Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Mercury Emission Control Utilizing the Chem-Mod Process

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Mercury Emission Control Utilizing the Chem-Mod Process"— Presentation transcript:

1 Mercury Emission Control Utilizing the Chem-Mod Process

2 Chem-Mod International LLC
INTRODUCTION

3 Company Overview Chem-Mod International LLC is an advanced clean coal company which has developed a sorbent-based, multi-pollutant control technology called The Chem-Mod™ Solution Chem-Mod International is a privately held corporation

4 Company Overview Chem-Mod International was founded in 2004 with the purpose of promoting the use of the Chem-Mod technology internationally The technology is jointly owned with Chem-Mod LLC which provides emission control in the United States and Canada 4

5 Company Overview Chem-Mod’s technology substantially reduces emissions at coal-fired power plants: Mercury Sulfur Dioxide Nitrogen Oxide Heavy Metals Light Metals Chlorides

6 The Chem-Mod™ Solution
Dual Reagent System MerSorb for Oxidation of Heavy Metal including Mercury Low maintenance, cost effective, easy to operate Reagents can be added to the boiler at three points: Before combustion During combustion After combustion Harmful emission contaminants are captured in the fly ash and permanently bound in a ceramic matrix Resulting fly ash is non-leachable Reagents are non-hazardous materials which require no special shipping or handling requirements

7 Intellectual Property
Multiple US and International Patents Issued Five Patent Families Applied for in China Case No. International Application Chinese Application, Date Claims Status 1 WO2006/006978 X, 3/8/2007 Sulfur sorbents Under prosecution 2a WO2006/101499 /9/2007 Mercury sorbents 2b WO2006/099611 /15/2007 9 WO2007/084509 /17/2007 Business methods, NOx reduction Awaiting examination 11 WO2007/092504 /6/2008 Cementitious ash; non-leaching ash; use of combustion by-products 7

8 Chem-Mod International LLC
Pilot Scale Testing

9 Pilot Scale Testing Energy and Environmental Research Center
Pilot Scale Testing was performed at the Energy and Environmental Research Center of the University of North Dakota in Grand Forks, ND, USA

10 Pilot Scale Testing Schematic Diagram of the Combustion Test Facility (CTF)

11 Pilot Plant Operating Conditions
575,000 – 700,000 Btu/hr XS Oxygen – 2.75% to 3.5% 20% Over-fire Air ESP for Particulate Control 300°F - 325°F, 360°F Other Equipment Utilized Wet Scrubber SCR Baghouse

12 Section 45 Test Results Columbian Bituminous Coal June 18, 2009 0.50%
Coal Source Test Date Chemical Treatment Rates Emission Reductions Mercury S-Sorb MerSorb Sulfur Baseline Overall NOx Columbian Bituminous Coal June 18, 2009 0.50% 0.05% 1.24% 42.78 66.58 29.71 CAPP Bituminous Coal August 4, 2009 0.785% 5.86% 58.04% 61.54% 21.37% NAPP Bituminous Coal August 5, 2009 0.10% 2.92% 69.81% 85.10% 23.93% PRB Subbituminous Coal August 6, 2009 0.03% 0.00% 48.44% 72.26% 28.49% CAPP Bituminous Coal September 28, 2009 65.80% 94.94% 20.90% CAPP Bituminous Coal September 29, 2009 3.25% 41.60% 64.22% 22.20% PRB Subbituminous Blend October 19, 2009 0.02% 45.57% 85.93% 22.42% PRB Subbituminous Blend October 20, 2009 46.87% 85.73% 20.91% PRB Subbituminous Blend October 21, 2009 48.75% 84.42% 23.72% SAPP Bituminous Coal October 27, 2009 51.37% 51.49% 22.19% CAPP Bituminous Coal November 23, 2009 67.74% 82.38 26.92% 55.20% 75.75 CAPP Bituminous Coal December 17, 2009 42.66% 66.72% 22.08% CAPP = Central Appalachian NAPP = Northern Appalachian PRB = Powder River Basin SAPP = Southern Appalachian

13 CAPP Case Study - Operating Conditions
0.614 – MMBtu/hr FEGT = 2200°F Excess Air = 18% to 20% Over-Fire Air = 20% ESP Temp = 310°F Wet Scrubber = 290°F MerSorb = 0.10% S-Sorb = 0.5%

14 CAPP Case Study - Fuel Analysis
Test Number Date AF-CTS-1067 September 28, 2009 AF-CTS-1068 Fuel Description CAPP Bituminous Feedstock Coal Refined Coal As-Fired H2O-Free Proximate Analysis, % Moisture Volatile Matter Fixed Carbon Ash 2.80 33.07 54.88 9.25 34.02 56.46 9.52 32.96 54.22 10.02 33.93 55.76 10.31 Ultimate Analysis, % Hydrogen Carbon Nitrogen Sulfur Oxygen 5.24 75.68 1.42 1.73 6.68 5.07 77.86 1.47 1.78 4.31 5.15 75.09 1.36 1.77 6.61 4.98 77.29 1.40 1.82 4.20 Heating Value, Btu/lb 13,022 13,397 12,868 13,245 Mercury, µg/g, dry Maximum Flue Gas Hg 3.5% O2 lb/TBtu 0.116 11.53 8.91 0.126 12.64 9.79

15 CAPP Case Study – Emission Reductions
Test Number Date AF-CTS-1067 September 28, 2009 AF-CTS-1068 Fuel Description CAPP Bituminous Feedstock Coal Refined Coal Corrected to 3.25% O2 Furnace Scrubber Out NOx, ppm Hg, µg/m3 305 298 1.84 241 230 0.607 Mass Emission Rates NOx, lb-NO2/hr NOx, lb-NO2/MMBtu NOx reduction, % Hg, lb/hr Hg, lb/TBtu Hg Reduction, % From Baseline From Coal 0.271 0.426 9.13 x 10-07 1.43 83.95 0.207 0.337 20.90 3.01 x 10-07 0.490 65.73 94.99

16 PRB Case Study - Operating Conditions
PRB Blend Produced at Section 45 Production Facility Treatment Rates MerSorb = 0.021% S-Sorb = 0.51% Operating Conditions FEGT = 2200°F 20% XS Air (3.5% Flue Gas O2) 20% Over-Fire Air ESP = 310°F

17 PRB Case Study – Fuel Analysis
Run Number: Date: AF-CTS-1126 April 20, 2010 AF-CTS-1127 Fuel Description: Date Sampled: Feedstock Coal March 31, 2010 Refined Coal As-Fired Moisture-Free Proximate Analysis, wt% Moisture Volatile Matter Fixed Carbon Ash 18.10 29.07 44.76 8.07 35.50 54.65 9.85 20.30 29.15 43.77 6.78 36.56 54.94 8.50 Ultimate Analysis, wt% Hydrogen Carbon Nitrogen Sulfur Oxygen 5.85 54.85 0.75 0.35 30.41 4.69 66.64 0.91 0.43 17.48 6.01 53.39 0.76 0.38 32.69 4.71 66.96 0.95 0.47 18.41 Heating Value, Btu/lb 9351 11,418 9276 11,634 Hg Content, µg/g, dry Theoretical Flue Gas Hg @ 3.5% O2, µg/dNm3 lb/TBtu 0.0549 7.932 5.871 0.0539 8.022 5.811

18 PRB Case Study – Corrected Hg Emissions

19 PRB Case Study – Test Results
Run Number: Date: AF-CTS-1126 April 20, 2010 AF-CTS-1127 Fuel Description: Feedstock Coal Refined Coal Corrected to 3.5% O2: Furnace ESP NOx, ppm SO2, ppm Hg, µg/dNm3 202 320 195 319 3.363 135 310 138 309 0.836 Mass Emission Rates: ESP Out NOx, lb NO2/hr NOx, lb NO2/MMBtu SO2, lb/hr SO2, lb/MMBtu Hg, lb/hr Hg, lb/TBtu 0.177 0.272 0.404 0.620 1.64×10-6 2.525 0.129 0.195 0.385 0.583 4.15×10-7 0.629 Emission Reductions, % NOx SO2 Hg From Coal 17.18 57.76 From Baseline 28.31 5.97 77.51 22.12 89.18

20 Pilot Scale Testing Energy & Environmental Research Center
University of North Dakota 15 North 23rd Street, Stop 9018 Grand Forks, North Dakota World Wide Web: Telephone No. 1 (701) Fax No. 1 (701) Jay Gunderson, Research Engineer

21 Chem-Mod International LLC
Full Scale Testing

22 Full Scale Test Program
ORIGINAL TEST PROGRAM – 2008 Testing to demonstrate multiple emission controls Sulfur Mercury NOx Application rates of reagents were significantly higher than current program standards

23 Full Scale Test Program
Seven Full Scale Burn Tests Conducted Over Four Year Period Five different Utility companies involved Unit sizes range from 30 to 190 MWe (net) Multiple injection points utilized Multiple reagent formulas tested Multiple application rates tested

24 Reagent Injection Options

25 Full Scale Test Equipment
Reagent Injection Points – Coal Feeders

26 Full Scale Test Equipment
S-Sorb Day Bins

27 Full Scale Test Equipment
MerSorb Storage Totes and Pump Station

28 Full Scale Test Equipment
S-Sorb Bulk Storage

29 Full Scale Test Results
Date Plant Location Plant Size / Type Coals Burned Chem-Mod Reduction from Baseline Hg (%) Sulfur NOx Oct Michigan 30 MWe Stoker Dry Scrub Mixed fuel blend (e.g. PRB, Illinois Basin) 98% 40% 21% Nov 2005 Missouri 160 MWe T-Fired ESP PRB (Powder River Basin Subbituminous) 90% 75% 10% Dec 2005 Montana 86% 48% 18% Aug 2006 Illinois 80 MWe T-Fired 87% 68% 31% Illinois Basin 76% 20% 15% Oct 2006 65% 13% Dec 2007 Maryland 135 MWe Wall-Fired NAPP (Northern Appalachian, Bituminous) 97% 14% 33% 190 MWe Cyclone Baghouse South American (Bituminous) 44% Jun 2008 91% 30%

30 Full Scale Test - Other Benefits
No issues were identified in power plant operations Particular care was taken in observation of: Pulverizers Burners Boiler Water Walls Tube Pendants Air Heater Sections ESPs Baghouses

31 Full Scale Test - Other Benefits
Improved Fly Ash characteristics Improved heat rates due to reduced fouling Potential reduced CO2 Emission due to more efficient operation and possible carbonate formation Reduced emission of heavy metals other than Hg Potential increase in SCR catalyst life due to Arsenic removal Decreased scale buildup on boiler tubes

32 Full Scale Test - Other Benefits
Buildup of slag between the boiler tubes Notice how you can see all the way back to the brick wall Notice how clean the area closest to the injection point is Boiler Tubes from PRB burning plant after furnace injection of S-Sorb at 5 to 6% for five days.

33 Full Scale Test Program – Section 45
United States IRS Code Section 45 Reduce NOx by 20% from baseline emission Reduce Hg or SO2 by 40% from baseline emission Pilot Scale Tests Successful for NOx / Hg Reduction Reagent Formula Modified Application Rates Significantly Reduced Vehicle for Initial Commercialization

34 Section 45 Full Scale Test Program
Section 45 Tests performed 2009 to present Tests Performed with Three Utilities at Four Sites Demonstrate Compatibility With Power Plant Systems “DO NO HARM” Boilers Burners Pulverizers ESP SCR Scrubber Baghouse

35 Section 45 Full Scale Test Results
Date Plant Location Plant Size / Type Coals Burned HgT Baseline (µg/m3) Chem-Mod Reduction (%) Jan 2009 Michigan 120 MWe Front Wall ESP 80% PRB, 20% CAPP 5.58 1.94 65.8% Jun 2009 Maryland 300 MWe Opposed Wall ESP, SCR CAPP 4.56 1.99 56.4% Mar 2010 Florida 440 MWe T-Fired 1.50 0.71 53.9% Oct 2010 600 MWe ESP, SCR, Wet Scrub 0.98 0.64 34.8%

36 Chem-Mod International LLC
Commercial Operation

37 Commercial Operation Section 45 Refined Coal Program - vehicle for commercialization Chem-Mod Solution licensed to four companies Refined Coal Facilities running at 8 power plants owned by three different utilities Twenty additional Refined Coal Facilites in the installation process at other sites Initial startup of facilities occurred in December 2009

38 Generating Stations with Section 45 Facilites in Operation
No of Boilers Boiler Features Fuel Emission Controls CR 4 600 MWe (3) Tangential, (1) Opposed Wall (2) CAP/NAPP/IB Blend (2) CAP ESP, SCR, Wet Scrub WY 300 MWe 4 Opposed Wall CAPP MM 2 130 MWe (2) Tangential ESP, SCR, Wet Scrub UA 1 100 MWe (1) Front Wall ESP CA 3 (2) 130 MWe Tangential (1) 225 MWe Tangential (2) ESP (1) Baghouse SC 5 (4) 120 MWe Front Wall (1) 300 MWe Tangential PRB/CAPP Blend BR Opposed Wall PRB JF Tangential TOTAL 23

39 Typical Chem-Mod Section 45 Process Flow Diagram

40 Typical 3000 ton/hr Chem-Mod Refined Coal Production Facility

41 S-Sorb Bulk Storage Silo

42 MerSorb Bulk Storage Tanks

43 Twin 1500 ton/hr Pug Mill type Mixers

44 Hg Emission From Power Plants with Section 45 Chem-Mod Refined Coal
Station Boiler Emission Controls 2010 Average Hg Emission (µg/m3) Reduction From Theoretical (%) CR Unit 1 600 MWe T-Fired ESP, SCR, Wet Scrub 0.234 97.8% CR Unit 2 600 MWe Opposed Wall 0.373 96.5% WY Unit 1 300 MWe Opposed Wall ESP, SCR, Wet Scrub 0.415 96.1% UR Unit 3 100 MWe Front Wall ESP 4.637 56.7% CA Unit 1 130 MWe T-Fired 3.322 69.0% MM Unit 1 Baghouse 0.137 98.7% Notes:1) Theoretical Hg value estimated from fleet average as fired Hg content of coal at µg/g (ppm) at 12,000 BTU as fired. When Corrected to 6% O2, this yields a standard Hg flue gas concentration of µg/m3. 2) Only units with installed Continuous Mercury Monitors appear in this table.

45 Commercial Operation Further Development
Baghouse and Scrubber equipped units approach or achieve 90% Hg reduction from theoretical emission ESP equipped units are significantly improved from baseline, but have yet to achieve 90% theoretical capture Case study under way to improve Hg capture on units which are only equipped with an ESP S-Sorb reagent formula modifications in progress Altered application rate of MerSorb and S-Sorb to increase capture effectiveness

46 Section 45 Case Study Initial Test Hg Results – PRB Coal

47 Commercial Operation To date, utilities have burned more than 8 Million Tons of Chem-Mod Refined Coal Several units have operated on 100% Chem-Mod Refined Coal since February 2010 No units have reported any operational issues associated with handling or burning Chem Mod Refined Coal

48 Chem-Mod International LLC
Conclusion

49 Chem-Mod’s Many Advantages
Effective Multi-Pollutant Control SO2, Hg, Heavy and Light Metals, and Chlorides Removes Elemental Mercury Permanently locks contaminants in ash Creates saleable fly ash Avoid Scrubbing Low capital and maintenance costs Minimum downtime Small footprint required for equipment Minimal parasitic load Low-Cost Solution Environmentally Sound Readily available chemicals that require no special handling No toxic waste created

50 Conclusion & Questions
Further information can be found at: or us at: Chem-Mod International, LLC 3745 East Overlook Drive Port Clinton, OH (office)


Download ppt "Mercury Emission Control Utilizing the Chem-Mod Process"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google