Wednesday, September 08, 2010

Biomass-fired CHP - one third the price of the next cheapest power source

Councils or businesses would be well advised to construct biomass-fired combined heat and power (CHP) plants to satisfy their energy needs as the cheapest possible option - one that might even make a profit - of all possible energy solutions.

This is one conclusion of a set of figures published by DECC and highlighted this week in a parliamentary answer by Charles Hendry.

The tables below are taken from Mott Macdonald (2010) and give levelised cost estimates (average lifetime generation cost per megawatt-hour) for new build plants in the main large-scale electricity generation technologies in the UK, at current engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contract prices.

Mott MacDonald comment that the CHP options reveal the lowest cost power by far, at only £24.9/MWh, one third the cost of a gas powered plant, once the steam revenues are factored in.

Assumptions include that the projects are able to secure a 100% use for their steam over the whole plant life, which may not always be possible, unless companies/councils are using the heat for their own premises. Another assumption is that carbon prices will continue to increase.

The biomass-fired schemes, which have much higher heat-to-power ratios, have the lowest net costs, even seeing negative costs in the medium to long term - i.e., they could make money for the developer.

Even if the biomass CHP schemes can capture only half of the projected steam credit, the costs would still be less than £70/MWh in 2020.

The table reveals other interesting aspects the cost of some renewables, nuclear, and carbon capture and storage:

• offshore wind power is the most expensive form of power at £190/MWh for Round 3 of the bids

• integrating CCS (carbon capture and storage) into coal or gas fired plant would substantially raise capital and operating costs.

• the leading 3rd generation nuclear designs, although projected to incur a significant first build premium, have a lower levelised cost at £99/MWh than an Advanced Super Critical (ASC) coal plant without CCS, but still significantly higher than Combined Cycle Gas Turbine (CCGT).

• anaerobic digestion is not as cost effective as normally assumed

• landfill gas and sewage gas are much more cost-effective than energy from waste.

Under DECC’s central carbon price projection, the premium for CCS versus un-scrubbed plants is £32-38/MWh, although the carbon costs on the un-scrubbed coal and gas plants is £40/MWh and £15/MWh, respectively.

In the longer term, as these technologies bring costs down from experience, the levelised costs of CCS equipped plant will undercut those for the un-scrubbed plant.

Even then, the CCS equipped plants still see levelised costs of £105-115/MWh with gas at the lower end, and coal at the upper end of the range. Adopting DECC’s low carbon price projection would see the CCS equipped plant continuing to be more expensive than a non-equipped plant through the 2020s.

The tables


It should be noted that for the purposes of presentation, the table only gives either 'FOAK' (first-of-a-kind) prices or 'NOAK' (nth-of-a-kind) prices for each technology. On offshore wind, for example, it shows offshore wind 'FOAK' prices, whereas the round 2 technology may be considered to have progressed towards 'NOAK' prices. Mott Macdonald estimate 'NOAK' offshore wind costs at £125/MWh (10% discount rate, 2009 project start at today's EPC prices).


Case 1: 10% discount rate, 2009 project start at today's EPC prices, with mixed FOAK/NOAK
Levelised cost Gas CC GT Gas CCGT with CCS FOAK ASC coal ASC c oal with CCS FOAK Coal IGCC FOAK Coal IGCC with CCS FOAK Onshore wind Offshore wind FOAK Offshore wind R3 FOAK Nuclear PWR. FOAK
Capital Costs 12.4 29.8 33.4 74.1 61.7 82.0 79.2 124.1 144.6 77.3
Fixed operating Coals 3.7 7.7 8.6 18.6 9.7 17.7 14.6 36.7 45.8 12.25
Variable Operating Costs 2.3 3.6 2.2 4.7 3.4 4.6 __ __ __ 2.1
Fuel Costs 46.9 65.0. 19.9 28.7 20.3 28.3 __ __ __ 5.3
Carbon Costs 15.1 2.1 40.3 6.5 39.6 5.5 __ __ __ __
Decomm and waste fund __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ 2.1
CO2 transport and storage __ 4.3 __ 9.6 __ 9.5 __ __ __ __
Steam Revenue __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
Total levelised cost 80.3 112.5 104.5 142.1 134.6 147.6 93.9 160.9 190.5. 99.0
Case 1: 10% discount rate, 2009 project start at today's EPC prices, with mixed FOAK/NOAK
Levelised Cost Small business power only. FOAK Large biomass power only. FOAK OCGT AD on waste Landfill gas Sewage gas Small biomass CHP. FOAK
Capital Costs 55.8 46.1 7.1 63.8 25.8 42.0 91.3
Fixed operating Coals 21.0 13.4 3.0 21.0 13.1 8.9 23.9
Variable Operating Costs 2.5 2.5 1.5 18.6 21.1 2.1 2.8
Fuel Costs 36.7 31.2 60.6 __ __ __ 54.9
Carbon Costs __ __ 18.2 __ __ __ __
Decomm and waste fund __ __ __ __ __ __ __
CO2 transport and storage __ __ __ __ __ __ __
Steam Revenue __ __ __ __ __ __ 148.5
Total levelised cost 116.0 93.2 90.5 103.3 60.0 54.0 172.9
Net levelised cost __ __ __ __ __ __ 24.4
Levelised Cost Large biomass CHP. FOAK 10MW gas. CHP Small GT based CHP CCGT. CHP Energy from waste Hydro reservoir
Capital Costs 86.8 17.2 15.1 14.3 94.9 74.2
Fixed operating Coals 22.0 4.8 4.3 5.0 15.2 9.0
Variable Operating Costs 2.4 2.4 2.4 1.9 56.7 -
Fuel Costs 48.7 83.4 76.8 57.1 - -
Carbon Costs - 25.5 23.5 18.5 - -
Decomm and waste fund - - - - - -
CO2 transport and storage - - - - - -
Steam Revenue 135.0 56.6 45.2 27.2 - -
Total levelised cost 160.0 133.4 122.1 96.7 166.8 83.2
Net levelised cost 24.9 76.8 76.8 69.4 - -

1 comment:

Alexander said...

Good post, very informative.