Posted on 09/27/2011 12:49:55 PM PDT by thackney
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued a record of decision that will allow federal funding to help build a 400 MW plant that combines an integrated gasification combined-cycle system with urea production and carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology.
The Summit Texas Clean Energy Project will be partially funded with $450 million from DOE’s Clean Coal Power Initiative. The plant, owned by Summit Texas Clean Energy LLC, will produce power by converting subbituminous coal into hydrogen-rich synthesis gas andcarbon dioxide (CO2). The syngas and steam will be fed to the combined-cycle combustion and steam turbine generator to produce 200 MW of electricity that will be fed to the power grid.
The plant will use Siemens (NYSE: SI) IGCC technology and Linde Rectisol acid-gas capture technology to capture 90 percent of the CO2 from the plant’s syngas. A portion of the captured CO2 will be used to produce urea for fertilizer. The remainder will be used for enhanced oil recovery with monitoring, verification and accounting to demonstrate the geologic storage. In addition, the plant will provide recycling, deep-well injection and evaporation ponds to eliminate the release of process and brine water to surface waters.
Wonder why they wouldn’t this little unit in Wyoming next to the sub-bi coal istead of hauling it a thousand miles?
Opps, missed BUILD right tween wouldn’t and this.
Because of the need for the power and the CO2 in Texas.
And, because we have lots of coal in Texas?
Is this one of those projects that needs a ton of water to keep the machinery cool?
Coal plants are thermal power plants. They do use cooling water. As do all thermal power plants.
Could this be the project that the former Mayor of Dallas, Laura Miller, has been working on - is it possible that the darn influence of a green politico and her state legislature husband is now leading to spending by another gov agency? Duh
More info:
Most of the water in the TCEP system will be recycled through the plant, and Gjelde and Hodel say they’ve taken steps to reduce the plant’s water consumption. Rather than use water to condense the steam, they’ve invested in an expansive air-cooling system. Further, the plant uses a “zero discharge” system. Additionally, by recycling the wastewater, they expect to have no water discharge- and therefore no watershed pollution.
If this was a good idea let this company pay 100% of the money it takes to build the plant. It is none of the governments business to be putting tax dollars in to a private business....
Agreed.
But if we have to waste tax dollars on carbon capture nonsense, I like using the CO2 for enhanced oil production.
There was a controversy over a plant proposed to be built near Abilene, but from what I read they could only do it if Cap and Trade passed so they would get all those lovely “carbon credits” (or subsidies) - but the main complaint was the amount of water they would use in a very arid area. Midland/Odessa is drier than Abilene so I wonder what folks out there think of this?
This Co-Gen is to run on Sub-bituminous coal, not lignite. If they wanted to fire it on lignite they needed to put the plant in East Texas, not Odessa.
Even though there is plenty of lignite in East Texas, there are a number of powerplants in Texas burning Sub-bituminous coal, from Wyoming's Powder River Basin, because that coal has much more energy and much lower emissions than lignite.
Well good for you; you answered the question!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.