## Improving the Efficiency of Coal

- Fired Power Plants

for Near Term Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions

Office of Systems

, Analys e s and Planning April 16, 2010

Phil DiPietro

Katrina Krulla

DOE/NETL

- 2010/1411EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In 2008, the U.S. coal

- fired power plant ( CFPP ) fleet had a generation

- weighted average efficiency of 32.5% while the top ten percent of the fleet had an efficiency of 37.6%, five percentage points higher. The generating units in the top ten percent are diverse (they are not all new, large, super crit ical plants), indicating an opportunity for fleet

- wide efficiency improvement. The National Energy Technology Laboratory ( NETL ) segmented the fleet into 13 groups based on characteristics that limit efficiency

, and calculated the best

- in

- class efficiency within each group. Based on each group achieving an average efficiency equal to its 90 th
percentile, the overall CFPP fleet average efficiency would be 35.2%. NETL sets forth a vision

of 36% based on retiremen ts of low efficiency units

, and improvements within the best

- in

- class. Under a scenario where generation from coal is constant at the 2008 level, increasing the average efficiency from 32.5% to 36% reduces U.S. GHG by 175 MMmt/year i or 2. 5% of total U.S

. GHG emissions in 2008.

DECILE ANALYSIS

NETL examined coal generating unit efficiency data from the Energy Velocity (EV) database 1

, ii
for the years 1998 through 2008. Figure 1 shows the performance of the CFPP fleet in 2008 ranked by efficiency and brok en into ten deciles of equal capacity. The fleet generation

weighted average efficiency is 32.5%, while the top performing decile is over five percentage points higher, at 37.6%.

Figure 2 shows a comparison of the characteristics of the top decile to the rest of the fleet (deciles 1

- 9) . While on average the top decile consisted of units with larger capacities , higher steam pressures, higher load factors, and a higher percentage burning bituminous coal, there was significant overlap with the rest o f the fleet. For example

, the average steam pressure at the

turbine of the top decile is around 3000 psig, but there are ten units within the top decile with steam pressures in th e 1800 psig to 2000 psig range. Also, the net nameplate capacity of the

uni ts in top decile, while larger on avera ge, ranged from 114 MW to 1426 MW

, indicating that even small plants can achieve higher than average efficiencies.

Figure 2 shows that t he average age of the units in the top decile is roughly the same as the rest

of the fleet, 40 years vs. 42 years, and both groupings contain units that are over 50 years old. Since coal generating units with SO 2 controls are expect ed to have lower efficiencies due to auxiliary load requirements, it is noteworthy that both the top d ecile and the rest of the fleet ha ve almost the same percentage of units with sulfur controls.

1 EV stores a collection of public data on power generating units that is primarily obtained from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This analysis uses the average annual net heat rate to calculate efficiency. Un its with anomalous data, capacity factors under 10%, using less than 97% coal, and gasification p lants, were removed from the dataset. The units that were removed from the dataset represented 3 % of the total generation from all coal units. The resulting dataset contained 89 2 units.Figure 1. 2008 Generation Weighted CFPP Efficiency by Decile

* Using data from EIA form 923 iii for 2008 produces a generation weighted efficiency of 33.0%. The EV dataset is

based on the EPA Continuous Emissions Monitoring System and results in lower efficiencies on average for each
plant when compared to the EIA.

Figure 2. Characteristics of Top Decile and Rest of Fleet

2008 Top Decile 2008 Rest of Fleet

Average Range Average Range

Gen eration Weighted Efficiency 37.6% 36.3%

- 43.7% 32.0% 19.5%

- 36.2%

Capacity (MW) 580 114

- 1426 329 27

- 1300

% of units that are
Super Critical 55%

- 10%

-

Steam Pressure (psi g ) 2935 1800

- 3500 2088 600

- 5000

Age (yrs) 40 1

- 54 42 1

- 69

Load Factor* 83% 67%

- 99% 75% 24%

- 105%

% of units burning

Bituminous Coal 66%

- 56%

-

% of units with SO2

Controls 36%

- 35%

-

* Load factor = annual net generation / (net nameplate capacity * operating hours during the year)

. Operating hours is defined as the number of hours the unit is online and does not include the time

the uni t is shut down for maintenance or other reasons. Load factors may be artificially high for the
top decile relative to the rest of the fleet because nameplate capacity corresponds to design
efficiency not actual efficiency

.SETTING A CFPP FLEET EFFICIENCY TARGET

Figure 3 shows 860 2 coal generating units segmented by steam pressure 3

, iv , coal type, and nameplate capacity 4 . If each segment is able to refurbish underperforming units to achieve a generation

- weighted efficiency equal to that of the 90 th percentile unit, then the generation

weighted CFPP fleet efficiency can be improved from 32.5% to 35.2% 5 . This efficiency target takes into account the differences between the top decile and the rest of the fleet.

Figure 3. Segmentation Analysis of the CFPP Fleet

Segment Criteria Sub

- population Characteristics Efficiency

Unit Type Coal

Type Size

(MW) Capacity

(GW) # Units Generation

(BkWh) Average 90 th

Percentile

Low Pressure
Sub Critical (600

- 1600 psig) Bit.

0

- 200 10.3 127 44 29.6% 33.0%

Subbit. 4.6 59 26 27.5% 29.8%

Other 0.6 7 2 27.4% 30.5%

High Pressure
Sub Critical (1800

- 2600 psig) Bit. 0

- 200 21.6 134 112 32.1% 34.8%

200

- 500 33.4 103 189 32.8% 35.6%

500+ 29.7 48 176 32.7% 35.0%

Subbit. 0

- 200 7.2 47 42 30.7% 32.5%

200

- 500 31.2 97 191 31.4% 35.6%

500+ 64.4 98 401 31.6% 33.8%

Other 11.1 28 72 31.7% 35.1%

Super Critical (3334+ psig) Bit. 60.7 79 372 35.1% 37.3%

Subbit. 15.0 20 90 35.2% 37.2%

Other 8.1 13 55 31.8% 34.9%

Whole fleet 298 860 1772 32.5% 37.6%

2 An additional 32 units were omitted from the segmentation analysis due to missing or anomalous steam pressure

data.

3 Steam pressure data was obtained from the 2008 Platts UDI database and combined with the dataset obtained f rom EV.

4 In some cases units were not broken into capacity categories because the populations were small and mostly homogeneous. Although load factor for the top decile was an average of 83% compared to 75% for the rest of the fleet, it was deemed to be change able through better dispatch.

5 To calculate fleet efficiency target: 3412 / ( Σ (3412/90 th pe r c en t ile eff. * generation) / 1772)NETL is setting forth a vision for CFPP fleet

- wide average efficiency of 36% based on (1)

retirement s of lower efficiency units combined with increased generation from higher efficiency refurbished units and (2) advanced refurbishments and improved operation and maintenance practices to increase average efficiency of some segments beyond the best

- in

- class.

The low pressure sub critical units and the 0

- 200 MW subbituminous units in Figure 3 had 90 th
percentile efficiencies that were significantly lower than the rest of the fleet. Retiring these units and relying on increased generation from the more efficient segments to maintain constant coal generation y ields a fleet efficiency target of 35.6%.

Aggressive refurbishments could allow some segments to improve beyond the 90 th percentile level. For example, the high pressure subcritical, subbituminous, 500 MW segment ha d a 90 th
percentile efficiency of 33.8% while the same segment in the 200

- 500 MW size ha d a 90 th
percentile of 35.6% . Also, a ll of the high pressure subcritical and super critical, bituminous coal segments achieved average efficiencies below the NETL bituminous baseline study v which sets

an eff iciency of 36.8% for a new subcritical CFPP and 39.1% for a new supercritical CFPP using existing technology

.

Improving fleet efficiency beyond the 90 th percentile level is also supported by analysis of

historic al efficiency data (1998

- 2008). NETL examined a scenario where each unit achieved its best efficiency over the past ten years in the same year. The units were ranked by best year efficiency and grouped into new deciles of equal capacity using the same method to produce Figure 1. Figure 4 reports the generation

- weighted average efficiency for the original 2008 decile analysis and the best year scenario. Note that deciles nine and ten (60 GW of capacity) achieve generation

- weighted average efficiencies of 37.7% and 39.7% in their best ye ars , which is higher than any individual 90 th percentile segment. It is possible that units could routinely achieve the efficiency of their best year through better operation and maintenance practices 6

. Assuming that the CFPP fleet employs a combination of aggressive refurbishment and improved operation maintenance, 36% is a reasonable average efficiency target.

6 NETL considered that units may achieve their best year efficiency when they are running at maximum load. To account for this we examined the correlation between best year efficiency and the year with the highest load factor and found no correlation. We also examined the years in which best year efficiency was achieved to see if there was any one year in which a preponderance of units achieved their best or worst year, and found that the years were evenly distributed.Figure 4

. Best Year Generation

- Weighted Efficiency Analysis

NEW SOURCE REVIEW

The 36% CFPP fleet efficiency target does not take into account installing sulfur scrubbers at facilities that lack controls. New Source Review (NSR) requires that generating units over

73MW emit SO 2 under 1.4lbs/MWh or reduce emissions to 90

- 95% of the possible emissions vi

. The EV dataset showed that 250 GW of the 307 GW CFPP fleet emits SO 2 above the 1.4lbs/MWh level, and that 165 GW lack any type of sulfur controls. If efficiency upgrades were done in conjunction with installing sulfur scrubbers on 165

- 250 GW of the flee t, the efficiency target would be reduced .5 to 1 percentage points.

SUMMARY

The segmentation analysis serves as the basis for the 36% average CFPP fleet efficiency vision

. NETL expects that the fleet achieving ef ficiencies approaching the best

- in

- clas s will require a combination of improved operational and maintenance practices, capital investments in unit refurbishments, and application of advanced technologies.FUTURE WORK

The analysis of the opportunity to increase CFPP efficiency coul d be improved by:

Verification of coal generating unit efficiency data

. Estimates of the cost of efficiency upgrades.

Unit

- specific data to enable estimation of the design heat rate for each generating unit. Case studies of efficiency upgrades at generatin g units, including ASPEN models, to provide concrete examples of the opportunity to improve efficiency. Detailed analyses of scenarios where some of the generating units are retired, some are refurbished and up

- rated, and others are fixed with s ulfur, NOx, and mercury controls. Analyses of how more efficient coal plants will dispatch, what other generating sources will be displaced, and the overall effect on GHG emissions.REFERENCES

i Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2009

NEMS Run Results. http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/stimulus/aeostim.html.

ii NETL analysis of Ventyx’s Velocity Suite 2008 net heat rate data for coal

- fired units. Units with less than 10% capacity factor and using less than 97% coal were excluded from analysis. Un its with missing or anomalous data were also excluded. The excluded units account for 3% of the electricity generated from coal in 2008. http://www.ventyx.com/velocity/vs

- overview.asp

iii Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration , Utility, Non

- Utility, and

Combined Heat & Power Plant Database. http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/data.html

iv 2008 P latts UDI World Electric Power Plant Database.

v Cost and Performance Baseline for Fossil Energy Plants Desk Reference (May 2007) http://www.netl.doe.gov/energy

- analyses /pubs/deskreference/index.html

vi 40 CFR Part 60

– Standards of Performance for Electric Utility Steam Generating Units for Which Construction Commenced after September 18, 1978, Final Rule Amendments, February 27, 2006