This project has generated comprehensive and realistic results of feasibilities for a coal-biomass to liquids (CBTL) plant in southern West Virginia
and evaluated the sensitivity of the analyses to various anticipated scenarios and parametric uncertainties. Specifically the project has addressed economic feasibility, technical feasibility, market feasibility, and financial feasibility. In the economic feasibility study, a multi-objective siting model was developed and was then used to identify and rank the suitable facility sites. Spatial models were also developed to assess the biomass and coal feedstock availabilities and economics. Environmental impact analysis was conducted mainly to assess life cycle analysis and greenhouse gas emission. Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis were also investigated in this study. Sensitivity analyses on required selling price (RSP) and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of CBTL fuels were conducted according to feedstock availability and price, biomass to coal mix ratio, conversion rate, internal rate of return (IRR), capital cost, operational and maintenance cost. The study of siting and capacity showed that feedstock mixed ratio limited the CBTL production. The price of coal had a more dominant effect on RSP than that of biomass. Different mix ratios in the feedstock and conversion rates led to RSP ranging from $104.3 - $157.9/bbl. LCA results indicated that GHG emissions ranged from 80.62 kg CO<
sub>
2<
/sub>
eq to 101.46 kg CO2 eq/1,000 MJ of liquid fuel at various biomass to coal mix ratios and conversion rates if carbon capture and storage (CCS) was applied. Most of water and fossil energy were consumed in conversion process. Compared to petroleum-derived-liquid fuels, the reduction in GHG emissions could be between -2.7% and 16.2% with CBTL substitution. As for the technical study, three approaches of coal and biomass to liquids, direct, indirect and hybrid, were considered in the analysis. The process models including conceptual design, process modeling and process validation were developed and validated for different cases. Equipment design and capital costs were investigated on capital coast estimation and economical model validation. Material and energy balances and techno-economic analysis on base case were conducted for evaluation of projects. Also, sensitives studies of direct and indirect approaches were both used to evaluate the CBTL plant economic performance. In this study, techno-economic analysis were conducted in Aspen Process Economic Analyzer (APEA) environment for indirect, direct, and hybrid CBTL plants with CCS based on high fidelity process models developed in Aspen Plus and Excel. The process thermal efficiency ranges from 45% to 67%. The break-even oil price ranges from $86.1 to $100.6 per barrel for small scale (10000 bbl/day) CBTL plants and from $65.3 to $80.5 per barrel for large scale (50000 bbl/day) CBTL plants. Increasing biomass/coal ratio from 8/92 to 20/80 would increase the break-even oil price of indirect CBTL plant by $3/bbl and decrease the break-even oil price of direct CBTL plant by about $1/bbl. The order of carbon capture penalty is direct >
indirect >
hybrid. The order of capital investment is hybrid (with or without shale gas utilization) >
direct (without shale gas utilization) >
indirect >
direct (with shale gas utilization). The order of thermal efficiency is direct >
hybrid >
indirect. The order of break-even oil price is hybrid (without shale gas utilization) >
direct (without shale gas utilization) >
hybrid (with shale gas utilization) >
indirect >
direct (with shale gas utilization).