20.5.3 Data Sources
The thermal efficiency, carbon dioxide emission coefficient, total facility cost,
annual operating cost, and operating years of the supercritical and subcritical coalfired power generation facilities are taken from the International Projects for
Increasing the Efficient Use of Energy, Project Formation Research on Highefficiency Clean Coal Technology, and the Follow-up Study Concerning Development of Project Utilizing Super Critical Coal-fired Thermal Power Plant and CCS
Technologies in Bulgaria (NEDO 2014a, b). EPC costs are taken from the project
formation study for ultra-supercritical power generation project by co-firing of
imported coal in Vietnam (NEDO 2014a, b), and the selling price of electricity in
India is taken from the Survey on Indian Electric Power Business Environment
(NEDO 2014a, b). The cost of disposing of coal-fired power generation equipment
refers to “a list of specifications of each power source” (METI 2019). The annual
income of the operator is India’s per capita income, and the transmission efficiency
of India is estimated by IEA. The price of coal is taken from the BP yearbook. We
also take Toshiba’s projects in India as refereneces (Toshiba Hydroelectric Equipment (Hangzhou) Co., Ltd. 2018, Toshiba Systems Corporation 2018). The calculation assumes that Japan has provided 38 power generation facilities to India so far,
and that one-third of these will be supercritical coal-fired. Production of all 13 sets of
supercritical coal-fired power generation equipment is assumed to take place in
India. Table 20.7 lists the variables used in the calculation.
20.5.4 Benefits to Japan, China, and India from
the Introduction of Supercritical Coal-Fired Power
Generation
20.5.4.1 Benefits to India
This study assumes that the annual operating costs (excluding fuel costs) and number
of operators are constant with the introduction of 660 MW units of supercritical coalfired power generation equipment. Economic and environmental profits for India
resulting from installation are given in Table 20.8.
Our calculations show that the installation of a 660 MW supercritical coal-fired
power plant can reduce 1.43 Mt of carbon dioxide at a cost of 10.75 USD/ton.
Assuming that SO x , NO x , and dust reduction costs are 100 USD/ton, annual treatment costs for sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and dust in India would be 523,000,
505,000, and 311,000 USD, respectively. Accounting for these treatment costs, the
carbon dioxide reduction cost of introducing a supercritical coal-fired power generation facility is then 9.82 USD/ton. Introducing supercritical pressure coal-fired
power generation equipment can reduce 0.32 coal-equivalent Mt of coal per unit
per year. If the import price of coal is 75 USD/ton, then annual fuel cost can be
378
Y. Ling et al.
The thermal efficiency, carbon dioxide emission coefficient, total facility cost,
annual operating cost, and operating years of the supercritical and subcritical coalfired power generation facilities are taken from the International Projects for
Increasing the Efficient Use of Energy, Project Formation Research on Highefficiency Clean Coal Technology, and the Follow-up Study Concerning Development of Project Utilizing Super Critical Coal-fired Thermal Power Plant and CCS
Technologies in Bulgaria (NEDO 2014a, b). EPC costs are taken from the project
formation study for ultra-supercritical power generation project by co-firing of
imported coal in Vietnam (NEDO 2014a, b), and the selling price of electricity in
India is taken from the Survey on Indian Electric Power Business Environment
(NEDO 2014a, b). The cost of disposing of coal-fired power generation equipment
refers to “a list of specifications of each power source” (METI 2019). The annual
income of the operator is India’s per capita income, and the transmission efficiency
of India is estimated by IEA. The price of coal is taken from the BP yearbook. We
also take Toshiba’s projects in India as refereneces (Toshiba Hydroelectric Equipment (Hangzhou) Co., Ltd. 2018, Toshiba Systems Corporation 2018). The calculation assumes that Japan has provided 38 power generation facilities to India so far,
and that one-third of these will be supercritical coal-fired. Production of all 13 sets of
supercritical coal-fired power generation equipment is assumed to take place in
India. Table 20.7 lists the variables used in the calculation.
20.5.4 Benefits to Japan, China, and India from
the Introduction of Supercritical Coal-Fired Power
Generation
20.5.4.1 Benefits to India
This study assumes that the annual operating costs (excluding fuel costs) and number
of operators are constant with the introduction of 660 MW units of supercritical coalfired power generation equipment. Economic and environmental profits for India
resulting from installation are given in Table 20.8.
Our calculations show that the installation of a 660 MW supercritical coal-fired
power plant can reduce 1.43 Mt of carbon dioxide at a cost of 10.75 USD/ton.
Assuming that SO x , NO x , and dust reduction costs are 100 USD/ton, annual treatment costs for sulfur oxides, nitrogen oxides, and dust in India would be 523,000,
505,000, and 311,000 USD, respectively. Accounting for these treatment costs, the
carbon dioxide reduction cost of introducing a supercritical coal-fired power generation facility is then 9.82 USD/ton. Introducing supercritical pressure coal-fired
power generation equipment can reduce 0.32 coal-equivalent Mt of coal per unit
per year. If the import price of coal is 75 USD/ton, then annual fuel cost can be
378
Y. Ling et al.