Improving the Efficiency of Coal-Fired Power Plants 

for Near Term Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions

Office of Systems, Analyses and Planning

April 16, 2010

Phil DiPietro

Katrina Krulla

DOE/NETL-2010/1411
EXECUTIVE 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 critical 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 90th

percentile, the overall CFPP fleet average efficiency would be 35.2%. NETL sets forth a vision 

of 36% based on retirements 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/yearior 2.5% of total U.S.

GHG emissions in 2008.

DECILE ANALYSIS

NETL examined coal generating unit efficiency data from the Energy Velocity (EV) database1,ii

for the years 1998 through 2008. Figure 1 shows the performance of the CFPP fleet in 2008 

ranked by efficiency and broken into ten deciles of equal capacity. The fleet generationweighted 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 of 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 the 1800 psig to 2000 psig range. Also, the net nameplate capacity of the 

units in top decile, while larger on average, ranged from 114 MW to 1426 MW, indicating that 

even small plants can achieve higher than average efficiencies.

Figure 2 shows that the 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 SO2 controls are expected to have lower efficiencies due to 

auxiliary load requirements, it is noteworthy that both the top decile and the rest of the fleet have

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. Units with anomalous data, capacity factors under 10%, using less than 

97% coal, and gasification plants, 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 892 units.
Figure 1. 2008 Generation Weighted CFPP Efficiency by Decile

*Using data from EIA form 923iii 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

Generation 

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 

(psig)

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 unit 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 8602coal generating units segmented by steam pressure 3,iv, coal type, and 

nameplate capacity4. If each segment is able to refurbish underperforming units to achieve a 

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

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 changeable through better dispatch. 

5 To calculate fleet efficiency target: 3412 / (Σ (3412/90th percentile eff. * generation) / 1772)
NETL is setting forth a vision for CFPP fleet-wide average efficiency of 36% based on (1) 

retirements 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 subcritical units and the 0-200 MW subbituminous units in Figure 3 had 90th

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 yields a fleet efficiency target of 35.6%.

Aggressive refurbishments could allow some segments to improve beyond the 90th percentile 

level. For example, the high pressure subcritical, subbituminous, 500 MW segment had a 90th

percentile efficiency of 33.8% while the same segment in the 200-500 MW size had a 90th

percentile of 35.6%. Also, all of the high pressure subcritical and supercritical, bituminous coal 

segments achieved average efficiencies below the NETL bituminous baseline studyv which sets 

an efficiency of 36.8% for a new subcritical CFPP and 39.1% for a new supercritical CFPP using 

existing technology. 

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

historical 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 years, which 

is higher than any individual 90th percentile segment. It is possible that units could routinely 

achieve the efficiency of their best year through better operation and maintenance practices6. 

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

Decile 2008 Efficiency

1998 - 2008 

Best Year 

Efficiency

1 27.6% 29.9%

2 29.9% 31.7%

3 30.8% 32.5%

4 31.6% 33.3%

5 32.2% 34.1%

6 32.9% 35.0%

7 33.8% 35.8%

8 34.7% 36.9%

9 35.7% 37.7%

10 37.6% 39.7%

Average 32.5% 34.5%

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 SO2 under 1.4lbs/MWh or reduce emissions to 90-95% of the possible emissionsvi. 

The EV dataset showed that 250 GW of the 307 GW CFPP fleet emits SO2 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 fleet, 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 efficiencies approaching the best-in-class 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 could 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 generating 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 sulfur, 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. Units 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 Platts 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