Mesaba Energy: Utility-Scale Power Plant - Case Study Example

--------------------------- --------------------------- --------------------------- --------------------------- A Literature Review of Mesaba Energy Project Introduction Mesaba Energy project (MEP) is a new utility scale IGCC power plant using ConocoPhillips' E-Gas technology for Coal gasification. Excelsior Energy Incl. applied to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) for site permission to construct and operate a 1,212 Megawatt Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle electric power generating station. Along with that, idea of a natural gas line and transmission line for high voltage also has been proposed ("Mesaba"). Power station consists of two phases 'Mesaba one' and 'Mesaba two' each of which is rated to give peak power of 606 MW. For one industrial project, it's the location that dominates most and decides about its future. The site should accommodate multiple generating units, covering more than 1,000 acres to provide buffer zone between the plant facilities and nearby communities. Preferred project location is West Range Plant Site, Greenfield which is designated for auxiliary mining purposes ("Area Definitions"). The main objective for this site is due to Iron range that is only about 70 miles northwest of Duluth near Taconite and Bovey. Other than this, natural gas pipelines, high voltage transmission line corridors and viable rail service are also the deciding factors. An alternate site is also under consideration, located in the east range plant site; which is closer to Hoyt Lake iron range, about 50 mile north of Duluth and has access to water as well as feed-stock transportation option ("Minnesota Hydrology Guide", 1992). An estimated total project costs approximately $1.97 Billion, Department of Energy share is $36 Million. It is expected to complete construction work by 2011 and after that within one year to start its operation. The main attributes to this project are, 2005 Energy Policy Act that provides loan guarantees, legislatively mandated PPA with Northern States Power (A3/BBB-), Regulatory incentives and exemption from certificate of need, Public support and large demand in market, and fuel flexibility or lowest-cost fuel ("Mesaba"). MEP: From Coal to Technology Project is supposed to be designed with a thought as fuel efficient where primary material is coal; a small statistic outlines the fuel compositions which can be used interchangeably; 100% coal including Powder River Basin sub-bituminous and Illinois No. 6 bituminous coals, up to 1:1 ratio of coal and petroleum coke blend and petroleum coke. A group of MIT studied on role of coal to lessen its effect on global climate change. They came up with a result that carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology can reduce carbon dioxide emission to a significant amount without hampering its energy output requirement. According to Dr. Deutch: As the world's leading energy user and greenhouse gas emitter, the U.S. must take the lead in showing the world CCS can work. Demonstration of technical, economic, and institutional features of CCS at commercial scale coal combustion and conversion plants will give policymakers and the public confidence that a practical carbon mitigation control option exists, will reduce cost of CCS should carbon emission controls be adopted, and will maintain the low-cost coal option in an environmentally acceptable manner. Coal is a low cost and its usage is increasing day by day. So using coal directly without CCS will affect the climate directly leading to a global change. CCS enables coal to meet its energy criteria in future and in parallel saving the atmosphere from CO2 emissions as coal contains a high carbon percentage ("Future of Coal", 2007). Fuel gasification is done first which is a process of converting coal, petroleum coke etc into gaseous state from solid one. It is similar to natural gas and used for electric power generation. The gasification process that MEP will use is ConocoPhillips' E-Gas technology. Raw materials are first crushed and slurry is formed which is pumped into a vessel keeping pressure very high known as gasifier along with sub-stoichiometric amounts of purified oxygen. Then syngas is formed, cooled, any sort of contaminations if present are cleaned and combusted. Combustion is done in combustion turbine that is connected directly to a generator. The energy is created inside the turbine which converts mechanical energy to electrical one. Mechanical structure is like that there is a positive feedback. The hot exhausted gases are passed through a recovery chamber which is nothing but a boiler that collects steam and piped to steam turbine that is also connected to generator giving more electrical energy. The whole process is known as Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) ("Mesaba", "International Energy Agency"). IGCC is also known as efficient and environmentally friendly process. Coke, Coal and heavy oil refinery bottoms are being converted into power mostly by this process. Due to its high efficiencies it requires less amount of coal resulting very less CO2 emission in environment. US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has already decided to regulate mercury emissions from coal burnings. They found that mercury is a toxic substance of greatest concern among all the air toxics emitted from power plants. Though mercury removal with sophisticated technology gives a range of no control to 90% level accuracy but it varies from plant to plant. An integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) power plant has the advantage regarding this. It can achieve very high mercury removal performance with established technology. IGCC plants remove mercury from the syngas upstream of the gas turbine. Hence, IGCC power plant gives very good result in mercury removal side, low in cost, and reliable in design. This removal step should be done when volumetric rate is small ("The cost of Mercury Removal", 2002). Taking input from Tampa Electric Company and Texaco Power, Parsons developed a reference IGCC plant to study cost estimate value. He came with a result of applying carbon absorption system to estimate cost of mercury control (Parsons, 2001). The idea was obtained from the Eastman Chemical Company, which uses carbon beds at its syngas facility in Kingsport, Tennessee ("Telephone"). Labivitz School's initial study, 2005 says that first unit of MEP (Mesaba one) will improve the iron range which was economically depressed and also to the larger state of Minnesota. As per their 2006 report Mesaba one will impact Minnesota's economy by many ways like; Excelsior provided inputs to the models of about $1.6 billion in direct spending on construction for Mesaba One, $1.4 billion for Mesaba Two and $440 million in revenue or output on Mesaba One operations during a typical plant-year will be used for maintenance. Along with that a non-recurring $399 million in increased business and household spending on Mesaba unit one, that results into ultimately $640 million throughout the state. Other than these, it will provide thousands of jobs. Over the period of 2008-2011 when Mesaba one will be under construction, full-time, part-time and temporary construction jobs peak at 1555. A total of over 107 full-time, part-time, and temporary jobs and additional 1,966 during the peak year in other sectors will be given by Mesaba One at the time of operations (Labivitz School, 2006). But some peoples are opposing the construction of a coal gasification power plant on the Scenic Highway in Itasca County. They think that lot of fuel will be wasted for electric generation which is not required at all and would degrade recreational lake country near the Scenic Highway, resulting pollution of air and water. Apart from that, as it has been decided by the authority to take only 107 people as permanent employee which is very less in concern, they think it does not change state's financial status (Helmberger, M.). Conclusion A Literature Review has been presented here. It gives an outline of Mesaba project; its origin, objective, requirements and working technology. Though dispute has arisen into the minds of citizens but it has several positive impacts in economical as well as social life too e.g. construction employment could give 1000 temporary jobs to the people of state, will make more refinements in IGCC process and bring advancement in existing technology, reduce overall CO2 emissions and most important this project will utilize available coal resources and enhance electric power. Works Cited "Mesaba Energy Project". Joint-Permit-Application (Section-1). 2005. Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development. Area Definitions. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1992. Minnesota Hydrology Guide. Interdisciplinary MIT Study. "The Future of Coal". 2007 International Energy Agency. "Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle - Clean Coal Technologies." Labivitz School. "The Economic Impact of Constructing and Operating an Integrated Gasification Combined-Cycle Power- Generation Facility on the Iron Range". 2006. < www.d.umn.edu/sbe/departments/bber> Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory. 2002. The Cost of Mercury Removal In An IGCC Plant. Letter Report. Contract No. DE-AM26-99FT40465, Program, Product and Project Engineering and Analysis Services. Parsons. "Clean Coal Reference Plants: IGCC Texaco." December 2001. Telephone communication with Dave Denton. Eastman Chemical Company. Helmberger, M. "Mesaba project moving forward; challenges still loom for Excelsior Energy; Hoyt Lakes meeting set for Aug. 23". Volume 17, Issue 33. Read More