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 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 Company Overview

4 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 Company Overview

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

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 ClaimsStatus 1WO2006/ X, 3/8/2007 Sulfur sorbents Under prosecution 2aWO2006/ /9/2007 Mercury sorbents Under prosecution 2bWO2006/ /15/2007 Mercury sorbents Under prosecution 9WO2007/ /17/2007 Business methods, NOx reduction Awaiting examination 11WO2007/ /6/2008 Cementitious ash; non-leaching ash; use of combustion by-products Awaiting examination

8 Chem-Mod International LLC Pilot Scale Testing

9 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 Coal Source Test Date Chemical Treatment Rates Emission Reductions Mercury S-SorbMerSorbSulfurBaselineOverallNOx Columbian Bituminous Coal June 18, %0.05%1.24% CAPP Bituminous Coal August 4, %0.05%5.86%58.04%61.54%21.37% NAPP Bituminous Coal August 5, %0.10%2.92%69.81%85.10%23.93% PRB Subbituminous Coal August 6, %0.03%0.00%48.44%72.26%28.49% CAPP Bituminous Coal September 28, %0.10%0.00%65.80%94.94%20.90% CAPP Bituminous Coal September 29, %0.10%3.25%41.60%64.22%22.20% PRB Subbituminous Blend October 19, %0.02%0.00%45.57%85.93%22.42% PRB Subbituminous Blend October 20, %0.02%0.00%46.87%85.73%20.91% PRB Subbituminous Blend October 21, %0.02%0.00%48.75%84.42%23.72% SAPP Bituminous Coal October 27, %0.10%0.00%51.37%51.49%22.19% CAPP Bituminous Coal November 23, %0.10%0.00%67.74% % CAPP Bituminous Coal November 23, %0.05%0.00%55.20% % CAPP Bituminous Coal December 17, %0.10%0.00%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 – 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 September 28, 2009 Fuel Description CAPP Bituminous Feedstock Coal CAPP Bituminous Refined Coal As-FiredH 2 O-FreeAs-FiredH 2 O-Free Proximate Analysis, % Moisture Volatile Matter Fixed Carbon Ash – – Ultimate Analysis, % Hydrogen Carbon Nitrogen Sulfur Oxygen Ash Heating Value, Btu/lb13,02213,39712,86813,245 Mercury, µg/g, dry Maximum Flue Gas Hg µg/dNm 3.5% O 2 lb/TBtu

15 CAPP Case Study – Emission Reductions Test Number Date AF-CTS-1067 September 28, 2009 AF-CTS-1068 September 28, 2009 Fuel Description CAPP Bituminous Feedstock Coal CAPP Bituminous Refined Coal Corrected to 3.25% O 2 FurnaceScrubber OutFurnaceScrubber Out NO x, ppm Hg, µg/m Mass Emission Rates Scrubber Out NO x, lb-NO 2 /hr NO x, lb-NO 2 /MMBtu NO x reduction, % Hg, lb/hr Hg, lb/TBtu Hg Reduction, % From Baseline From Coal – 9.13 x – x

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 O 2 ) –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 April 20, 2010 Fuel Description: Date Sampled: Feedstock Coal March 31, 2010 Refined Coal March 31, 2010 As-FiredMoisture-FreeAs-FiredMoisture-Free Proximate Analysis, wt% Moisture Volatile Matter Fixed Carbon Ash – – Ultimate Analysis, wt% Hydrogen Carbon Nitrogen Sulfur Oxygen Ash Heating Value, Btu/lb , ,634 Hg Content, µg/g, dry Theoretical Flue Gas 3.5% O 2, µg/dNm 3 lb/TBtu

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 April 20, 2010 Fuel Description: Feedstock CoalRefined Coal Corrected to 3.5% O 2 : FurnaceESPFurnaceESP NO x, ppm SO 2, ppm Hg, µg/dNm Mass Emission Rates: ESP Out NO x, lb NO 2 /hr NO x, lb NO 2 /MMBtu SO 2, lb/hr SO 2, lb/MMBtu Hg, lb/hr Hg, lb/TBtu × × Emission Reductions, % NO x SO 2 Hg From Coal – From Baseline From Coal –

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 2004 – 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 DatePlant LocationPlant Size / TypeCoals Burned Chem-Mod Reduction from Baseline Hg (%) Sulfur (%) NOx (%) Oct 2005 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 160 MWe T-Fired ESP PRB86%48%18% Aug 2006 Illinois 80 MWe T-Fired ESP PRB87%68%31% Illinois Basin76%20%15% Oct 2006 Missouri 160 MWe T-Fired ESP PRB98%65%13% Dec 2007 Maryland 135 MWe Wall-Fired ESP NAPP (Northern Appalachian, Bituminous) 97%14%33% Dec 2007 Maryland 190 MWe Cyclone Baghouse South American (Bituminous) 98%44%20% Jun 2008 Montana 160 MWe T-Fired ESP PRB91%30%20%

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 CO 2 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 tubesNotice 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 SO 2 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 DatePlant Location Plant Size / Type Coals Burned HgT Baseline ( µ g/m 3 ) Chem-Mod ( µ g/m 3 ) Reduction (%) Jan 2009Michigan 120 MWe Front Wall ESP 80% PRB, 20% CAPP % Jun 2009Maryland 300 MWe Opposed Wall ESP, SCR CAPP % Mar 2010Florida 440 MWe T-Fired ESP CAPP % Oct 2010Maryland 600 MWe Opposed Wall ESP, SCR, Wet Scrub CAPP %

36 Chem-Mod International LLC Commercial Operation

37 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 Station No of Boilers Boiler FeaturesFuelEmission Controls CR4 600 MWe (3) Tangential, (1) Opposed Wall (2) CAP/NAPP/IB Blend (2) CAP ESP, SCR, Wet Scrub WY4 300 MWe 4 Opposed Wall CAPPESP, SCR, Wet Scrub MM2 130 MWe (2) Tangential CAPPESP, SCR, Wet Scrub UA1 100 MWe (1) Front Wall CAPPESP CA3 (2) 130 MWe Tangential (1) 225 MWe Tangential CAPP (2) ESP (1) Baghouse SC5 (4) 120 MWe Front Wall (1) 300 MWe Tangential PRB/CAPP BlendESP BR2 600 MWe Opposed Wall PRBESP JF2 130 MWe Tangential CAPPESP TOTAL23

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 StationBoilerEmission Controls 2010 Average Hg Emission ( µ g/m 3 ) Reduction From Theoretical (%) CR Unit 1600 MWe T-FiredESP, SCR, Wet Scrub % CR Unit 2600 MWe Opposed WallESP, SCR, Wet Scrub % WY Unit 1300 MWe Opposed WallESP, SCR, Wet Scrub % UR Unit 3100 MWe Front WallESP % CA Unit 1130 MWe T-FiredESP % MM Unit 1130 MWe T-FiredBaghouse % 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% O 2, 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-Mods Many Advantages 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 Effective Multi-Pollutant Control Low-Cost Solution Readily available chemicals that require no special handling No toxic waste created Environmentally Sound

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