Office of Fossil Energy
SECA Solid State Fuel Cells
Clean Economic Energy in a Carbon/Water Challenged World
Wayne A. Surdoval
Technology Manager, Fuel Cells
National Energy Technology Laboratory
United States Department of Energy
Revolutionizing Power Production & Use
SECA as a key part of DOE
DOE’s
s Strategy to Reduce Electrical Energy Losses
Coal Generation
Transmission &
Distribution
End-Use
35% Efficiency
31% Efficiency
4% Efficiency
(65% Loss)
(11% Loss)
(87% Loss)
SECA SOFC
Systems
SMART
GRID
Solid-State
Lighting
60% Efficiency
55% Efficiency
(40% Loss)
(8% Loss)
Light
Current
Technology
Coal Generation
DOE Programs
for Tomorrow
>40% Efficiency
Effi i
(27% Loss)
SECA and other DOE programs can realistically increase
end-use efficiency by more than 10x! (from 4 to >40)
2
Adapted from AEP, Ohio Fuel Cell Coalition, June 2009
1400
Raw Water Withdrawal Comparison
•Percentage of Power from Steam Plant is significantly reduced
•Higher fuel cell cycle efficiency reduces water use per unit of coal feed
1200
Gallons/MWh ((net)
G
1000
•Separate fuel and oxidant streams in fuel cell permits use of substantially
less cooling water to condense, recycle and reuse process H2O
Water
W
t Consumption
C
ti
(gal/MWh)
( l/MWh)
PC plants: 1000 - 1200
IGCC: 600-700
Nuclear: 1600
NGCC: 500
From NETL Bituminous Baseline Study
800
Supercritical PC2
600
400
2
IGCC2
200
IGFC1
0
1
1 System
2 System
3
includes 100% carbon capture and CO2 compression to 2,215 psia
includes 90% carbon capture and CO2 compression to 2,215 psia
FY 09 Fossil Energy Fuel Cell Program
Solid State Energy Conversion Alliance
(SECA)
$70
$60
$50
$40
SECA
FY 09…...$58,000,000
SECA Cost Reduction
Industry
$30
$20
SECA Coal Based Systems
Industry
$10
$0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Request
National Laboratories
Universities,
Small Business
4
Appropriation
Intellectual Property
Cornerstone of the Alliance
Industry Teams Develop Proprietary Technologies
Non-Exclusive Licenses
Exceptional Circumstance to Bayh-Dole Act
Research
Core Technology Program
• Promotes
P
t Collaboration
C ll b
ti – Industry
I d t knows
k
it will
ill benefit
b
fit
• Limits Research Redundancy – Less Government Dollars
• Technology in best designs – Technology isn’t “locked up”
5
SECA Industry Teams & Major
Subcontractors
Calgary
VersaPower
Systems
6
00076A 10-22-08 WAS
2009 SECA Core Technology & Other
Partners
NEXTECH
MATERIALS
ANL
7
00076C 6-03-09 WAS
Solid State Energy Conversion Alliance
Performance Assessment Rating Tool (OMB)
2010
Stack Cost ~ $175/kW stack
Capital Cost < $700/kW system
Maintain Economic Power Density with
Increased Scale ~ 300mW/cm2
Ref: 2007
Goal: 2010
Mass customization – stacks used in multiple
applications….large
li ti
l
and
d small
ll systems
t
8
SECA Industry Teams
FY 2001 – FY 2007
5kW Systems - Complete
SECA Ind
Industry
str Team
9
Location
Protot pe
Prototype
NETL Validation
General Electric
Torrance, CA
Complete
Pass
Delphi
p
Rochester, NY
Complete
p
Pass
Fuel Cell Energy
Calgary, BC
Complete
Pass
Acumentrics
Westwood, MA
Complete
Pass
Si
Siemens
P
Power G
Group
Pitt b h PA
Pittsburgh,
C
Complete
l t
P
Pass
Cummins Power Gen.
Minneapolis, MN
Complete
Pass
Size
Efficiency
Degradation
Availability
Target
3 – 10 kW
35 (LHV)
4%/1,000 hrs
90%
Aggregate Team
Performance
3 – 7 kW
35.4 – 41 %
2%/1,000 hrs
97%
Cost
$724 - $775/kW
Single Cell Module Performance
Planar Cell - Atmospheric
(x10)
250mw/cm2@ 275mw/cm2@ 400mw/cm2@ 450mw/cm2@ 600mw/cm2@ 500mw/cm2@ 450mw/cm2@
0.85V
06V
0.6
0 7V
0.7V
0 7V
0.7V
0 7V
0.7V
0 7V
0.7V
0 8V
0.8V
550 cm2
144 cm2
144cm2
144cm2
144cm2
144cm2
144 cm2
800
600
400
200
0
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
System ($/kW) ref 2002
10
2007
2008
How Big are the U.S. Markets?
C l
Coal
Cumulative
e Additions
(GW
W)
EIA/AEO 2007 New Capacity Forecast
350.0
300.0
250.0
200.0
150.0
100.0
50.0
0.0
2010
2015
2020
2025
YEAR
New Coal Capacity
All New Capacity
SECA Fuel Cells available for installation in 2018
New Coal Capacity, 2018 – 2030…….110 GW
Average SECA Fuel Cell Production …. 9.2 GW/yr
EIA Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) for 2007 pp. 82-83
11
2030
Solid State Energy conversion Alliance
Fuel Cells Technology Timeline
2005
2006
SECA R&D
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2020
Technology Solutions and Enabling Technology
SECA Cost
Reduction
Validation test
Validation test
SECA Coal
Based
Systems
SECA
Manufacturing
Operate
Single
g Module
(1 MW) Scale
$700/kW
Ref: 2007
12
Operate Multiple
Module ((5 MW))
Scale with Turbines
250 – 500 MW IGFC
Coal-Based Fuel Cell
Objective
Air
Separation
Air
SECA Coal Based Systems
near-zero water requirement
99% carbon capture
O2
H 2O
Catalytic CO, H2, CH4
Gasification
CH4
O2
CO2,CO, H2, H2O
Dry Gas Cleaning
CO, H2, CH4
O2
O2
Combustor
Combustor
Coal
Anode
CO2
Cathode
Sulfur
Recovery
Atmospheric SOFC
Air
H 2O
Air
Marketable
Ash/Slag
By-product
13
Marketable
Sulfur
By-product
•
Atmospheric SOFC with catalytic gasification 25 % Methane
•
Separate Fuel and Air Streams: Oxy Combustion
•
Cycle Efficiency (HHV); 99% Capture

~50% with CO2 Compression

~53% w/out CO2 Compression
Heat Recovery
e.g., Expander
CO2
Sequestration
q
Unmineable
Coal Beds
Enhanced
Oil Recovery
Depleted Oil & Gas
Reservoirs
Deep Saline
Aquifer
Air
Separation
Air
SECA Coal Based Systems
near-zero water requirement
99% carbon capture
O2
H 2O
Catalytic CO, H2, CH4
Gasification
25% CH4
O2
CO2,CO, H2, H2O
Gas Cleaning
CO, H2, CH4
O2
O2
Combustor
Combustor
Coal
Anode
CO2
Cathode
Sulfur
Recovery
Pressurized SOFC
Air
H 2O
Air
Marketable
Ash/Slag
By-product
14
Marketable
Sulfur
By-product
•
Pressurized SOFC with catalytic gasification 25% Methane
•
Separate Fuel and Air Streams: Oxy Combustion
•
No steam cycle – minimal external water requirement
•
Cycle Efficiency (HHV); 99% Capture

~56% with CO2 Compression

~60% w/out CO2 Compression
Heat Recovery
e.g., Expander
CO2
Sequestration
q
Unmineable
Coal Beds
Enhanced
Oil Recovery
Depleted Oil & Gas
Reservoirs
Deep Saline
Aquifer
Impact of Efficiency on COE
Advanced Power Systems
With CO2 Capture, Compression and Storage
PC
Baseline
IGCC
Baseline
IGFC
Atmos.
IGFC
Press.
y
Efficiency
HHV (%)
27 2
27.2
32 5
32.5
50 0
50.0
57 3
57.3
Capital Cost
$/kW
2 870
2,870
2 390
2,390
1 991
1,991
1 667
1,667
100
37
26
2
11.6
10.6
8.5
7.3
Steam Cycle
% Power
Cost-of-Electricity
¢/kW-hr
¢/kW
hr
The Benefit of SOFC for Coal Based power Generation, Report Prepared for U. S. Office of Management and Budget, 30OCT07
15
1400
Raw Water Withdrawal Comparison
•Percentage of Power from Steam Plant is significantly reduced
•Higher fuel cell cycle efficiency reduces water use per unit of coal feed
1200
Gallons/MWh ((net)
G
1000
•Separate fuel and oxidant streams in fuel cell permits use of substantially
less cooling water to condense, recycle and reuse process H2O
Water
W
t Consumption
C
ti
(gal/MWh)
( l/MWh)
PC plants: 1000 - 1200
IGCC: 600-700
Nuclear: 1600
NGCC: 500
From NETL Bituminous Baseline Study
800
Supercritical PC2
600
400
2
IGCC2
200
IGFC1
0
1
1 System
2 System
16
includes 100% carbon capture and CO2 compression to 2,215 psia
includes 90% carbon capture and CO2 compression to 2,215 psia
For More Information About the DOE Office
of Fossil Energy Fuel Cell Program
Websites:
www.netl.doe.gov
www.fe.doe.gov
www.grants.gov
CDs available from the website
FE Fuel Cell Program Annual
Report _2008
9th Annual SECA Workshop
P
Proceedings
di
Fuel Cell Handbook (7th ed.)
Wayne A
A. Surdoval
Technology Manager, Fuel Cells
National Energy Technology Laboratory
U. S. Department of Energy
(Tel) 412 386-6002
(Fax) 412 386-4822
[email protected]
17