Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants
|
|
- Ralph Maxwell
- 7 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Technical Paper BR-1900 Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Authors: G.T. Bielawski M.J. Schmeida N.T. White Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group, Inc. Barberton, Ohio, U.S.A. Presented to: Power-Gen International Date: November 12-14, 2013 Location: Orlando, Florida, U.S.A.
2 Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants G.T. Bielawski, M.J. Schmeida, and N.T. White Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group, Inc., Barberton, Ohio, U.S.A. BR-1900 Presented to: Power-Gen International November 12-14, 2013 Orlando, Florida, U.S.A. Abstract Selection criteria for coal-fired utility power plant air quality control system (AQCS) equipment for SO 2, SO 3 (H 2 SO 4 ), HCl, NO x, particulate, and mercury emissions control has always been the subject of varied opinions. For example, SO 2 can be controlled by a wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) system, spray dryer absorber FGD, circulating dry scrubber FGD, or dry sorbent injection. Wet FGD was the traditional choice for high sulfur fuels with high SO 2 removal requirements, but now additional factors such as wastewater treatment and mercury control are having a major influence on the type of FGD system that is selected. This paper provides a high-level survey of the types of AQCS equipment currently in service or under construction at utility power plants in the United States (U.S.). Tables and charts are presented showing the entire population of U.S. coal-fired power plants and the types of AQCS equipment as a percentage of total installed capacity. The factors that have lead to those decisions are discussed as well as the factors that will likely affect AQCS equipment selection in the future. Environmental regulations continue to evolve. Once regulations are clarified, utilities can proceed with more certainty to upgrade their existing AQCS equipment and/or add additional equipment. Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 1
3 Regulatory Drivers The utility industry in the U.S. has been faced with a barrage of regulatory-related acronyms: CAA, CAIR, CATR, CSAPR, CAVR, BACT, PSD, MACT, MATS, NAAQS, NSR, SIP, FIP, CCR, ELG, and others. There have been numerous changes in regulatory direction, and the industry has been seeking clarity and stability for many years. This diverse set of regulatory actions related to air pollution control sparked considerable innovation in the development of technologies for utility power plants and other industries. There are several technologies available to control each pollutant. The primary pollutants of interest are sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), sulfur trioxide (SO 3 ), sulfuric acid (H 2 SO 4 ) mist, hydrogen chloride (HCl), nitrogen oxides (NO x ), particulate, and mercury. Hazardous air pollutants (HAPS), including selenium, are also of interest. Specific equipment was at one time considered to be employed to control a particular pollutant, such as installing a wet flue gas desulfurization system (wet FGD) to control SO 2. Today, wet FGD systems are considered part of an overall strategy to control particulate, mercury and other acid gases, such as HCl. In fact, the various technologies utilized in the air quality control system (AQCS) are looked at holistically to achieve the required levels of control. Thus, a utility plant owner today, trying to make the best choice for their new or upgraded AQCS, is faced with a considerable challenge. Fuel In addition to regulations, fuel is another important factor that impacts the choice of technologies used in an AQCS. The use of low sulfur Powder River Basin (PRB) coal has steadily increased (Figure 1). Initially, PRB was primarily utilized in the western states, frequently close to the mines. Today, there has been a steady penetration of PRB use across the U.S., with PRB now being an important part of the fuel mix for even eastern utilities, despite the additional transportation costs. But as PRB use has grown, so has the requirement of many utilities to assure that their fleet is flexible in the types of fuel that can be used. Each fuel source has its own set of challenges for the boiler and the AQCS. For example, SCR catalyst poisoning can occur from the phosphorus found in PRB coal and the arsenic found in some eastern coals. In addition, the impact of the current low price of natural gas, as well as alternative sources of power generation, drive the need to reduce the cost of coal-fired power generation. Terms such as fuel flexibility and opportunity fuels are now commonly used. Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 2
4 Figure 1: Electric Utility Coal Demand by Coal Type Utility Demand for Coal % of Total Demand by Coal Type (est.) Central Appalachia 16.1% 7.4% Northern Appalachia 10.7% 11.0% Illinois Basin 7.6% 11.7% Powder River Basin 43.7% 49.8% Other 21.9% 20.1% United States 100.0% 100.0% USA Utility Demand of Coal (Millions of tons) 1, Source: IHS CERA 500 Wyoming Coal Production Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 3
5 AQCS Equipment in Service SO 2 Control The widespread implementation of FGD first began in the U.S. in the 1970s. In the late 1980s, FGD technology saw widespread implementation in Europe, and then beginning in the early 2000s, in China. In the past, wet FGD was favored when the control efficiency for SO 2 was required to be 90% or greater for either high sulfur or lower sulfur coals. Today, wet FGDs are typically designed to achieve 98% or more SO 2 removal with high sulfur coal. The first dry FGD systems that were widely available in the 1980s were of the spray dryer absorber (SDA) type. These SDA systems were used for lower SO 2 removal requirements, typically 70 to 85%, on lower sulfur coals. Today, with better understanding of SDA technology and advanced control systems, some that even employ intelligent control, SDA systems can reliably achieve greater than 96% SO 2 removal on lower sulfur fuels. In addition to the SDA dry FGD, circulating fluid bed FGD systems, commonly referred to as circulating dry scrubbers (CDS) are now widely being implemented in the U.S., primarily on units less than 400 MW. CDS technology is capable of up to 96 to 98% SO 2 removal efficiency on medium and higher sulfur fuels, but a CDS dry FGD system typically uses 20% more lime than an SDA system for the same inlet SO 2 loading and SO 2 removal. Since there has been widespread adoption of PRB fuel and fuel blending, if a utility s fuel choices in the future do not include burning solely high sulfur eastern coal, dry FGD systems utilizing SDA technology will likely have a lower life cycle cost than systems utilizing CDS technology. Dry FGD systems, either SDA or CDS, also achieve high levels of removal of other acid gases and toxics. When coupled with the fabric filter, dry FGD systems also achieve very low particulate emissions. The pending Effluent Limitation Guidelines (ELG) have pushed the desire to eliminate any wastewater. This, in combination with impacts of fuel blending, has resulted in almost all new FGD selections being dry systems of either the SDA or CDS type. Utilities with existing wet FGD systems are also looking into implementing a zero liquid discharge (ZLD) approach through additional technology such as evaporation and crystallization. With the head start in the 1970 s, the U.S. was well ahead of the rest of the world in the adoption of FGD technology. By 1998, the U.S. had 99 GW of installed FGD capacity, and the rest of the world had only a combined 128 GW. 1 By 2011, many countries had surpassed the U.S. in the utilization of FGD. In the U.S. 204 GW (61%) of coal-fired generation was equipped with FGD systems and 130 GW (39%) was not controlled. This compares with other countries as shown in Figure 2. Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 4
6 Figure 2: Percent of Total Coal-fired Generating Capacity with FGD in Total Coal- Fired Capacity (GW) Total Coal- Fired Capacity with FGD (GW) Percent of Coal with FGD Germany % Turkey % China % United States % Poland % World 1, , % Source: McIlvaine Company 100% Percent of Total Coal-Fired Generating Capacity with FGD % 80% 60% 71% 66% 61% 58% 50% 40% 20% 0% Germany Turkey China United States Poland World Source: McIlvaine Company Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 5
7 In the U.S. in 2012, there was approximately 324 GW of coal-fired generation in operation. With the announced retirement of a number of coal-fired units, it is projected that 297 GW of coal-fired generation will be operating in the U.S. in Reduction in coal-fired generating capacity is the result of utilities retiring units that are no longer economically viable when faced with the retrofit costs to comply with new and future regulations, among other factors. Coal, however, will maintain an important role in electric power generation, as fuel diversity is a key for any country that seeks to maintain its competitive position as a supplier to the global economy. The population of FGD systems in the U.S. in 2012 is shown in Figure 3 by type of system. The category of dry FGD systems includes both SDA and CDS and its variants. Dry sorbent injection (DSI) is another technology that can be used when SO 2 removal efficiency requirements are low. Many new FGD systems have been announced or are already under construction, and the expected population of FGD systems in 2016 is also shown in Figure 3. Figure 3 shows that, based on current announcements, approximately 68 GW of coal-fired units in the U.S. will not have an FGD system in Note that the category CFB Boiler in Figure 3 includes those units for which the boiler is a circulating fluidized-bed boiler with no SO 2 controls other than the limestone that may be used in the CFB boiler s bed material. If an FGD or DSI system is also used with a CFB boiler, those FGD and DSI systems are included in their respective categories. Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 6
8 Figure 3: SO 2 Control Implementation U.S. Coal-Fired Electric Generating Units Greater than 50 MW SO 2 Controls in 2012 Total Units Total GW % of Total GW Wet FGD % Dry FGD % DSI % Controlled Total % CFB Boiler % None % Grand Total % *Source Platts UDI World Electric Power Producers Database, IHS CERA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, McCoy Power Reports, Babcock & Wilcox Market Research U.S. Coal-Fired Electric Generating Units Greater than 50 MW SO 2 Controls in 2016 (Projected) Total Units Total GW % of Total GW Wet FGD % Dry FGD % DSI % Controlled Total % CFB Boiler % None % Grand Total % *Source Platts UDI World Electric Power Producers Database, IHS CERA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, McCoy Power Reports, Babcock & Wilcox Market Research Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 7
9 SO 2 Control 2012 SO 2 Control 2016 Scrubbed 64.6% Scrubbed 75.8% No FGD 35.4% No FGD 24.2% Total Coal-fired 324 GW; Scrubbed 210 GW DSI is included in scrubbed total Total Coal-fired: 297 GW; Scrubbed 225 GW DSI is included in scrubbed total SO 2 Control 2012 SO 2 Control 2016 WET FGD 54.9% DRY FGD 9.3% DSI 0.4% WET FGD 59.8% DRY FGD 14.3% DSI 1.7% No FGD 35.4% No FGD 24.2% Total Scrubbed: 210 GW Total Scrubbed: 225 GW SO 2 Control 2012 SO 2 Control 2016 DRY FGD 14.4% DRY FGD 18.9% DSI 0.6% DSI 2.2% WET FGD 85.0% WET FGD 78.9% Total Scrubbed: 210 GW Total Scrubbed: 225 GW Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 8
10 Estimates for additional coal unit retirements beyond 2016 are in the range of 20 to 30 GW through Assuming that the retirements will primarily include units that do not have an existing FGD, this leaves 38 to 48 GW that will likely be adding FGD systems at some point in the future. Potential choices of technologies for these remaining units that have yet to be controlled are discussed later in this paper. In the earlier years of FGD, there was some use of advanced scrubbing technologies that produced salable byproducts, such as sulfur, sulfuric acid, or fertilizer, but the vast majority of FGD systems in operation today utilize wet limestone technology. There are also a number of wet FGD systems designed to use lime as the reagent, but they were generally installed before With the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), pending Effluent Limitation Guidelines (ELG), and solid waste disposal regulations, the factors that guide the choice of the type of FGD systems for the coal-fired capacity that has yet to be controlled will certainly be different than those that guided past decisions. In addition, many of the FGD systems in service today were installed up to 40 years ago. These existing systems were installed at a time when removal requirements were less stringent. Many of these systems have received upgrades over the years, particularly to improve reliability and reduce maintenance. Nonetheless, many of these systems will require additional modifications to meet as yet to be promulgated regulations. Complete replacement of first generation FGD systems is also a possibility, and has already happened at a few sites. Dry sorbent injection can also be used for SO 2 control, but the primary use of DSI in the past has been the control of SO 3, also referred to as sulfuric acid mist (H 2 SO 4 ), typically for units that utilize higher sulfur coals equipped with a selective catalytic reduction (SCR) system, electrostatic precipitator (ESP) and wet FGD. There is also some use of DSI for HCl control for MATS compliance. Whereas DSI for SO 3 and HCl control frequently utilizes hydrated lime as the reagent, more reactive sodium reagents (trona or sodium bicarbonate) are needed for SO 2 control, and typically a maximum of 70% SO 2 removal is targeted. To achieve 70% SO 2 removal, a stoichiometric ratio of 1.5 is typically needed for the most reactive of the sodium reagents (milled trona), and the cost of the sodium reagents is high. The sodium compounds are also soluble and have a high ph, so the resulting ash contains these soluble sodium compounds, and the high ph is known to increase the solubility of heavy metals from the ash. Thus the leaching of the soluble sodium compounds and heavy metals from the ash is an issue that must be considered in ash disposal systems. In addition to the need to reduce sulfuric acid mist to control the visible blue stack plume, SO 3 control is also utilized upstream of activated carbon injection. The SO 3 can poison activated carbon by taking up the active sites on the activated carbon that otherwise would be available to remove mercury. Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 9
11 Particulate Control Dry electrostatic precipitators (ESP) have historically been used to control particulate emissions from coal-fired boilers. Most of these precipitators were installed in the 1970s and 1980s in a cold-side configuration, as they are located downstream of the air heater. In some cases, the ESP was located upstream of the air heater in a hotside configuration, normally to address low sulfur applications that have high ash restivity at lower temperatures. Many original hot-side precipitators have since been rebuilt with modern ESP technology, converted into cold-side ESPs, or replaced by fabric filters. The implementation of hot-side precipitators is a good example of the utility industry adopting a new, seemingly better, technology before it was fully proven. Most utilities will continue operating existing ESPs as part of a MATS compliance plan. However, in some cases, the plans also include improving the ESP performance by increasing collecting area or improving migration velocity (how fast the charged ash particle moves toward the collecting surface). Additionally, many owners are performing repairs to improve mechanical reliability due to neglect in the past. Options to increase collecting area can include: 1) rebuilding the ESP with taller collecting plates, 2) adding an additional field in the direction of gas flow, and 3) adding an additional chamber perpendicular to gas flow. The options to increase migration velocity can include: 1) replacing or upgrading the ESP control system, 2) replacing and/or increasing the size of power supplies, 3) upgrading to or adding high frequency power supplies or three-phase power supplies, and 4) increasing sectionalization of the high voltage configuration. If there is an existing wet FGD system following the ESP that is to be upgraded, new high performance mist eliminators are available for the existing wet FGD system to increase fine particulate capture. If a new FGD system is being added to a boiler, it will most likely be a dry FGD. In this case, a new fabric filter will almost certainly be part of the dry FGD system. An existing ESP may then be used as a primary particulate collector, such that the majority of the flyash can still be sold for beneficial use, or the ESP can be deactivated, bypassed or dismantled. Prior to the advent of SDA technology, fabric filters (also called baghouses) saw very few applications in the utility industry. The first fabric filters that were employed were of the reverse gas type, in which the dust is dislodged from the filter bag by passing clean flue gas in reverse through the fabric filter media. Later, pulsejet fabric filters (PJFF), which were already proven on industrial applications, came to be accepted for utility applications. In a PJFF, blow pipes are located immediately above the bags through which short bursts of air are emitted to dislodge the dust from the filter media. Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 10
12 Fabric filters have also been used upstream of a wet FGD on a few higher sulfur, newer units, usually with lime DSI upstream of the fabric filter. The lime injection is used to protect the bags and other fabric filter internals from SO 3 attack. Other higher sulfur, new coal-fired boilers built within the last 10 years with a wet FGD system have adopted the wet ESP for final particulate removal and acid gas mist control. Wet ESPs follow the wet FGD system, therefore the gas passing through the wet ESP is saturated with water. The collecting surfaces of a wet ESP are washed with water to dislodge the collected particulate matter. The wet ESPs are effective; however, similar overall system efficiencies for the pollutants of interest can be obtained at a lower life cycle cost with SDA/CDS with a PJFF or DSI/PJFF/Wet FGD system configurations. Another method of simultaneous particulate and SO 2 removal employed at a few plants in the 1970s was the downflow venturi scrubber followed by an absorber tower. However, the combination of the SO 2 scrubbing byproducts plus the flyash presented erosion and scaling issues. Venturis are also size-selective in particulate removal, that is, much of the submicron fraction of the flyash passes through the scrubber. Only a few of these systems are still in service today. The population of each one of these technologies in the current utility coal-fired fleet is shown in Figure 4. Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 11
13 Figure 4: Particulate Control Equipment Implementation U.S. Coal-Fired Electric Generating Units Greater than 50 MW Particulate Controls in 2012 Total Units Total GW % of Total GW ESP % Baghouse % ESP % and Baghouse Other % (i.e., venturis) Grand Total % *Source Platts UDI World Electric Power Producers Database, IHS CERA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, McCoy Power Reports, Babcock & Wilcox Market Research U.S. Coal-Fired Electric Generating Units Greater than 50 MW Particulate Controls in 2016 (Projected) Total Units Total GW % of Total GW ESP % Baghouse % ESP % and Baghouse Other % (i.e., venturis) Grand Total % *Source Platts UDI World Electric Power Producers Database, IHS CERA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, McCoy Power Reports, Babcock & Wilcox Market Research PM Control 2012 PM Control 2016 ESP 74.1% Baghouse 20.0% ESP 68.1% Baghouse 24.9% ESP & Baghouse 2.3% Other 3.6% ESP & Baghouse 3.4% Other 3.6% Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 12
14 NO x The first technology used to lower NO x emissions is the low NO x burner, sometimes used in combination with two-stage combustion, as any further reduction typically requires the use of ammonia or urea. Each boiler manufacturer has their own version of low NO x burner technology, having gone through multiple iterations to develop the optimized designs that are available today. Further NO x reduction is achievable with two-stage combustion, where less than the total air required for complete combustion is introduced at the burners, with the balance entering through overfire air ports. Beyond combustion controls, additional NO x reduction requires the use of either selective noncatalytic reduction (SNCR) or selective catalytic reduction (SCR). With SNCR, ammonia or urea is injected into a high temperature area of the boiler (typically above 1500 F). The chemical reaction that takes place in the furnace typically provides NO x reduction of 30 to 50% from uncontrolled levels. The level of NO x reduction is frequently limited by the need to maintain low levels of ammonia in the stack gas. The SCR process can typically provide up to 92% NO x reduction of the NOx entering the SCR. In the SCR process, ammonia is added to the flue gas immediately upstream of multiple levels of catalyst in a reactor that is located between the economizer and air heater. SCR catalysts, however, are susceptible to poisoning by various elements frequently found in coal ash, most notably arsenic in some eastern coals and phosphorus in PRB coal, particularly when the PRB is fired with two-stage combustion. In some cases, fuel additives may lessen the impact of these unfavorable fuel constituents on catalyst life. The SCR process also provides some mercury removal benefits, as discussed later in this paper. The current and projected utilization of low NO x burners, SNCR, and SCR on U.S. utility boilers is shown in Figure 5. The other category below includes boilers that utilize only low NO x burners, possibly with the addition of two-stage combustion, as the only means of NO x control. Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 13
15 Figure 5: NO x Control Implementation U.S. Coal-Fired Electric Generating Units Greater than 50 MW NO x Controls in 2012 Total Units Total GW % of Total GW SCR % SNCR % Other % Grand Total % *Source Platts UDI World Electric Power Producers Database, IHS CERA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, McCoy Power Reports, Babcock & Wilcox Market Research U.S. Coal-Fired Electric Generating Units Greater than 50 MW NO x Controls in 2016 (Projected) Total Units Total GW % of Total GW SCR % SNCR % Other % Grand Total % *Source Platts UDI World Electric Power Producers Database, IHS CERA, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, McCoy Power Reports, Babcock & Wilcox Market Research SNCR 8.3% NOx Control 2012 OTHER 48.3% SNCR 9.8% NOx Control 2016 OTHER 40.6% SCR 43.4% SCR 49.6% Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 14
16 Mercury Mercury control can be achieved by a number of technologies. Activated carbon injection is one technology that is frequently used. However, mercury control can also be achieved by optimizing the other equipment in the AQCS so that as much mercury as possible is removed. Then, activated carbon injection is used only as a trim, if it is needed at all. Mercury exists in the flue gas in both elemental and oxidized forms; the concentration of oxidized mercury in the flue gas is higher when more halogen is present. There is typically a sufficient level of chlorine present in many eastern bituminous coals such that more oxidized mercury is present in the flue gas than elemental mercury. For low chlorine coals, such as PRB, chlorine or bromine is sometimes added in small amounts to oxidize the mercury. Oxidized mercury is readily absorbed in a wet FGD system; elemental mercury is also absorbed in a wet FGD system, but to a lesser degree. Oxidized mercury is also more readily captured than elemental mercury in a dry FGD system. SCR systems provide the added benefit of enhanced mercury oxidation to aid in this capture in the FGD system. Therefore, SCR systems are expected to become an integral part of mercury compliance strategy moving forward, and mercury compliance may play as much of a part in catalyst management strategy as NO x compliance. Bromine injection can also be used to promote mercury oxidation with either a wet or dry FGD system. However, this causes soluble bromine compounds to accumulate in a wet FGD system, with the soluble bromine compounds then present in any wet FGD wastewater. Sulfides in some form are sometimes injected into a wet FGD system to turn the captured oxidized and elemental mercury into highly insoluble and stable mercuric sulfides that are removed with the solids. Data is not readily available on the population of the different types of mercury control technology being employed on coal-fired utility boilers. Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 15
17 AQCS Equipment Choice Criteria: Looking to the Future Into the foreseeable future, many of the criteria that are factors in AQCS equipment selection today will continue to be the drivers. These include items such as: Proven experience for the intended application Multi-pollutant control Operational flexibility O&M considerations Proven Experience As previously discussed, there are several technologies that are suitable for SO 2, particulate, NO x, and mercury control. However, more stringent emissions regulations, as well as other considerations, may limit the viable technologies. For example, both SDA and CDS dry FGD systems have been proven successful at achieving required SO 2 reductions on PRB fuels. And while CDS has proven successful on medium and some higher sulfur coals, reagent costs have not generally made it an economical choice for higher sulfur fuel applications where wet FGD dominates. Also, although a particular technology may demonstrate effective emissions reductions on a particular fuel, consistent results are necessary to maintain its viability on a long-term basis when considering changes in fuel blends, market conditions and regulatory requirements. In addition to the fuel considerations, unit size is a factor when evaluating a technology. What works well on a smaller unit where a single reactor or module can be utilized may not translate to larger units where multiple modules would be required. There are also emerging technologies that have not been proven in a utility application. Utilities must therefore continue to carefully evaluate use of new technologies to determine if the plant is willing to accept the potential risk involved with unproven technologies. Multi-Pollutant Control Utility coal-fired plants face many challenges to remain viable, so it is critical to evaluate the plant as a whole to take advantage of synergies that exist between equipment and to improve plant efficiency. AQCS technology was previously often selected specifically for the pollutant to be controlled, such as FGD for SO 2, SCR for NO x, and ESP for particulate matter. Many of these systems are also capable of controlling other pollutants, and the capability of a particular technology to control multiple pollutants will continue to be a driver in the selection of a complete AQCS. Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 16
18 In addition to the ability of a technology to directly control other pollutants, its impact on the ability of other AQCS equipment to control its targeted pollutant(s) must also be considered. For example, a side reaction of an SCR includes the ability of the catalyst to oxidize mercury, which makes it more readily captured in an FGD system. However, an SCR also oxidizes SO 2 to SO 3, which evades capture in a wet FGD system, but not in a dry FGD system. In FGD systems, both SDA and CDS designs are well-known for their ability to control other acid gases, while wet FGD systems often require the addition of DSI systems. The particulate control devices also play an integral role in mercury and acid gas control, with fabric filters permitting much higher removals of these pollutants than ESPs alone. Fabric filters are also integral to SO 2 removal with dry FGD systems, which is a key factor when evaluating an AQCS system as a whole. The tables below illustrate other interactions between the various AQCS components and the interrelationship between pollutants. An effective multi-pollutant control strategy will carefully consider these interrelationships. Post-Combustion Emission Control Technology for Multi-Pollutants Air Emissions Wet FGD Dry FGD DSI SCR SNCR ACI ESP FF Acid gases ❶ ❶ NO x ❶ ❶ Mercury ❶ ❶ Particulate matter ❶ ❶ ❶ ❶ This technology directly captures this pollutant or, in the case of NO x, converts it into nitrogen and water 2 This technology captures a gas or an ultra-fine particulate on a readily filterable sorbent 3 This technology filters or precipitates previously injected sorbent laden with the pollutant from the flue gas Source: Adapted from IHS CERA s Post-combustion emission control technology cheat sheet Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 17
19 Air Emissions NAAQS MATS CAIR, etc Regional Haze Acid gases NO x Mercury PM Source: Adapted from IHS CERA s Post-combustion emission control technology cheat sheet Operational Flexibility Equipment selection must accommodate changing requirements with minimal new equipment or modifications in order for the facility to remain competitive. One aspect of this is fuel flexibility. Switching to lower sulfur fuels such as PRB has permitted some existing facilities to achieve compliance with the installation of less expensive systems such as low NO x burners and DSI rather than installing more expensive systems like SCR and FGD. However, fuel choice is most often driven by cost to improve plant economics. The flexibility of a system to accommodate varying fuels is therefore critical to the continued operation of the plant. In addition, emissions limits are likely to become even more stringent. One can view this as a continuation of the need for fuel flexibility. For example, if the design of a dry FGD system is for a certain emission when burning a 1.0 lb SO 2 per million Btu coal but the plant is required to burn a 1.5 lb SO 2 per million Btu coal, the emissions control system must perform to a higher standard to remove more sulfur. A utility would be best served to install a system that has the capability of meeting more stringent future emissions levels than one that is only designed for the fuel being used at the time of installation. This point is also illustrated by the use of ESPs. This technology served the industry well in the past, and many ESPs will stay in service achieving MATS requirements. However, ESPs are much more sensitive to changing flue gas conditions, flyash composition, and injected sorbents such as activated carbon and lime, than fabric filters, and are not capable of cost effectively achieving the very low emissions levels required for a new unit. These facts, coupled with the expectation of decreased particulate limits and the multi-pollutant capability of fabric filters, make fabric filters the clear path for new installations. Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 18
20 Fewer and fewer coal-fired units are dispatched at base load. As demand on coal-fired units continues to be more susceptible to cycling, primarily due to the variability of wind and other renewables, coal-fired units will be required to swing from minimum to full load on a regular basis. The ability of the selected technology to follow these load swings with minimal negative impacts will be critical. The efficiency of the equipment at reduced loads and the potential negative impacts to overall system operations must be considered. For example, SDA system turndown is approximately 5:1, and CDS system turndown is approximately 2:1 with no flue gas recirculation. With flue gas recirculation, greater turndown of CDS systems is achievable, but the range varies for each unit. With SDA systems, the conditions match the unit load; that is, pressure drop and power consumption decrease with load. To accommodate reduced load with a CDS, either modules are taken offline, or gas recirculation is utilized, requiring proportionately more power. Low flue gas temperature impacts the ability of both technologies to achieve proper drying. As another example, the design of an SCR system must account for the swings in fuel and boiler load. The primary concern is flue gas temperature as the catalyst cannot typically handle all economizer outlet temperatures throughout the load range. Changes to the convection pass design can regulate the temperature to the SCR. Also of importance with load following is the concern for ash deposition, which can be exacerbated by swings in load. This is another area where the SCR operations cannot be adjusted to accommodate these swings, but the system design can take this into account from the start by evaluating ash flow distribution throughout the load range. These examples illustrate the holistic approach to AQCS design that will continue to play a large role. O&M Considerations AQCS system selection must also carefully consider the operating and maintenance (O&M) impact of the equipment, as well as the impact on other plant systems throughout the life of the plant. The number of personnel that are required to operate and maintain new systems is a critical consideration. For SCR systems or fabric filters, the impact on staffing is relatively minor and is typically covered by existing operations. But for an FGD, this can be a significant additional cost for the plant. Wet FGD systems are certainly the workhorse of the eastern fleet of coal-fired power plants. O&M costs for wet FGD systems are higher than dry FGD systems because there are more moving parts, more wear parts, and chemistry to monitor. On the other Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 19
21 hand, wet FGD systems accommodate fuels of any sulfur level, adjust to varying boiler loads, and use an inexpensive reagent. However, concerns over waste water treatment and disposal, and the solid byproduct disposal, have some speculating about the future of this technology. Nonetheless, for plants that wish to maintain a high sulfur fuel in their fuel mix, wet FGD is still a viable alternative. Recent advances in system design to make the wet FGD system closed-loop from a water balance standpoint reduce concerns about plant waste water treatment and disposal, and disposal costs for gypsum are no more than that produced from dry FGD systems. Although inherent differences are believed to exist in the reagent required for the various dry systems, pebble lime or hydrated lime can be used for both SDA and CDS systems. For an SDA using pebble lime, a slaker is used on-site. Hydrated lime used for an SDA or CDS system can be delivered to the site or made on site from pebble lime with a hydrator system. Therefore, the choice of pebble lime or hydrated lime should be based only on consumption rates and equipment capital costs. Power and water consumption will also affect technology choice. Power consumption for wet FGD systems is typically higher than for dry FGD systems. Power consumption is comparable for the various dry FGD systems at full load, but lower for an SDA than a CDS at reduced boiler loads. The number of operators required for each system varies. Wet FGD systems require a fair amount of attention. Dry FGD systems require much less attention, with both SDA and CDS systems typically requiring one control room and one area operator, and a share of other plant resources like mechanics and IC&E technicians. However, CDS systems typically require a lesser share of mechanics and IC&E technicians than SDA systems, unless a CDS system includes an on-site hydrator system, which tends to equalize the resources needed. Maintenance costs extend beyond the number of people required to control and maintain the system. It includes the cost and frequency of repairs and wear parts, including the effects on other AQCS equipment. An example of this is the quantity and frequency of fabric filter bag changes associated with SDA and CDS systems, where there are fewer bags with a longer expected life with SDA systems. Bag life expectancies can also affect the maximum length of time between planned boiler outages. Water treatment and byproduct disposal concerns will factor into future equipment selections as effluent and disposal guidelines continue to tighten. Wet FGD systems can be made to be closed loop systems to lessen the impact of water treatment concerns. Dry FGD systems can utilize waste water from other sources, making them ideal where water usage is an issue. Byproduct disposal for all solid wastes from FGD processes is similar, but ash disposal or re-use potential can be impacted by other upstream processes. For example, activated carbon injection often results in too high of Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 20
22 a carbon content to permit flyash sale. The use of SNCR results in higher residual ammonia in the flyash than with an SCR, which could also impact flyash sales. Conclusion Coal will continue to be an important part of the landscape for U.S. utilities, and there is still a substantial portion of the coal fleet that will require AQCS equipment. AQCS equipment selection will continue to be very complex, requiring considerable analyses by utilities, architect-engineers, and system suppliers working together. The operation of a coal-fired power plant cannot be neatly segmented into packages that discretely control various air pollutants. The plant operations as a whole must be evaluated holistically to arrive at the most economical means of achieving not only air emissions requirements, but also to evaluate the impact on water and solids treatment and disposal requirements. Likewise, air, water and solids disposal regulations are not independent of each other. Clarity and stability of all regulations at the same time would allow utilities to select the most optimum system configurations for their plants. References 1. Srivastava, R., Controlling SO 2 Emissions: A Review of Technologies, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, November by Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be published, translated or reproduced in any form or by any means, or incorporated into any information retrieval system, without the written permission of the copyright holder. Permission requests should be addressed to: Marketing Communications, Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group, P.O. Box 351, Barberton, Ohio, U.S.A Or, contact us from our Web site at Disclaimer Although the information presented in this work is believed to be reliable, this work is published with the understanding that Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group, Inc. (B&W PGG) and the authors and contributors to this work are supplying general information and are not attempting to render or provide engineering or professional services. Neither B&W PGG nor any of its employees make any warranty, guarantee or representation, whether expressed or implied, with respect to the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, product, process, method or apparatus discussed in this work, including warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular or intended purpose. Neither B&W PGG nor any of its officers, directors or employees shall be liable for any losses or damages with respect to or resulting from the use of, or the inability to use, any information, product, process, method or apparatus discussed in this work. Air Quality Control System Choices for U.S. Utility Power Plants Page 21
Assessing the Changes Required by the Industrial Boiler MACT Regulations
Technical Paper MS-17 Assessing the Changes Required by the Industrial Boiler MACT Regulations Authors: A.L. LeClair L.M. McDermitt Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group, Inc. Barberton, Ohio, U.S.A
More informationMulti-pollutant control solutions for coal based power plants
Multi-pollutant control solutions for coal based power plants By Luca Mancuso and Hans Janssen Content SOx control Wet Scrubbers Open towers Dual Flow Tray Technology Semi-Dry SDA CFB Scrubbers Dust control
More informationBill Maxwell, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS (C439-01)
TO: Bill Maxwell, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, OAQPS (C439-01) FROM: Jeffrey Cole, RTI International DATE: December 2003 SUBJECT: Methodology for Estimating Cost and Emissions Impact for Coal-
More informationState of the Art (SOTA) Manual for Boilers and Process Heaters
State of the Art (SOTA) Manual for Boilers and Process Heaters Original Date: July 1997 Revision Date: February 22, 2004 State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Air Quality Permitting
More informationRoadmap Performance Target Best technology Capability
Sulfur Dioxide Control Technologies In Electric Power Plants CCTR Basic Facts File #5 Brian H. Bowen, Marty W. Irwin The Energy Center at Discovery Park Purdue University CCTR, Potter Center, 500 Central
More informationINTRODUCTION. Fact Sheet: Air Pollution Emission Control Devices for Stationary Sources
Fact Sheet: Air Pollution Emission Control Devices for Stationary Sources INTRODUCTION Stationary sources of air pollution emissions, such as power plants, steel mills, smelters, cement plants, refineries,
More informationWell Positioned for the Future
Dominion Generation Virginia City Hybrid Energy Center Well Positioned for the Future The Coal Institute July 13, 2015 Rick Boyd Manager of Fuel Origination & Operations 1 Dominion Profile Operating Segments
More informationNatural Gas Conversions of Existing Coal-Fired Boilers
White Paper MS-14 Natural Gas Conversions of Existing Coal-Fired s Authors: F.J. Binkiewicz Jr., P.E. R.J. Kleisley B.E. McMahon J.E. Monacelli D.A. Roth D.K. Wong Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group,
More informationThe Fate of Ammonia and Mercury in the Carbon Burn-Out (CBO ) Process
The Fate of Ammonia and Mercury in the Carbon Burn-Out (CBO ) Process Vincent M Giampa Progress Materials, Inc., One Progress Plaza, St. Petersburg, Florida 33701 KEYWORDS: mercury, ammonia, carbon burn-out,
More informationOutlook on Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) Technology
The IGCC Process: From Coal To Clean Electric Power Outlook on Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) Technology Testimony of Edward Lowe Gas Turbine-Combined Cycle Product Line Manager General
More informationAir Pollution Control for Industrial Boiler Systems
Air Pollution Control for Industrial Boiler Systems J.B. Kitto Babcock & Wilcox Alliance, Ohio, U.S.A. Presented to: ABMA Industrial Boiler Systems Conference November 6-7, 1996 West Palm Beach, Florida,
More informationA Comparison of Fluid-Bed Technologies for Renewable Energy Applications
Technical Paper BR-1833 A Comparison of Fluid-Bed Technologies for Renewable Energy Applications Authors: J.P. DeFusco P.A. McKenzie W.R. Stirgwolt Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group, Inc. Barberton,
More informationAppendix 5A: Natural Gas Use in Industrial Boilers
Appendix 5A: Natural Gas Use in Industrial Boilers Industrial boilers consumed 2.1 Tcf of natural gas in 2006, accounting for 36% of total natural gas in manufacturing. 1 In this appendix, we provide further
More informationCoalGen 2010 Pre-Air Heater Control of SO3 and Related Condensables
CoalGen 2010 Pre-Air Heater Control of SO3 and Related Condensables Charles A. Lockert, Breen Energy Solutions, 104 Broadway Street, Carnegie, PA 15106 Greg Filippelli, P.E. and Marty Dillon, ADA Environmental
More informationPhoenix Process Engineering, Inc. Project Experience Helping Clients Achieve MACT Compliance
Phoenix Process Engineering, Inc. Project Experience Helping Clients Achieve MACT Compliance The Boiler MACT, 40 CFR 63, Subpart DDDDD, was vacated in 2007 by the U.S Court of Appeals and the 2004 rule
More informationSite Identification No.: 197809AAO Application No.: 15030051
Project Summary for a Construction Permit Application from Midwest Generation for a Natural Gas Conversion Project for the Joliet Electric Generating Station Joliet, Illinois Site Identification No.: 197809AAO
More informationTODAY S THERMAL OXIDIZER SOLUTIONS TO MEET TOMORROW S CHALLENGES
Callidus Oxidizers for Waste Destruction TODAY S THERMAL OXIDIZER SOLUTIONS TO MEET TOMORROW S CHALLENGES Thermal oxidizer systems Catalytic oxidizer systems Callidus, experts in Thermal Oxidizers Wide
More informationThe Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) for the Mercury Air Toxics Standard (MATS)
The Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) for the Mercury Air Toxics Standard (MATS) Kevin Culligan U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Associate Division Director, Sector Policies and Programs Division
More informationSO 3 -Monitoring in Flue Gas of a Power Plant Application & Results
of a Power Plant Application & Results : Introduction - SO 3 / H 2 SO4 - The SO 3 Challenge : Spectral evaluation - Components to be monitored - Calibration : Analyzer Setup : Field Test Results : Benefits
More informationThermo Scientific Arke SO 3 System. increased sensitivity. greater value
Thermo Scientific Arke SO 3 System increased sensitivity greater value Technology That Meets the Challenge The Thermo Scientific Arke SO 3 System, with built-in SO 3 generator, uses an advanced Quantum
More informationIT3 01 Conference, Philadelphia, PA, May 14-18, 2001
IT3 01 Conference, Philadelphia, PA, May 14-18, 2001 BAGHOUSE OPTIMIZATION AT A MEDICAL WASTE INCINERATOR R. D. Montgomery Phoenix Services, Inc. John Kumm EA Engineering, Science, and Technology C. P.
More informationBubbling Fluidized Bed or Stoker Which is the Right Choice for Your Renewable Energy Project?
Technical Paper Bubbling Fluidized Bed or Stoker Which is the Right Choice for Your Renewable Energy Project? J.P. DeFusco, P.A. McKenzie and M.D. Fick Barberton, Ohio, U.S.A. Presented to: CIBO Fluid
More informationTECHNICAL PUBLICATION
TECHNICAL PUBLICATION Biomass Conversion Strategies for Existing Power Plants Evaluation Criteria and Feasibility Analysis by Curtis Schaaf Boiler Design Engineer Riley Power Inc. Kevin Toupin Director,
More informationComparison of selected plasma technologies
Comparison of selected plasma technologies PREPARED BY PLASTEP PARTNER #11 INSTITUTE OF NUCLEAR CHEMISTRY AND TECHNOLOGY Working group Dr. Andrzej Pawelec Mrs. Sylwia Witman-Zając Mrs. Agnieszka Molenda
More informationIron and Steel Manufacturing
Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook WORLD BANK GROUP Effective July 1998 Iron and Steel Manufacturing Industry Description and Practices Steel is manufactured by the chemical reduction of iron
More informationRemoving Thallium from Industrial FGD Scrubber Water with Sorbster Adsorbent Media
Case History MAR Systems Inc. Removing Thallium from Industrial FGD Scrubber Water with Sorbster Adsorbent Media Trace thallium levels in process and wastewater streams pose a human toxicity threat. Tidwell
More informationREPRESENTATIVE PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Roosevelt R. Huggins Roosevelt R. Huggins is the Regional General Manager within Black & Veatch's energy business for Energy Business Development in Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Oklahoma. He is responsible
More informationJeffery J. Williams Emerson Process Management Power & Water Solutions 200 Beta Drive Pittsburgh, PA. 15238
Author: Jeffery J. Williams Power & Water Solutions 200 Beta Drive Pittsburgh, PA. 15238 Keywords: Abstract: Efficiency, Enterprise Automation, Expert Systems, Modeling, Neural Networks, Optimization,
More informationContinuous Emissions Monitoring - Program 77
Program Description Program Overview Coal-fired power plants are in increased need of robust, accurate, and certifiable continuous emissions monitors (CEMs) for mercury, particulate matter (PM), acid gases,
More informationFACT SHEET PROPOSED MERCURY AND AIR TOXICS STANDARDS
FACT SHEET PROPOSED MERCURY AND AIR TOXICS STANDARDS ACTION On March 16, 2011, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a proposed rule that would reduce emissions of toxic air pollutants from
More informationENVIROENERGY SOLUTIONS. Presentation of APC and Wet Electrostatic Precipitation Technology
ENVIROENERGY SOLUTIONS Presentation of APC and Wet Electrostatic Precipitation Technology Agenda Introduce participants Review WESP technology Review the Applications of WESP Questions & answers People
More informationNAWTEC18-3507 COMPARISON OF ACID GAS CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES IN EFW FACILITIES
Proceedings of the 18 th Annual North American Waste-to-Energy Conference NAWTEC18 May 11-13, 2010, Orlando, Florida, USA NAWTEC18-3507 COMPARISON OF ACID GAS CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES IN EFW FACILITIES Craig
More informationMILLIKEN CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT UNIT 2 ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR PERFORMANCE TEST RESULTS BEFORE AND AFTER MODIFICATION
MILLIKEN CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT UNIT 2 ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR PERFORMANCE TEST RESULTS BEFORE AND AFTER MODIFICATION Prepared by: CONSOL Inc. Research & Development 4000 Brownsville
More informationEfficiency on a large scale CFB Steam Boilers
Efficiency on a large scale CFB Steam Boilers Circulating Fluidized Bed Steam Boiler The Circulating Fluidized Bed Steam Boiler is an offering from Bosch Thermotechnology a member of the worldwide Bosch
More informationEPA Requirements for Diesel Standby Engines In Data Centers. Bob Stelzer / CTO / Safety Power Inc. For 7x24 Fall 2014 Conference. 1.
EPA Requirements for Diesel Standby Engines In Data Centers Bob Stelzer / CTO / Safety Power Inc For 7x24 Fall 2014 Conference 1.0 Introduction In order to get the Air Emissions Permit for facilities that
More informationSULFURIC ACID MIST PERFORMANCE TEST PROTOCOL. Duke Energy Florida, Inc. Crystal River Power Plant Units 4&5 Crystal River, Citrus County, Florida
SULFURIC ACID MIST PERFORMANCE TEST PROTOCOL Duke Energy Florida, Inc. Crystal River Power Plant Units 4&5 Crystal River, Citrus County, Florida August 2013 CONTENTS SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION...3 SECTION
More informationWolverine Clean Energy Venture
Prepared for: Wolverine Power Supply Cooperative Cadillac, Michigan Supplement to CAA Section 112(g) MACT Auxiliary Boiler Amended Application No. 317-07 Wolverine Clean Energy Venture Rogers City, MI
More informationComparison of Economic and Technical Features of Fluid Bed and Spray Dryer FGD Systems
Comparison of Economic and Technical Features of Fluid Bed and Spray Dryer FGD Systems Douglas J. Roll, P.E. Plant Manager AES Greenidge, LLC Dresden, NY Dr. Harald Reissner Manager, Gas Cleaning Austrian
More informationLocking In the Benefits to Fuel Switching
Locking In the Benefits to Fuel Switching Patrick Bean CERF III - April 19, 2012 Outline Project purpose The Power Shift Fuel market update Changing power plant dispatch Coal unit environmental Regulations
More informationIt s the coal Rod Hatt
It s the coal Rod Hatt 859-873-0188 rod_hatt@coalcombustion.com Gas Coal Molecular Structure CAPP is easiest coal to use: Easy to Low NOx Little to no Slag Little to no Corrosion Easy on Operators
More informationNitrogenous Fertilizer Plants
Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook WORLD BANK GROUP Effective July 1998 Nitrogenous Fertilizer Plants Industry Description and Practices This document addresses the production of ammonia, urea,
More informationColorado Department of Public Health and Environment - Air Pollution Control Division
Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) Analysis of Control Options For Colorado Energy Nations, Golden, Colorado I. Source Description Owner/Operator: Source Type: Boiler Type(s): Colorado Energy Nations
More informationOperating Performance and Latest Technology of DeNOx Plants for Coal-Fired Boilers
192 Operating Performance and Latest Technology of DeNOx Plants for Coal-Fired Boilers Operating Performance and Latest Technology of DeNOx Plants for Coal-Fired Boilers Masayuki Hirano Yasuyoshi Kato
More informationBest Available Retrofit Technology Analysis Report
Report Best Available Retrofit Technology Analysis Report Weyerhaeuser Corporation Longview, WA Prepared for Weyerhaeuser Corporation P.O. Box 188 Longview, Washington 98632 December 2007 Revised June
More informationAir Pollution and its Control Measures
International Journal of Environmental Engineering and Management. ISSN 2231-1319, Volume 4, Number 5 (2013), pp. 445-450 Research India Publications http://www.ripublication.com/ ijeem.htm Air Pollution
More informationWaste Incineration Plants
Waste Incineration Plants Modern Technology for a better Environmental Welcome at Hafner! We Manufacture Systems for Energy Recovery from Wastes and Biomass as well as for Treatment of Hazardous Wastes.
More informationSULFUR RECOVERY UNIT. Thermal Oxidizer
SULFUR RECOVERY UNIT Thermal Oxidizer BURNERS FLARES INCINERATORS PARTS & SERVICE SULFUR RECOVERY UNIT Thermal Oxidizer Tail Gas Thermal Oxidizer designed and built to GOST-R requirements. Zeeco can meet
More informationINDUSTRIAL BOILER MACT FACTSHEET
INDUSTRIAL BOILER MACT FACTSHEET The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Industrial/Commercial/Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart DDDDD),
More informationBEST AVAILABLE RETROFIT TECHNOLOGY AT EGU FACILITIES. July 1, 2011
BEST AVAILABLE RETROFIT TECHNOLOGY AT EGU FACILITIES July 1, 2011 WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 101 South Webster Street Box 7921 Madison, Wisconsin 53707-7921 1 Statement of Purpose This document
More informationPOLLUTED EMISSION TREATMENTS FROM INCINERATOR GASES
POLLUTED EMISSION TREATMENTS FROM INCINERATOR GASES Ecole Nationale Supérieure de Chimie Avenue du Général Leclerc, Campus de Beaulieu 35700 Rennes, France Tel 33 (0)2 23 23 80 02 Fax 33 (0)2 23 23 81
More informationCoal ash utilisation over the world and in Europe
Workshop on Environmental and Health Aspects of Coal Ash Utilization International workshop 23 rd 24 th November 2005 Tel-Aviv, Israel Coal ash utilisation over the world and in Europe Hans-Joachim Feuerborn
More informationElectricity Sources. Coal Fleet
This paper is called Coal Facts because it provides factual information and data related to coal-based electricity. Most of the data are taken from independent third party sources, such as the Energy Information
More informationCATALYSTS IN COMBUSTION TECHNOLOGY AND FLUE GAS CLEANING COMBUSTION AND FUELS
CATALYSTS IN COMBUSTION TECHNOLOGY AND FLUE GAS CLEANING CATALYSIS AND CATALYSTS Catalytic reactions Catalysts influence a chemical reaction by changing its mechanism: Reaction without catalyst: A + B
More informationBasic Mercury Data & Coal Fired Power Plants
Basic Mercury Data & Coal Fired Power Plants CCTR Basic Facts File #2 Brian H. Bowen, Marty W. Irwin The Energy Center at Discovery Park Purdue University CCTR, Potter Center, 500 Central Drive West Lafayette,
More informationUniversity of Iowa Power Plant
University of Iowa Power Plant Contents Purpose... 2 History... 3 Cogeneration... 6 Boilers... 7 Environmental Impact... 10 Steam Turbine Generators... 12 Modernization... 14 Biomass Fuel Initiative...
More informationThis article provides a basic primer on an
Everything You Need to Know About NOx Controlling and minimizing pollutant emissions is critical for meeting air quality regulations. By Charles Baukal, Director of R&D, John Zinc Co. LLC, Tulsa, Okla.
More informationA Case Study on Coal to Natural Gas Fuel Switch
A Case Study on Coal to Natural Gas Fuel Switch by Brian Reinhart, P.E. Presenter Alap Shah Mark Dittus Ken Nowling Bob Slettehaugh Black & Veatch December 12, 2012 INTRODUCTION In the United States, natural
More informationSNOX flue gas treatment for boilers burning high-sulphur fuels
SNOX flue gas treatment for boilers burning high-sulphur fuels SNOX flue gas treatment for boilers burning high-sulphur fuels 1 / 18 Summary The processing of more and more high-sulphur crude oil makes
More informationBP Texas City Refinery
BP Texas City Refinery ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT FOR YEAR 2010 (Review of Y2009 Performance) Introduction Recognizing the complex nature of petroleum refining operations and to ensure that we meet our stated
More informationDescription of Thermal Oxidizers
Description of Thermal Oxidizers NESTEC, Inc. is a full service equipment supplier specializing in solutions for plant emission problems. The benefit in working with NESTEC, Inc. is we bring 25+ years
More informationWaste to Energy in Düsseldorf. for a clean city.
Waste to Energy in Düsseldorf for a clean city. Waste Management in Düsseldorf. Düsseldorf s public utilities company known as Stadtwerke Düsseldorf operates a waste to energy plant (WtE) that has been
More informationSMPS: Present Application & Future Investigation
SMPS: Present Application & Future Investigation Gary J. Grieco, PE Air Consulting Associates, LLC Morris Plains, NJ Abstract This paper discusses Switch Mode Power Supply for improved energization of
More informationIssue. September 2012
September 2012 Issue In a future world of 8.5 billion people in 2035, the Energy Information Administration s (EIA) projected 50% increase in energy consumption will require true all of the above energy
More informationA pound of coal supplies enough electricity to power ten 100-watt light bulbs for about an hour.
Did You Know? A pound of coal supplies enough electricity to power ten 100-watt light bulbs for about an hour. Nonrenewable Coal Coal Basics Coal Takes Millions of Years To Create Coal is a combustible
More informationFAC 7.1: Generators. EPA Impacts on Emergency Gensets for 2015 Installations
FAC 7.1: Generators EPA Impacts on Emergency Gensets for 2015 Installations Speaker: Bob Stelzer, CTO Safety Power Inc bob.stelzer@safetypower.ca Speaker: Randy Sadler, SME, Safety Power Inc. randy.sadler@safetypower.ca
More informationEmissions from Waste-to-Energy: A Comparison with Coal-fired Power Plants
Proceedings of IMECE 03 2003 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress & Exposition Washington, D.C., November 16-21, 2003 IMECE2003-55295 Emissions from Waste-to-Energy: A Comparison with Coal-fired
More informationOptimization Design for Sulfur Dioxide Flow Monitoring Apparatus in Thermal Power Plants Hao-wei Hu 1, a, Xue Yang 1, b and Xiao-wei Song 1, c
International Conference on Information Sciences, Machinery, Materials and Energy (ICISMME 2015) Optimization Design for Sulfur Dioxide Flow Monitoring Apparatus in Thermal Power Plants Hao-wei Hu 1, a,
More informationEnvironment Impact Assessment of Thermal Power Plant for Sustainable Development
International Journal of Environmental Engineering and Management. ISSN 2231-1319, Volume 4, Number 6 (2013), pp. 567-572 Research India Publications http://www.ripublication.com/ ijeem.htm Environment
More informationNitrogenous Fertilizer Plants
Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency Environmental Guidelines for Nitrogenous Fertilizer Plants Industry Description and Practices This document addresses the production of ammonia, urea, ammonium
More informationINCINERATION IN JAPAN
INCINERATION IN JAPAN DR. CHIAKI IZUMIKAWA Regulations in the environmental field are becoming severe and severe. At the same time, NIMBY syndrome is becoming stronger day by day. The cost of incineration
More informationA GUIDANCE NOTE ON THE BEST PRACTICABLE MEANS FOR ELECTRICITY WORKS BPM 7/1 (2014)
A GUIDANCE NOTE ON THE BEST PRACTICABLE MEANS FOR ELECTRICITY WORKS (COAL-FIRED PLANT, GAS-FIRED GAS TURBINE, AND OIL-FIRED GAS TURBINE (PEAK LOPPING PLANT)) BPM 7/1 (2014) Environmental Protection Department
More informationWet or Dry? Which Scrubber Type will Reign Supreme?
Wet or Dry? Which Scrubber Type will Reign Supreme? New IMO regulations for the restriction of shipping vessel air pollution are on the very near horizon. These new regulations will require significant
More informationERCOT Analysis of the Impacts of the Clean Power Plan Final Rule Update
ERCOT Analysis of the Impacts of the Clean Power Plan Final Rule Update ERCOT Public October 16, 2015 ERCOT Analysis of the Impacts of the Clean Power Plan Final Rule Update In August 2015, the U.S. Environmental
More informationOptimal Power Plant Integration of Post-Combustion CO 2 Capture. Dr. Tobias Jockenhövel Dr. Rüdiger Schneider Michael Sandell Lars Schlüter
Optimal Power Plant Integration of Post-Combustion CO 2 Capture Dr. Tobias Jockenhövel Dr. Rüdiger Schneider Michael Sandell Lars Schlüter Siemens AG, Energy Sector Germany POWER-GEN Europe 2009 Cologne,
More informationTECHNICAL BRIEFING SHEET NRG Texas Power LLC Permit No.: HAP-14
TECHNICAL BRIEFING SHEET NRG Texas Power LLC Permit No.: HAP-14 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: NRG Texas Power LLC (NRG Texas) has requested a Hazardous Air Pollutant (HAP) Major Source [FCAA 112(g)] Permit HAP-14,
More informationThe Use of Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) Systems in Stationary Natural Gas Engines. The Engine Manufacturers Association August 2004
www.enginemanufacturers.org Two North LaSalle Street Suite 2200 Chicago, Illinois 60602 Tel: 312/827-8700 Fax: 312/827-8737 The Use of Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) Systems in Stationary Natural Gas
More informationA Review of Biomass Boiler Technologies. Fernando Preto CanmetENERGY, Natural Resources Canada
A Review of Biomass Boiler Technologies Fernando Preto CanmetENERGY, Natural Resources Canada Agricultural Biomass for Combustion Energy April 14 2011, Guelph About CanmetENERGY CanmetENERGY is a science
More informationImpact of Coal Plant Retirements on the Capacity and Energy Market in PJM
Impact of Coal Plant Retirements on the Capacity and Energy Market in PJM by Neil Copeland Debashis Bose Black & Veatch INTRODUCTION It has recently been observed that U.S. electricity providers are announcing
More informationDevelopment and Operating Results of Low SO2 to SO3 Conversion Rate Catalyst for DeNOx Application
Development and Operating Results of Low SO2 to SO3 Conversion Rate Catalyst for DeNOx Application By Isato Morita Yoshinori Nagai Dr. Yasuyoshi Kato Babcock-Hitachi K.K., Japan Dr.Howard N. Franklin Hitachi
More informationHow To Reduce Coal Power Plant Emissions
Emissions from coal fired power Generation Workshop on IEA High Efficiency, Low Emissions Coal Technology Roadmap Date: 29 November 2011 Location: New Delhi Osamu Ito Energy Technology Policy Division
More informationThe Single Absorption Scrubbing Sulfuric Acid Process
The Single Absorption Scrubbing Sulfuric Acid Process Leonard J. Friedman, Samantha J. Friedman Acid Engineering & Consulting, Inc. 17770 Deauville Lane, 33496, USA LJ.Friedman@Acideng.com Keywords: Sulfuric
More informationGUIDELINES FOR PROCESSING AND USING REFUSE DERIVED FUEL (RDF) IN CEMENT INDUSTRY
1 GUIDELINES FOR PROCESSING AND USING REFUSE DERIVED FUEL (RDF) IN CEMENT INDUSTRY August, 2012 Government of Pakistan Pakistan Environmental Protection Agency (Ministry of Climate Change) Islamabad 2
More informationAirborne Particulate Matter: Pollution Prevention and Control
Airborne Particulate Matter: Pollution Prevention and Control Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook WORLD BANK GROUP Effective July 1998 Airborne particulate matter (PM) emissions can be minimized
More informationRemoving Heavy Metals from Wastewater
Removing Heavy Metals from Wastewater Engineering Research Center Report David M. Ayres Allen P. Davis Paul M. Gietka August 1994 1 2 Removing Heavy Metals From Wastewater Introduction This manual provides
More informationCT556 Boiler Efficiency Modern Controls for Package Boiler Operations
CT556 Boiler Efficiency Modern Controls for Package Boiler Operations Marc L Hunter Vice President 25 & 26 March 2015 PUBLIC www.rockwellautomation.com www.us.endress.com 2 Agenda Boiler Operations Overview
More informationEnhanced power and heat generation from biomass and municipal waste. Torsten Strand. Siemens Power Generation Industrial Applications
Enhanced power and heat generation from biomass and municipal waste Torsten Strand Siemens Power Generation Industrial Applications Enhanced power and heat generation from biomass and municipal waste Torsten
More informationTRIAL CHEMICAL CLEANING OF FOULED APH BASKETS
TRIAL CHEMICAL CLEANING OF FOULED APH BASKETS Dr. Abhay Kumar Sahay, AGM(CC OS) Bijay Manjul, AGM( Operation) Kahalgaon Boiler has three inputs Steam generator 1. WATER 2. COAL 3. AIR Burner Air preheater
More informationFERTIGATION. Lawrence J. Schwankl
production FERTIGATION Lawrence J. Schwankl F ertigation is the injection of fertilizers through the irrigation system. Microirrigation systems are well-suited to fertigation because of their frequency
More informationDevelopments and trends shaping the future for Waste-to- Energy technology suppliers
Developments and trends shaping the future for Waste-to- Energy technology suppliers 21 st October 2015 Copenhagen, Denmark Edmund Fleck ESWET President 2 Contents 1. About ESWET 2. Introduction 3. Modern
More informationph Value of Common Household Items and the Environmental Effects ph on Water; http://www.epa.gov/acidrain/education/site_students/phscale.
ACID RAIN What is acid rain? Acid rain is a broad term that is often used to describe several forms of acid deposition. Wet deposition is when rain, snow, fog, or mist contains high amounts of sulfuric
More informationOur Environmental Protection Plan RECYCLING CAPABILITIES AND ENVIRONMENTAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Our Environmental Protection Plan RECYCLING CAPABILITIES AND ENVIRONMENTAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS WHO WE ARE Since day one, East Penn has made safe recycling an everyday practice. East Penn opened its doors as
More informationCOMBUSTION. By: Michael Biarnes. In collaboration with: Bill Freed and Jason Esteves. E Instruments International LLC - www.e-inst.
COMBUSTION By: Michael Biarnes In collaboration with: Bill Freed and Jason Esteves E Instruments International LLC - www.e-inst.com 1 Combustion What is Combustion? Combustion takes place when fuel, most
More informationHEAT RECOVERY OPTIONS FOR DRYERS AND OXIDIZERS
HEAT RECOVERY OPTIONS FOR DRYERS AND OXIDIZERS William K. Scullion, Application Engineering Leader, MEGTEC Systems, De Pere, WI Introduction Competitive pressures continuously motivate us to examine our
More informationOTCQB: MEEC. Corporate Presentation
OTCQB: MEEC Corporate Presentation FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS This presentation contains forward-looking statements as defined in Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, that are
More informationMATS and Boiler Rules
em feature MATS and Boiler Rules Practical, Data-Driven Standards by Gina McCarthy Gina McCarthy is Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The U.S. Environmental
More informationINCINERATION PLANTS. Hazardous waste incineration Wastewater incineration Sewage sludge incineration. A Bayer and LANXESS company
INCINERATION PLANTS Hazardous waste incineration Wastewater incineration Sewage sludge incineration A Bayer and LANXESS company HAZARDOUS WASTE INCINERATION Introduction INTRODUCTION The thermal treatment
More informationDeNOx, DeSOx, and CO2 Removal Technology for Power Plant
DeNO x, DeSO x, and CO 2 Removal Technology for Power Plant 174 DeNOx, DeSOx, and CO2 Removal Technology for Power Plant Hirofumi Kikkawa, Dr. Eng. Hiroshi Ishizaka Keiichiro Kai Takanori Nakamoto OVERVIEW:
More informationCross-State Air Pollution Rule Reducing Air Pollution Protecting Public Health
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Reducing Air Pollution Protecting Public Health U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air and Radiation 2 Overview of Action EPA finalized the Cross-State Air Pollution
More informationBoiler NOx Emissions and Energy Efficiency
Boiler NOx Emissions and Energy Efficiency Prepared For: Boiler Operators and Facility Managers Prepared By: 100 Montgomery Street, Suite 600 San Francisco, CA 94104 AGENDA Introduction Boiler NOx Formation
More information