H 2 -BASED IRONMAKING

Transcription

1 H 2 -BASED IRONMAKING CASE: SSAB RAAHE STEEL MILL Markus Hurskainen VTT Eemeli Tsupari Forus Oy Researcher s Seminar August 23rd-24th 2017, Lappeenranta

2 Background & scope Iron&steel sector is a marked contributor to CO 2 emissions from industry Iron & steel 30% 30% VTT has studied options for significant emissions reductions in iron&steel industry in several projects and developed a feasibility evaluation tool One important alternative was missing: Iron ore can be reduced with H 2 enabling virtually CO 2 -free iron/steel Add H 2 based process to the tool 0 Reference PCC OBF w/o CCS OBF with CCS BF plus BF plus with Selexol BF plus with MEA Purchased Biocoke (PCI replacement) PtMeOH from conv. gas 10%PCC+MeOH Data: IEA Energy technology perspectives 2010 Fig: Reducing CO2 emissions from heavy industry 2012 CO2 /t 80 ########################################################## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 77 ######################################################## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 74 ###################################################### ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 71 #################################################### ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 68 ################################################## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 65 ################################################ ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 62 ################################################ ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 59 #################################################################### ## ## 56 ############################ ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ########## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 53 ## ## ###################################### ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 50 ######################################## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 47 #################################### ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 44 ################################## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 41 ############################## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 38 ############################ ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 35 ########################## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 32 ###################### ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 29 ########## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 26 ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 23 ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 20 ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 17 ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 14 ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 11 ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 8 ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## 5 ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## Sähkön hinta (sis. siirto ja netto verot), /MWh

3 STEEL PRODUCTION

4 Primary(=ore-based) steel production Blast furnace + basic oxygen furnace Iron ore / sinter / pellets Coke Direct reduced iron + electric arc furnace Iron ore / pellets Reducing gas (CO+H 2 ) coal, oil, NG ~94% of world s iron production Blast furnace (BF) Liquid iron pig iron O 2 /air ~6% of world s iron production Direct reduction (DR) Direct reduced iron sponge iron Scrap steel Basic oxygen furnace (BOF) O 2 Scrap steel Electric arc furnace (EAF) Electricity Crude steel

5 Direct reduced iron Various process alternatives

6 MIDREX The most common DRI process Reducing takes place in solid state (~ C) Tanaka (2015). Resources Trend and Use of Direct Reduced Iron in Steelmaking Process

7 DRI USING HYDROGEN?

8 Direct reduced iron with pure H 2 Hydrogen would be a good reducing agent: H 2 has been shown to react more rapidly than CO reactor size can be decreased compared to current MIDREX and HYL [1].but price and availability are a challenge Using pure H 2 is more or less in development phase still Few different processes/approaches Circored (Outotec s dual fluid bed process, H 2 from natural gas, commercial ) Hydrogen Flash Ironmaking (University of Utah, fundamental research [2]) H 2 in shaft kiln ( H 2 Midrex ) [1] da Costa et al (2014). Modelling a new low CO2 emissions hydrogen steelmaking process [2] Sohn&Mosabbad (2016). Development of a Novel Flash Ironmaking Technology with Greatly Reduced Energy Consumption and CO2 Emissions

9 Direct reduced iron using electrolytic H 2 SSAB/LKAB/Vattenfall HYBRIT project teel%20based%20on%20hydrogen.pdf

10 H 2 DRI IN RAAHE?

11 Case description H 2 DRI case: investment into a electrolytic H 2 -based direct reduced iron process Vs Reference case: refurbishment of the current process Changes in: Electricity consumption Direct CO 2 emissions Coke and PCI coal consumption LNG purchase O 2 purchase/sales CAPEX

12 Reference case SSAB Raahe steel mill *: BF-BOF route 2.6 Mt/a of hot metal, 8600 h/a 4 Mt/a CO 2, Finland s single largest point source *Some slight improvements to the process have been assumed as described in Arasto pdf

13 H 2 DRI case Electrolysers + shaft furnace H 2 direct reduction process + electric arc furnace (EAF) Storage of hydrogen is not considered (electrolysers assumed to be run 8600 h/a at full capacity) Coke gas assumed to be replaced by additional LNG in steel rolling processes and a small amount of coal is still used in the electric arc furnace No change in district/process heat revenues (large excess) or other OPEX

14 Electricity requirement for electrolytic H 2 DRI process Specific electricity requirement Source Hydrogen/electrolysis 11.5* GJ/t crude steel [1], [2] DRI GJ/t crude steel [1] EAF GJ/t crude steel [1] Hot rolling GJ/t crude steel [2] SUM 14.3 GJ/t crude steel [1] Fischedick et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 84 (2014) [2] SSAB Raahe environmental permission *value from [1] was adjusted to suit the lower scrap metal content in Raahe

15 CAPEX Reference case Blast furnace refurb. 74 /t CS [2] Basic oxygen furnace refurbishment 64 /t CS [2] Coke plant refurb. 17 /t CS [2] TOTAL =155 /t crude steel H 2 DRI case DRI process 161* /t CS [2] Electric arc furnace 184 /t CS [2] Electrolysers 650 /kw LHV [1] 236 /t CS TOTAL =581 /t crude steel [1] Fischedick et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 84 (2014) [2] Wörtler et al. (2013). Steel's Contribution to a low Carbon Europe *process using electrolytic H 2 was assumed to cost 30% less than natural gas based MIDREX Elect rolys ers 40 % DR 28 % EAF 32 %

16 Implications of adopting H 2 DRI Direct CO 2 emissions would be reduced by 87.5% Electricity consumption would increase by 11 TWh roughly the production of Hanhikivi 1 (9-10 TWh) ~1 TWh more LNG would be required for rolling ~1.4 Mt of oxygen would be produced as a by-product total demand in Finland is ~1.3 Mt/a.

17 Economics?

18 Excel tool CO2 /t 0 Reference PCC OBF w/o CCS OBF with CCS BF plus OBF w/o CCS BF plus with Selexol BF plus with MEA Purchased Biocoke (PCI replacement) PtMeOH from conv. gas 10%PCC+MeOH DRI by H Electricity (incl. transmission and net taxes), /MWh In the tool, various options to reduce emissions from Raahe steel mill are compared The tool shows the most profitable option (in terms of M /a) as a function of electricity and EUA prices In addition, profitability maps vs. reference case are also shown for each alternative LNG price 40 /MWh Coal price (PCI) 12 /MWh 83 /t Coke price/value 150 /t 18 /MWh Biocoke price 40 /MWh 326 /t C-neutral MeOH value 76 /MWh WACC 11% Economic timeframe 16 years Investment sensitivity 4% CO2 transp.&storage cost 40 /t HKA 8600 h/a Share of biocoke 50 % of PCI (enb.) Value of oxygen 70 /t Value of surplus oxygen 2 /t Sliders for sensitivity analysis NOTE: options are not equal in terms of climate benefit!

19 Default market prices/values Value Unit Comment LNG 42 /MWh Coal (for PCI or EAF) 12 /MWh Coke 150 /t Biocoke 40 /MWh C-neutral methanol 70 /MWh PtMeOH cases CO 2 transport & storage 40 /t CCS cases Value of oxygen 70 /t Value of excess oxygen 10* /t For H 2 DRI case *lower price as it is not reasonable to assume that all of the oxygen could be sold WACC 8%, timeframe 20 years

20 35 /t Additional cost (M /a) compared to reference case Default values CO2 H2 DRI + EAF (M /a) /t 10 /MWh 25 /MWh Electricity (incl. transmission and net taxes), /MWh 80 /t

21 Additional cost (M /a) compared to reference case Electrolyser CAPEX /kw 23 /t CO2 H2 DRI + EAF (M /a) /t 10 /MWh 28 /MWh Electricity (incl. transmission and net taxes), /MWh 80 /t

22 CO2 /t 80 /t Additional cost (M /a) compared to reference case Electrolyser CAPEX /kw & Greenfield BF+BOF 5 /t 10 /MWh 35 /MWh H2 DRI + EAF (M /a) Electricity (incl. transmission and net taxes), /MWh

23 CO2 /t 12 /MWh H 2 DRI Most profitable options Results with default values BF Plus with -27CCS OBF with CCS OBF w/o CCS (Selexol) BF Plus PtMeOH % PCC from conv to MeOH gases Reference Electricity (incl. transmission and net taxes), /MWh

24 CO2 /t Most profitable options Electrolyser CAPEX /kw H 2 DRI 16 /MWh OBF with CCS BF Plus with CCS OBF w/o CCS (Selexol) BF Plus Reference PtMeOH % PCC from conv to MeOH gases Electricity (incl. transmission and net taxes), /MWh

25 CO2 /t Most profitable options Electrolyser CAPEX /kw & Greenfield BF+BOF OBF with CCS H DRI OBF w/o CCS BF Plus with CCS (Selexol) BF Plus PtMeOH Reference % PCC from conv gases to MeOH 24 /MWh Electricity (incl. transmission and net taxes), /MWh

26 Conclusions & next steps DRI w/ electrolytic H 2 could enable basically CO 2 -free steel production Process seems technically feasible but economics seem a bit challenging But as CCS still faces a lot of opposition and obstacles, H 2 route might still be the way to go Next: add LanzaTech s ethanol process (gas fermentation)

27 THANKS!