermal 

units (also lb/106Btu)

lb/MWh Pounds per megawatt hour

LHV Lower heating value

LNB Low NOx burner

LP Low pressure

lpm Liters per minute

m Meters

mg Milligram

m/min Meters per minute

m

3

/min Cubic meter per minute

MMBtu Million British thermal units (also 

shown as 106 Btu)

MMBtu/hr Million British thermal units (also 

shown as 106 Btu) per hour

MP Medium Pressure

MPa Megapascals

MWe Megawatts electric

MWh Megawatt-hour

MWt Megawatts thermal

N/A Not applicable

NETL National Energy Technology 

Laboratory

NGCC Natural gas combined cycle

NH3 Ammonia

NOx Nitrogen oxides

NSPS New Source Performance Standards

OPPB Office of Program Performance and 

Benefits

O&M Operation and maintenance

PM Particulate matter 

PM10 Particulate matter measuring 10 μm 

or less

POTW Publicly owned treatment works

ppm Parts per million 

ppmv Parts per million volume

ppmvd Parts per million volume, dry 

PSA Pressure swing adsorption

PSFM Power systems financial model

psia Pounds per square inch absolute

psid Pounds per square inch differential

psig Pounds per square inch gage

PT Product transport

RDS Research and Development 

Solutions, LLC

RMA Raw material acquisition

RMT Raw material transport

ROE Return on equity

S# Stoichiometric number

SGC Synthesis gas cooler

SGS Sour gas shift

SO2 Sulfur dioxide

SOx Oxides of sulfur

STG Steam turbine generator

SWS Sour water stripper

TASC Total as-spent cost

TGTU Tail gas treating unit

TOC Total overnight cost 

Tonne Metric ton (1,000 kg)

TPC Total plant cost

TPD Tons per day

TPH Tons per hour

TSS Total suspended solids

T&S Transport and storage

ULSD Ultra-low sulfur diesel 

U.S. United States

USC Ultra-supercritical

VGO Vacuum gas oil

vol% Volume percent

WGS Water gas shift

wt% Weight percent

WTI West Texas Intermediate

WTW Well-to-Wheels

ZnO Zinc oxide

ZnS Zinc sulfide

$/bbl Dollars per barrel

μS/cm micro Siemens per cm, a measure of 

conductivity

C Celsius

F Fahrenheit
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

1

Executive Summary

Economic and national security concerns related to liquid fuels have revived national interest in 

alternative liquid fuel sources. Coal-to-Fischer-Tropsch fuels production is a major technology 

option for many states and for the Department of Energy (DOE). This report examines the 

technical and economic feasibility of a commercial coal-to-liquids (CTL) facility in the Illinois 

coal basin that nominally produces 50,000 barrels per day (bbl/day) F-T liquids using an ironbased catalyst with an expected final product split of approximately 70:30 diesel/naphtha. The 

facility employs dry-feed Shell-type gasification technology and Fischer-Tropsch (F-T/FT) 

technology to produce commercial-grade diesel and naphtha liquids from medium-sulfur 

bituminous coal. 

A minimal amount of excess electrical power is also produced and assumed to be sold into the 

power market to provide an operating credit in the cost estimation calculations.

The scope of this study includes:

- Development of a conceptual plant design

- Modeling and analysis of the process

- Capital cost estimate

- Economic viability assessment

Where incentives (e.g., loan guarantees) are available, this study concludes that a CTL facility is 

economically competitive with crude oil prices as low as $107 per barrel1– in the scenario where 

CO2 is not sequestered – or $116 per barrel in the case where CO2 is sequestered for greenhouse 

gas (GHG) impact mitigation1.

As removal of CO2 from the shifted gas is inherent to F-T operations, a large portion of the cost

of capture is already incorporated into the design of a typical F-T facility. The low incremental 

cost of sequestration – about $9 per barrel of Equivalent Crude Oil, or $0.27 per gallon of 

petroleum diesel equivalent fuel – demonstrates the relatively low costs of additional capture 

requirement and compression.

If no incentives are available (using the commercial fuels financing structure), the CTL facility is 

economically viable when the crude oil prices are $125 per barrel – in the scenario where CO2 is 

not sequestered – or $134 per barrel in the case where CO2 is sequestered for GHG impact 

mitigation1.

Plant Design & Constraints

The initial plant design used for this study was based on the April 2007 National Energy 

Technology Laboratory (NETL) report, “Baseline Technical and Economic Assessment of a 

Commercial Scale Fischer-Tropsch Liquids Facility.” [1] The work in this study built upon and 

incorporated several design changes and improvements that were identified during that analysis 

 

1The crude oil values listed above are based on Energy Information Administration (EIA) data of historic spot prices 

from June 2009 through November 2013 for the various fuel types. These were used to develop correlations 

between the various fuel prices and the West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude oil price (Crude oil: Ultra-low sulfur 

diesel is 1.25 and Naphtha:Diesel is 0.70). The correlations were used to estimate the Equivalent Crude Oil (ECO) 

price. The ECO price is the minimum market price for crude oil at which the first-year COPs will be met.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

2

and through other work, such as the January 2009 NETL report, “Affordable, Low-Carbon 

Diesel Fuel from Domestic Coal and Biomass.” [2] Design changes from the April 2007 study 

include:

1. The gasifier system was changed from the ConocoPhillips E-GasTM system to a dry-feed, 

single-stage, entrained-flow system similar to a Shell Global Solutions commercial design.

2. The operations of the F-T liquids upgrading units were altered to achieve a product split 

emphasizing diesel fuel production over naphtha (approximately 70:30). Specifically, the 

wax hydrocracking unit was adjusted to provide the desired diesel yield.

3. The process configuration was changed to increase the amount of CO2 captured for storage 

by adding a new water-gas shift (WGS) reactor prior to the combined cycle power generation 

step to convert CO to CO2, and by employing a dual-stage Rectisol®unit upstream of the F-T 

Synthesis loop for CO2 separation.

4. A second scenario was added in order to ascertain the incremental cost of CO2 sequestration. 

In this scenario, the separated CO2 is vented to the atmosphere instead of compressing, 

transporting, and storing it. The CO2 is still separated to prevent the build-up of inert CO2 in 

the recycle loop and otherwise reduce equipment sizes, and consequently capital costs. 

5. The system design incorporated low-cost efforts to reduce water usage.

The CTL plant design that was evaluated utilizes an iron-based catalyst and a low-temperature FT reactor. The concept includes a total of eight gasifiers that produce syngas, which is cleaned 

and combined before being ducted to the F-T reactor. 

Vapor products from the second-stage reactors (those leaving the F-T synthesis section) are sent 

to a cyclone to prevent liquid carryover. They are then cooled and sent to a three-phase 

separator. The hot condensate is sent to the product upgrading processes. The remaining vapors 

are processed for CO2 removal, oxygenate removal, dehydration, and additional hydrocarbon 

recovery. The majority of the resulting tail-gas vapor is recycled to the F-T reactor, with the 

remainder being processed in the hydrogen recovery unit.

The remaining pre-fuel gas from the hydrogen recovery unit is mixed with the light gases 

produced in the hydrocarbon upgrading sections and the off-gas from the wax stream. In the 

case of the CO2 sequestration case, this fuel gas is shifted to maximize CO2 capture potential. In 

both cases, a portion of the fuel gas is separated out for combustion in direct-fired heaters, which 

allows for more steam from the heat recovery to be directed to electrical power production. An 

additional portion of fuel gas is utilized for coal drying and the remainder is sent to the 

combustion turbines.

The plant was designed with the goal to operate independent of the bulk electric power system 

(i.e. the power grid) during steady-state operations – producing enough power for plant needs –

while minimizing the production of export power (export power was desired to be less than 10 

percent of total electrical power production). The total amount of excess electrical power output 

varies based on a combination of the internal heat requirements (consumption of fuel gas) and 

facility heat sources (available for steam production) as well as on whether CO2 captured at the 

facility is to be sequestered or merely vented to the atmosphere due to the large electrical load 

associated with compression. 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

3

The electrical power was produced via two sources and in the following ways: 1) the steam from 

the F-T reactor and from the combustion turbine heat recovery unit were combined and utilized 

in steam turbines, and 2) the aforementioned fuel gas by-product from the F-T process was 

combusted in off-the-shelf GE turbines, which were sized specifically to the available fuel flow 

in order to achieve the goal of minimizing the export power. 

The sequestration case achieves the goal of producing less than 10 percent excess electricity (4.6 

MWe); however, as the vent case was designed to have the same coal flow rate as the 

sequestration case in order to maintain a liquids output of 50,000 bbl/day, it produces 97.1 MWe

and consequently does not meet the excess electricity production limit.

Performance Results

Total plant performance data are summarized in Exhibit ES-1. Both facilities were designed to 

nominally produce 50,000 bpd of liquid fuels, but the CO2 vent case is slightly more thermally 

efficient owing to the reduced parasitic load (the result of not having to compress the CO2). 

Exhibit ES-1 Plant performance summary

CO2 Sequestration 

Case CO2 Vent Case

As-received Coal Feed Rate, tonne/day (tpd) 19,056 (21,006) 19,056 (21,006)

Syngas feed rate, lb/hr 2,498,396 2,498,396

Fuel gas recycle rate, lb/hr 743,921 743,921

Diesel Production, bbl/day 35,230 (70.5%) 35,230 (70.5%)

Naphtha Production, bbl/day 14,762 (29.5%) 14,762 (29.5%)

Gross Plant Power, MWe 427 473

Net Plant Power for Export, MWe 4.7 97.1

Carbon Dioxide Captured, tonne/day (tpd) 23,954 (26,405) 23,196 (25,569)

Carbon Dioxide Sequestered, tonne/day (tpd) 23,954 (26,405) n/a

The CTL plant is capable of producing 35,230 bbl/day of commercial-grade diesel liquid 

(70.5 percent) and 14,762 bbl/day of F-T naphtha liquids (29.5 percent). The naphtha would be 

shipped to a refinery for further upgrading into commercial-grade end products or for use as a 

feedstock for the chemicals industry.

Economic Results

The capital and operating costs, as well as the breakeven selling prices required for the project to 

be economically viable (meeting a 20 percent Internal Rate of Return on Equity [IRROE]), are 

summarized in Exhibit ES-2. As shown, a commercial-scale CTL facility will require 

approximately $6.4 and $6.5 billion in total overnight cost for the CO2 vent case and CO2

sequestration cases, respectively, ranging between $127,996 and $130,662 per barrel of F-T 

liquids daily production capacity ($/bbl/day). For comparison purposes, the TOC values are

shown in Exhibit ES-3 in thousands of dollars ($1,000) with error bars demonstrating the impact 

of the +30%/-15% accuracy (see Section 1.6.1) in the available cost estimates for this study and 

consistent with the screening study level of design engineering. 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

4

The primary figure-of-merit in this report is the cost of production (COP) (a.k.a. required selling 

price) expressed in $/bbl of product. The COP values were calculated using the Power Systems 

Financial Model (PSFM) and estimated to be the value that yields a net present value of zero at a 

given internal rate of return on equity (IRROE) for 30 years of operation based on the assumed 

financial structure and escalations. The COP was assumed to escalate at three percent per year 

for the thirty-year economic life of the plant. All costs are expressed in June 2011 dollars. Two 

financial structures were assumed for calculating the figures-of-merit. These structures are based 

on typical values for fuel projects with and without loan guarantees or government subsidies. 

The results are listed in Exhibit ES-2.

Two additional figures-of-merit included in this study are the equivalent crude oil (ECO) price 

and the equivalent petroleum diesel (EPD) price. These are the theoretical crude oil and 

petroleum based diesel prices, based on historic data that would produce the calculated COP

values. Both of the equivalent prices take into account the differences in energy content between 

the F-T and petroleum-derived fuels (explained further in Section 1.6.3). These results are also 

listed in Exhibit ES-2.

For cases with loan guarantee incentives, the facility will be economically competitive with 

traditional (or petroleum) means of fuel production when crude oil prices are between $107/bbl 

and $116/bbl for the CO2 vent and sequestration cases, respectively. This equates to a 

petroleum-diesel equivalent price of $3.18/gallon and $3.44/gallon (prices do not include federal 

or state taxes) for the CO2 vent and sequestration cases, respectively. The fuel produced in the 

sequestration case is more expensive due to the compression, transport, and storage costs, as 

evidenced by the positive value for the incremental cost of CCS.

Exhibit ES-2 Capital, operating cost, and COP summary 

CO2

Sequestration CO2 Vent Incr. CCS Cost

Total Overnight Cost, $1000 6,532,052 6,398,760 133,292

Total Overnight Cost, ($/bbl/day) 130,662 127,996 2,666

Total As Spent Cost*, $1000 7,494,877

[7,715,660]

7,341,938

[7,558,216]

152,939

[157,444]

Total As Spent Cost*, ($/bbl/day) 149,922 [154,388] 146,862 [151,189] 3,060 [3,150]

Total annual fixed O&M, $1000 200,854 197,405 3,448

Total variable O&M (90% CF), $1000 130,076 127,370 2,706

Total annual fuel cost (90% CF), $1000 473,377 473,377 0

Total annual power credit (90% CF), $1000 -2,149 -44,844 42,695

COP F-T Diesel, $/bblFTD 133.2 [154.2] 123.1 [143.7] 10.1 [10.5]

COP F-T Naphtha, $/bblFTN 92.8 [107.4] 85.8 [100.1] 7.0 [7.3]

Equivalent Crude Oil Price*, $/bblECO 115.6 [133.8] 106.9 [124.7] 8.7 [9.1]

Equivalent Petroleum Diesel Price*, $/bblEPD 144.5 [167.2] 133.6 [155.8] 10.9 [11.4]

*

Values are shown for two financial structures. The first (lower) value is based on the loan guarantee 

finance structure. The second (higher/bracketed) value is based on the commercial fuels finance 

structure. 

All costs in June 2011 dollars.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

5

Exhibit ES-3 TOC ($1,000) with error bars 

Source: NETL

Cost Sensitivity to Financing Structures and Capital Charge Factors

Two financial structures were examined in this study: the first structure, considered to be 

representative of a commercial fuels project, is assumed to have no loan guarantees, while the 

second structure assumed moderate government incentives – in the form of government loan 

guarantees. Both scenarios face a high degree of market risk as the facilities involve a large 

amount of capital that must be financed with revenues from a volatile commodity fuels market; 

co-production of electricity via an integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) plant allows 

for diversification of products which dampens the impact of the volatile fuels market. The COPs

for both structures are listed in Exhibit ES-2. The costs include a credit of $60/MWh for excess 

power generated. The sensitivity of economic results to the power credit and different financing 

structures is included in Section 5.2. 

To achieve economic viability, a commercial-scale CTL facility equipped for CO2 sequestration 

will require crude oil prices to be above $133.8/bbl (in the case with no incentives) and

$115.6/bbl (in the moderate incentives case) to obtain parity with petroleum derived diesel. 

Exhibit ES-4 summarizes the results of the study, presenting the equivalent crude oil prices and 

equivalent petroleum diesel prices for each scenario. The sequestration case with no loan 

guarantees has the highest ECO price and EPD price ($133.8/bbl and $167.2/bbl, respectively). 

The case that includes incentives and does not sequester CO2 has the lowest ECO price and EPD

$0

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

$5,000,000

$6,000,000

$7,000,000

$8,000,000

$9,000,000

Sequestration Venting Total Over Night Cost, 1000$

Delta = $133,292
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

6

price ($106.9/bbl and $133.6/bbl, respectively) due primarily to the lower CCF, but also in part 

to the increased power production, reduced auxiliary loads, and reduced capital cost resulting 

from the exclusion of CO2 compression systems.

Exhibit ES-4 Comparison of ECO bbl and EPD bbl

Source: NETL

133.8

124.7

115.6

106.9

167.2

155.9

144.5

133.6

0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

100

120

140

160

180

Sequestration Vent Sequestration Vent

No Incentives Incentives

$ per bbl

ECO

EPD
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

7

1 Introduction

The objective of this report is to assess the design and financial performance of a commercialscale coal-to-Fischer-Tropsch liquids plant using a dry-feed Shell Global Solutions-type 

commercial gasifier with optimum carbon capture. 

1.1 Site Description 

All plants in this study are assumed to be located at a generic plant site in the Midwestern United 

States, with ambient conditions and site characteristics as presented in Exhibit 1-1 and 

Exhibit 1-2.

Exhibit 1-1 Site ambient conditions

Elevation, ft 0

Barometric Pressure, psia 14.7

Design Ambient Temperature, Dry Bulb, F 59

Design Ambient Temperature, Wet Bulb, F 51.5

Design Ambient Relative Humidity, % 60

Exhibit 1-2 Site characteristics

Location Greenfield, Midwestern United States

Topography Level

Size, acres 300

Transportation Rail, Road, Pipeline

Ash Disposal Off Site

Water Municipal (50%) / Groundwater (50%)

Access Landlocked, with access by railway and highway

CO2 Storage Delivered to plant boundary at 15.2 MPa (2,215 psia)

The following design parameters are considered site-specific and are not quantified for this 

study. Allowances for normal conditions and construction are included in the cost estimates.

 Flood plain considerations

 Existing soil/site conditions

 Water discharges and reuse

 Rainfall/snowfall criteria

 Seismic design

 Buildings/enclosures

 Fire protection

 Local code height requirements

 Noise regulations, and their impact on site and surrounding area
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

8

1.2 Design Coal 

The design coal assumed for this study is presented in Exhibit 1-3. 

Exhibit 1-3 Design coal analysis – Illinois No. 6

Rank Bituminous 

Seam Illinois No. 6 (Herrin)

Source Old Ben mine [3]

Proximate Analysis (weight %)a

As Received Dry

Moisture 11.12 0.00

Ash 9.70 10.91

Volatile Matter 34.99 39.37

Fixed Carbon 44.19 49.72

Total 100.00 100.00

Sulfur 2.51 2.82

HHV, kJ/kg 27,113 30,506

HHV, Btu/lb 11,666 13,126

LHV, kJ/kg 26,151 29,544

LHV, Btu/lb 11,252 12,712

Ultimate Analysis (weight %)

As Received Dry

Moisture 11.12 0.00

Carbon 63.75 71.72

Hydrogen 4.50 5.06

Nitrogen 1.25 1.41

Chlorine 0.29 0.33

Sulfur 2.51 2.82

Ash 9.70 10.91

Oxygenb6.88 7.75

Total 100.00 100.00

Notes:

a

The proximate analysis assumes sulfur as volatile matter

b

By difference

1.3 Environmental Requirements

The environmental control equipment used in the conceptual design conforms to best available 

control technology (BACT) guidelines, which are summarized in Exhibit 1-4.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

9

Exhibit 1-4 BACT environmental design basis

Pollutant

Environmental Design Basis

Control Technology Limit

Sulfur Oxides (SO2)

Rectisol®/Selexol/Econamine 

Plus/Sulfinol-M + Claus Plant 99+% or ≤ 0.050 lb/106

Btu

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) LNB and N2 Dilution primarily 

with humidification as needed 15 ppmvd (@ 15% O2)

Particulate Matter (PM) Cyclone/Barrier Filter/Wet 

Scrubber/AGR Absorber 0.006 lb/106

Btu

Mercury (Hg) Activated Carbon Bed 95% removal

While the coal-to-liquids (CTL) process is considered a petrochemical complex, the regulations 

on emissions considered in this study were for fossil-fuel-fired power plants. The current 

regulation governing new fossil-fuel-fired power plants is the New Source Performance 

Standards (NSPS) published in February 2006 and shown in Exhibit 1-5. These standards 

supersede the previous performance standards established in 1978. [4] The new standards apply 

to units with the capacity to generate greater than 73 MW of power by burning fossil fuels, as 

well as cogeneration units that sell more than 25 MW of power and more than one-third of the 

potential output capacity to any utility power distribution system. The rule also applies to 

combined cycle, including integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) plants, and combined 

heat and power combustion turbines that burn 75 percent or more synthetic-coal gas.

Exhibit 1-5 Standards of performance for electric utility steam-generating units built, 

reconstructed, or modified after February 28, 2005

Pollutant

New Units Reconstructed Units Modified Units

Emission 

Limit 

% 

Reduction

Emission 

Limit 

(lb/106Btu)

% 

Reduction

Emission 

Limit 

(lb/106Btu) 

% 

Reduction

PM 0.015 lb/106

Btu 99.9 0.015 99.9 0.015 99.8

SO2 1.4 lb/MWh 95 0.15 95 0.15 90

NOx 1.0 lb/MWh N/A 0.11 N/A 0.15 N/A

The BACT emission limits assumed for this study exceed the emission requirements of the 2006 

NSPS. It is possible that state and local requirements could supersede NSPS or BACT and 

impose even more stringent requirements. 

1.3.1 Carbon Dioxide

For both the sequestration and vent cases, the basis is an optimum removal based on carbon input 

in the coal, and excluding carbon in the Fischer-Tropsch (F-T) product and the carbon that exits 

the gasifier with the slag. CO2 is captured from the syngas leaving the gasifiers using the 

Rectisol®process, from the vapor stream exiting the F-T reactor using a proprietary amine CO2-

removal system, and in the sequestration case only CO2 is captured from the fuel gas 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

10

downstream of the water gas shift (WGS) unit using a proprietary amine system. The design 

includes compression of the recovered CO2 to 2,215 psia for pipeline transport at the plant 

boundary. The CO2 is transported 100 km (62 miles) via pipeline to a geologic sequestration 

field for injection into a saline formation. The CO2 is transported and injected as a supercritical 

fluid in order to avoid two-phase flow and achieve maximum efficiency. CO2 transport and

storage (T&S) performance specifications were independently estimated by the National Energy 

Technology Laboratory (NETL). The T&S estimation methodology is explained in more detail 

in the Quality Guidelines for Energy System Studies (QGESS) document “Carbon Dioxide 

Transport and Storage Costs in NETL Studies.” [5]

1.3.2 Mercury

The mercury content in the Illinois No. 6 coal is reported as a mean value of 0.09 ppm (dry 

basis), with a standard deviation of 0.06, based on 34 samples of coal shipped by Illinois mines. 

Mercury capture from the syngas via activated carbon is assumed to be 95 percent, based on 

experience at the Eastman Chemical plant. If additional capture is necessary, dual carbon beds 

can be used to achieve greater than 99 percent mercury removal.

1.4 Raw Water Usage

Raw water makeup is assumed to be provided 50 percent by publicly owned treatment works 

(POTW) and 50 percent from groundwater. The amount of raw water usage for an IGCC case 

has been estimated in a previous study done for NETL. [5] In that study, raw water usage was 

defined as the water metered from a raw water source and used in the plant processes for any and 

all purposes, such as cooling tower makeup, condenser makeup, ash handling makeup, syngas 

humidification, and quench system makeup. In that study, as in the current study, the plant is

equipped with an evaporative cooling tower, and all process blowdown streams are treated and 

recycled to the cooling tower. This is the “lowest hanging fruit” on the water minimization 

system. 

Since the F-T plant differs from an IGCC plant, the technique for estimating water usage is 

different and based on the following:

1. The power generation processes were modeled in the Aspen process simulation program,

which calculates the required cooling water load and stack water loss.

2. The Aspen model for the F-T synthesis area and the product upgrading area was used to 

predict the required F-T cooling water load.

3. The total of the cooling tower blowdown and vaporization losses was predicted based on 

the estimated cooling water circulation rate.

Other water minimization options are possible but were not factored into the present study. One 

option to reduce the makeup water demand would be to add a reverse osmosis unit and treat the 

cooling tower system blowdown streams and recycle them either to the cooling tower or steam 

systems. However, most of the water loss is evaporative loss from the cooling towers. More aircooled heat exchangers could be added to reduce the load on the cooling tower and its 

corresponding evaporative losses. 

Another water minimization option includes recovering water from the coal dryer. The Shellbased gasification process uses a dry-feed system, which is sensitive to the coal moisture content. 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

11

Coal moisture consists of two parts: surface moisture and inherent moisture. For coal to flow 

smoothly through the lock hoppers, the surface moisture must be removed. The Illinois No. 6 

coal used in this study contains 11.12 percent total moisture on an as-received basis. It was 

assumed that the coal must be dried to 5 percent moisture to allow for smooth flow through the 

dry-feed system. The coal is simultaneously crushed and dried in the coal mill then delivered to 

a surge hopper with an approximate 2-hour capacity. The drying medium is provided by 

combining the off-gas from the Claus plant and a slipstream of clean syngas and passing them 

through an incinerator. The incinerator flue gas, with an oxygen content of 6 volume percent, is 

then used to dry the coal in the mill. The design does not include the recovery of water from the 

coal drying system.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

12

1.5 Balance of Plant

Assumed balance of plant requirements are listed in Exhibit 1-6.

Exhibit 1-6 Balance of plant design requirements

Cooling system Recirculating, Evaporative Cooling Tower

Cooling tower makeup water composition is available. [3]

Fuel and Other storage

Coal 30 days

Slag 30 days

Sulfur 30 days

Plant Distribution Voltage

Motors below 1 hp 110/220 volt

Motors 250 hp and below 480 volt

Motors above 250 hp 4,160 volt

Motors above 5,000 hp 13,800 volt

Steam and Gas Turbine generators 24,000 volt

Grid Interconnection voltage 345 kV

Water and Waste

Makeup Water Process water is available at a flow rate of 1,500 gpm. [3]

Feed water Process water treatment is included and will produce boiler feed 

quality water.

Process Wastewater Process wastewater and storm water that contacts equipment 

surfaces is collected and treated for recycle as slurry or quench 

makeup. Selected blowdown is discharged through a permitted 

discharge permit.

Sanitary Waste Disposal Design includes a packaged domestic sewage treatment plant 

with effluent discharged to the industrial wastewater treatment 

system. Sludge is hauled off site. 

Water Discharge Most of the wastewater is recycled for plant needs. Blowdown is

treated for chloride and metals, and discharged.

Solid Waste Slag is assumed to be a solid waste that is classified as nonhazardous.

An offsite waste disposal site is assumed to have the capacity to 

accept waste generated throughout the life of the facility.

Solid waste sent to disposal is at an assumed nominal fee per 

ton, even if the waste is hauled back to the mine.

Solid waste generated that can be recycled or reused is assumed 

to have a zero cost to the technology.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

13

Process water and cooling water come from two different treatment facilities. The composition 

and physical properties of each are shown in Exhibit 1-7.

Exhibit 1-7 Process and cooling water properties

Property Process Water Cooling Water

Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) 200 μS/cm 1250 μS/cm

Total Suspended Solids (TSS) N/A N/A

Hardness 100 mg/l as CaCO3 75 mg/l as CaCO3

Alkalinity 100 ppm 350 ppm

Sulfate 4 ppm 50 ppm

Chloride 10 ppm 200 ppm

Silica 30 mg/l 30 mg/l

Aluminum N/A N/A

Iron 0.25 mg/l 0.25 mg/l

Calcium 70 mg/l 25 mg/l

Magnesium 25 mg/l 45 mg/l

Phosphate 0.4 mg/l 6.0 mg/l (ortho)

Ammonia <1 mg/l 19 mg/l

Chlorine <0.1 mg/l <0.1 mg/l

pH 8.0 8.0

1.6 Economic Analysis

Estimates of capital cost, operating costs, and financial performance were updated using the best 

available information and expressed in June 2011 dollars.

Capital cost and production cost estimates developed for the CTL plant were based on adjusted 

vendor-furnished, actual cost data, or best possible projections (when necessary). The financial 

performance of the facility was estimated using various costs, product prices, and financial 

parameters to generate a cost of production (COP) value.

Detailed information pertaining to topics such as contracting strategy, EPC contractor services, 

estimation of capital cost contingencies, owner’s costs, cost estimate scope, economic 

assumptions, finance structures, cost of electricity, etc. are available in the April 2011 revision of 

the QGESS document “Cost Estimation Methodology for NETL Assessment of Power Plant 

Performance” [6] Select portions are repeated here for completeness.

Despite the application of process contingencies and other best efforts to realistically project the 

cost of emerging technologies, it should be noted that such cost projections are often shown to be 

optimistic when compared to actual costs. Accordingly, the "next commercial offering" cost 

estimates in this report, while intended for plants that lie somewhere between first-of-a-kind 

(FOAK) and nth-of-a-kind (NOAK) in the maturity spectrum, could be closer to NOAK plant 

costs given the inherent "technology optimism" associated with projecting costs for emerging 

technologies. Continuing research and development could result in technologies that are more 

advanced than the emerging technologies assessed by this report, leading to costs that are lower 

than those estimated herein.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

14

Detailed information regarding FOAK and NOAK can be found in the August 2013 revision of 

the QGESS document “Technology Learning Curve (FOAK to NOAK)” [7]

1.6.1 Capital Costs

The cost estimation methodology is explained in more detail in Section 2.7 of “Cost and 

Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Power Plants, Volume 1: Bituminous Coal and Natural 

Gas to Electricity.” [8] 

Bare erected costs (BEC) comprises the cost of process equipment, on-site facilities and 

infrastructure that support the plant (e.g., shops, offices, labs, road), and the direct and indirect 

labor required for its construction and/or installation. The cost of EPC services and 

contingencies are not included in BEC. BEC is an overnight cost expressed in base-year dollars.

Engineering, procurement, and construction costs (EPCC) comprise the BEC plus the cost of 

services provided by the engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contractor. EPC 

services include: detailed design, contractor permitting (i.e., those permits that individual 

contractors must obtain to perform their scopes of work, as opposed to project permitting, which 

is not included here), and project/construction management costs. EPCC is an overnight cost 

expressed in base-year dollars.

Total plant costs (TPC) comprise the EPCC plus project and process contingencies. TPC is an 

overnight cost expressed in base-year dollars. 

Total overnight capital costs (TOC) comprise the TPC plus all other overnight costs, including 

owner’s costs. TOC is an “overnight” cost, expressed in base-year dollars and as such does not 

include escalation during construction or interest during construction. The TOC for each plant 

was calculated by adding owner’s costs to the total plant cost (TPC). 

Total as-spent capital costs (TASC) are the sum of all capital expenditures as they are incurred 

during the capital expenditure period including their escalation. TASC also includes interest 

during construction. Accordingly, TASC is expressed in mixed, current-year dollars over the 

capital expenditure period.

The capital costs have an estimated accuracy of +30/-15 percent, consistent with the screening 

study level of design engineering applied to the two cases in the study. The accuracy reflects the 

recommended practice 18R-97 guidelines of the AACE (formerly Association for the 

Advancement of Cost Engineering International) for estimates intended for the purpose of a 

“Feasibility Study” (AACE Class 4). [9] Exhibit 1-8 describes the characteristics of an AACE 

Class 4 cost estimate. The value of the study lies not in the absolute accuracy of the individual 

cases, but in the fact that both cases were evaluated under the same set of technical and economic 

assumptions. The consistency of approach allows meaningful comparisons.

Exhibit 1-8 Features of an AACE Class 4 cost estimate

Project 

Definition Typical Engineering Completed Expected Accuracy

1 to 15%

 plant capacity, block schematics, indicated layout, process 

flow diagrams for main process

 systems, and preliminary engineered process and utility

 equipment lists

-15% to -30% on the 

low side, and +20% to 

+50% on the high side
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

15

The costs are grouped according to a process/system oriented code of accounts. This type of 

code-of-account structure has the advantage of grouping all reasonably allocable components of 

a system or process so they are included in the specific system account. (This would not be the 

case had a facility, area, or commodity account structure been chosen instead). 

Process contingency was added to cost account items that were deemed to pose significant risk 

due to lack of operating experience. Process contingency is intended to compensate for 

uncertainty in cost estimates caused by performance uncertainties associated with the 

development status of a technology. Process contingencies are applied to each plant section 

based on its current technology status using guidelines in the AACE International Recommended 

Practice 16R-90. [10] 

Project contingency was added to the EPCC accounts to cover the cost of any additional 

equipment or other costs that would result from a more detailed design. Project contingencies 

are added to the summation of EPC and process contingency costs. 

Both contingencies represent costs that are expected to occur. Each BEC account was evaluated 

against the level of estimate detail and field experience to determine project contingency. 

TOC values are expressed in June 2011 dollars. The estimate represents current commercial 

offerings for the gasification and F-T technologies, or best possible projections for very near-term, 

yet non-commercial, offerings. The estimates represent a complete fuels plant facility. The 

boundary limit is defined as the total plant facility within the “fence line,” including the coal 

receiving facilities, power generation facility, and water supply system. Costs were grouped 

according to a process/system-oriented code of accounts.

1.6.2 Production Costs and Expenses

The production or operating and maintenance (O&M) costs described in this report section pertain 

to charges associated with operating and maintaining the entire plant over its expected life.

O&M costs are determined on an annual basis for the first year of operation. Quantities for 

major consumables such as fuel were taken from the heat and mass balance developed for this 

application. Other consumables evaluated on the basis of the quantity required the use of 

reference data. Operating labor costs were determined on the basis of the number of operators. 

Maintenance costs were evaluated on the basis of requirements for each major plant section. 

The O&M costs and expenses associated with the plant include:

 Operating labor

 Maintenance – material and labor

 Administrative and support labor

 Consumables

 Fuel cost

 Taxes and insurance

These costs and expenses are estimated on a reference basis and escalated to June 2011 dollars. 

The costs assume normal operation and do not include the initial startup costs. The operating 

labor, maintenance material and labor, and other labor-related costs were combined and then

divided into two components: fixed O&M costs, which are independent of liquids production, 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

16

and variable O&M costs, which are proportional to liquids production. The variable O&M cost 

estimate allocation is based on the plant capacity factor.

The other operating costs, consumables and fuel, are determined on a daily 100-percent 

operating capacity basis and adjusted to an annual plant operation basis. The inputs for each 

category of operating costs and expenses are identified in the succeeding subsections, along with 

more specific discussion of the evaluation processes.

The petroleum equivalent diesel price is calculated by taking the cost of production for diesel in 

$/bbl and multiplying this value by the ratio of the lower heating values of FT diesel and 

petroleum diesel.

Petroleum Equivalent Diesel Price = (

Petroleum Diesel LHV

FT Diesel LHV ) ∗ FY COP FT Diesel

The equivalent crude oil price is then calculated by multiplying the petroleum equivalent diesel 

price by a factor of 0.80. The factor of 0.80 was calculated from data of historic spot prices 

provided by the EIA from June 2009 through November 2013 for various fuel types. 

Equivalent Crude Oil = 0.80 ∗ Petroleum Equivalent Diesel Price

This data was used to develop correlations between the various fuel prices and the WTI crude oil 

price (Crude oil: Ultra-low sulfur diesel is 1.25 and Naphtha: Diesel is 0.70). The ECO price is

the theoretical crude oil price, based on historic data, which would produce the calculated COP.

1.6.3 Cost of Production of Liquid Fuels

The figure-of-merit in this report is the COP expressed in $/bbl. The COPs were calculated 

using the Power Systems Financial Model (PSFM) which is a discounted cash flow model. [11]

The COP values is estimated to be the required revenue that yields a net present value of zero at 

a given internal rate of return on equity (IRROE) for 30 years of operation based on the assumed 

financial structure and escalations. COP is assumed to escalate at three percent per year for the 

thirty-year economic life of the plant. All costs are expressed in June 2011 dollars.

The capital and operating costs for CO2 T&S were modeled based on the specifications in the 

NETL QGESS: [5] In the sequestration case, the costs were combined with the plant capital and 

operating costs to produce an overall COP.

There are two project financial structures: one is representative of commercial fuel projects and 

the second is representative of a project with loan guarantees. The economic assumptions used 

to estimate the COPs are shown in Exhibit 1-9 and Exhibit 1-10. [12,13]

Exhibit 1-9 Financial structure for fuels projects

Scenario Commercial Fuels Loan Guarantees

Percent Debt 50% 60%

Percent Equity 50% 40%

Debt Interest Rate 8.00% 4.56%

Internal Rate of Return on Equity (IRROE) 20% 20%

After Tax Weighted Cost of Capital 12.48% 9.70%

Capital Charge Factor (CCF) 0.218 0.170
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

17

Exhibit 1-10 Financial assumptions for PSFM

Parameter Value

TAXES

Income Tax Rate 38% (Effective 34% Federal, 6% State)

Capital Depreciation 20 years, 150% declining balance

Investment Tax Credit None

Tax Holiday None

FINANCING TERMS

Repayment Term of Debt 30 years 

Grace Period on Debt Repayment None

Debt Reserve Fund None

TREATMENT OF CAPITAL COSTS

Capital Cost Escalation During Construction 

(nominal annual rate) 3.6%

a

Distribution of Total Overnight Capital over the 

Capital Expenditure Period (before escalation) 5-Year Period: 10%, 30%, 25%, 20%, 15%

Working Capital zero for all parameters

% of Total Overnight Capital that is Depreciated

100% (this assumption introduces a very 

small error even if a substantial amount of 

TOC is actually non-depreciable)

INFLATION

COP, O&M, Fuel Escalation (nominal annual rate) 3.0%b COP, O&M, ECO, Fuel

a

A nominal average annual rate of 3.6 percent is assumed for escalation of capital costs during 

construction. This rate is equivalent to the nominal average annual escalation rate for process plant 

construction costs between 1947 and 2008, according to the Chemical Engineering Plant Cost Index.

b

An average annual inflation rate of 3.0 percent is assumed. This rate is equivalent to the average 

annual escalation rate between 1947 and 2008 for the U.S. Department of Labor's Producer Price 

Index for Finished Goods, the so-called "headline" index of the various Producer Price Indices. (The 

Producer Price Index for the Electric Power Generation Industry may be more applicable, but that data 

does not provide a long-term historical perspective since it only dates back to December 2003.)
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

18

2 Plant Configuration

The CTL process configuration chosen for this study is designed to

(1) Maximize the conversion of feedstocks to liquid transportation fuels, achieved 

through recycling unreacted synthesis gas back to the reactor;

(2) Maximize diesel fuel as the primary liquid fuel product;

(3) Produce enough electrical power for the facility to be self-sufficient, but minimize 

exported electrical power to a level no greater than 10 percent of the internal power 

requirements for the CO2 sequestration case; 

(4) Minimize the amount of CO2 and other greenhouse gases released to the atmosphere 

during production of the fuel, in so far as plant performance or final product cost is 

not significantly impacted.

The facility was designed to produce 50,000 bbl/day of F-T liquids using an iron-based catalyst 

with an expected final product split of approximately 70:30 diesel/naphtha. This is in contrast to 

the April 2007 study wherein F-T naphtha represented a more significant portion of the final 

product, based on a desire to focus on gasoline production (via the upgrading of naphtha). 

The production of additional diesel fuel in the current configuration requires that extra hydrogen 

(compared to the previous design) be supplied to the diesel hydroprocessing units in the product 

upgrading step. In addition, the wax hydrocracker model was redesigned to achieve higher 

diesel fuel yields. The diesel produced in the facility is ready for delivery to end-use customers, 

after the addition of the appropriate additives (additives are added at the distribution site). The 

naphtha produced has been stabilized and can either be shipped to a refinery for further 

upgrading to a commercial grade gasoline blendstock or sold as a chemical feedstock.

The plant achieves the goal of electrical power independence, in part, by recovering heat from 

the Fischer-Tropsch synthesis reactors to produce steam, which is then used in a steam turbine 

along with steam produced by syngas cooling and in the heat recovery steam generation unit. In 

the CO2 sequestration case, the steam derived power represents 26 percent (29 percent in the CO2

vent case) of the electrical power generated in the CTL facility with the remaining 74 percent (71 

percent in the CO2 vent case) being produced by the combustion of light gases recovered from 

the reactor vapor overhead and the various product recovery and upgrading sections of the CTL 

facility in the combustion turbines.

The final product slate of the facility is nominally:

 35,230 bbl/day of F-T diesel fuel

 14,762 bbl/day of stabilized (heteroatom, olefinic, and aromatic content is reduced) F-T 

naphtha

 The sequestration case produces 427.2 MWe of electrical power, 422.5 MWe of which is 

used within the facility and 4.7 MWe of which is sold into the grid (1.1 percent of total

power production at a credit of $60/MWh. The vent case produces 472.8 MWe of 

electrical power, 375.7 MWe of which is used within the facility and 97.1 MWe of which 

is sold into the grid (20.5 percent of total power production) at a credit of $60/MWh.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

19

 The sequestration case captures 26,405 tons/day of CO2 (2,200,423 lb/hr) and compresses 

it to approximately 2,215 psia for pipeline transport from the facility to a geologic 

formation 100 km (62 miles) away. The vent case vents 25,569 tons/day of CO2

(2,200,424 lb/hr) from the capture systems.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

20

3 System Description

The CTL plant design utilized in this report represents the culmination of “lessons learned” over 

(a) the course of a number of years studying CTL facilities, (b) shifting environmental and 

performance concerns, and (c) numerous sensitivity analyses to ascertain optimal process 

performance.

A simplified process flow diagram of the major unit processes is provided in Exhibit 3-1 in order 

to provide an overview of the CTL plant configuration. The CO2 vent case differs only in that it 

does not include CO2 compression, water gas shift of the fuel gas, or CO2 capture from the fuel 

gas.

Exhibit 3-1 Coal-to-liquids process flow diagram (red items only in sequestration case)

Source: NETL

Synthesis gas (syngas) is produced in a dry-feed Shell type gasifier. In order for the syngas to be 

usable in an F-T synthesis reactor, it must be cleaned and treated. The major equipment used to 

clean the syngas consists of a water-wash scrubber for particulate removal (which also has the 

added benefit of removing some of the mercury), an activated carbon bed for mercury removal, a 

WGS reactor2, a dual-stage Rectisol®acid gas removal (AGR) system using a refrigerated 

methanol solution for sulfur and CO2 removal3. A Claus plant is used to produce elemental 

sulfur from the sulfur-containing gases captured in the AGR system.

 

2 Only a portion of the syngas is passed through the WGS reactor. The amount of syngas shifted is controlled to 

obtain an overall H2:CO molar ratio between 1:1 and 1.1:1, as required for the F-T process.

3 CO2 is removed to reduce the volume of syngas, and therefore equipment sizes and capital expenditures. H2S and 

COS are removed in order to protect the F-T catalyst.

Shell-based Gasifier, Cooling Water Scrubber, and Partial Water Gas Shift

Air Separation Unit

CO2 Compression

Mercury Removal

CO2 Removal Combined Cycle Power Generation WGS

Acid Gas Treating and Sulfur Recovery

Rectisol Fischer- Tropsch Synthesis Oxygen

Dry Coal

Slag

Air Oxygen to Reformer

CO2 CO2 from Rectisol Export Power

Steam to Power Generation

Naphtha Diesel Fuel

Sulfur Oxygen

To CO2 Compression or vented

Steam Fuel gas Vent

Tail Gas Recycle CO2 Removal

Hydrocarbon Recovery

Product Upgrading

Hydrogen Recovery

FT Tail Gas Recycle

Hydrogen

CO2 F-T Liquids

CO2

Light Ends
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

21

The clean syngas is then mixed with tail gas recycle from the hydrogen recovery unit and fed to 

the low-temperature, slurry-phase, iron-based, F-T synthesis reactor, which converts the syngas 

to saturated hydrocarbons. The majority of the hydrocarbon products (those with a carbon chain 

length greater than four) are upgraded in the hydrocracking and hydrotreating units (Product 

Upgrading in the flow diagram) to produce F-T diesel (70 percent by volume) and F-T naphtha 

(30 percent by volume). The tail gas from the F-T unit, which includes unconverted CO and H2, 

short chain hydrocarbons, and CO2 is processed in an amine unit for CO2 removal. This prevents 

the buildup of CO2 in the recycle loop and reduces CO2 emissions from the facility (in the 

scenario where captured CO2 is sequestered). A portion of the tail gas is then directly recycled to 

the F-T reactor for maximum conversion of carbon to fuels, while the remainder is sent to: (a) a 

combustion turbine and subsequent heat recovery steam generator (HRSG), (b) direct fired 

heaters for coal drying, and (c) direct fired heaters for process heating needs. 

The sequestration and vent cases differ in that:

1) In the sequestration case the CO2 streams from the syngas capture system (Rectisol®), FT tail gas capture system (amine), and F-T fuel gas capture system (amine) are combined 

and compressed, transported, and sequestered in a geologic formation.

2) In the vent case, there is no compression, transportation, or sequestration. The CO2 is 

still captured in the syngas capture system and F-T tail gas capture system but not in the 

F-T fuel gas capture system. The CO2 produced from the two capture systems is vented 

into the atmosphere.

The steam produced by the recovery of heat in the F-T synthesis reactor, along with the steam 

produced in the HRSG, is utilized in a steam turbine to produce power. 

The combined output of the combustion and steam turbines is within 10 percent of total plant 

electricity requirement for the CO2 capture case.

Individual process components are described in greater detail in the following sections.

3.1 Synthesis Gas Production

Exhibit 3-2 provides a simplified block flow diagram of the gasification and syngas cleanup 

sections. The primary differences between the CO2 vent and sequestration cases are that: (a) 

CO2 is captured in the CO2 vent case, but it is not compressed, but instead vented, (b) the CO2

vent case does not have water gas shift of the fuel gas or an amine CO2 capture system for the 

fuel gas, and (c) the absence of these fuel gas treatment systems and CO2 compression results in

a lower auxiliary power requirement, as well as lower cooling water requirement for the facility, 

therefore, the amount of power exported increases and the amount of water withdrawal 

decreases. These differences are shown in the performance summaries provided in Exhibit 4-1

and Exhibit 4-2.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

22

Exhibit 3-2 Block flow diagram of the gasification, syngas shift, and acid gas removal area (sequestration only systems shown in red)

Source: NETL

Sour Water Stripper

1

Water to Slurry & Blowdown

11

10

Clean Syngas to F-T Synthesis Dry Coal

Slag

Note: Water from FT area and TGCU modeled but not shown

Mercury Removal 14

Syngas

Raw Gas Quench & Cooling

Oxygen

ASU Air

5

Water Scrubber Rectisol® Unit

Oxygen

Tail Gas to Gasifier

Claus Plant

Note: Tail Gas boost compressor modeled but not shown

Vent

Water-Gas Shift Reactors

Coal Dryer

Drying Gas Prep

9

2

Oxygen To Claus Plant

20

6 Steam

CO2 Compressor Compressed CO2 18 13

Shift Steam

12 15

2 Acid Gas

Dry-Feed Gasifier

16

Sulfur 17

CO2 from F-T Synthesis Gas Rectisol Unit and from Fuel Gas Amine Unit Flue Gas

Fuel Gas

8 Coal
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

23

Exhibit 3-3 Stream table for the gasification, syngas shift, and acid gas removal area – CO2 sequestration case

1 2 5 6 8 9 10 11 12

V-L Mole Fraction

Ar 0.0092 0.0318 0.0318 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0067 0.0067

CH4 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.0002

CO 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.4256 0.4256

CO2 0.0003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0190 0.0190

COS 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0005 0.0005

H2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.2034 0.2034

H2O 0.0099 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.3320 0.3320

HCl 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.0002

H2S 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0057 0.0057

N2 0.7732 0.0178 0.0178 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0057 0.0057

NH3 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0010 0.0010

O2 0.2074 0.9504 0.9504 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

SO2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 1.0000

V-L Flowrate (lbmol/hr) 210,973 845 40,525 9,376 0 6,298 0 218,718 185,910

V-L Flowrate (lb/hr) 1,522,014 27,189 1,304,136 168,908 0 113,459 0 4,336,854 3,686,326

Solids Flowrate (lb/hr) 0 0 0 0 1,750,518 1,637,058 175,324 0 0

Temperature (°F) 59 90 90 650 59 220 2,600 389 389

Pressure (psia) 14.70 125.00 125.00 740.00 14.70 14.70 615.00 575.00 575.00

Enthalpy (Btu/lb)A30.23 26.67 26.67 3,063.97 --- 14,149.18 --- 1,043.28 1,043.28

Density (lb/ft3) 0.1 0.7 0.7 1.3 --- 0.0 --- 1.3 1.3

V-L Molecular Weight 28.857 32.181 32.181 18.015 --- 18.015 --- 19.829 19.829

A - Reference conditions are 32.02 F & 0.089 PSIA
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

24

Exhibit 3-3 Stream table for the gasification, syngas shift, and acid gas removal area – CO2 sequestration case (continued)

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 35

V-L Mole Fraction

Ar 0.0000 0.0067 0.0063 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0105 0.0000

CH4 0.0000 0.0002 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0003 0.4394

CO 0.0000 0.4256 0.3410 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.5602 0.0512

CO2 0.0000 0.0190 0.0764 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.0093 0.0008

COS 0.0000 0.0005 0.0004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

H2 0.0000 0.2034 0.2495 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.4101 0.2001

H2O 1.0000 0.3320 0.3142 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0029

HCl 0.0000 0.0002 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

H2S 0.0000 0.0057 0.0054 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

N2 0.0000 0.0057 0.0054 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0096 0.3053

NH3 0.0000 0.0010 0.0010 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0003

O2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

SO2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000

V-L Flowrate (lbmol/hr) 14,243 32,808 232,961 4,970 0 49,998 16,600 141,810 7,002

V-L Flowrate (lb/hr) 256,596 650,528 4,593,450 218,718 0 2,200,423 730,542 2,498,405 122,766

Solids Flowrate (lb/hr) 0 0 0 0 43,875 0 0 0 0

Temperature (°F) 550 389 401 80 359 121 60 95 385

Pressure (psia) 800.00 575.00 560.00 749.50 17.30 2,214.70 135.00 520.00 460.00

Enthalpy (Btu/lb)A2,918.18 1,043.28 1,026.52 -43.00 --- -169.59 3.27 51.50 378.62

Density (lb/ft3) 1.6 1.3 1.2 8.7 329.1 41.7 1.1 1.5 0.9

V-L Molecular Weight 18.015 19.829 19.718 44.010 --- 44.010 44.010 17.618 17.533
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

25

Exhibit 3-4 Stream table for the gasification, syngas shift, and acid gas removal area – CO2 vent case

1 2 3 6 8 9 10 11 12

V-L Mole Fraction

Ar 0.0092 0.0318 0.0318 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0067 0.0067

CH4 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.0002

CO 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.4256 0.4256

CO2 0.0003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0190 0.0190

COS 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0005 0.0005

H2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.2034 0.2034

H2O 0.0099 0.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.3320 0.3320

HCl 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.0002

H2S 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0057 0.0057

N2 0.7732 0.0178 0.0178 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0057 0.0057

NH3 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0010 0.0010

O2 0.2074 0.9504 0.9504 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

SO2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 1.0000

V-L Flowrate (lbmol/hr) 52,743 211 494 2,344 0 1,574 0 54,679 46,478

V-L Flowrate (lb/hr) 1,522,010 6,797 15,900 42,227 0 28,365 0 1,084,214 921,581

Solids Flowrate (lb/hr) 0 0 0 0 437,629 409,265 43,831 0 0

Temperature (°F) 59 90 90 650 59 220 2,600 389 389

Pressure (psia) 14.7 125.0 125.0 740.0 14.7 14.7 615.0 575.0 575.0

Enthalpy (Btu/lb)A13.0 11.5 11.5 1,317.3 --- 6,083.1 --- 448.5 448.5

Density (lb/ft3) 0.076 0.687 0.687 1.257 --- 0.037 --- 1.277 1.277

A - Reference conditions are 32.02 F & 0.089 PSIA
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

26

Exhibit 3-4 Stream table for the gasification, syngas shift, and acid gas removal area – CO2 vent case (continued)

13 14 15 16 17 18 20 35

V-L Mole Fraction

Ar 0.0000 0.0067 0.0063 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0105 0.0000

CH4 0.0000 0.0002 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0003 0.5918

CO 0.0000 0.4256 0.3410 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.5602 0.0396

CO2 0.0000 0.0190 0.0764 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 0.0093 0.0026

COS 0.0000 0.0005 0.0004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

H2 0.0000 0.2034 0.2495 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.4101 0.0479

H2O 1.0000 0.3320 0.3142 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0011

HCl 0.0000 0.0002 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

H2S 0.0000 0.0057 0.0054 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

N2 0.0000 0.0057 0.0054 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0096 0.3171

NH3 0.0000 0.0010 0.0010 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

O2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

SO2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Total 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000

V-L Flowrate (lbmol/hr) 3,561 8,202 58,240 1,242 0 12,104 35,453 1,714

V-L Flowrate (lb/hr) 64,149 162,632 1,148,363 54,680 0 532,696 624,601 33,801

Solids Flowrate (lb/hr) 0 0 0 0 10,969 0 0 0

Temperature (°F) 550 389 401 80 359 121 95 385

Pressure (psia) 800.0 575.0 560.0 749.5 17.3 2,214.7 520.0 460.0

Enthalpy (Btu/lb)A1,254.6 448.5 441.3 -18.5 --- -72.9 22.1 148.4

Density (lb/ft3) 1.597 1.277 1.217 9 329.101 41.660 1.528 0.999
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

27

3.1.1 Air Separation Unit

The facility is equipped with a total of four air separation units (ASU) for the eight gasifier 

trains. Each ASU, composed of two cold boxes, is designed to produce a nominal output of 

15,182 tonne/day (16,739 tpd) of 95 mole percent O2. This O2 is used in the gasifier, F-T plant, 

and Claus plant. The ASU is designed with two production trains. The air compressors are 

powered by an electric motor. There is no direct integration between the ASU and the rest of the 

facility. A process schematic of a typical ASU is shown in Exhibit 3-6

The air feed to the air separation unit is supplied from stand-alone air compressors. The filtered 

air is compressed in centrifugal compressors, with intercooling between each stage. The air 

stream is cooled and then fed to an adsorbent-based pre-purifier system. 

Air from the stand-alone compressor is cooled and fed to an adsorbent-based pre-purifier system. 

The adsorbent removes water, CO2, and C4+ saturated hydrocarbons in the air. After passing 

through the adsorption beds, the air is filtered with a dust filter to remove any adsorbent fines 

that may be present. Downstream of the dust filter a small stream of air is withdrawn to supply 

the instrument air requirements of the ASU.

Regeneration of the adsorbent in the pre-purifiers is accomplished by passing a hot nitrogen 

stream through the off-stream bed(s) in a direction countercurrent to the normal airflow. The 

nitrogen is heated against extraction steam (1.7 MPa [250 psia]) in a shell and tube heat 

exchanger. The regeneration nitrogen drives off the adsorbed contaminants. Following 

regeneration, the heated bed is cooled to near normal operating temperature by passing a cool 

nitrogen stream through the adsorbent beds. The bed is re-pressurized with air and placed on 

stream so that the current on-stream bed(s) can be regenerated.

The air from the pre-purifier is then split into three streams. About 70 percent of the air is fed 

directly to the cold box. About 25 to 30 percent of the air is compressed in an air booster 

compressor. This boosted air is then cooled in an aftercooler against cooling water before it is 

fed to the cold box. About 5 percent of the air is fed to a turbine-driven, single-stage, centrifugal 

booster compressor. This stream is cooled in a shell and tube aftercooler against cooling water 

before it is fed to the cold box.

All three air feeds are cooled in the cold box to cryogenic temperatures against returning product 

oxygen and nitrogen streams in plate-and-fin heat exchangers. The large air stream is fed 

directly to the first distillation column to begin the separation process. The second air stream is 

liquefied against boiling liquid oxygen before it is fed to the distillation columns. The third, 

small air stream is fed to the cryogenic expander to produce refrigeration to sustain the cryogenic 

separation process. The work produced from the expansion is used to power the turbine booster 

compressor.

Inside the cold box the air is separated into oxygen and nitrogen products. The oxygen product 

is withdrawn from the distillation columns as a liquid and is pressurized in a cryogenic pump. 

The pressurized liquid oxygen is then vaporized against the high-pressure air feed before being 

warmed to ambient temperature. The gaseous oxygen exits the cold box and is split into two 

streams. Essentially all of the gaseous oxygen is fed to the centrifugal compressor with 

intercooling between each stage of compression. The compressed oxygen is then fed to the 

gasification unit. The second oxygen stream is fed to the Claus plant, the autothermal reformers 

in the F-T area, and to the autothermal reformer in the fuel gas cleanup area.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

28

Nitrogen is produced from the cold box at two pressure levels. Low-pressure nitrogen is split 

into two streams. The majority of the low-pressure nitrogen is compressed and fed to the gas 

turbine as diluent nitrogen. A small portion of the nitrogen is used as the regeneration gas for the 

pre-purifiers and recombined with the diluent nitrogen. A high-pressure nitrogen stream is also 

produced from the cold box and is further compressed before it is also supplied to the gas 

turbine.

Exhibit 3-5 Typical ASU process schematic

Source: NETL

3.1.2 Coal Drying

The Shell-based gasification process uses a dry-feed system that is sensitive to the coal moisture 

content. Coal moisture consists of two parts: surface moisture and inherent moisture. For coal to 

flow smoothly through the lock hoppers, the surface moisture must be removed. The Illinois No. 

6 coal used in this study contains approximately eleven weight-percent total moisture on an asreceived basis. It was assumed that the coal must be dried to approximately 5 percent moisture 

to allow for smooth flow through the dry feed system. 

The coal is simultaneously crushed and dried in the coal mill and then delivered to a surge 

hopper, which has approximately a two-hour capacity. The drying medium is provided by 

combining the off-gas from the Claus plant and a slipstream of F-T tail gas and passing them 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

29

through an incinerator. The incinerator flue gas, with an oxygen content of 6 volume percent, is 

used to dry the coal in the mill.

The coal is drawn from the surge hoppers and fed through a pressurized lock hopper system to a 

dense phase pneumatic conveyor, which uses CO2 recovered from the syngas to convey the coal 

to the gasifiers.

The equipment in the coal drying and grinding system is fabricated of materials appropriate for 

the abrasive environment present in the system. The tanks and agitators are rubber lined. The 

pumps are either rubber-lined or hardened metal to minimize erosion. Piping is fabricated of 

high-density polyethylene (HDPE).

3.1.3 Gasifier

The gasifier is a dry-feed, single-stage, entrained-flow gasification system similar to a Shell 

Global Solutions commercial design. The gasifier system includes high-temperature gas cooling 

via syngas recycle, slag handling, and solid waste handling equipment. The gasifier also 

includes a refractory-lined water wall that is protected by molten slag that solidifies on the 

cooled walls.

The heat recovery from the gasifier is broken into two stages. The first stage 1) recovers hightemperature heat in each gasifier train via a gasifier jacket, which cools the syngas by 

maintaining the reaction temperature at 1,427°C (2,600°F). The second stage 2) reduces the 

temperature of the product gas from the gasifier to 1,082°C (1,980°F) by mixing in recycled gas, 

then to 399 °C (750°F) with water quench, which provides a portion of the water required for the 

WGS reaction. 

The gasification system consists of four gasifier trains with two gasifiers in each train, along with 

one spare gasifier, for a total of nine dry-feed gasifiers. The spare gasifier is included to 

maintain overall plant availability of 90 percent. The gasification plant section was modeled as 

four copies of a single gasification train to enable direct comparison with baseline study case 

models of similar size, and the results were combined to generate the required quantity of syngas 

for the F-T facility.

These gasifiers, operate at 4.2 MPa (615 psia) and process a total of 19,056 tonne/day 

(21,006 tpd) of as-received coal for both the CO2 sequestration and vent cases. Coal reacts with 

oxygen and steam at a temperature of 1,427 °C (2,600 °F) to produce principally H2 and CO, 

with little CO2 or CH4 formed.

3.1.4 Particulate Removal

After passing through the water quench, the syngas passes through a cyclone and a raw gas 

candle filter system where a majority of the fine particles are removed and returned to the 

gasifier with the coal fuel. The filter consists of an array of ceramic candle elements in a 

pressure vessel. Fines produced by the gasification system are recirculated to extinction. The 

ash that is not carried out with the gas forms slag and runs down the interior walls, exiting the 

gasifier in liquid form. The slag is solidified in a quench tank for disposal. Lockhoppers reduce 

the pressure of the solids from 4.2 MPa to atmospheric pressure 1.0 MPa (615 to 14.7 psia). 

Following the water quench and particulate removal, the syngas is cooled to 232°C (450°F) 

before going to the syngas scrubber by vaporizing high-pressure boiler feed water (BFW) and 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

30

pre-heating intermediate-pressure BFW. The syngas scrubber removes residual particulate 

matter further downstream.

3.1.5 Gas Scrubbing

The “sour” gas leaving the particulate filter system consists mostly of H2, CO, CO2, water vapor, 

N2, and smaller quantities of CH4, COS, H2S, and NH3.

The quench scrubber washes the syngas in a counter-current flow in two packed beds. The 

syngas leaves the scrubber saturated at a temperature of 193 °C (379 oF). The quench scrubber 

removes essentially all of the entrained particles, principally unconverted carbon, slag, and 

metals. The bottoms from the scrubber are sent to the slag removal and handling system for 

processing. 

Sour water from the syngas scrubber is stripped of sour gas and treated for recycle or discharge. 

The sour water stripper removes chlorides, NH3, and other impurities from the waste water 

stream of the scrubber. The sour gas stripper consists of a sour drum that accumulates sour water 

from the gas scrubber and condensate from synthesis gas coolers. Sour water from the drum 

flows to the sour water stripper, which consists of a packed column with a steam-heated reboiler. 

Sour gas is stripped from the liquid at about 250 °F and sent to the sulfur recovery unit. 

Remaining water is sent to wastewater treatment.

3.1.6 Water Gas Shift through Acid Gas Removal

The required operating parameters of the F-T synthesis reactor are satisfied with the WGS and 

AGR units. These parameters (H2:CO, H2O:CO, and stoichiometric number [S#]) are described 

below and reported in Exhibit 3-6. The metrics apply to the total F-T reactor feed, which 

includes the clean syngas, steam and recycle from the hydrocarbon recovery process.

Exhibit 3-6 F-T reactor syngas operating parameters for both cases

Parameter Value

S# 10.98

H2:CO 21.02

H2O:CO 31.80

1

Synthesis gas metric at the inlet of the F-T reactor

2Ratio of hydrogen to carbon monoxide at the inlet of the F-T reactor

3Ratio of moisture to carbon monoxide at the inlet to the WGS units

The H2:CO ratio is simply calculated by dividing the moles of hydrogen by the moles of carbon 

monoxide in the syngas stream. Due to the ability of the iron-based F-T catalyst to promote 

water gas shift in situ enabling CO2 to be a source of carbon, the F-T reactor requires a relatively

low H2/CO molar ratio of 1:1 to 1.1:1.

The H2O:CO ratio was based on common practice and assures an atmosphere conducive to 

shifting and provides a suitable moisture content at the WGS exit to prevent coking. 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

31

The S# metric is calculated using the following equation:

S# =

(H2 − CO2)

(CO + CO2)

⁄

In systems without significant water gas shift activity, the S# is targeted to values near 2 [14]. 

Since the iron-based catalyst promotes the WGS reaction, the S# is less than 2 in the study cases.

The process descriptions are provided in the following subsections.

3.1.6.1 Water Gas Shift

In order to achieve the desired H2:CO ratio of 1:1 at the reactor inlet, about 15 percent of the 

syngas is routed through two WGS reactors in series. The WGS reactors convert most of the CO 

to H2 and CO2 by reacting the CO with water over a fixed bed of catalyst via the water gas shift 

reaction shown below.

Water Gas Shift: CO + H2O ↔ CO2 + H2

Steam is injected prior to the first stage of WGS to adjust the H2O/CO molar ratio.

As water gas shift is a net exothermic process, the heat of reaction must be managed between 

stages. The exiting temperature of the first stage is 470 °C (878 oF), which is an increase over 

the inlet temperature of 219 °C (426 oF). The temperature is reduced by utilizing a heat 

exchanger that reduces the temperature to 204 °C (400 oF) by producing steam.

The temperature again rises to 254 °C (489 oF) in the second stage of WGS. This heat is 

recovered (the temperature is reduced to 230 °C (446 oF)) by preheating the syngas exiting the 

gas scrubber (described in Section 3.1.5) to 198 °C (389 °F) from 193 °C (379 °F) prior to 

entering the first stage of WGS.

The two stages of WGS result in a 95.6 percent overall conversion of CO to CO2. The WGS 

catalyst also serves to hydrolyze COS thus eliminating the need for a separate COS hydrolysis 

reactor. 

The shifted syngas rejoins the bypassed syngas and enters the low temperature cooling system, 

where it is cooled to 35 °C (95 °F) prior to the mercury removal beds.

3.1.6.2 Mercury Removal

Mercury is removed by packed beds of sulfur-impregnated carbon similar to what has been used 

at the Eastman Chemical gasification plant in Kingsport, Tennessee. A bed of sulfurimpregnated carbon, with approximately a 20-second superficial gas residence time, can achieve 

95 percent mercury removal in addition to removal of other volatile heavy metals, such as 

arsenic. The spent carbon sorbent is discarded as a hazardous waste with a disposal cost of 

$1,300/ton.

3.1.6.3 Acid Gas Removal

A feature of this plant configuration is that COS, H2S, and CO2 are removed from the syngas 

within the same process system, the Rectisol®unit. The purpose of the Rectisol®unit, which 

utilizes a refrigerated methanol solvent, is to preferentially remove H2S and COS as a product 

stream, and then to remove the remaining H2S and a majority of the CO2. This is achieved in the 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

32

dual-stage Rectisol®unit. Since the Rectisol® system removes COS, the COS hydrolysis pretreatment step is unnecessary and has been eliminated.

The use of methanol prevents formation of ice and hydrates at the low operating temperatures. 

Cool, dry, particulate-free syngas enters the first absorber unit at approximately 100 oF and 

520 psia. The low operating temperatures are beneficial, because at these temperatures the 

solvent carrying capacity for both CO2 and H2S becomes very high. (1) These features allow for 

high separations of both CO2 and H2S.

The low temperature operation can lead to complicated flow schemes, as well as elevated plant 

costs. (1) Therefore, Rectisol generally finds application only in relatively difficult gas treating 

conditions where extremely high purities are required. 

Shown below in Exhibit 3-7 is an example Rectisol process employed as the Texaco refinery, in 

Wilmington, CA. (2) The unit was built by Linde A.G. of Munich and is part of a hydrogen 

production train where vacuum residual oil is gasified to provide hydrogen for the refinery. 

Exhibit 3-7 Rectisol process flow diagram example

Source: EPA

The feedgas (stream 1) is first cooled against the separation products, and is sent to the main 

absorber where H2S and CO2 are removed in the bottom section of the tower. The sulfur-free gas 

is washed in the top section of the main absorber to remove remaining CO2 (stream 2). The 

bottom product from the main absorber contains all H2S, some CO2, and some H2. This stream is 

flashed to recover H2 from the loaded methanol solvent. The H2 is pressurized and recycled to 

the feedgas inlet. The bottoms product of the flash is sent to the H2S enrichment column to 

remove additional CO2 to achieve the required H2S concentration. This is accomplished with the 

stripping gas (stream 6), which is nitrogen obtained from the oxygen plant. The CO2 rich off gas 

(stream 3b) is combined with the off gas from the cold stripper (stream 3a) and is the product 

CO2 stream (stream 3), which is vented to the atmosphere or compressed (see Section 3.1.7). 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

33

The bottom of the H2S enrichment column is sent to the warm stripper where the absorbed H2S 

and CO2 are stripped and sent to the Claus plant (stream 4). 

The stream of CO2-loaded methanol, leaving the CO2-absorption section of the main absorber 

(middle section) after H2 flashing, is stripped with nitrogen in the cold stripper, and the overhead 

(stream 3a) is combined with stream 3b, as discussed prior. The bottoms of the cold stripper, 

partially stripped, cold methanol, is sent back to the main absorber. The methanol/water mixture 

condensed from the feed gas is separated in the methanol water separation still to produce an 

overhead methanol stream, which is recycled, and a bottoms waste water stream (stream 5).

The amine CO2 capture systems associated with the F-T tail gas and F-T fuel gas are discussed in 

Section 3.2. 

3.1.7 CO2 Compression and Dehydration

CO2 is generated at three pressure levels from the AGR process. In the CO2 vent case, this CO2

is vented to the atmosphere, while in the sequestration case the low pressure (LP) stream is 

compressed from 0.15 MPa (22 psia) to 1.1 MPa (160 psia) and then combined with the medium 

pressure (MP) stream. The high pressure (HP) stream is combined between compressor stages at 

2.1 MPa (300 psia). The combined stream is compressed from 2.1 MPa (300 psia) to a 

supercritical condition at 15.3 MPa (2,215 psia) using a multiple-stage, intercooled compressor. 

During compression, the CO2 stream is dehydrated to a dewpoint of -40 oC (-40 °F) with 

triethyleneglycol. The raw CO2 stream from the Rectisol®process contains over 99 percent CO2

with the balance being primarily nitrogen and hydrogen, for modeling purposes it was treated as 

100 percent CO2. The pure CO2 is transported via pipeline to a geologic sequestration site 100 

km (62 miles).

3.1.8 Claus Unit

Acid gas from each Rectisol®stripper unit is routed to the associated Claus plant. The Claus 

plant partially oxidizes the H2S in the acid gas to elemental sulfur. The rate of sulfur recovery is 

approximately 43,875 lb/hr in both cases. This rate represents ~100 percent recovery.

Acid gas from the Rectisol®unit is preheated to 450 °F. A portion of the acid gas, along with all 

of the sour water stripper overhead vapor and oxidant, is fed to the Claus furnace. In the furnace, 

H2S is oxidized to SO2 using 95 percent oxygen. A furnace temperature greater than 2,450 °F 

must be maintained in order to thermally decompose all of the NH3 present in the sour gas 

stream.

Three preheaters and three sulfur converters are used to obtain a per-pass H2S conversion 

efficiency of approximately 97.8 percent. In the furnace waste heat boiler, 650 psia steam is 

generated. This steam is used to satisfy all Claus process preheating and reheating requirements 

as well as to produce excess steam that is sent to the medium-pressure steam header. The sulfur 

condensers produce 50 psig steam that goes to the low-pressure steam header.

3.1.9 Zinc Oxide

While the Rectisol®system is capable of reducing the sulfur levels to between 0.1 and 1.0 ppm, 

which are sufficiently low for an F-T process using iron-based catalyst, the long term onspecification operation of the Rectisol®

unit cannot be guaranteed. 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

34

Therefore, the treated, clean syngas is fed to a packed bed of solid zinc oxide (ZnO) to remove 

any residual heteroatom content (i.e., sulfur) that makes it through the syngas treatment 

processes. The zinc oxide is a final guard bed to protect the Fischer-Tropsch synthesis catalyst

and is capable of reducing the sulfur content of the sweet gas to the F-T feed to less than 1 ppb.

The cost of the addition of the required two ZnO beds to the process is insignificant compared to 

the total plant cost. If the sulfur polishing step were not there during an upset in the Rectisol®

unit, the entire amount of F-T catalyst in the reactors might be poisoned and would have to be 

replaced. The cost of the shutdown and lost production would far outweigh the cost of the sulfur 

polishing unit. The addition of this unit is insurance in the same manner that spares are installed 

for almost all liquid pumps.

3.2 Fischer-Tropsch Synthesis

The cleaned syngas is preheated and mixed with steam and recycled tail gas and fed to the 

slurry-bed F-T hydrocarbon synthesis reactor (which operates at around 475oF and 300 psia). 

The coal-derived syngas has a hydrogen-to-carbon monoxide (H2:CO) ratio of 0.73, prior to tail 

gas recycle (1.02 post tail gas recycle), which is converted in the F-T reactor to straight chain 

olefinic and aliphatic hydrocarbons with a H:C ratio of approximately 2.1. Use of an iron-based 

F-T catalyst (as opposed to cobalt-based) is preferred when utilizing low H2:CO ratio syngas as 

the iron-based catalyst also promotes WGS activity, which allows a portion of the WGS reaction 

to occur in the reactor. This additional WGS activity within the reactor produces a liquid 

product with a H:C ratio that is higher than the H2:CO ratio of the inlet syngas.

The F-T reactor consists of two parallel first-stage slurry beds that feed a common second-stage 

slurry bed. The conceptual design of the F-T synthesis section is represented in Exhibit 3-8. 

Unconverted synthesis gas is cooled between the first and second stages to 65.6oC (150oF) to 

remove water and a hot hydrocarbon condensate (which is sent to product recovery), and then reheated prior to entering the second stage. Each stage accomplishes approximately 61 percent 

conversion of carbon monoxide (hydrogen is in excess) leading to a per-pass conversion of 85 

percent of carbon monoxide. There is no direct recycle of unconverted synthesis gas back into 

the second-stage reactor (the implementation of the recycle loop is discussed in a subsequent 

section).

Reactor temperature is modulated by removing tremendous heat released by the Fischer-Tropsch 

process through generation of 24.8 bar (360 psig) steam through bayonet tubes suspended from 

an internal double tubesheet. The reactors operate at 21-22 bar (305-319 psia) and nominally 

249oC (480oF)4.

Synthesis gas is introduced into the reactors through a cylindrical gas distributor and bubbles up 

through the slurry phase. Fischer-Tropsch wax and catalyst make up the slurry phase, into which 

the synthesis gas dissolves, contacts the catalyst, and is oligomerized, producing more FischerTropsch liquids. Streams of liquid wax are withdrawn from the reactors with a slurry valve, 

which accomplishes the majority of the catalyst-wax separation.

 

4 The outlet temperature is set by the target that was yield in the systems model, with this choice being at the edge of 

the operating window referred to as low temperature Fischer-Tropsch synthesis.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

35

Exhibit 3-8 Simplified representation of the F-T synthesis section

Source: NETL

Vapor is removed from the overhead of the first-stage reactor passing through a cyclone to 

prevent liquid carryover. The vapor is cooled and sent to a three-phase separator. The hot 

condensate (light liquid hydrocarbons) is recovered for further use. The water is sent to 

treatment, and the remaining vapors are reheated and sent to the second-stage reactor.

A cyclone removes entrained catalyst particles from the vapor stream leaving the top of the F-T 

reactor before being sent to a condenser for recovery of condensable hydrocarbon products, 

which are then processed in hydrotreaters in the product upgrading section of the plant.

The remaining vapor stream – containing unreacted syngas, inerts, and light hydrocarbons 

(predominantly methane, ethane, and propane) – is processed in an amine unit for CO2 removal 

to prevent CO2 build up in the recycle loop and reduce equipment sizes. In the sequestration 

case, the captured CO2 is sent to the gasification section for compression with CO2 from the 

Rectisol®unit. In the vent case it is merely vented to the atmosphere. A portion of the vapor 

stream is compressed for recycle to the F-T reactor while the rest of the gas is sent through a 

hydrogen recovery process to separate out hydrogen that is used for hydrotreating the liquids. 

The remaining gas is used as fuel gas.

The wax products are sent to hydrocyclones to accomplish the remaining catalyst-wax 

separation. Subsequently, the resulting wax stream is degassed with the resulting vapor cooled 

to remove additional condensate that is sent to product recovery and the residual vapor combined 

with the tail gas for recycling. The liquid wax is sent to wax clarifying and fed to the 

hydrocarbon recovery section.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

36

The catalyst that is separated from the bulk of the wax streams is recycled back to the FischerTropsch reactors. To maintain performance, a portion of the catalyst inventory of the reactors is 

removed for disposal and replaced. Catalyst replacement rates are influenced by loss of catalyst 

functional lifetime (activity and selectivity) and attrition losses. A composite lifetime 

(mechanical and functional) of the catalyst in this system analysis is 0.78 years, meaning 0.015 

percent of catalyst inventory is replaced per hour.

The catalyst-free liquid leaving the filter system is reduced in pressure and flashed. The vapor 

stream is further cooled to 100 °F and flashed. The vapor stream from the second flash is used 

as fuel for the gas turbine and the liquid from both flash drums is sent to the feed drum of the 

product fractionators, along with the condensate recovered from the overhead vapor streams. 

Exhibit 3-9 provides simplified block flow diagram of the F-T, product recovery, and product 

upgrading areas. Exhibit 3-10 and Exhibit 3-11 show the temperature, pressure, flow, and 

compositions of the process streams in the F-T area at the design coal feed rate for the CO2

sequestration and CO2 vent cases, respectively.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

37

Exhibit 3-9 Block flow diagram for the F-T synthesis and product upgrading area

Source: NETL

Clean Syngas

F-T Reactor Dehydration/ Compression Hydrocarbon Recovery

Wax Hydrocracking

Naphtha Hydrotreating

Distillate Hydrotreating

Hydrogen Recovery 23

27

28

29

30

31

32

Naphtha Pool

Diesel Pool

21 Steam

33

34

CO2 Removal

22 Aqueous Oxygenates

F-T Liquids

CO2

ZnO Polishing 20 Tail Gas Recycle

24

To Fuel Gas Pool

To Fuel Gas Pool

To Fuel Gas Pool

To Fuel Gas Pool To Fuel Gas Pool
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

38

Exhibit 3-10 Stream table for the F-T synthesis and product upgrading area – CO2 sequestration

20 21 22 23 24 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

V-L Mole Fraction

H2 0.4102 0.0000 0.0000 0.0013 0.4102 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

N2 0.0200 0.0000 0.0000 0.0017 0.0962 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

O2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

H2S 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

CO 0.5602 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.4031 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

CO2 0.0093 0.0000 1.0000 0.0116 0.0069 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

H2O 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0507 0.0431 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

NH3 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

HCL 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

HCN 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

SULFUR 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

COS 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

CH4 0.0003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0012 0.0284 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C2H4 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0009 0.0103 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C2H6 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.0017 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C3H6 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0003 0.0001 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C3H8 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0001 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

IC4H8 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

NC4H8 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

IC4H10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

NC4H10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0001 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C5H10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0006 0.0000 0.0000 0.1431 0.0000

NC5H12 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0418 0.0000 0.0000 0.0808 0.0000

IC5H12 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0424 0.0000

C6H12 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0008 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1819 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

NC6H14 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0546 0.0000 0.0000 0.1739 0.0000

IC6H14 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0061 0.0000 0.0000 0.0651 0.0000

C7H14 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0011 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1415 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C7H16 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0606 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C8H16 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0014 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1181 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C8H18 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0006 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0506 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C9H18 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0986 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C9H20 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0008 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0422 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

39

Exhibit 3-10 Stream table for the F-T synthesis and product upgrading area – CO2 sequestration (continued)

20 21 22 23 24 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

V-L Mole Fraction

C10H20 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0022 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0822 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C10H22 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0010 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0352 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C11H22 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0027 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1206 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C11H24 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0012 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0517 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C12H24 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0033 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1006 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C12H26 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0015 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0431 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C13H26 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0039 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0840 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C13H28 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0360 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C14H28 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0046 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0700 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C14H30 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0021 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0300 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C15H30 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0054 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0584 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C15H32 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0024 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0250 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C16H32 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0061 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0487 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C16H34 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0026 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0209 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C17H34 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0066 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0407 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C17H36 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0030 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0174 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C18H36 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0074 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0339 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C18H38 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0032 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0145 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C19H38 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0077 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0283 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C19H40 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0035 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0121 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C20H40 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0082 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0230 0.0000 0.0000

C20H42 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0037 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0099 0.0000 0.0000

ALKYLATE 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

ISOMERAT 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

REFORMAT 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C7-300HC 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1006 0.0000

3-350HC 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0265 0.0000

350-5HC 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.7298

500+HC 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0557

C7-300HT 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.2981 0.0000

3-350HT 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0695 0.0000

350-5HT 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1475

500+HT 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0670
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

40

Exhibit 3-10 Stream table for the F-T synthesis and product upgrading area – CO2 sequestration (continued)

20 21 22 23 24 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

V-L Mole Fraction

OXVAP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0001 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

OXHC 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0860 0.1638 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

OXH2O 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C5N 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C6N 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C7N 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C8N 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C9N 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C10N 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C6A 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C7A 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C8A 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C9A 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C10AP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C21OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0136 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0317 0.0000 0.0000

C22OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0153 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0305 0.0000 0.0000

C23OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0168 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0294 0.0000 0.0000

C24OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0179 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0284 0.0000 0.0000

C25OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0188 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0274 0.0000 0.0000

C26OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0193 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0264 0.0000 0.0000

C27OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0197 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0254 0.0000 0.0000

C28OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0197 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0245 0.0000 0.0000

C29OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0197 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0236 0.0000 0.0000

C30WAX 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.6758 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.7198 0.0000 0.0000

Total 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000

V-L Molecular Weight 17.493 18.015 44.010 608.035 16.693 2.016 2.016 2.016 104.506 177.165 658.868 105.664 194.681

V-L Flowrate (lbmol/hr) 142,824 8,775 36,786 572 203,707 709 362 2,756 921 524 537 1,398 2,013

V-L Flowrate (lb/hr) 2,498,396 158,087 1,618,962 347,549 3,400,404 1,429 731 5,556 96,211 92,751 353,896 147,699 391,830

Solids Flowrate (lb/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Temperature (°F) 600 240 100 487 343 100 100 100 100 100 100 112 255

Pressure (psia) 360.0 325.0 265.0 75.0 325.0 600.0 600.0 120.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 40.0 20.0

Density (lb/ft3) 0.549 56.237 2.138 37.600 0.625 0.197 0.197 0.040 43.116 46.189 51.458 41.122 42.502
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

41

Exhibit 3-11 Stream table for the F-T synthesis and product upgrading area – CO2 vent

20 21 22 23 23 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

V-L Mole Fraction

H2 0.4102 0.0000 0.0000 0.0013 0.4102 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

N2 0.0200 0.0000 0.0000 0.0017 0.0962 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

O2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

H2S 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

CO 0.5602 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.4031 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

CO2 0.0093 0.0000 1.0000 0.0116 0.0069 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

H2O 0.0000 1.0000 0.0000 0.0507 0.0431 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

NH3 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

HCL 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

HCN 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

SULFUR 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

COS 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

CH4 0.0003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0012 0.0284 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C2H4 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0009 0.0103 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C2H6 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.0017 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C3H6 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0003 0.0001 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C3H8 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0001 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

IC4H8 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

NC4H8 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

IC4H10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

NC4H10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0001 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C5H10 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0006 0.0000 0.0000 0.1431 0.0000

NC5H12 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0418 0.0000 0.0000 0.0808 0.0000

IC5H12 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0424 0.0000

C6H12 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0008 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1819 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

NC6H14 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0546 0.0000 0.0000 0.1739 0.0000

IC6H14 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0061 0.0000 0.0000 0.0651 0.0000

C7H14 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0011 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1415 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C7H16 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0606 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C8H16 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0014 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1181 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C8H18 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0006 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0506 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C9H18 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0986 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C9H20 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0008 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0422 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

42

Exhibit 3-11 Stream table for the F-T synthesis and product upgrading area – CO2 vent (continued)

20 21 22 23 23 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

V-L Mole Fraction

C10H20 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0022 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0822 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C10H22 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0010 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0352 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C11H22 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0027 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1206 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C11H24 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0012 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0517 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C12H24 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0033 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1006 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C12H26 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0015 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0431 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C13H26 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0039 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0840 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C13H28 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0360 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C14H28 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0046 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0700 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C14H30 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0021 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0300 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C15H30 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0054 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0584 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C15H32 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0024 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0250 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C16H32 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0061 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0487 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C16H34 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0026 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0209 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C17H34 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0066 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0407 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C17H36 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0030 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0174 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C18H36 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0074 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0339 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C18H38 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0032 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0145 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C19H38 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0077 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0283 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C19H40 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0035 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0121 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C20H40 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0082 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0230 0.0000 0.0000

C20H42 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0037 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0099 0.0000 0.0000

ALKYLATE 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

ISOMERAT 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

REFORMAT 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C7-300HC 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1006 0.0000

3-350HC 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0265 0.0000

350-5HC 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.7298

500+HC 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0557

C7-300HT 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.2981 0.0000

3-350HT 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0695 0.0000

350-5HT 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1475

500+HT 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0670
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

43

Exhibit 3-11 Stream table for the F-T synthesis and product upgrading area – CO2 vent (continued)

20 21 22 23 23 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

V-L Mole Fraction

OXVAP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0001 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

OXHC 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0018 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0860 0.1638 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

OXH2O 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C5N 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C6N 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C7N 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C8N 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C9N 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C10N 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C6A 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C7A 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C8A 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C9A 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C10AP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

C21OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0136 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0317 0.0000 0.0000

C22OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0153 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0305 0.0000 0.0000

C23OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0168 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0294 0.0000 0.0000

C24OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0179 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0284 0.0000 0.0000

C25OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0188 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0274 0.0000 0.0000

C26OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0193 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0264 0.0000 0.0000

C27OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0197 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0254 0.0000 0.0000

C28OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0197 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0245 0.0000 0.0000

C29OP 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0197 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0236 0.0000 0.0000

C30WAX 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.6758 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.7198 0.0000 0.0000

Total 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000 1.0000

V-L Molecular Weight 17.493 18.015 44.010 608.035 16.693 2.016 2.016 2.016 104.506 177.165 658.868 105.664 194.681

V-L Flowrate (lbmol/hr) 142,824 8,775 36,786 572 203,707 709 362 2,756 921 524 537 1,398 2,013

V-L Flowrate (lb/hr) 2,498,396 158,087 1,618,962 347,549 3,400,404 1,429 731 5,556 96,211 92,751 353,896 147,699 391,830

Solids Flowrate (lb/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Temperature (°F) 600 240 100 487 343 100 100 100 100 100 100 112 255

Pressure (psia) 360.0 325.0 265.0 75.0 325.0 600.0 600.0 120.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 40.0 20.0

Density (lb/ft3) 0.549 56.237 2.138 37.600 0.625 0.197 0.197 0.040 43.116 46.189 51.458 41.122 42.502

A - Reference conditions are 32.02 F & 0.089 PSIA
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

44

3.3 Product Recovery

All of the hydrocarbon streams from the Fischer-Tropsch synthesis section (wax and condensate 

recovered from the overhead vapor streams) are combined in the feed drum of the product 

fractionator. The product fractionator separates these hydrocarbons into a low-pressure light 

hydrocarbon vapor stream and three liquid streams: naphtha, middle distillate, and wax. The 

liquid cuts of the fractionators are defined by the following boiling range cut points:

Naphtha C5 saturates to 350°F (177°C)

Middle Distillate 350-650°F (177-343°C)

Wax Greater than 650°F (343°C)

This simple separation section consists of one fractionation column with a steam side-stripper. 

Required support equipment (heat exchangers, flash drums, and furnace utilities) are included in 

the capital estimate of this section. The feed drum operates as a flash drum at approximately 

135°F (57°C) and 90 psia (6.2 Bar). The vapor feed rate to the tower is used for pressure control 

of the flash drum. The vapor serves as stripping media after being fed to the middle of the 

column. The liquid is heated to approximately 343°F (173°C) via a fired heater, which burns 

residual fuel gas.

The naphtha product is withdrawn from an upper tray and is sent to the naphtha hydrotreating 

section. Steam stripping is used to provide a stable liquid middle distillate stream from the 

middle of the column, which is cooled (via contact with the column feed stream), and then is sent 

to the distillate hydrotreating section. The tower bottoms are withdrawn and cooled via contact 

with the tower feed and subsequent water-cooled exchangers prior to being sent to the wax 

hydrocracking section.

The Hydrogen Recovery system processes a slipstream of the F-T tail gas to recover H2 for use 

in the hydrotreaters and hydrocracker. A pressure swing adsorption (PSA) unit is used to produce 

high purity H2 and the rejected stream from the process is blended with the remaining F-T tail 

gas for use as fuel gas.

The rationale for placement of the hydrogen recovery downstream of the F-T reactor is threefold:

1. The presence of H2 promotes the F-T reaction:

CO + 2n H2 = CnH2n + n H2O.

2. The F-T reactor produces additional H2 via the WGS reaction:

CO + H2O = CO2 + H2.

3. Less gas is treated per unit of H2 recovered since the F-T liquids are removed. 

Fuel gas recovered from the Hydrocarbon Recovery, Hydrogen Recovery, Naphtha 

Hydrotreating, Distillate Hydrotreating, and Wax Hydrocracking units is mixed, flashed, and 

then compressed to 350 psia at 110 °F. 

Oxygen and steam are then added to this stream prior to a WGS reactor in order to increase the 

H2 and CO2 fractions in the fuel gas. After the WGS reactor in the sequestration case, this 

stream is treated by proprietary amine AGR process which is used to capture CO2, thereby 

reducing the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the turbine exhaust. This captured CO2 is 

mixed with the CO2 removed from the F-T synthesis loop and sent to the gasification island for 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

45

dehydration and compression. In the vent case the fuel gas is combusted without shifting or CO2

capture.

The remaining fuel gas at 335 psia is separated and part of it routed to the various F-T process 

furnaces. The remaining F-T fuel gas is sent to the gasification area for coal drying and power 

production. A simplified block flow diagram of the power generation area of the facility is 

provided in Section 3.6.1.

3.4 Recycle Gas Loop

Vapor products from the second-stage reactors (those leaving the Fischer-Tropsch synthesis 

section) are sent to a cyclone to prevent liquid carryover, cooled, and then sent to a three-phase 

separator. The hot condensate is sent to the product upgrading processes. The remaining vapors 

are processed for CO2 removal, oxygenate removal, dehydration, and additional hydrocarbon 

recovery. The majority of the resulting tail-gas vapor is recycled to the F-T reactor, with the 

remainder being processed in the hydrogen recovery unit.

The remaining pre-fuel gas from the hydrogen recovery unit is mixed with the light gases 

produced in the hydrocarbon upgrading sections and the off-gas from the wax stream. In the 

case of the CO2 sequestration case, this fuel gas is shifted to maximize CO2 capture potential. In 

both cases, a portion of the fuel gas is separated out for combustion in direct fired heaters 

throughout the CTL plant, which allows for more steam from the heat recovery to be directed to 

electrical power production, and the remainder is sent to the combustion turbines.

3.5 Product Upgrading

3.5.1 Naphtha Hydrotreaters

Light liquid hydrocarbon products are processed in the naphtha hydrotreating units to produce 

stabilized (heteroatom, olefinic, and aromatic content is reduced) F-T naphtha. This is then 

blended with naphtha produced in the hydrocracker. The off gas from this process is combined 

with portions of the F-T tail gas.

3.5.2 Middle Distillate Hydrotreaters

The product recovery distillation tower produces a middle distillate that is sent to a fixed bed 

catalytic hydrotreater that produces an acceptable quality diesel fuel. This processing section 

removes oxygenates and any residual heteroatoms (sulfur and nitrogen), and greatly reduces the 

olefinic and aromatic content. The distillate hydrotreater also produces, and the processing 

section separates off, a waste-water stream and a residual C4- vapor stream, which is recovered. 

The hydrotreated middle distillate from this processing section is blended with the analogous 

stream from the wax hydrocracker to form a product diesel. The product diesel has an estimated 

pour point of -45.6°C (-50.1°F), which is well below the target value of any region in the United 

States [15], and the estimated cetane index of this diesel product is 70.7, which is above the 

standards set in the World Wide Fuel Charter (minimum requirements between 48 and 55 

depending on category [16]); hence there is no need for additives. These values are provided in 

Exhibit 3-12.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

46

Exhibit 3-12 Diesel properties

Property Value

Density, lb/bbl 266.9

Net Heat of Combustion, MMBtu/gal (LHV) 0.12

Pour Point, °F -50.1

Cetane Index 70.7

3.5.3 Wax Hydrocracking

The models utilized in this study are based on Chevron’s isocracking process that emphasized 

diesel production compared to naphtha production. [10] Based on the reported yields for a twostage design processing VGO (Vacuum Gas Oil), a set of wax hydrocracking yields was 

developed. Exhibit 3-13 provides the wax hydrocracking model product yield. The wax 

hydrocracking model produces a Diesel/(C5+ naphtha) product ratio of 6.

Exhibit 3-13 Wax hydrocracking model product yield distributions

Component

Yields

Weight % Volume %

C1-C4s 4.50 -

C5-C6s 4.59 5.58

Naphtha 6.67 7.39

Diesel 84.24 87.03

Total 100.00 100.00

C5+Naphtha 11.26 12.97

Diesel/(C5+Naphtha) 7.48 6.71

The F-T process design can be adjusted to a low wax yield (as little as 56 weight percent) and 

still make the desired 2.33/1 Diesel/(C5+Naphtha) ratio by using the wax hydrocracking model 

described previously.

This facility was designed for maximum diesel fuel production and the hydrocracker is 

configured to maximize diesel production by selectively hydrocracking the wax product mainly 

to the diesel boiling range. The wax fraction is sent to the wax hydrocracker, which breaks down 

the wax into naphtha and middle distillate, as well as some residual C4- vapor, which is 

recovered. The single, multibed, downflow wax hydrocracker catalytically cracks the wax under 

a 75-103 bar (1088-1494 psia) hydrogen atmosphere at a nominal temperature of 371°C (700°F). 

There is inter-bed cooling to remove the heat of reaction from hydrogen-rich recycle gas. A flash 

drum is used to recover unutilized hydrogen-rich gas for recycle back to the hydrocracker. A 

distillation column is used to separate the liquids from the flash into naphtha, middle distillate, 

and wax streams. The residual uncracked wax is recycled to extinction. The middle distillate 

from the wax hydrocracker is sent for blending with the middle distillate range product from the 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

47

distillate hydrotreating section. The naphtha stream from the wax hydrocracker is sent to the 

naphtha reforming unit. 

To achieve a 70:30 diesel/naphtha product split (volume basis), the wax hydrocracker model was 

redesigned from that used in the April 2007 study to increase the diesel fuel yield. In the 

process, a certain amount of hydroisomerization occurs, which has the beneficial effect of 

lowering the pour point of the diesel fuel.

3.6 Power Production

The plant is designed to produce sufficient electric power to satisfy the power requirements for 

the gasification plant and the F-T facility, to make the entire facility electric power independent. 

Limiting the amount of excess power produced has two benefits: 1) the facility is not dependent 

on external power sources or supplies and 2) it improves the efficiency of the facility.

The prevailing industry philosophy in designing CTL facilities is that excess syngas should only 

be combusted in a direct-fired boiler so as to maximize the amount of syngas converted to the 

higher value liquid fuel products. It was determined, however, that the use of a combined-cycle 

power cycle (i.e., adding a combustion turbine to the facility) improved both the environmental 

and economic performance of the facility, and subsequently it was decided to use such a power 

cycle. Commercially available combustion turbines of the appropriate size were selected in 

order to minimize excess power production.

3.6.1 Combustion Turbine Generators

The combustion turbine generators that could be used for this application are three General 

Electric (GE) gas turbines (MS6001B) each producing a nominal 45 MWe. The actual total 

power production is 112 MWe in the CO2 sequestration case and 136 MWe in the CO2 vent case. 

The difference in power output between the cases is attributed to differences in fuel gas 

composition. The stream data are available in Exhibit 3-3 and the block diagram is provided in 

Exhibit 3-14
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

48

Exhibit 3-14 Block flow diagram for the fuel gas preparation and power generation area

Source: NETL

HRSG

Fuel Gas

Stack Gas

Fuel Gas Heating

Turbine Cooling Air Ambient Air Steam Turbine BFW Process Steam

Note: Steam cycle simplified

To BFW Heater

Reclaimed Water

Fuel Gas Compressor

35
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

49

Because fuel gas from the F-T area is imported into the gasification and power production Aspen

model, some adjustment had to be made to the composition of the imported fuel gas. The Aspen

gasification and power plant model do not contain any hydrocarbons heavier than methane. 

Therefore, in order to import the fuel gas into the power plant model, the heavier hydrocarbons 

were changed to methane on a weight basis. This overestimates the heating value and tends to 

increase the power production because methane has a higher heating value than the heavier 

hydrocarbons. However, this change is slight since there is only a relatively small amount of 

these hydrocarbons in the total fuel gas going to the gas turbine. Using the sequestration case as 

an example, Exhibit 3-15 shows there is negligible effect on lower heating value (LHV) by 

substituting trace heavy components with methane.

Exhibit 3-15 Fuel gas LHV comparison between turbine and F-T models

Component

LHV

Btu/lb

Mass Fraction 

in F-T Fuel Gas

LHV F-T Fuel 

Gas, Btu/lb

Mass Fraction 

in Turbine Fuel 

Gas

LHV Turbine 

Fuel Gas, 

Btu/lb

H2 51,573 0.02301009 1186.69937 0.0230101 1186.69937

CO 4,344 0.0818232 355.43998 0.0818232 355.43998

CO2 0 0.00211792 0.00000 0.0021179 0.00000

H2O 0 0.00296592 0.00000 0.0029659 0.00000

NH3 7,998 0.00025819 2.06500 0.0002582 2.06500

HCN 9,915 8.51E-07 0.00844 8.51E-07 0.00844

CH4 21,509 0.40201125 8646.85998 0.4021163 8649.11842

C2H4 20,275 1.18E-06 0.02394 0 0.00000

C2H6 20,424 0.00010435 2.13124 0 0.00000

C3H6 19,675 8.44E-09 0.00017 0 0.00000

C3H8 19,920 6.39E-08 0.00127 0 0.00000

IC4H8 19,469 1.16E-11 0.00000 0 0.00000

10193.22939 10193.33121

3.6.2 Steam Turbine Power Generation

Heat from the various gasification, AGR, and F-T processes is recovered with multiple heat 

exchangers matching the quality and quantity of available heat. This heat recovery produces 

steam at various pressures, part of which is used for process needs and the remainder is used to 

run the steam turbines to produce additional power of 316 MWe and 337 MWe of power in the 

sequestration and CO2 vent cases, respectively.

The HRSG is a horizontal gas flow, drum-type, multi-pressure design that is matched to the 

characteristics of the gas turbine exhaust gas. The HP drum produces steam at main steam 

pressure; while the intermediate pressure (IP) drum produces steam for export to the cold reheat. 

The HRSG drum pressures are nominally 1,800/452 psia for the HP/IP turbine sections, 

respectively.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

50

Natural circulation of steam is accomplished in the HRSG by utilizing differences in densities 

due to temperature differences of the steam. The natural circulation HRSG provides the most 

cost-effective and reliable design.

3.6.3 Flare Stack

Each gasifier has a self-supporting, refractory-lined, carbon steel flare stack to combust and 

dispose of product gas during startup, shutdown, and upset conditions. The flare stack is 

provided with multiple pilot burners, fueled by natural gas or propane, with pilot monitoring 

instrumentation.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

51

4 Performance Summary and Mass Balances

The plant power output, including auxiliary load, for the facilities is summarized in Exhibit 4-1

and Exhibit 4-2.

The total F-T liquids production of 49,992 bpd consists of 35,230 bpd (70.5 percent) diesel and 

14,762 bpd (29.5 percent) of low-octane C5+ naphtha. The diesel product can be sold as a 

commercial diesel fuel after the addition of appropriate additives. The C5+ naphtha product is a 

low octane material that is an excellent ethylene cracker feedstock, or it can be further processed 

to make a gasoline blending component. 

If more export power is required, additional coal must be consumed to produce it. 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

52

Exhibit 4-1 Plant performance summary – CO2 sequestration case 

Plant Output

Gas Turbine Power 111,600 kWe

Steam Turbine Power 315,600 kWe

Total 427,200 kWe

Auxiliary Load

Coal Handling 1,760 kWe

Coal Milling 8,160 kWe

Slag Handling 2,080 kWe

Air Separation Unit Auxiliaries 4,000 kWe

Air Separation Unit Main Air Compressor 235,480 kWe

Oxygen Compressor 35,600 kWe

Nitrogen Compressors 6,080 kWe

CO2 Compressor 43,480 kWe

Boiler Feedwater Pumps 1,640 kWe

Condensate Pump 200 kWe

Quench Water Pump 2,280 kWe

Syngas Recycle Compressor 2,920 kWe

Circulating Water Pump 6,800 kWe

Ground Water Pumps 800 kWe

Cooling Tower Fans 3,560 kWe

Scrubber Pumps 1,360 kWe

Acid Gas Removal 13,640 kWe

Gas Turbine Auxiliaries 4,000 kWe

Steam Turbine Auxiliaries 400 kWe

Claus Plant/TGTU Auxiliaries 1,000 kWe

Claus Plant TG Recycle Compressor 840 kWe

F-T Power requirement 31,948 kWe

Miscellaneous Balance of PlantA12,000 kWe

Transformer Losses 2,520 kWe

Total 422,548 kWe

Plant Performance

Net Auxiliary Load 422,548 kWe

Net Plant Power 4,652 kWe

Coal Feed Flowrate 794,022 (1,750,518) kg/hr (lb/hr)

Thermal InputB5,984,963 kWt

Condenser Duty 928 (880) GJ/hr (MMBtu/hr)

Raw Water Withdrawal 32.8 (8,672) m

3

/min (gpm)

Carbon in coal 506,147 (1,115,863) kg/hr (lb/hr)

Carbon in Slag 2,531 (5,579) kg/hr (lb/hr)

Sulfur 19,901 (43,875) kg/hr (lb/hr)

Raw Water Consumption 26.8 (7,078) m

3

/min (gpm)

A - Includes plant control systems, lighting, HVAC, and miscellaneous low voltage loads

B - HHV of Illinois No. 6 coal is 27,135 kJ/kg (11,666 Btu/lb)
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

53

Exhibit 4-2 Plant performance summary – CO2 vent case

Plant Output

Gas Turbine Power 136,000 kWe

Steam Turbine Power 336,800 kWe

Total 472,800 kWe

Auxiliary Load

Coal Handling 1,760 kWe

Coal Milling 8,160 kWe

Slag Handling 2,080 kWe

Air Separation Unit Auxiliaries 4,000 kWe

Air Separation Unit Main Air Compressor 235,480 kWe

Oxygen Compressor 35,600 kWe

Nitrogen Compressors 6,080 kWe

CO2 Compressor 0 kWe

Boiler Feedwater Pumps 1,840 kWe

Condensate Pump 240 kWe

Quench Water Pump 2,280 kWe

Syngas Recycle Compressor 2,920 kWe

Circulating Water Pump 6,240 kWe

Ground Water Pumps 720 kWe

Cooling Tower Fans 3,280 kWe

Scrubber Pumps 1,360 kWe

Acid Gas Removal 13,640 kWe

Gas Turbine Auxiliaries 4,000 kWe

Steam Turbine Auxiliaries 400 kWe

Claus Plant/TGTU Auxiliaries 1,000 kWe

Claus Plant TG Recycle Compressor 840 kWe

F-T Power requirement 29,278 kWe

Miscellaneous Balance of PlantA12,000 kWe

Transformer Losses 2,520 kWe

Total 375,718 kWe

Plant Performance

Net Auxiliary Load 375,718 kWe

Net Plant Power 97,082 kWe

Coal Feed Flowrate 794,022 (1,750,518) kg/hr (lb/hr)

Thermal InputB5,984,963 kWt

Condenser Duty 928 (880) GJ/hr (MMBtu/hr)

Raw Water Withdrawal 30.1 (7,940) m

3

/min (gpm)

Carbon in coal 506,147 (1,115,863) kg/hr (lb/hr)

Carbon in Slag 2,531 (5,579) kg/hr (lb/hr)

Sulfur 19,901 (43,875) kg/hr (lb/hr)

Raw Water Consumption 24.5 (6,473) m

3

/min (gpm)

A - Includes plant control systems, lighting, HVAC, and miscellaneous low voltage loads

B - HHV of Illinois No. 6 coal is 27,135 kJ/kg (11,666 Btu/lb)

4.1.1 Carbon Balance

An overall carbon balance for the facilities is provided in Exhibit 4-3 and Exhibit 4-4. About 

0.5 percent of the total carbon is encapsulated in the slag, while over 80 percent of the entering 

carbon is converted to syngas going to the F-T reactor. In the sequestration case the compressed 

CO2 and F-T liquid product streams contain the majority of carbon exiting the plant, accounting 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

54

for approximately 55 percent and 40 percent of the total entering carbon, respectively. The total 

amount of carbon lost to the environment is about 6 percent of the entering carbon.

Note that carbon emissions from the stack are in the form of CO2 emissions to the atmosphere, 

and that these emissions only represent a fraction of the total life cycle GHG emissions 

associated with the finished diesel fuel.

Exhibit 4-3 Elemental carbon mass balance – CO2 sequestration case

Carbon In, kg/hr (lb/hr) Carbon Out, kg/hr (lb/hr)

Coal 506,109 (1,115,863) Naphtha 56,404 (124,349) 11%

Diesel 150,183 (331,096) 30%

Slag 2,531 (5,579) 1%

CO2 272,389 (600,516) 54%

Stack gas 24,603 (54,324) 5%

Total 506,109 (1,115,863) Total 506,109 (1,115,863) 100%

Exhibit 4-4 Elemental carbon mass balance – CO2 vent case

Carbon In, kg/hr (lb/hr) Carbon Out, kg/hr (lb/hr)

Coal 506,109 (1,115,863) Naphtha 56,404 (124,349) 11%

Diesel 150,183 (331,096) 30%

Slag 2,531 (5,579) 1%

Stack gas 297,030 (654,839) 59%

Total 506,109 (1,115,863) Total 506,109 (1,115,863) 100%

4.1.2 Sulfur Balance

All the sulfur in the coal is recovered as elemental sulfur in the Claus plant.

4.1.3 Water Balance

Water balances in Exhibit 4-5 and Exhibit 4-6 represent one of the four gasification sections (see 

Section 3.1.3) and one quarter of the F-T area water needs. The last row represents the complete 

F-T plant and all four of the gasification sections. The water demand is the total water demand 

for that plant section; this consists of a combination of raw and recycled water. Some water may 

also be discharged via a permitted discharge. The raw water consumption is the difference 

between the water withdrawal and consumption. Raw water consumption is 8.4 and 7.7 barrels 

of water per bbl of diesel produced for the CO2 Sequestration Case and CO2 Vent Case, 

respectively (5.9 and 5.4 barrels of water per barrel of F-T liquids produced).
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

55

Exhibit 4-5 Water balance – CO2 sequestration case

Water Usage by Area

m

3

/min (gpm)

Water 

Demand

Internal 

Recycle

Raw Water 

Withdrawal

Process 

Water 

Discharge

Raw Water 

Consumption

Slag Handling 0.43 (114) 0.43 (114) 0.0 (0) 0.0 (0) 0.0 (0)

Quench/Wash 3.0 (786) 2.07 (548) 0.9 (238) 0.0 (0) 0.9 (238)

SWS Blowdown 0.0 (0) 0.0 (0) 0.0 (0) 0.03 (7) -0.03 (-7)

Condenser Makeup 0.8 (221) 0.0 (0) 0.8 (221) 0.0 (0) 0.8 (221)

Gasifier Steam 0.3 (84) 0.0 (0) 0.3 (84)

Shift Steam 0.5 (128) 0.0 (0) 0.5 (128)

BFW Makeup 0.03 (8) 0.0 (0) 0.03 (8)

Cooling Tower 6.7 (1,742) 0.28 (74) 6.3 (1,668) 1.5 (392) 4.8 (1,276)

BFW Blowdown 0 0.03 (8) -0.03 (-8)

SWS Blowdown 0.0 (0) 0.25 (66) -0.25 (-66)

SWS Excess Water 0.0 (0) 0.0 (0) 0.0 (0)

1⁄4 of F-T area values 0.16 (41.60) 0 0.16 (41.60) 0 0.16 (41.60)

Total 10.99 (2,904) 2.79 (736) 8.21 (2,168) 1.5 (398) 6.70 (1,770)

Total 4 Gasifier sections 

plus F-T plant 43.98 (11,617) 11.15 (2,945) 32.83 (8,672) 6.03 (1,594) 26.79 (7,078)

Exhibit 4-6 Water balance – CO2 vent case

Water Usage by Area

m

3

/min (gpm)

Water 

Demand

Internal 

Recycle

Raw Water 

Withdrawal

Process 

Water 

Discharge

Raw Water 

Consumption

Slag Handling 0.43 (114) 0.43 (114) 0.0 (0) 0.0 (0) 0.0 (0)

Quench/Wash 3.0 (786) 2.07 (548) 0.9 (238) 0.0 (0) 0.9 (238)

SWS Blowdown 0.0 (0) 0.0 (0) 0.0 (0) 0.03 (7) -0.03 (-7)

Condenser Makeup 0.8 (222) 0.0 (0) 0.8 (222) 0.0 (0) 0.8 (222)

Gasifier Steam 0.3 (84) 0.0 (0) 0.3 (84)

Shift Steam 0.5 (128) 0.0 (0) 0.5 (128)

BFW Makeup 0.03 (9) 0.0 (0) 0.03 (9)

Cooling Tower 6.1 (1,601) 0.28 (75) 5.8 (1,526) 1.4 (360) 4.4 (1,166)

BFW Blowdown 0.0 (0) 0.03 (9) -0.03 (-9)

SWS Blowdown 0.0 (0) 0.25 (66) -0.25 (-66)

SWS Excess Water 0.0 (0) 0.0 (0) 0.0 (0)

1⁄4 of F-T area values 0.04 (9) 0.04 (9) 0.0 (0) 0.0 (00) 0.0 (00)

Total 10.3 (2,722) 2.79 (737) 7.5 (1,985) 1.4 (367) 6.1 (1,618)

Total 4 Gasifier sections 

plus F-T plant 41.3 (10,896) 11.20 (2956) 30.1 (7,940) 5.6 (1,467) 24.5 (6,473)
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

56

5 Cost Estimation Results

5.1 Capital and Operating Costs

The gasifier, associated syngas treatment units, Rectisol®system, CO2 compressors, Claus unit, 

gas and steam turbines, and other equipment typically associated with an IGCC plant were scaled 

from updated cost estimates (2011 dollar basis) for the Shell gasifier Case 6 in “Cost and 

Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Power Plants, Volume 1: Bituminous Coal and Natural 

Gas to Electricity.” [8] Capital costs for the F-T reactor and various treatment and upgrading 

systems were based on adjusted, vendor-furnished, actual cost data, and best possible 

projections.

A process contingency of 25 percent was applied to the F-T reactor and associated equipment. 

The capital costs at the TPC level include equipment, materials, labor, indirect construction 

costs, engineering, and contingencies. Additional details are highlighted in Section 1.6 of this 

report and the NETL QGESS. [6]

The TOC for the entire CTL facility with CO2 capture was estimated to be $6,532 million. This 

cost includes appropriate contingency factors and owners costs. [6] On a per barrel basis of daily 

liquid capacity, this cost is $130,662/bpdFTL for the sequestration case. Exhibit 5-1 shows a 

summary breakdown of the capital costs for the CO2 sequestration case and Exhibit 5-3 shows a 

summary breakdown of the capital costs for the CO2 vent case. The total TOC is the TPC plus 

owner’s costs.

A credit of $60/MWh is included for excess power generated. Exhibit 5-2 and Exhibit 5-4 show

the breakdown of the total operating cost for the sequestration and vent cases, respectively.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

57

Exhibit 5-1 Total plant cost summary with CO2 sequestration

Client: USDOE/NETL Report Date: 2013-Dec-23

Project: Activity 25

Case: Base Case 1 - Total System

Plant Size: 49,992 bbl/day Estimate Type: Conceptual Cost Base (Jun) 2011 ($x1000)

Acct Equipment Material Labor Sales Bare Erected Eng'g CM Contingencies

No. Item/Description Cost Cost Direct Indirect Tax Cost $ H.O.& Fee Process Project $ $/bpd $/bpdECO $/bpdEPD

1 COAL & SORBENT HANDLING

1.1 Coal Receive & Unload $10,063 $0 $4,850 $0 $0 $14,913 $1,296 $0 $3,242 $19,451 $389 $371 $464

1.2 Coal Stackout & Reclaim $13,003 $0 $3,109 $0 $0 $16,112 $1,368 $0 $3,496 $20,976 $420 $400 $500

1.3 Coal Conveyors & Yd Crush $12,090 $0 $3,076 $0 $0 $15,166 $1,290 $0 $3,291 $19,747 $395 $377 $471

1.4 Other Coal Handling $3,163 $0 $712 $0 $0 $3,875 $328 $0 $841 $5,044 $101 $96 $120

1.5 Sorbent Receive & Unload $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

1.6 Sorbent Stackout & Reclaim $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

1.7 Sorbent Conveyors $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

1.8 Other Sorbent Handling $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

1.9 Coal & Sorbent Hnd.Foundations $0 $6,719 $17,561 $0 $0 $24,281 $2,307 $0 $5,318 $31,906 $638 $608 $760

SUBTOTAL 1. $38,318 $6,719 $29,308 $0 $0 $74,346 $6,589 $0 $16,187 $97,122 $1,943 $1,852 $2,315

2 COAL & SORBENT PREP & FEED

2.1 Coal Crushing & Drying $121,566 $7,331 $17,471 $0 $0 $146,368 $12,217 $0 $31,717 $190,302 $3,807 $3,629 $4,536

2.2 Prepared Coal Storage & Feed $5,758 $1,383 $891 $0 $0 $8,032 $664 $0 $1,739 $10,435 $209 $199 $249

2.3 Dry Coal Injection System $189,497 $2,184 $17,357 $0 $0 $209,038 $17,410 $0 $45,290 $271,738 $5,436 $5,182 $6,477

2.4 Misc.Coal Prep & Feed $3,166 $2,313 $6,814 $0 $0 $12,293 $1,099 $0 $2,678 $16,070 $321 $306 $383

2.5 Sorbent Prep Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

2.6 Sorbent Storage & Feed $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

2.7 Sorbent Injection System $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

2.8 Booster Air Supply System $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

2.9 Coal & Sorbent Feed Foundation $0 $11,614 $9,966 $0 $0 $21,580 $2,005 $0 $4,717 $28,301 $566 $540 $675

SUBTOTAL 2. $319,987 $24,826 $52,498 $0 $0 $397,310 $33,395 $0 $86,141 $516,846 $10,339 $9,856 $12,319

3 FEEDWATER & MISC. BOP SYSTEMS

3.1 Feedwater System $1,568 $2,706 $1,419 $0 $0 $5,693 $515 $0 $1,242 $7,449 $149 $142 $178

3.2 Water Makeup & Pretreating $1,161 $120 $638 $0 $0 $1,919 $177 $0 $629 $2,724 $54 $52 $65

3.3 Other Feedwater Subsystems $882 $291 $260 $0 $0 $1,433 $124 $0 $311 $1,868 $37 $36 $45

3.4 Service Water Systems $679 $1,354 $4,666 $0 $0 $6,698 $637 $0 $2,200 $9,535 $191 $182 $227

3.5 Other Boiler Plant Systems $3,658 $1,367 $3,364 $0 $0 $8,390 $764 $0 $1,831 $10,985 $220 $209 $262

3.6 FO Supply Sys & Nat Gas $511 $966 $895 $0 $0 $2,372 $223 $0 $519 $3,113 $62 $59 $74

3.7 Waste Treatment Equipment $1,570 $0 $973 $0 $0 $2,543 $245 $0 $836 $3,624 $73 $69 $86

3.8 Misc. Power Plant Equipment $1,709 $228 $889 $0 $0 $2,826 $270 $0 $929 $4,025 $81 $77 $96

SUBTOTAL 3. $11,739 $7,032 $13,103 $0 $0 $31,874 $2,953 $0 $8,497 $43,324 $867 $826 $1,033

TOTAL PLANT COST SUMMARY

TOTAL PLANT COST
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

58

Exhibit 5-1 Total plant cost summary with CO2 sequestration (continued)

Acct Equipment Material Labor Sales Bare Erected Eng'g CM Contingencies

No. Item/Description Cost Cost Direct Indirect Tax Cost $ H.O.& Fee Process Project $ $/bpd $/bpdECO $/bpdEPD

4 GASIFIER & ACCESSORIES

4.1 Gasifier, Syngas Cooler & Auxiliaries (Shell) $699,517 $0 $301,659 $0 $0 $1,001,175 $88,113 $137,204 $188,698 $1,415,190 $28,308 $26,986 $33,732

4.2 Syngas Cooling w/4.1 $0 w/ 4.1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

4.3 ASU/Oxidant Compression $551,221 $0 w/equip. $0 $0 $551,221 $51,506 $0 $60,273 $663,000 $13,262 $12,642 $15,803

4.4 LT Heat Recovery & FG Saturation $42,214 $0 $15,797 $0 $0 $58,011 $5,481 $0 $12,698 $76,191 $1,524 $1,453 $1,816

4.5 Misc. Gasification Equipment w/4.1&4.2 $0 w/4.1&4.2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

4.6 Flare Stack System $0 $3,287 $1,328 $0 $0 $4,615 $431 $0 $1,009 $6,056 $121 $115 $144

4.8 Major Component Rigging w/4.1&4.2 $0 w/4.1&4.2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

4.9 Gasification Foundations $0 $39,797 $23,734 $0 $0 $63,531 $5,856 $0 $17,347 $86,734 $1,735 $1,654 $2,067

SUBTOTAL 4. $1,292,951 $43,084 $342,518 $0 $0 $1,678,553 $151,389 $137,204 $280,025 $2,247,170 $44,951 $42,850 $53,563

 5A GAS CLEANUP & PIPING

5A.1 Rectisol System $217,615 $0 $176,832 $0 $0 $394,447 $37,218 $78,889 $102,111 $612,665 $12,255 $11,683 $14,603

5A.2 Elemental Sulfur Plant $24,556 $4,786 $31,465 $0 $0 $60,808 $5,775 $0 $13,317 $79,900 $1,598 $1,524 $1,904

5A.3 Mercury Removal $2,985 $0 $2,256 $0 $0 $5,241 $494 $262 $1,199 $7,196 $144 $137 $172

5A.4 Shift Reactors $5,623 $0 $2,248 $0 $0 $7,870 $735 $0 $1,721 $10,327 $207 $197 $246

5A.5 Particulate Removal w/4.1 $0 w/4.1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

5A.6 Blowback Gas Systems $3,633 $611 $342 $0 $0 $4,587 $423 $0 $1,002 $6,012 $120 $115 $143

5A.7 Fuel Gas Piping $0 $1,692 $1,107 $0 $0 $2,799 $244 $0 $609 $3,652 $73 $70 $87

5A.9 HGCU Foundations $0 $1,965 $1,324 $0 $0 $3,289 $304 $0 $1,078 $4,671 $93 $89 $111

SUBTOTAL 5A. $254,412 $9,055 $215,574 $0 $0 $479,041 $45,194 $79,151 $121,037 $724,423 $14,491 $13,814 $17,267

 5AA F-T SYNTHESIS AND PRODUCT UPGRADE

5AA.1 FT Synthesis* $220,379 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $220,379 $21,156 $59,502 $75,260 $376,298 $7,527 $7,175 $8,969

5AA.2 Amine CO2 Adsorption $15,940 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $15,940 $1,530 $4,304 $5,444 $27,218 $544 $519 $649

5AA.3 Amine Regeneration Section $74,537 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $74,537 $7,156 $20,125 $25,455 $127,273 $2,546 $2,427 $3,034

5AA.4 Compression $27,040 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $27,040 $2,596 $7,301 $9,234 $46,171 $924 $880 $1,101

5AA.5 Hydrocarbon Recovery $81,544 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $81,544 $7,828 $22,017 $27,847 $139,237 $2,785 $2,655 $3,319

5AA.6 Hydrogen Recovery $47,842 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $47,842 $4,593 $12,917 $16,338 $81,690 $1,634 $1,558 $1,947

5AA.7 Autothermal Reformer $0 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

5AA.8 Naphtha Hydrotreater $5,481 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $5,481 $526 $1,480 $1,872 $9,358 $187 $178 $223

5AA.9 Diesel Hydrotreater $11,841 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $11,841 $1,137 $3,197 $4,044 $20,219 $404 $386 $482

5AA.10 Wax Hydrocracker $42,706 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $42,706 $4,100 $11,531 $14,584 $72,921 $1,459 $1,390 $1,738

5AA.11 Raw Fuel Gas Compressor, HP $21,883 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $21,883 $2,041 $0 $4,785 $28,708 $574 $547 $684

5AA.12 Fuel Gas to GT Compressor, HP $5,767 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $5,767 $538 $0 $1,261 $7,566 $151 $144 $180

5AA.13 WGS Shift Reactor $10,835 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $10,835 $1,040 $2,925 $3,700 $18,501 $370 $353 $441

5AA.14 Amine CO2 Adsorption $3,896 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $3,896 $374 $1,052 $1,331 $6,653 $133 $127 $159

5AA.15 Amine Regeneration Section $364 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $364 $35 $98 $124 $621 $12 $12 $15

SUBTOTAL 5AA. $570,056 $0 $0 $0 $0 $570,056 $54,649 $146,450 $191,277 $962,432 $19,252 $18,352 $22,940

5B CO2 REMOVAL & COMPRESSION

5B.1 CO2 Removal System $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

5B.2 CO2 Compression & Drying $51,200 $0 $17,359 $0 $0 $68,560 $6,393 $0 $14,991 $89,944 $1,799 $1,715 $2,144

SUBTOTAL 5B. $51,200 $0 $17,359 $0 $0 $68,560 $6,393 $0 $14,991 $89,944 $1,799 $1,715 $2,144

TOTAL PLANT COST
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

59

Exhibit 5-1 Total plant cost summary with CO2 sequestration (continued)

Acct Equipment Material Labor Sales Bare Erected Eng'g CM Contingencies

No. Item/Description Cost Cost Direct Indirect Tax Cost $ H.O.& Fee Process Project $ $/bpd $/bpdECO $/bpdEPD

6 COMBUSTION TURBINE/ACCESSORIES $0

6.1 Combustion Turbine Generator $47,397 $0 $3,359 $0 $0 $50,756 $10,985 $11,909 $14,199 $87,848 $1,757 $1,675 $2,094

6.2 Open $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

6.3 Compressed Air Piping $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

6.9 Combustion Turbine Foundations $0 $394 $455 $0 $0 $849 $186 $0 $653 $1,689 $34 $32 $40

SUBTOTAL 6. $47,397 $394 $3,814 $0 $0 $51,604 $11,171 $11,909 $14,852 $89,537 $1,791 $1,707 $2,134

7 HRSG, DUCTING & STACK

7.1 Heat Recovery Steam Generator $12,719 $0 $2,463 $0 $0 $15,182 $1,408 $0 $1,659 $18,249 $365 $348 $435

7.2 Open $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

7.3 Ductwork $0 $1,076 $754 $0 $0 $1,830 $156 $0 $397 $2,382 $48 $45 $57

7.4 Stack $2,076 $0 $775 $0 $0 $2,850 $266 $0 $312 $3,428 $69 $65 $82

7.9 HRSG,Duct & Stack Foundations $0 $395 $397 $0 $0 $792 $74 $0 $260 $1,125 $23 $21 $27

SUBTOTAL 7. $14,795 $1,471 $4,388 $0 $0 $20,654 $1,904 $0 $2,627 $25,185 $504 $480 $600

8 STEAM TURBINE GENERATOR $0

8.1 Steam TG & Accessories $40,717 $0 $6,409 $0 $0 $47,126 $4,151 $0 $5,128 $56,404 $1,128 $1,076 $1,344

8.2 Turbine Plant Auxiliaries $268 $0 $611 $0 $0 $879 $84 $0 $96 $1,059 $21 $20 $25

8.3 Condenser & Auxiliaries $2,960 $0 $1,436 $0 $0 $4,396 $412 $0 $481 $5,288 $106 $101 $126

8.4 Steam Piping $7,100 $0 $3,079 $0 $0 $10,179 $779 $0 $2,739 $13,697 $274 $261 $326

8.9 TG Foundations $0 $1,264 $2,233 $0 $0 $3,497 $330 $0 $1,148 $4,975 $100 $95 $119

SUBTOTAL 8. $51,045 $1,264 $13,768 $0 $0 $66,077 $5,755 $0 $9,592 $81,423 $1,629 $1,553 $1,941

9 COOLING WATER SYSTEM

9.1 Cooling Towers $5,852 $0 $1,773 $0 $0 $7,626 $710 $0 $1,250 $9,587 $192 $183 $229

9.2 Circulating Water Pumps $2,358 $0 $173 $0 $0 $2,531 $216 $0 $412 $3,159 $63 $60 $75

9.3 Circ.Water System Auxiliaries $241 $0 $34 $0 $0 $275 $25 $0 $45 $345 $7 $7 $8

9.4 Circ.Water Piping $0 $8,535 $2,068 $0 $0 $10,603 $889 $0 $2,298 $13,790 $276 $263 $329

9.5 Make-up Water System $614 $0 $844 $0 $0 $1,458 $135 $0 $319 $1,912 $38 $36 $46

9.6 Component Cooling Water Sys $1,220 $1,460 $1,002 $0 $0 $3,682 $329 $0 $802 $4,813 $96 $92 $115

9.9 Circ.Water System Foundations $0 $3,410 $6,058 $0 $0 $9,468 $893 $0 $3,108 $13,469 $269 $257 $321

SUBTOTAL 9. $10,285 $13,404 $11,953 $0 $0 $35,642 $3,198 $0 $8,235 $47,075 $942 $898 $1,122

10 ASH/SPENT SORBENT HANDLING SYS

10.1 Slag Dewatering & Cooling $45,749 $0 $22,407 $0 $0 $68,157 $6,384 $0 $7,454 $81,994 $1,640 $1,564 $1,954

10.2 Gasifier Ash Depressurization w/10.1 w/10.1 w/10.1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

10.3 Cleanup Ash Depressurization w/10.1 w/10.1 w/10.1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

10.4 High Temperature Ash Piping $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

10.5 Other Ash Recovery Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

10.6 Ash Storage Silos $1,381 $0 $1,493 $0 $0 $2,874 $272 $0 $472 $3,618 $72 $69 $86

10.7 Ash Transport & Feed Equipment $1,901 $0 $444 $0 $0 $2,345 $209 $0 $383 $2,937 $59 $56 $70

10.8 Misc. Ash Handling Equipment $2,861 $3,506 $1,040 $0 $0 $7,408 $686 $0 $1,214 $9,308 $186 $177 $222

10.9 Ash/Spent Sorbent Foundation $0 $116 $152 $0 $0 $268 $25 $0 $88 $382 $8 $7 $9

SUBTOTAL 10. $51,893 $3,622 $25,537 $0 $0 $81,052 $7,576 $0 $9,611 $98,239 $1,965 $1,873 $2,342

TOTAL PLANT COST
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

60

Exhibit 5-1 Total plant cost summary with CO2 sequestration (continued)

Acct Equipment Material Labor Sales Bare Erected Eng'g CM Contingencies

No. Item/Description Cost Cost Direct Indirect Tax Cost $ H.O.& Fee Process Project $ $/bpd $/bpdECO $/bpdEPD

11 ACCESSORY ELECTRIC PLANT

11.1 Generator Equipment $837 $0 $815 $0 $0 $1,653 $153 $0 $181 $1,987 $40 $38 $47

11.2 Station Service Equipment $7,702 $0 $708 $0 $0 $8,410 $773 $0 $918 $10,102 $202 $193 $241

11.3 Switchgear & Motor Control $14,215 $0 $2,642 $0 $0 $16,857 $1,560 $0 $2,763 $21,180 $424 $404 $505

11.4 Conduit & Cable Tray $0 $7,223 $22,264 $0 $0 $29,487 $2,748 $0 $8,059 $40,293 $806 $768 $960

11.5 Wire & Cable $0 $13,926 $8,473 $0 $0 $22,398 $1,520 $0 $5,980 $29,898 $598 $570 $713

11.6 Protective Equipment $0 $797 $2,958 $0 $0 $3,755 $361 $0 $617 $4,733 $95 $90 $113

11.7 Standby Equipment $211 $0 $211 $0 $0 $422 $40 $0 $69 $531 $11 $10 $13

11.8 Main Power Transformers $13,787 $0 $117 $0 $0 $13,904 $1,052 $0 $2,243 $17,200 $344 $328 $410

11.9 Electrical Foundations $0 $123 $336 $0 $0 $460 $44 $0 $151 $654 $13 $12 $16

SUBTOTAL 11. $36,753 $22,069 $38,525 $0 $0 $97,346 $8,251 $0 $20,981 $126,578 $2,532 $2,414 $3,017

12 INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROL

12.1 IGCC Control Equipment w/4.1 $0 w/4.1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

12.2 Combustion Turbine Control w/6.1 $0 w/6.1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

12.3 Steam Turbine Control w/8.1 $0 w/8.1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

12.4 Other Major Component Control $1,428 $0 $973 $0 $0 $2,400 $225 $120 $412 $3,157 $63 $60 $75

12.5 Signal Processing Equipment w/12.7 $0 w/12.7 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

12.6 Control Boards,Panels & Racks $328 $0 $215 $0 $0 $543 $51 $27 $124 $745 $15 $14 $18

12.7 Computer & Accessories $7,615 $0 $249 $0 $0 $7,864 $721 $393 $898 $9,875 $198 $188 $235

12.8 Instrument Wiring & Tubing $0 $2,931 $5,549 $0 $0 $8,480 $686 $424 $2,398 $11,988 $240 $229 $286

12.9 Other I & C Equipment $5,090 $0 $2,522 $0 $0 $7,612 $711 $381 $1,306 $10,009 $200 $191 $239

SUBTOTAL 12. $14,461 $2,931 $9,507 $0 $0 $26,899 $2,394 $1,345 $5,137 $35,775 $716 $682 $853

13 IMPROVEMENTS TO SITE

13.1 Site Preparation $0 $262 $5,948 $0 $0 $6,210 $605 $0 $2,045 $8,860 $177 $169 $211

13.2 Site Improvements $0 $4,653 $6,578 $0 $0 $11,231 $1,114 $0 $3,704 $16,049 $321 $306 $383

13.3 Site Facilities $8,339 $0 $9,360 $0 $0 $17,699 $1,760 $0 $5,838 $25,296 $506 $482 $603

SUBTOTAL 13. $8,339 $4,915 $21,887 $0 $0 $35,140 $3,479 $0 $11,586 $50,205 $1,004 $957 $1,197

14 BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES

14.1 Combustion Turbine Area $0 $317 $179 $0 $0 $496 $43 $0 $108 $647 $13 $12 $15

14.2 Steam Turbine Building $0 $5,495 $7,822 $0 $0 $13,317 $1,200 $0 $2,178 $16,694 $334 $318 $398

14.3 Administration Building $0 $2,275 $1,649 $0 $0 $3,924 $342 $0 $640 $4,906 $98 $94 $117

14.4 Circulation Water Pumphouse $0 $356 $240 $0 $0 $596 $51 $0 $97 $744 $15 $14 $18

14.5 Water Treatment Buildings $0 $954 $930 $0 $0 $1,885 $167 $0 $308 $2,359 $47 $45 $56

14.6 Machine Shop $0 $1,164 $796 $0 $0 $1,961 $170 $0 $320 $2,451 $49 $47 $58

14.7 Warehouse $0 $1,880 $1,213 $0 $0 $3,093 $268 $0 $504 $3,865 $77 $74 $92

14.8 Other Buildings & Structures $0 $1,126 $876 $0 $0 $2,002 $175 $0 $435 $2,613 $52 $50 $62

14.9 Waste Treating Building & Str. $0 $1,182 $2,257 $0 $0 $3,438 $314 $0 $750 $4,503 $90 $86 $107

SUBTOTAL 14. $0 $14,749 $15,963 $0 $0 $30,712 $2,729 $0 $5,340 $38,781 $776 $739 $924

TOTAL COST $2,773,630 $155,535 $815,702 $0 $0 $3,744,868 $347,018 $376,059 $806,116 $5,274,060 $105,498 $100,569 $125,711

TOTAL PLANT COST
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

61

Exhibit 5-1 Total plant cost summary with CO2 sequestration (continued)

Acct Equipment Material Labor Sales Bare Erected Eng'g CM Contingencies

No. Item/Description Cost Cost Direct Indirect Tax Cost $ H.O.& Fee Process Project $ $/bpd $/bpdECO $/bpdEPD

Owner's Costs

Preproduction Costs

6 Months All Labor $47,686 $954 $909 $1,137

1 Month Maintenance Materials $8,285 $166 $158 $197

1 Month Non-fuel Consumables $2,142 $43 $41 $51

1 Month Waste Disposal $1,617 $32 $31 $39

25% of 1 Months Fuel Cost at 100% CF $10,958 $219 $209 $261

2% of TPC $105,481 $2,110 $2,011 $2,514

Total $176,169 $3,524 $3,359 $4,199

Inventory Capital

60 day supply of fuel and consumables at 100% CF $91,311 $1,827 $1,741 $2,176

0.5% of TPC (spare parts) $26,370 $527 $503 $629

Total $117,681 $2,354 $2,244 $2,805

Initial Cost for Catalyst and Chemicals $29,733 $595 $567 $709

Land $900 $18 $17 $21

Other Owner's Costs $791,109 $15,825 $15,085 $18,857

Financing Costs $142,400 $2,848 $2,715 $3,394

Total Overnight Costs (TOC) $6,532,052 $130,662 $124,557 $155,696

TASC Multiplier (Loan Guarantees FUELS, 35 year) 1.147

Total As-Spent Cost (TASC) $7,494,877 $149,922 $142,917 $178,646

TOTAL PLANT COST
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

62

Exhibit 5-2 Total operating and maintenance costs with CO2 sequestration

INITIAL & ANNUAL O&M EXPENSES Cost Base (Jun): 2011

Base Case 1 - Total System

bbl/day: 49,992

 Capacity Factor (%): 90

OPERATING & MAINTENANCE LABOR

Operating Labor

 Operating Labor Rate(base): 39.70 $/hour

 Operating Labor Burden: 30.00 % of base

 Labor O-H Charge Rate: 25.00 % of labor

Total

 Operating Labor Requirements(O.J.)per Shift: 1 unit/mod. Plant 

 Skilled Operator 2.0 8.0

 Operator 10.0 40.0

 Foreman 1.0 4.0

 Lab Tech's, etc. 3.0 12.0

 TOTAL-O.J.'s 16.0 64.0

Annual Cost Annual Unit Cost

$ $/(bbl/day)

Annual Operating Labor Cost $28,934,630 $578.785

Maintenance Labor Cost $47,363,570 $947.423

Administrative & Support Labor $19,074,550 $381.552

Property Taxes and Insurance $105,481,202 $2,109.962

TOTAL FIXED OPERATING COSTS $200,853,953 $4,017.722

VARIABLE OPERATING COSTS

$/bbl

Maintenance Material Cost $89,476,433 $5.44845

Consumables Consumption Unit Initial Fill 

 Initial Fill /Day Cost Cost

Water (/1000 gallons) 0 6,244 1.67 $0 $3,433,490 $0.20907

Chemicals 6

MU & WT Chem. (lbs) 0 37,199 0.27 $0 $3,272,918 $0.19930

Carbon (Mercury Removal) (lb) 301,013 515 1.63 $489,217 $275,185 $0.01676

FT Catalyst (lbs) 1,010,363.60 3,532.22 7.15 $7,224,100 $8,296,378 $0.50519

Water Gas Shift Catalyst (ft3) 3,655 3 771.99 $2,821,253 $793,477 $0.04832

Methanol (tons) 1,871 45 300.00 $561,300 $4,434,750 $0.27004

Amine Solution (gal) 479,971 153 36.79 $17,658,727 $1,849,146 $0.11260

Hydrotreating Catalyst (ft3) 772.62 0.71 700.00 $540,835 $162,187 $0.00988

Naphtha reforming catalyst (ft3) 278.90 0.25 900.00 $251,008 $75,273 $0.00458

Isomerization Catalysts (ft3) 373.12 0.34 500.00 $186,560 $55,946 $0.00341

Claus Catalyst (ft3) w/equip. 7 203.15 $0 $486,163 $0.02960

Subtotal Chemicals $29,732,998 $19,701,423 $1.19967

Other

Butane (tons) 0 0 651.34 $0 $0 $0.00000

Gases, N2 etc. (/100scf) 0 0 0.00 $0 $0 $0.00000

L.P. Steam (/1000 pounds) 0 0 0.00 $0 $0 $0.00000

Subtotal Other $0 $0 $0.00000

Waste Disposal

Spent Mercury Catalyst (lb.) 0 515 0.65 $0 $110,074 $0.00670

Flyash (ton) 0 0 0.00 $0 $0 $0.00000

Slag (ton) 0 2,104 25.11 $0 $17,354,113 $1.05674

 Subtotal-Waste Disposal $0 $17,464,187 $1.06344

By-products & Emissions (credit)

Sulfur (ton) 0 0 0.00 $0 $0 $0.00000

Supplemental Electricity (for sale) (MWh) 0 112 58.59 $0 ($2,148,868) -$0.13085

Subtotal By-Products $0 ($2,148,868) -$0.13085

TOTAL VARIABLE OPERATING COSTS $29,732,998 $127,926,663 $7.78978

Fuel (ton) 0 21,006 68.60 $0 $473,377,146 $28.82514
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

63

Exhibit 5-3 Total plant cost summary – CO2 vent

Client: USDOE/NETL Report Date: 2013-Dec-23

Project: Activity 25

Case: Base Case 1 - Total System

Plant Size: 49,992 bbl/day Estimate Type: Conceptual Cost Base (Jun) 2011 ($x1000)

Acct Equipment Material Labor Sales Bare Erected Eng'g CM Contingencies

No. Item/Description Cost Cost Direct Indirect Tax Cost $ H.O.& Fee Process Project $ $/bpd $/bpdECO $/bpdEPD

1 COAL & SORBENT HANDLING

1.1 Coal Receive & Unload $10,063 $0 $4,850 $0 $0 $14,913 $1,296 $0 $3,242 $19,451 $389 $371 $464

1.2 Coal Stackout & Reclaim $13,003 $0 $3,109 $0 $0 $16,112 $1,368 $0 $3,496 $20,976 $420 $400 $500

1.3 Coal Conveyors & Yd Crush $12,090 $0 $3,076 $0 $0 $15,166 $1,290 $0 $3,291 $19,747 $395 $377 $471

1.4 Other Coal Handling $3,163 $0 $712 $0 $0 $3,875 $328 $0 $841 $5,044 $101 $96 $120

1.5 Sorbent Receive & Unload $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

1.6 Sorbent Stackout & Reclaim $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

1.7 Sorbent Conveyors $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

1.8 Other Sorbent Handling $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

1.9 Coal & Sorbent Hnd.Foundations $0 $6,719 $17,561 $0 $0 $24,281 $2,307 $0 $5,318 $31,906 $638 $608 $760

SUBTOTAL 1. $38,318 $6,719 $29,308 $0 $0 $74,346 $6,589 $0 $16,187 $97,122 $1,943 $1,852 $2,315

2 COAL & SORBENT PREP & FEED

2.1 Coal Crushing & Drying $121,566 $7,331 $17,471 $0 $0 $146,368 $12,217 $0 $31,717 $190,302 $3,807 $3,629 $4,536

2.2 Prepared Coal Storage & Feed $5,758 $1,383 $891 $0 $0 $8,032 $664 $0 $1,739 $10,435 $209 $199 $249

2.3 Dry Coal Injection System $189,497 $2,184 $17,357 $0 $0 $209,038 $17,410 $0 $45,290 $271,738 $5,436 $5,182 $6,477

2.4 Misc.Coal Prep & Feed $3,166 $2,313 $6,814 $0 $0 $12,293 $1,099 $0 $2,678 $16,070 $321 $306 $383

2.5 Sorbent Prep Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

2.6 Sorbent Storage & Feed $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

2.7 Sorbent Injection System $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

2.8 Booster Air Supply System $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

2.9 Coal & Sorbent Feed Foundation $0 $11,614 $9,966 $0 $0 $21,580 $2,005 $0 $4,717 $28,301 $566 $540 $675

SUBTOTAL 2. $319,987 $24,826 $52,498 $0 $0 $397,310 $33,395 $0 $86,141 $516,846 $10,339 $9,855 $12,319

3 FEEDWATER & MISC. BOP SYSTEMS

3.1 Feedwater System $1,750 $3,020 $1,583 $0 $0 $6,354 $574 $0 $1,386 $8,314 $166 $159 $198

3.2 Water Makeup & Pretreating $1,091 $113 $599 $0 $0 $1,802 $166 $0 $591 $2,559 $51 $49 $61

3.3 Other Feedwater Subsystems $984 $325 $291 $0 $0 $1,600 $138 $0 $348 $2,085 $42 $40 $50

3.4 Service Water Systems $638 $1,271 $4,383 $0 $0 $6,292 $598 $0 $2,067 $8,956 $179 $171 $213

3.5 Other Boiler Plant Systems $3,436 $1,284 $3,160 $0 $0 $7,881 $718 $0 $1,720 $10,318 $206 $197 $246

3.6 FO Supply Sys & Nat Gas $511 $966 $895 $0 $0 $2,372 $223 $0 $519 $3,113 $62 $59 $74

3.7 Waste Treatment Equipment $1,475 $0 $914 $0 $0 $2,389 $230 $0 $786 $3,405 $68 $65 $81

3.8 Misc. Power Plant Equipment $1,709 $228 $889 $0 $0 $2,826 $270 $0 $929 $4,025 $81 $77 $96

SUBTOTAL 3. $11,594 $7,208 $12,713 $0 $0 $31,515 $2,917 $0 $8,344 $42,775 $856 $816 $1,020

TOTAL PLANT COST

TOTAL PLANT COST SUMMARY
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

64

Exhibit 5-3 Total plant cost summary – CO2 vent (continued)

Acct Equipment Material Labor Sales Bare Erected Eng'g CM Contingencies

No. Item/Description Cost Cost Direct Indirect Tax Cost $ H.O.& Fee Process Project $ $/bpd $/bpdECO $/bpdEPD

4 GASIFIER & ACCESSORIES

4.1 Gasifier, Syngas Cooler & Auxiliaries (Shell) $699,517 $0 $301,659 $0 $0 $1,001,175 $88,113 $137,204 $188,698 $1,415,190 $28,308 $26,985 $33,732

4.2 Syngas Cooling w/4.1 $0 w/ 4.1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

4.3 ASU/Oxidant Compression $551,221 $0 w/equip. $0 $0 $551,221 $51,506 $0 $60,273 $663,000 $13,262 $12,642 $15,803

4.4 LT Heat Recovery & FG Saturation $42,214 $0 $15,797 $0 $0 $58,011 $5,481 $0 $12,698 $76,191 $1,524 $1,453 $1,816

4.5 Misc. Gasification Equipment w/4.1&4.2 $0 w/4.1&4.2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

4.6 Flare Stack System $0 $3,287 $1,328 $0 $0 $4,615 $431 $0 $1,009 $6,056 $121 $115 $144

4.8 Major Component Rigging w/4.1&4.2 $0 w/4.1&4.2 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

4.9 Gasification Foundations $0 $39,797 $23,734 $0 $0 $63,531 $5,856 $0 $17,347 $86,734 $1,735 $1,654 $2,067

SUBTOTAL 4. $1,292,951 $43,084 $342,518 $0 $0 $1,678,553 $151,389 $137,204 $280,025 $2,247,170 $44,951 $42,850 $53,562

 5A GAS CLEANUP & PIPING

5A.1 Rectisol System $217,615 $0 $176,832 $0 $0 $394,447 $37,218 $78,889 $102,111 $612,665 $12,255 $11,683 $14,603

5A.2 Elemental Sulfur Plant $24,556 $4,786 $31,465 $0 $0 $60,808 $5,775 $0 $13,317 $79,900 $1,598 $1,524 $1,904

5A.3 Mercury Removal $2,985 $0 $2,256 $0 $0 $5,241 $494 $262 $1,199 $7,196 $144 $137 $172

5A.4 Shift Reactors $5,623 $0 $2,248 $0 $0 $7,870 $735 $0 $1,721 $10,327 $207 $197 $246

5A.5 Particulate Removal w/4.1 $0 w/4.1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

5A.6 Blowback Gas Systems $3,633 $611 $342 $0 $0 $4,587 $423 $0 $1,002 $6,012 $120 $115 $143

5A.7 Fuel Gas Piping $0 $1,692 $1,107 $0 $0 $2,799 $244 $0 $609 $3,652 $73 $70 $87

5A.9 HGCU Foundations $0 $1,965 $1,324 $0 $0 $3,289 $304 $0 $1,078 $4,671 $93 $89 $111

SUBTOTAL 5A. $254,412 $9,055 $215,574 $0 $0 $479,041 $45,194 $79,151 $121,037 $724,423 $14,491 $13,814 $17,267

 5AA F-T SYNTHESIS AND PRODUCT UPGRADE

5AA.1 FT Synthesis* $220,380 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $220,380 $21,156 $59,503 $75,260 $376,298 $7,527 $7,175 $8,969

5AA.2 Amine CO2 Adsorption $15,940 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $15,940 $1,530 $4,304 $5,444 $27,218 $544 $519 $649

5AA.3 Amine Regeneration Section $74,538 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $74,538 $7,156 $20,125 $25,455 $127,273 $2,546 $2,427 $3,034

5AA.4 Compression $27,040 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $27,040 $2,596 $7,301 $9,234 $46,171 $924 $880 $1,101

5AA.5 Hydrocarbon Recovery $81,544 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $81,544 $7,828 $22,017 $27,847 $139,237 $2,785 $2,655 $3,319

5AA.6 Hydrogen Recovery $47,841 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $47,841 $4,593 $12,917 $16,338 $81,689 $1,634 $1,558 $1,947

5AA.7 Autothermal Reformer $0 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

5AA.8 Naphtha Hydrotreater $5,480 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $5,480 $526 $1,480 $1,872 $9,358 $187 $178 $223

5AA.9 Diesel Hydrotreater $11,841 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $11,841 $1,137 $3,197 $4,044 $20,219 $404 $386 $482

5AA.10 Wax Hydrocracker $42,706 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $42,706 $4,100 $11,531 $14,584 $72,921 $1,459 $1,390 $1,738

5AA.11 Raw Fuel Gas Compressor, HP $29,451 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $29,451 $2,746 $0 $6,440 $38,637 $773 $737 $921

5AA.12 Fuel Gas to GT Compressor, HP $6,764 w/equip. w/equip. $0 $0 $6,764 $631 $0 $1,479 $8,874 $177 $169 $212

SUBTOTAL 5AA. $563,527 $0 $0 $0 $0 $563,527 $53,999 $142,374 $187,995 $947,895 $18,961 $18,075 $22,594

5B CO2 REMOVAL & COMPRESSION

5B.1 CO2 Removal System $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

5B.2 CO2 Compression & Drying $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

SUBTOTAL 5B. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

TOTAL PLANT COST
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

65

Exhibit 5-3 Total plant cost summary – CO2 vent (continued)

Acct Equipment Material Labor Sales Bare Erected Eng'g CM Contingencies

No. Item/Description Cost Cost Direct Indirect Tax Cost $ H.O.& Fee Process Project $ $/bpd $/bpdECO $/bpdEPD

6 COMBUSTION TURBINE/ACCESSORIES $0

6.1 Combustion Turbine Generator $42,610 $0 $3,020 $0 $0 $45,630 $10,985 $11,909 $14,199 $82,723 $1,655 $1,577 $1,972

6.2 Open $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

6.3 Compressed Air Piping $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

6.9 Combustion Turbine Foundations $0 $354 $409 $0 $0 $763 $186 $0 $653 $1,603 $32 $31 $38

SUBTOTAL 6. $42,610 $354 $3,429 $0 $0 $46,393 $11,171 $11,909 $14,852 $84,326 $1,687 $1,608 $2,010

7 HRSG, DUCTING & STACK

7.1 Heat Recovery Steam Generator $14,626 $0 $2,833 $0 $0 $17,458 $1,619 $0 $1,908 $20,986 $420 $400 $500

7.2 Open $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

7.3 Ductwork $0 $1,070 $750 $0 $0 $1,819 $155 $0 $395 $2,369 $47 $45 $56

7.4 Stack $2,064 $0 $770 $0 $0 $2,834 $265 $0 $310 $3,409 $68 $65 $81

7.9 HRSG,Duct & Stack Foundations $0 $393 $394 $0 $0 $787 $73 $0 $258 $1,119 $22 $21 $27

SUBTOTAL 7. $16,690 $1,463 $4,747 $0 $0 $22,899 $2,112 $0 $2,871 $27,882 $558 $532 $665

8 STEAM TURBINE GENERATOR 

8.1 Steam TG & Accessories $42,612 $0 $6,707 $0 $0 $49,319 $4,344 $0 $5,366 $59,029 $1,181 $1,126 $1,407

8.2 Turbine Plant Auxiliaries $281 $0 $640 $0 $0 $921 $88 $0 $101 $1,110 $22 $21 $26

8.3 Condenser & Auxiliaries $3,090 $0 $1,499 $0 $0 $4,589 $430 $0 $502 $5,521 $110 $105 $132

8.4 Steam Piping $7,924 $0 $3,436 $0 $0 $11,360 $869 $0 $3,057 $15,287 $306 $291 $364

8.9 TG Foundations $0 $1,325 $2,340 $0 $0 $3,665 $346 $0 $1,203 $5,214 $104 $99 $124

SUBTOTAL 8. $53,907 $1,325 $14,623 $0 $0 $69,854 $6,076 $0 $10,230 $86,160 $1,723 $1,643 $2,054

9 COOLING WATER SYSTEM

9.1 Cooling Towers $5,530 $0 $1,676 $0 $0 $7,206 $671 $0 $1,182 $9,058 $181 $173 $216

9.2 Circulating Water Pumps $2,227 $0 $164 $0 $0 $2,391 $204 $0 $389 $2,984 $60 $57 $71

9.3 Circ.Water System Auxiliaries $228 $0 $32 $0 $0 $260 $24 $0 $43 $327 $7 $6 $8

9.4 Circ.Water Piping $0 $8,107 $1,964 $0 $0 $10,070 $844 $0 $2,183 $13,098 $262 $250 $312

9.5 Make-up Water System $582 $0 $801 $0 $0 $1,383 $128 $0 $302 $1,813 $36 $35 $43

9.6 Component Cooling Water Sys $1,156 $1,383 $949 $0 $0 $3,488 $312 $0 $760 $4,560 $91 $87 $109

9.9 Circ.Water System Foundations $0 $3,243 $5,763 $0 $0 $9,007 $850 $0 $2,957 $12,813 $256 $244 $305

SUBTOTAL 9. $9,724 $12,733 $11,349 $0 $0 $33,805 $3,033 $0 $7,815 $44,653 $893 $851 $1,064

10 ASH/SPENT SORBENT HANDLING SYS

10.1 Slag Dewatering & Cooling $45,749 $0 $22,407 $0 $0 $68,157 $6,384 $0 $7,454 $81,994 $1,640 $1,563 $1,954

10.2 Gasifier Ash Depressurization w/10.1 w/10.1 w/10.1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

10.3 Cleanup Ash Depressurization w/10.1 w/10.1 w/10.1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

10.4 High Temperature Ash Piping $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

10.5 Other Ash Recovery Equipment $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

10.6 Ash Storage Silos $1,381 $0 $1,493 $0 $0 $2,874 $272 $0 $472 $3,618 $72 $69 $86

10.7 Ash Transport & Feed Equipment $1,901 $0 $444 $0 $0 $2,345 $209 $0 $383 $2,937 $59 $56 $70

10.8 Misc. Ash Handling Equipment $2,861 $3,506 $1,040 $0 $0 $7,408 $686 $0 $1,214 $9,308 $186 $177 $222

10.9 Ash/Spent Sorbent Foundation $0 $116 $152 $0 $0 $268 $25 $0 $88 $382 $8 $7 $9

SUBTOTAL 10. $51,893 $3,622 $25,537 $0 $0 $81,052 $7,576 $0 $9,611 $98,239 $1,965 $1,873 $2,342

TOTAL PLANT COST
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

66

Exhibit 5-3 Total plant cost summary – CO2 vent (continued)

Acct Equipment Material Labor Sales Bare Erected Eng'g CM Contingencies

No. Item/Description Cost Cost Direct Indirect Tax Cost $ H.O.& Fee Process Project $ $/bpd $/bpdECO $/bpdEPD

11 ACCESSORY ELECTRIC PLANT

11.1 Generator Equipment $889 $0 $866 $0 $0 $1,755 $163 $0 $192 $2,110 $42 $40 $50

11.2 Station Service Equipment $7,322 $0 $673 $0 $0 $7,996 $735 $0 $873 $9,604 $192 $183 $229

11.3 Switchgear & Motor Control $13,515 $0 $2,512 $0 $0 $16,027 $1,483 $0 $2,626 $20,136 $403 $384 $480

11.4 Conduit & Cable Tray $0 $6,867 $21,168 $0 $0 $28,034 $2,613 $0 $7,662 $38,309 $766 $730 $913

11.5 Wire & Cable $0 $13,240 $8,055 $0 $0 $21,295 $1,445 $0 $5,685 $28,425 $569 $542 $678

11.6 Protective Equipment $0 $797 $2,958 $0 $0 $3,755 $361 $0 $617 $4,733 $95 $90 $113

11.7 Standby Equipment $222 $0 $221 $0 $0 $443 $42 $0 $73 $558 $11 $11 $13

11.8 Main Power Transformers $14,819 $0 $126 $0 $0 $14,945 $1,131 $0 $2,411 $18,487 $370 $353 $441

11.9 Electrical Foundations $0 $133 $361 $0 $0 $494 $47 $0 $162 $703 $14 $13 $17

SUBTOTAL 11. $36,767 $21,036 $36,940 $0 $0 $94,744 $8,019 $0 $20,302 $123,065 $2,462 $2,347 $2,933

12 INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROL

12.1 IGCC Control Equipment w/4.1 $0 w/4.1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

12.2 Combustion Turbine Control w/6.1 $0 w/6.1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

12.3 Steam Turbine Control w/8.1 $0 w/8.1 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

12.4 Other Major Component Control $1,406 $0 $958 $0 $0 $2,364 $222 $118 $406 $3,109 $62 $59 $74

12.5 Signal Processing Equipment w/12.7 $0 w/12.7 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

12.6 Control Boards,Panels & Racks $323 $0 $211 $0 $0 $535 $50 $27 $122 $734 $15 $14 $17

12.7 Computer & Accessories $7,500 $0 $245 $0 $0 $7,745 $710 $387 $884 $9,726 $195 $185 $232

12.8 Instrument Wiring & Tubing $0 $2,887 $5,465 $0 $0 $8,352 $676 $418 $2,361 $11,806 $236 $225 $281

12.9 Other I & C Equipment $5,013 $0 $2,484 $0 $0 $7,497 $700 $375 $1,286 $9,858 $197 $188 $235

SUBTOTAL 12. $14,242 $2,887 $9,363 $0 $0 $26,491 $2,358 $1,325 $5,059 $35,233 $705 $672 $840

13 IMPROVEMENTS TO SITE

13.1 Site Preparation $0 $262 $5,948 $0 $0 $6,210 $605 $0 $2,045 $8,860 $177 $169 $211

13.2 Site Improvements $0 $4,653 $6,578 $0 $0 $11,231 $1,114 $0 $3,704 $16,049 $321 $306 $383

13.3 Site Facilities $8,339 $0 $9,360 $0 $0 $17,699 $1,760 $0 $5,838 $25,296 $506 $482 $603

SUBTOTAL 13. $8,339 $4,915 $21,887 $0 $0 $35,140 $3,479 $0 $11,586 $50,205 $1,004 $957 $1,197

14 BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES

14.1 Combustion Turbine Area $0 $317 $179 $0 $0 $496 $43 $0 $108 $647 $13 $12 $15

14.2 Steam Turbine Building $0 $5,495 $7,822 $0 $0 $13,317 $1,200 $0 $2,178 $16,694 $334 $318 $398

14.3 Administration Building $0 $2,275 $1,649 $0 $0 $3,924 $342 $0 $640 $4,906 $98 $94 $117

14.4 Circulation Water Pumphouse $0 $352 $234 $0 $0 $586 $50 $0 $95 $732 $15 $14 $17

14.5 Water Treatment Buildings $0 $896 $874 $0 $0 $1,770 $157 $0 $289 $2,216 $44 $42 $53

14.6 Machine Shop $0 $1,164 $796 $0 $0 $1,961 $170 $0 $320 $2,451 $49 $47 $58

14.7 Warehouse $0 $1,880 $1,213 $0 $0 $3,093 $268 $0 $504 $3,865 $77 $74 $92

14.8 Other Buildings & Structures $0 $1,126 $876 $0 $0 $2,002 $175 $0 $435 $2,613 $52 $50 $62

14.9 Waste Treating Building & Str. $0 $1,172 $2,239 $0 $0 $3,411 $311 $0 $744 $4,467 $89 $85 $106

SUBTOTAL 14. $0 $14,678 $15,883 $0 $0 $30,560 $2,716 $0 $5,313 $38,590 $772 $736 $920

TOTAL COST $2,714,962 $153,903 $796,368 $0 $0 $3,665,233 $340,021 $371,963 $787,368 $5,164,585 $103,308 $98,480 $123,101

TOTAL PLANT COST
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

67

Exhibit 5-3 Total plant cost summary – CO2 vent (continued)

Acct Equipment Material Labor Sales Bare Erected Eng'g CM Contingencies

No. Item/Description Cost Cost Direct Indirect Tax Cost $ H.O.& Fee Process Project $ $/bpd $/bpdECO $/bpdEPD

Owner's Costs

Preproduction Costs

6 Months All Labor $47,057 $941 $897 $1,122

1 Month Maintenance Materials $8,109 $162 $155 $193

1 Month Non-fuel Consumables $2,068 $41 $39 $49

1 Month Waste Disposal $1,617 $32 $31 $39

25% of 1 Months Fuel Cost at 100% CF $10,958 $219 $209 $261

2% of TPC $103,292 $2,066 $1,970 $2,462

Total $173,100 $3,463 $3,301 $4,126

Inventory Capital

60 day supply of fuel and consumables at 100% CF $91,216 $1,825 $1,739 $2,174

0.5% of TPC (spare parts) $25,823 $517 $492 $616

Total $117,039 $2,341 $2,232 $2,790

Initial Cost for Catalyst and Chemicals $29,005 $580 $553 $691

Land $900 $18 $17 $21

Other Owner's Costs $774,688 $15,496 $14,772 $18,465

Financing Costs $139,444 $2,789 $2,659 $3,324

Total Overnight Costs (TOC) $6,398,760 $127,996 $122,014 $152,518

TASC Multiplier (Loan Guarantees FUELS, 35 year) 1.147

Total As-Spent Cost (TASC) $7,341,938 $146,862 $139,999 $174,999

TOTAL PLANT COST
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

68

Exhibit 5-4 Total operating and maintenance costs – CO2 vent

INITIAL & ANNUAL O&M EXPENSES Cost Base (Jun): 2011

Base Case 1 - Total System

bbl/day: 49,992

 Capacity Factor (%): 90

OPERATING & MAINTENANCE LABOR

Operating Labor

 Operating Labor Rate(base): 39.70 $/hour

 Operating Labor Burden: 30.00 % of base

 Labor O-H Charge Rate: 25.00 % of labor

Total

 Operating Labor Requirements(O.J.)per Shift: 1 unit/mod. Plant 

 Skilled Operator 2.0 8.0

 Operator 10.0 40.0

 Foreman 1.0 4.0

 Lab Tech's, etc. 3.0 12.0

 TOTAL-O.J.'s 16.0 64.0

Annual Cost Annual Unit Cost

$ $/(bbl/day)

Annual Operating Labor Cost $28,934,630 $578.785

Maintenance Labor Cost $46,356,386 $927.276

Administrative & Support Labor $18,822,754 $376.515

Property Taxes and Insurance $103,291,707 $2,066.165

TOTAL FIXED OPERATING COSTS $197,405,478 $3,948.741

VARIABLE OPERATING COSTS

$/bbl

Maintenance Material Cost $87,573,721 $5.33259

Consumables Consumption Unit Initial Fill 

 Initial Fill /Day Cost Cost

Water (/1000 gallons) 0 5,717 1.67 $0 $3,143,709 $0.19143

Chemicals 6

MU & WT Chem. (lbs) 0 34,059 0.27 $0 $2,996,689 $0.18248

Carbon (Mercury Removal) (lb) 301,013 515 1.63 $489,217 $275,185 $0.01676

F-T Catalyst (lb) 1,010,363.60 3,532.22 7.15 $7,224,100 $8,296,378 $0.50519

Water Gas Shift Catalyst (ft3) 3,655 3 771.99 $2,821,253 $793,477 $0.04832

Methanol (tons) 1,871 45 300.00 $561,300 $4,434,751 $0.27004

Amine Solution (gal) 460,177 147 36.79 $16,930,492 $1,772,888 $0.10796

Hydrotreating Catalyst (ft3) 772.62 0.71 700.00 $540,835 $162,187 $0.00988

Naphtha reforming catalyst (ft3) 278.90 0.25 900.00 $251,008 $75,273 $0.00458

Isomerization Catalysts (ft3) 373.12 0.34 500.00 $186,560 $55,946 $0.00341

Claus Catalyst (ft3) w/equip. 5 203.15 $0 $325,539 $0.01982

Subtotal Chemicals $29,004,764 $19,188,314 $1.16843

Other

Butane (tons) 0 0 651.34 $0 $0 $0.00000

Gases, N2 etc. (/100scf) 0 0 0.00 $0 $0 $0.00000

L.P. Steam (/1000 pounds) 0 0 0.00 $0 $0 $0.00000

Subtotal Other $0 $0 $0.00000

Waste Disposal

Spent Mercury Catalyst (lb.) 0 515 0.65 $0 $110,074 $0.00670

Flyash (ton) 0 0 0.00 $0 $0 $0.00000

Slag (ton) 0 2,104 25.11 $0 $17,354,113 $1.05674

 Subtotal-Waste Disposal $0 $17,464,187 $1.06344

By-products & Emissions (credit)

Sulfur (ton) 0 0 0.00 $0 $0 $0.00000

Supplemental Electricity (for sale) (MWh) 0 2,330 58.59 $0 ($44,844,463) -$2.73069

Subtotal By-Products $0 ($44,844,463) -$2.73069

TOTAL VARIABLE OPERATING COSTS $29,004,764 $82,525,467 $5.02519

Fuel (ton) 0 21,006 68.60 $0 $473,377,146 $28.82514
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

69

5.2 Cost of Production

Two financial structures were examined that reflect a hypothetical future in which technical risk 

has been partially mitigated by the demonstration of two or three commercial-scale CTL plants. 

The first is assumed to have no government incentives (commercial fuels) while moderate 

government incentives – in the form of a government loan guarantee – are assumed to be 

available under the second. Both scenarios face a high degree of market risk because of the 

volatile nature of energy prices, especially the world oil price. The TOC, TASC, and annual 

O&M costs were estimated based on plant performance and a 90 percent capacity factor (CF). 

The COP under each financial scenario structure were calculated. The results are presented in

Exhibit 5-5. These costs include a credit of $60/MWh for excess power generated. These values 

are consistent with those expected in an environment after a carbon regulatory framework has 

been established. The electricity credit accounts for less than 0.5 percent of the total COP in the 

sequestration case and less than 2.5 percent of the total COP in the vent case, as shown in 

Exhibit 5-6, any change in the assumed price would have very little impact on the overall COP 

values calculated.

Exhibit 5-7 provides the TOC per F-T bbl, ECO bbl, and EPD bbl values for each case for ease 

of comparison. 

Exhibit 5-5 Cost estimation results summary (CO2 sequestration)

CO2 Venting Case CO2 Sequestration Case

Commercial 

Fuels

Loan 

Guarantees

Commercial 

Fuels

Loan 

Guarantees

Total Overnight Cost, $1000 6,398,760 6,532,052

Total Overnight Cost, $/bpd 127,996 130,662

Total Overnight Cost, $/bpdECO 122,014 124,557

Total Overnight Cost, $/bpdEPD 152,518 155,696

Total As Spent Cost, $1000 7,558,216 7,341,938 7,715,660 7,494,877

Total As Spent Cost, $/bpd 151,189 146,862 154,338 149,922

Total As Spent Cost, $/bpdECO 144,123 139,999 147,127 142,917

Total As Spent Cost, $/bpdlEPD 180,154 174,999 183,908 178,646

Total annual fixed O&M, $1000 197,405 197,405 200,854 200,854

Total annual variable O&M (90% CF), $1000 127,370 127,370 130,076 130,076

Total annual feedstock cost (90% CF), $1000 473,377 473,377 473,377 473,377

Total annual power credit (90% CF), $1000 -44,844 -44,844 -2,149 -2,149

COP F-T Diesel, $/bblFTD 143.7 123.1 154.2 133.2

COP F-T Naphtha, $/bblFTN 100.1 85.8 107.4 92.8

Equivalent Crude Oil Price, $/bblECO 124.7 106.9 133.8 115.6

Equivalent Petroleum Diesel Price, $/bblEPD 155.9 133.6 167.2 144.5

All costs in June 2011 dollars.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

70

Exhibit 5-6 COP sensitivity to market price of electricity

0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

100

120

140

160

0 2 0 4 0 6 0 8 0 100 FT- Liquids COP ($/bbl ECO) total [Including CO2 T&S] (June 2011$s)

Market Price of Electricity ($/MWh)

With CO2 Sequestration

And Loan Guarrentees

With CO2 Venting

And Loan Guarrentees

With CO2 Sequestration

And Commercial Loans

With CO2 Venting

And Commercial Loans

Electricity Price = $58.59/MWh 

assumed in Study
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

71

Exhibit 5-7 Comparison of TOC per F-T bbl, ECO bbl, and EPD bbl

Source: NETL

130,662

127,996

124,557

122,014

155,696

152,518

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

200,000

Sequestration Vent

TOC, $/bbl (June 2011$s)

TOC, $/bpd

TOC, $/bpdECO

TOC, $/bpdEPD
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

72

Exhibit 5-8 provides a chart that demonstrates the sensitivity of the cost of production of FTLiquids to the capital charge factor. The capital charge factors (CCF) correlate with various 

finance structures, as pointed out in the chart, with high-risk investor owned utility (IOU) having 

a CCF of 0.124, loan guarantees having a CCF of 0.170, commercial fuels having a CCF of 

0.218 and 100 percent equity at 20 percent internal rate of return on equity (IRROE) having a 

CCF of 0.350.

Exhibit 5-8 FT-Liquids COP sensitivity to CCF

Source: NETL

0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

100

120

140

160

180

200

0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 FT- Liquids COP ($/bbl ECO) total [Including CO2 T&S] (June 2011$s)

Capital Charge Factor based on Financial Structures

With CO2 

Sequestration

With CO2 

Venting

Commercial 

Fuels

100% Equity @ 20% 

IRROE

High-Risk

IOU

Loan 

Guarantee
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

73

5.3 Cost of Carbon Capture

The base case F-T process with carbon sequestration was compared to the case where CO2 was 

vented. In the vent case the partial shift and carbon separation from syngas using Rectisol® was 

kept to maintain the H2/CO ratio fed to F-T reactor as was the amine-based tail gas CO2 capture 

system to prevent the build-up of inerts in the recycle loop. However, the WGS reactors and 

amine-based capture process were removed from the fuel gas stream as was the CO2

compressors, pipeline, and cost of sequestration. Exhibit 5-9 summarizes the additional costs 

due to carbon capture. 

The cost of capture was calculating using the following equation:

Cost of Carbon Capture = (A − B) (

C

D

⁄ )

Where: A = Cost of production for Fischer Tropsch Diesel with 

sequestration ($/bblFTD)

B = Cost of production for Fischer Tropsch Diesel without 

sequestration ($/bblFTD)

C = Rate of CO2 sequestration (tonne/day) 

D = Sum of total diesel daily production and adjusted total naphtha 

production. Naphtha is adjusted by a factor of 0.70 to account for lower value. 

Exhibit 5-9 Cost summary of CTL facility with and without CCS

Vent Case Sequestration 

Case

Cost of adding 

CCS (delta)

Total Overnight Cost, $1000 6,398,760 6,532,052 133,292

Total annual fixed O&M, $1000 197,405 200,854 3,448

Total annual variable O&M (90% CF), $1000 127,370 130,076 2,706

Total annual fuel cost (90% CF), $1000 473,377 473,377 0

COP F-T Diesel*, $/bblFTD 123.1 [143.7] 133.2 [154.2] 10.1 [10.5]

COP F-T Naphtha*, $/bblFTN 85.8 [100.1] 92.8 [107.4] 7.0 [7.3]

Equivalent Crude Oil Price*, $/bblECO 106.9 [124.7] 115.6 [133.8] 8.7 [9.1]

Equivalent Petroleum Diesel Price*, $/bblEPD 133.6 [155.9] 144.5 [167.2] 10.9 [11.3]

Cost of Carbon Capture*, $/Tonne N/A 19.11 [19.94] 19.11 [19.94]

*

Values are shown for two financial structures. The first (lower) value is based on the loan guarantee 

finance structure. The second (higher/bracketed) value is based on the commercial fuels finance 

structure. 

All costs in June 2011 dollars.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

74

6 Conclusions and Recommendations

6.1 Conclusions

Developing an alternative source of liquid fuels using coal as the carbon input has national 

security implications and economic consequences. The results of this study show that liquid 

fuels produced from a 50,000 bbl/day coal-based F-T plant (low temperature, iron-based 

catalyst) are more expensive than fuels produced conventionally from crude oil at today’s oil 

prices (about $98/barrel, WTI average in 2013). Government incentives in the form of loan 

guarantees significantly reduce the cost of F-T liquids, but not to less than current fuel prices 

derived from crude oil. The two cases examined in this study, one with CO2 captured and one 

with CO2 vented, have ECO prices of $134/bbl and $125/bbl, respectively, using the commercial 

fuels financing structure. Government loan guarantees reduce the ECO price for the same two 

cases to $116/bbl and $107/bbl, respectively. Barring a dramatic shift in the oil market, and 

given the extremely large capital investment required for these CTL plants (on the order of $6.5 

billion TOC), loan guarantees will likely be required to incentivize project development.

CO2 capture is an inherent part of the F-T process resulting in two point sources: from the shifted 

syngas via the Rectisol process and from the F-T tail gas via an amine-based process. In the vent 

case, CO2 from these two sources was released to the atmosphere. In the sequestration case, CO2

from these two sources was compressed to 2,214 psia along with additional CO2 captured from 

the combined cycle power section. The incremental cost of adding this capture and compression 

for sequestration is about $9/bbl (ECO price) independent of the financing structure used.

6.2 Recommendations for Further Study

Suggestions for future work include:

 Evaluate plant performance and economics using different coal types (subbituminous and 

lignite).

 Perform a detailed water usage analysis of the facility to determine more accurately the water 

makeup and discharge rates. Also determine the best means for minimizing water usage. 

 Perform a literature search to identify ways of reducing nitrogen and argon concentration in 

syngas to reduce recycle load to the F-T reactor.
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

75

7 References

1 “Baseline Technical and Economic Assessment of a Commercial Scale Fischer-Tropsch 

Liquids Facility,” DOE/NETL-2007/1260, Final Report for Subtask 41817.401.08.001, 

National Energy Technology Laboratory. April 2007. Available at: 

http://netl.doe.gov/research/energy-analysis/publications/details?pub=c0067f0f-422d4a28-ba34-46025b4ce0c0

2 Tarka, T. J., et al. “Affordable, Low-Carbon Diesel Fuel from Domestic Coal and Biomass,” 

DOE/NETL-2009/1349, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Pittsburgh, PA. 

January 2009. Available at: 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/File%20Library/Research/Energy%20Analysis/Coal/CBTLFinal-Report.pdf

3 Research and Development Solutions, LLC (RDS). “Design Basis: Market Based Advanced 

Coal Power Systems Comparison Study,” Revision 4, November 2005.

4 “Standards of Performance for Electric Utility Steam Generating Units for Which Construction 

Commenced after September 18, 1978,” 40 CFR 60, Subpart Da.

5 National Energy Technology Laboratory. “Quality Guidelines for Energy System Studies: 

Carbon Dioxide Transport and Storage Costs in NETL Studies.” September 2013.

6 National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). (2011). QGESS: Cost Estimation 

Methodology for NETL Assessments of Power Plant Performance. Energy Analysis 

Publications: Details. Retrieved on March 16, 2012, from 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/research/energy-analysis/quality-guidelines-qgess

7 National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). (2011). QGESS: Technology Learning 

Curve (FOAK to NOAK). Energy Analysis Publications: Details. Retrieved on 

September 16, 2013, from http://www.netl.doe.gov/research/energy-analysis/qualityguidelines-qgess

8 NETL. “Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants, Volume 1: Bituminous Coal 

and Natural Gas to Electricity”. DOE/NETL-2010/1397, Final Report. November 2010 

Available at: 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/File%20Library/Research/Energy%20Analysis/OE/BitBase_Fin

Rep_Rev2a-3_20130919_1.pdf

9 AACE (formerly Advancement of Cost Engineering International) (2005) Cost Estimate 

Classification System – As Applied in Engineering, Procurement, and Construction for 

the Process Industries; TCM Framework 7.3 – Cost Estimating and Budgeting, AACE 

International Recommended Practice No. 18R-97, 2005, Rev. November 29, 2011

Retrieved on April 8, 2013 from http://www.aacei.org/non/rps/18R-97.pdf

10 Advancement of Cost Engineering (AACE) International. (2003) Conducting Technical and 

Economic Evaluations – as Applied for the Process and Utility Industries TCM 

Framework: 3.2 – Asset Planning, 3.3 – Investment Decision Making, AACE 
Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Volume 4: CTL via F-T Synthesis

76

International Recommended Practice No. 16R-90, 2003.

Retrieved on April 8, 2013 from http://www.aacei.org/non/rps/16R-90.pdf

11 NETL Power Systems Financial Model Version 5.0, December 2008. User Guide available at 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/research/energy-analysis/publications/listing?progcat=all

12 Wimer, J. Recommended Project Finance Structures for the Economic Analysis of FossilBased Energy Projects. September 2008.

13 Tarka, T. Polygeneration of Fischer-Tropsch Diesel Fuel and Electricity from Coal U.S. 

Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory. August 2010.

14 Stefan Rabe, Thanh-Binh, Truong, et al. Low Temperature Catalytic Partial Oxidation of 

Methane for Gas-to-Liquids applications. s.l. : Elsevier, applied catalysts, 2005.

15 ASTM, TABLE X5.1 Tenth Percentile Minimum Ambient Air Temperatures for the United 

States (except Hawaii), American National Standard Designation: D 975 – 07, 2007. 

16 Worldwide Fuel Charter Committee, World Wide Fuel Charter, Fifth Edition, 2013.