Woody Biomass Co-Firing in Pulverized Coal Fired Boilers

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luther M. Raatikka
Keyword(s):  
Heat Input ◽  
Heat Rate ◽  
Woody Biomass ◽  
Electrical Energy ◽  
Pulverized Coal ◽  
Wood Pellets ◽  
Capital Costs ◽  
Auxiliary Power ◽  
Boiler Efficiency ◽  
Fuel Costs

With legislation requiring utilities to produce a significant fraction of their electrical energy with renewable fuel supplies, it is anticipated that cofiring biomass in large utility boilers will become increasingly popular. Boilers that are designed to burn pulverized coal (PC) can typically burn woody biomass at up to 5% of the rated heat input. An 800 MW PC-fired unit could, therefore, produce up to 40 MW of renewable energy with biomass co-firing. The generating plant may experience a net capacity de-rating whenever biomass is co-fired. This potential reduction in net plant output may be attributed to reduced boiler efficiency and additional auxiliary power requirements. Biomass fuel handling related auxiliary power requirements are dependent upon the form in which biomass is delivered to the plant. Preparation of woody biomass for co-firing in large PC-fired boilers is typically performed onsite with hammer mills or by off-site processing. For an 800 MW unit, onsite fuel size reduction will usually result in an incremental increase in auxiliary power of 3–4 MW, whereas the use of pre-processed biomass such as wood pellets will require a minimal increase in parasitic load. However, delivered fuel costs for raw wood requiring onsite processing are at least 60% lower than that of densified biomass on a heat input basis. This paper includes an economic comparison of co-firing woody biomass that is processed onsite by direct injection vs. co-firing densified woody biomass by co-milling in a large PC-fired boiler. This comparison will consider delivered fuel costs, capital costs, CO2 emissions and impacts upon boiler efficiency and net heat rate.

100% Test Burn of Torrefied Wood Pellets at a Full-Scale Pulverized Coal Fired Utility Steam Generator

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rod Hatt ◽  
David A. T. Rodgers ◽  
Randy Curtis
Keyword(s):  
Electrostatic Precipitator ◽  
Combustion Efficiency ◽  
Pulverized Coal ◽  
Powder River Basin ◽  
Wood Production ◽  
Wood Pellets ◽  
Front End ◽  
Combustion Emissions ◽  
And Storage ◽  
Test Fuel

Portland General Electric’s (PGE) Boardman plant is a nominal 600 megawatt (MW) coal fired unit that burns sub-bituminous Powder River Basin (PRB) coal from Wyoming. This paper will cover the experience and results of PGE’s Boardman plant operating on 100% torrefied wood (TW) pellets at 255 MW consuming almost 5000 tons of pellets. Results were positive and include suitable handing after inclement weathering for months. Pulverizers were able to handle the TW pellets with adjustments, resulting in near 100% combustion efficiency. Particulates were controlled with an electrostatic precipitator (ESP). Topics investigated include torrefied wood production, fuel handling and storage on the front end of the test. Fuel handling, pulverization, combustion, emissions, and ESP performance were monitored during the test and are reported here. Several one mill tests were conducted prior to the 100% test to evaluate and improve mill performance. This test showed that a pulverized coal (PC) boiler can operate on 100% TW fuel with minimal operational changes.

Fixed Duct Burner Heat Input Approach for Combined Cycle Power Plant ASME PTC 46 Performance Testing

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas K. Kirkpatrick ◽  
Bernard J. Pastorik ◽  
Wesley M. Newland
Keyword(s):  
Heat Input ◽  
Heat Rate ◽  
Combined Cycle ◽  
Test Method ◽  
Plant Performance ◽  
Ambient Conditions ◽  
Power Test ◽  
Alternative Approach ◽  
Combined Cycle Plant ◽  
Duct Burner

Since its publication in 1996, ASME PTC 46 Performance Test Code on Overall Plant Performance has established itself as the premier test code for conducting overall plant performance within the power industry, especially for combined cycle power plants. The current text within ASME PTC 46, which is currently under revision by the ASME PTC 46 Committee, describes in Section 5.3.4 Specified Measured Net Power that “This test is conducted for a combined cycle power plant with duct firing or other form of power augmentation, such as steam or water injection when used for that purpose.” Further, the only example problem for a combined cycle with duct firing is provided in Appendix B of the code utilizing the Specified Measured Net Power Test Method. Though the text and example are correctly presented within the code, it resulted in misinterpretation within the industry that the only correct way to test a combined cycle plant with duct firing was to conduct a Specified Measured Net Power Test. Though the Specified Measured Net Power Test Method is an acceptable and accurate method in determining the performance of a combined cycle plant with duct firing in operation, it lends to being inflexible to the weather conditions for the plant operation. When the weather is too cold, the exhaust energy from the combustion turbines may be at such a magnitude as to not allow the duct burners to be fired due to limitations within the heat recovery steam generator and steam turbine systems to take the load, thus limiting the plant testing to take place when the weather is warm enough to allow the plant to be operated with duct firing. The opposite condition can also exist where the ambient conditions are too hot so that the duct burner capacity is unable to achieve the specified measured net power allowing the test to be conducted. The limitations stated herein are the reasons that an alternative approach with more flexibility is necessary. This paper will present an alternative approach referred to as the Fixed Duct Burner Heat Input Test Method to testing combined cycle plants where the duct burner heat input (Fuel Flow) is held fixed while the plant net power and heat rate are left to float with ambient conditions. Corrections for both power and heat rate will be developed for ambient conditions per ASME PTC 46 guidelines. This paper will further present a comparison between the Specified Measured Net Power Test Method and the Fixed Duct Burner Heat Input Test Method in the areas of the flexibility of the methods for various ambient conditions, and the method uncertainty associated with each method’s ability to correct to reference conditions.

Nuclear, Solar and Desalination Working Together Symbiotically

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamad Alwashmi ◽  
Jay F. Kunze
Keyword(s):  
Drinking Water ◽  
Greenhouse Gases ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Energy Systems ◽  
Capital Costs ◽  
The World ◽  
Working Together ◽  
Fuel Costs ◽  
Emission Of Greenhouse Gases

In many parts of the world, drinking water is not available except through desalination. Most of these areas have an abundance of solar energy, with few cloudy periods. Energy is required for desalination and for producing electricity. Traditionally this energy has been supplied by fossil fuels. However, even in those parts of the world that have abundant fossil fuels, using them for these purposes is being discouraged for two reasons: 1) the emission of greenhouse gases from combustion of fossil fuels, and 2) the higher value of fossil fuels when used for transportation. Nuclear power and solar power are both proposed as replacements for fossil fuels in these locations. Both of these energy systems have high capital costs, and negligible fuel costs (zero for solar) Instead of these two primary forms of energy competing, this paper shows how they can compliment each other, especially where a significant part of the electricity demand is used for desalination.

scholarly journals Analisa Keseimbangan Energi PLTU Takalar (Punagaya) Unit 2 Berdasarkan Perubahan Beban

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 257
Author(s):  
Makmur Saini ◽  
Nur Hamzah ◽  
Devi Prasetyo Utomo
Keyword(s):  
Energy Balance ◽  
Energy Loss ◽  
Heat Rate ◽  
Electrical Energy ◽  
Optimal Operation ◽  
Steam Power ◽  
Energy Balance Method ◽  
Full Load ◽  
Operation Pattern ◽  
Operating Target

This study aims to calculate the efficiency and heat rate of the unit 2 PLTU Takalar (Punagaya) system with the energy balance calculation method, calculate the NPHR value of PLTU Takalar (Punagaya) unit 2 when the unit is operating, and also to determine the energy loss from the conversion energy results at PLTU Takalar (Punagaya) unit 2 when the unit operates. The PLTU's Net Plant Heat Rate (NPHR) value is a very important role as an indicator of the performance of a steam power plant. The real-time NPHR value calculation using the energy balance method can be used as an evaluation material to control the operation pattern of the generator in order to obtain optimal operation. The method used in this research is to collect direct and indirect data to calculate the energy balance and NPHR of PLTU Takalar (Punagaya) unit 2 during the reliability run period. The calculations carried out include the calculation of the energy balance in the boiler, the energy balance in the steam cycle, the balance of electrical energy, the efficiency of the PLTU and NPHR systems. Based on the results of calculations that have been carried out the efficiency and NPHR of PLTU Takalar (Punagaya) unit 2 is the best during the reliability run of 32.76% and 2801.93 kcal / kWh at full load conditions with an energy loss value of 220.60 MW. The performance of PLTU Takalar (Punagaya) unit 2 during the reliability run is very good where the unit operates continuously and the NPHR value when full load fulfills the contract warranty and the maximum operating target. 

Results of INPRO in the Area of Economics

2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Depisch ◽  
Juergen Kupitz
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Operating Cost ◽  
Production Costs ◽  
Electricity Production ◽  
Capital Costs ◽  
Environmental Objectives ◽  
Important Message ◽  
Unit Energy ◽  
Sres Scenarios ◽  
Fuel Costs

In the area of Economics four selected scenarios from the SRES study have been analysed within the International Project on Innovative Reactors and Fuel Cycles (INPRO) of the IAEA. They cover a range of possible future developments characterized by different degrees of globalisation and by different relative priorities on economic and environmental objectives. Four “aggressive nuclear” variants, one for each of the four selected SRES scenarios, are also analyzed. Provided innovative nuclear energy systems (INS) are economically competitive, they can play a major role in meeting future energy needs. Future economic competitiveness will depend on the speed of continuing cost reductions achieved by nuclear energy relative to competing technologies. The paper presents specific capital costs and electricity production costs at which nuclear energy is competitive in 2050 in the four selected SRES scenarios, and estimates corresponding costs for nuclear energy in the four aggressive nuclear variants. The important message is that for nuclear technology to gain and grow market share it must benefit sufficiently from learning to keep it competitive with competing energy technologies. For such learning to take place experience must be gained and to gain such experience the energy from INS must be cost competitive with energy from alternative sources and INS must represent an attractive investment to compete successfully in the capital market place. In total, INPRO defined two basic principles, five user requirements and several criteria in this area, which are presented in the full paper. To be cost competitive all component costs, e.g., capital costs, operating and maintenance costs, fuel costs, must be considered and managed to keep the total unit energy cost competitive. Limits on fuel costs in turn imply limits on the capital and operating cost of fuel cycle facilities, including mines, fuel processing and enrichment, fuel reprocessing and the decommissioning and long term management of the wastes from these facilities. Cost competitiveness of energy from INS will contribute to investor confidence, i.e. to the attractiveness of investing in INS, as will a competitive rate of return.

A Model for the Economic Evaluation of Plantation Biomass Production for Co-firing with Coal in Electricity Production

1999 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 106-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Nienow ◽  
Kevin T. McNamara ◽  
Andrew R. Gillespie ◽  
Paul V. Preckel
Keyword(s):  
Power Plant ◽  
Biomass Production ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Woody Biomass ◽  
Electricity Production ◽  
Variable Cost ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Capital Costs ◽  
Fuel Blending ◽  
Ash Disposal

Public and private electric utilities are considering co-firing biomass with coal as a strategy to reduce the levels of CO2, SO2 and NOx in stack emissions, as well as a response to state legislative mandates requiring the use of renewable fuels. This analysis examines the conditions under which biomass co-firing is economically feasible for utilities and woody biomass producers and describes additional environmental and community benefits associated with biomass use. This paper presents a case study of woody biomass production and co-firing at the Northern Indiana Public Service Company (NIPSCO) Michigan City Unit No. 12 power plant. A Salix (willow) production budget was created to assess the feasibility of plantation tree production to supply biomass to the utility for fuel blending. A GAMS model was developed to examine the optimal co-firing blend of coal and biomass while minimizing variable cost, including the cost of ash disposal and material procurement costs. The model is constrained by the levels of pollution produced. This model is used to examine situations where coal is the primary fuel and waste wood, willow trees, or both are available for fuel blending. Capital costs for co-firing were estimated outside of the model and are incorporated into the total cost of co-firing. The results indicate that under certain circumstances it is cost-effective for the power plant to co-fire biomass. Sensitivity analysis is used to test biomass price sensitivity and explores the effects of potential public policies on co-firing.

Detailed in-furnace measurements in a pulverized coal-fired furnace with combined woody biomass co-firing and air staging

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (9) ◽  
pp. 4517-4527 ◽  
Author(s):  
Minsung Choi ◽  
Xinzhuo Li ◽  
Kibeom Kim ◽  
Yonmo Sung ◽  
Gyungmin Choi
Keyword(s):  
Woody Biomass ◽  
Pulverized Coal ◽  
Air Staging

scholarly journals Generation of electrical energy at gas pipelines using a transported natural gas technological pressure drop

2019 ◽  
Vol 139 ◽  
pp. 01089
Author(s):  
M.D. Buranov ◽  
A.A. Mukolyants ◽  
I.V. Sotnikova
Keyword(s):  
High Pressure ◽  
Pressure Drop ◽  
Natural Gas ◽  
Electrical Energy ◽  
Gas Pipelines ◽  
Gas Distribution ◽  
Capital Costs ◽  
Specific Capital

The article discusses the possibilities of generating electricity without burning fuel by expanding high-pressure natural gas at gas distribution stations with lower specific capital costs. It is proposed to reduce the pressure of the transported natural gas using expander-generator units instead of traditional throttle devices.

Co-firing high ratio of woody biomass with coal in a 150-MW class pulverized coal boiler: Properties of the initial deposits and their effect on tube corrosion

Fuel ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 208 ◽  
pp. 714-721 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dedy Eka Priyanto ◽  
Yasuo Matsunaga ◽  
Shunichiro Ueno ◽  
Hidekazu Kasai ◽  
Tatsurou Tanoue ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Woody Biomass ◽  
High Ratio ◽  
Pulverized Coal ◽  
Pulverized Coal Boiler ◽  
Coal Boiler
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document