Comparison of Alternate Cooling Technologies for California Power Plants Economic, Environmental and Other Tradeoffs CONSULTANT REPORT
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Merrimack Station AR-1167 CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION Comparison of Alternate Cooling Technologies for California Power Plants Economic, Environmental and Other Tradeoffs CONSULTANT REPORT February 2002 500-02-079F Gray Davis, Governor CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION Prepared By: Electric Power Research Institute Prepared For: California Energy Commission Kelly Birkinshaw PIER Program Area Lead Marwan Masri Deputy Director Technology Systems Division Robert L. Therkelsen Executive Director PIER / EPRI TECHNICAL REPORT Comparison of Alternate Cooling Technologies for California Power Plants Economic, Environmental and Other Tradeoffs This report was prepared as the result of work sponsored by the California Energy Commission. It does not necessarily represent the views of the Energy Commission, its employees or the State of California. The Energy Commission, the State of California, its employees, contractors and subcontractors make no warrant, express or implied, and assume no legal liability for the information in this report; nor does any party represent that the uses of this information will not infringe upon privately owned rights. This report has not been approved or disapproved by the California Energy Commission, nor has the California Energy Commission passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the information in this report. Comparison of Alternate Cooling Technologies for California Power Plants Economic, Environmental and Other Tradeoffs Final Report, February 2002 Cosponsor California Energy Commission 1516 9th Street Sacramento, CA 95814-5504 Project Managers Matthew S. Layton, Joseph O’Hagan EPRI Project Manager K. Zammit EPRI • 3412 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304 • PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303 • USA 800.313.3774 • 650.855.2121 • [email protected] • www.epri.com DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI). NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY COSPONSOR, THE ORGANIZATION(S) BELOW, NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM: (A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I) WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR (III) THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S CIRCUMSTANCE; OR (B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT. ORGANIZATION(S) THAT PREPARED THIS DOCUMENT John S. Maulbetsch CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION LEGAL NOTICE THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED AS A RESULT OF WORK SPONSORED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION (COMMISSION). IT DOES NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT THE VIEWS OF THE COMMISSION, ITS EMPLOYEES, OR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. THE COMMISSION, THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ITS EMPLOYEES, CONTRACTORS, AND SUBCONTRACTORS MAKE NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AND ASSUME NO LEGAL LIABILITY FOR THE INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT; NOR DOES ANY PARTY REPRESENT THAT THE USE OF THIS INFORMATION WILL NOT INFRINGE UPON PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS. THIS REPORT HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED OR DISAPPROVED BY THE COMMISSION NOR HAS THE COMMISSION PASSED UPON THE ACCURACY OR ADEQUACY OF THIS INFORMATION IN THIS REPORT. ORDERING INFORMATION Requests for copies of this report should be directed to the EPRI Orders and Conferences, 1355 Willow Way, Suite 278, Concord, CA 94520, (800) 313-3774, press 2 or internally x5379, (925) 609-9169, (925) 609-1310 (fax). Copies of this report may also be downloaded from the California Energy Commission's website: http://www.energy.ca.gov/reports/ Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. EPRI. ELECTRIFY THE WORLD is a service mark of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. Copyright © 2002 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved. CITATIONS This report was prepared by John S. Maulbetsch 90 Lloyden Drive Atherton, CA 94027 This report describes research sponsored by EPRI and California Energy Commission. The report is a corporate document that should be cited in the literature in the following manner: Comparison of Alternate Cooling Technologies for California Power Plants: Economic, Environmental, and Other Tradeoffs, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA, and California Energy Commission, Sacramento, CA: 2002. Product ID. iii ABSTRACT This study defines, explains, and documents the cost, performance, and environmental impacts of both wet and dry cooling systems. A survey of the cooling system literature is provided in an annotated bibliography and summarized in the body of the report. Conceptual designs are developed for wet and dry cooling systems as applied to a new, gas-fired, combined-cycle 500- MW plant (170 MW produced by the steam turbine) at four sites chosen to be representative of conditions in California. The initial capital costs range from $2.7 to $4.1 million for wet systems using mechanical-draft wet cooling towers with surface steam condensers and from $18 to $47 million for dry systems using air-cooled condensers. Cooling system power requirements for dry systems are four to six times those for wet systems. Dry systems, which are limited by the ambient dry bulb temperature, cannot achieve as low a turbine back pressure as wet systems, which are limited by the ambient wet bulb. Therefore, heat rate penalties and capacity limitations are incurred at some sites depending on local meteorology. A methodology is developed and illustrated that accounts for these several components of cost and performance penalties in selecting an optimized design for a specific site. A brief review is given of some advanced cooling system technologies currently in development, highlighting an evaporative condenser system with a water-conserving mode that halves the consumptive water use of a conventional wet system. In addition, current research in the power plant cooling field is reviewed with particular attention to concepts for enhancing the performance of dry systems during the peak period (the hottest hours of the year). v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The performance of this study was greatly aided and the quality of its results improved by the contributions of many people and organizations. From the cooling system vendor community, contributions were made by Ceramic Cooling Tower Corporation, Hamon Cooling Towers, GEA Power Cooling Systems, The Marley Cooling Tower Company, Graham Corporation, and Niagara Blower, Inc. From the cooling system user community, gratitude is expressed to personnel with Crockett Co- Generation, Calpine, El Dorado Energy, MassPower, and Chinese Station. Useful review comments were provided by K. Bulleit, J. Burns, R. Furnari, G. Innes, W. Micheletti, and, particularly, Prof. Detlev Kröger. Extensive and valuable editorial assistance was provided by Chris Powicki of WEE Info. Continuing discussion throughout the course of the work with Matt Layton and Joe O’Hagan of the California Energy Commission and Kent Zammit of EPRI provided invaluable guidance. These acknowledgements should not be interpreted as meaning that all of the participants are in complete accord with or endorse the results and conclusions of this study. Where differences in opinion or point of view remain, the final report reflects those of the author. vii CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................. 1-1 The Drivers.............................................................................................................................. 1-1 Cooling System Options ......................................................................................................... 1-6 Once-Through Systems ..................................................................................................... 1-6 Recirculating Wet Systems ................................................................................................ 1-6 Dry Systems ....................................................................................................................... 1-6 Hybrid Wet-Dry Systems.................................................................................................... 1-7 Tradeoffs ................................................................................................................................. 1-7 Scope of Project...................................................................................................................... 1-7 Organization of Report .......................................................................................................... 1-10 References ............................................................................................................................ 1-11 2 POWER PLANT COOLING SYSTEMS.............................................................................. 2-1 Combined-Cycle Plants .........................................................................................................