2015GOVERNOR'S CONFERENCE

ON THE ENVIRONMENT

JOHN W. MOFFETT

CENTER FOR APPLIED ENERGY RESEARCHPOWER GENERATION & UTILITY FUELS

SENIOR PROGRAM COORDINATOR

RESEARCH IMPROVES OUR LIVES…

• There are as many as 50 years between the initial invention and commercialization for each bulb.

• Materials development, manufacturing, and the impact of other advancements in technology all play a role in this timeline for development.

• Time, failures, funding, solutions, markets and rules can accelerate the development or end it.

Incandescent

CFL

LED

16-20 23-30100

1600 Lumens

W a t t s / h o u r

Each advancement is based on research & the incremental improvement it brings

RESULT: More light for less power – tremendous improvement in efficiency

One LED will consume one-sixth

the power as one incandescent bulb.

You save on power and that results in lower emissions and is a

smarter use of our resources.

CARBON CAPTURE

Carbon capture is a relatively new technology – necessitated by rules and concern for anthropogenic impacts of CO2 on global warming.

Carbon capture is far more complex than a lightbulb and we all know how important that discovery has been and has be improved over the last 130 years.

In comparison carbon capture is in its infancy – yet progress is being made with more to come.

Similar characteristics of time, materials, manufacturing, failures, changing impacts, rules and markets all play a role in bringing this technology to market.

THREE TOPICS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION…

Developing a consortium for research Achievements of Carbon Management Research ConsortiumConsider the big picture and the end-game

Creating a Consortium for Success

Academics

Government

Industry

Consortium Model

RESPONSIBILITIESACADEMICS

Hire innovative & knowledgeable research staff

Provide laboratories & equipment for testing

Seek energy efficiency Integrate into power

house Seek out grants Publish findings

INDUSTRY

Provide guidance and direction for research

Review progress and findings – make suggestions

Support research activities

Leverage R&D Dollars Transfer knowledge to

funding entities.

GOVERNMENT

Develop legislative understanding

Assist in funding Transfer knowledge to

legislature to develop new policy

Provide policies to encourage investment in research

Project

Carbon Management Research Group (CMRG)

This consortium model was used to form the CMRG In 2006 LG&E and KU Energy (Formerly EON-US) awarded the Uky-CAER $1,500.000

(over 3 years) to develop Carbon Capture Technologies Research Program. In 2008 an industrial advisory group was formed; members included Duke Energy,

East Kentucky Power Coop, Big River Rural Coop, American Electric Power, LG&E and KU Energy Company and the Electric Power Research Institute.

This group was called the Carbon Management Research Group and I was honored to be its first chairman from 2008 to 2014.

Participation, funding, direction, concerns all express events that could have been stumbling stones, but we were successful in moving forward.

The group meets twice a year, over two days for updates and briefings on results, problems, issues and next steps.

Funding a Research Consortium

Since 2006 the CMRG is responsible for about $44 M in research For the individual member their investment has been multiplied by a

factor of 27.6 times – this maximizes their investment and helps to keep them connected.

Through the effort of the Kentucky Legislature they have matched all industry funding.

The University Research Foundation has contributed as well. CMRG has successfully applied for numerous grants from ARPA-E,

University of Wyoming Collaboration, Clean Energy Research Center USA-China (CERC), and DOE.

Carbon Capture Slipstream Pilot Plant, Capacity 0.7 MWe or 2 MWt

Principally Funded by DOE It stands 7 stories tall Consists of a Primary Absorber A primary and secondary

stripper It is currently operating at the

KU Brown Plant The process is capture and

release Principle goal is capture 90%

CO2 from the flue gas at the lowest energy cost.

It is integrated into the power cycle.

A MW (MegaWatt) is one Million Watts or 10,000 one hundred watt light bulbs. It is a measure of power.

UKY-CAER PROCESS

We have moved out of lab-scale to a small pilot in 2009, now to a larger pilot 2014 and we hope next to build an even larger facility.

We have achieved 90% removal of CO2 from the flue gas of a coal-fired power plant on average.

UK-CAER process uses a solvent that has a strong affinity for CO2. It is held tight enough to move it, until it is heated in the strippers and released as a concentrated gas. The solvent is cooled and reused.

In the current study we are looking a solvent usage, power usage, corrosion to piping and vessels, and controls

This process can achieve 98% removal, but it would require more power for small returns.

How long can we operate with out problems – don’t know yet

So carbon capture works …

• Other locations and processes in the US – like plant Barry a 25 MW slipstream (Mobile, Alabama) and they are piping the CO2 to underground to the Citronelle oil field nearby. Southern Company’s Plant Barry uses an amine-based solvent from MHI (Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., Tokyo, Japan).

• Then there is SaskPower’s Boundary Dam Unit which is 110 MW – full-size plant in Saskatchewan, Canada. It uses the Shell’s Cansolv amine-based process and the CO2 is sent by 40 mile-pipeline to Weyburn EOR (Enhanced Oil Recovery) project.

• Both these locations confirm successful results. Each design/solvent has different characteristics.

• In the next project the size will be increased so that good engineering design can be scaled up for a larger unit or plant.

Sequestration – the end-game

• CO2 Sequestration or the use in Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) is truly the end-game we need.

• Without sequestration there is no need or reason to capture carbon dioxide.

• More needs to be done to assure there will be safe places to put the captured CO2 without massive liabilities.

• Government needs to create policy and rules to share the liability with reasonable assurance that it can be done safely.

• We’ve already successfully injected CO2 into saline aquifers in Western Kentucky with the help of KGS (Kentucky Geological Service).

• A a clear pathway for the future that shares in the risk or reduces the liability is necessary so we have an end-game.

IN SUMMARY

• COAL is a resource that is available and usable in Kentucky. • Is the USA going to abandon the use of Coal all together? • Will COAL be part of the future energy mix?• Technically - carbon capture is feasible. • Technically - carbon sequestration is feasible. • Certainly the application of each will result in higher costs for the

consumer, but it may be lower than other alternatives.• Perhaps we need a reservoir of dollars to insure sites and reduce

individual company liabilities and long-term risk.• If we do that coal can remain alive in Kentucky and for the USA.

Thanks for your Attention