Initial Operating Results from the First B&V Installations of CT-121TM Wet FGD Technology in North America Dave Harris Vice President, AQCS Technology

Transcription

1 Electric Utility Environmental Conference Initial Operating Results from the First B&V Installations of CT-121TM Wet FGD Technology in North America Dave Harris Vice President, AQCS Technology January 30, 2008

2 Presentation objectives Provide description of initial performance of the Killen Unit 2 CT-121 FGD system Provide updates on recently started CT-121 FGD installations PowerSouth (formerly Alabama Electric Cooperative) plant Lowman Units 1 and 2 AEP Cardinal Unit 2 EUEC(8) - 2

3 DP&L Killen Station Unit 2 EUEC(8) - 3

4 DP&L Killen Electric Generation Station Unit 2 Manchester, Ohio 635 MW net (2.8 x 10 6 acfm) Balanced draft Hot-side ESP / SCR Existing brick chimney flue (designed for 2 units) Coal delivered by barge Bottom ash and fly ash sluiced to ponds EUEC(8) - 4

5 FGD design parameters Limestone forced-oxidation FGD producing commercial gypsum (>95% gypsum, <10% H 2 O) Single module of field-wound FRP (87 ft. 6 in. diameter) 97% SO 2 removal Design coals: Parameter Design high sulfur Typical high sulfur Permit coal HHV, Btu / lb 11,080 11,080 11,649 SO 2, lb / MBtu Cl 2, lb / MBtu EUEC(8) - 5

6 CT-121 Jet Bubbling Reactor (JBR) Outlet Plenum Gas Cooler To ME Inlet Plenum Gas Cooling Pumps Reaction Tank Absorber Bleed Pumps EUEC(8) - 6

7 Site arrangement EUEC(8) - 7

8 Planned versus actual unit load during startup Planned: Gradually increasing unit generation to 100% over 7 days. Unit load as-dispatched thereafter Compliant coal (400 ppmvd inlet SO 2 ) Actual Conditions: Forced outage at Stuart Station (600 MW) Rapid increase to 100% over 36 hours Compliant coal / Nymex coal blend (600 ppm) EUEC(8) - 8

9 Planned versus actual unit load during startup Actual Load Unit Generation (MW) Hr Planned Load 0 5/30 6/1 6/3 6/5 6/7 EUEC(8) - 9

10 Planned versus actual SO 2 during startup Planned: Compliant coal (1.2 lb / MBtu) startup + 3 days Increasing higher inlet SO 2 7 days per step: 100% Nymex coal (1.6 lb / MBtu) 75% Nymex / 25% medium S (2.15 lb / MBtu) 50% Nymex / 50% medium S (2.7 lb / MBtu) 25% Nymex / 75%,medium s (3.25 lb / MBtu) 100% medium S (3.8 lb / MBtu) EUEC(8) - 10

11 Planned versus actual SO 2 during startup Actual: Rapidly decreasing blend of compliant coal and Nymex 100% Nymex within 48 hours (600 ppmvd) Parametric testing (400 and 600 ppmvd) EUEC(8) - 11

12 Planned versus actual inlet SO 2 during startup 1,600 1,400 Planned 1,200 SO2 (ppmvd) 1, Actual /28 6/4 6/11 6/18 6/25 7/2 7/9 7/16 7/23 7/30 EUEC(8) - 12

13 Initial Performance Results EUEC(8) - 13

14 Slurry density control Suspected density meter calibration error. Density (wt%) /30 6/1 6/3 6/5 6/7 6/9 6/11 EUEC(8) - 14

15 Initial FGD system performance 1 st two weeks SO2 Removal Efficiency (%) Guarantee Reduced efficiency to reduce gypsum production prior to vacuum filter startup 90 5/30 6/1 6/3 6/5 6/7 6/9 6/11 6/13 6/15 EUEC(8) - 15

16 Initial FGD system performance parametric testing period June 19 to June 27 Reaction Tank ph Sparger Submergence, in. 5.0 base, ± base, ± base, ± 2.5, base, base base 4.3 base EUEC(8) - 16

17 Initial FGD system performance parametric testing period SO2 Removal (%) Parametric testing program (SO2, ph, submergence) Guarantee 90 5/28 6/4 6/11 6/18 6/25 7/2 7/9 7/16 7/23 7/30 EUEC(8) - 17

18 Performance following parametric testing SO2 Removal (%) End of Parametric Testing Guarantee /23 7/30 8/6 8/13 8/20 8/27 9/3 9/10 EUEC(8) - 18

19 Continuing CT-121 performance Inlet SO 2 increasing to 1,000 1,500 ppmvd range ph held at constant at ±4.0 to maximize reagent utilization Sparger submergence held constant SO 2 removal efficiency varies with inlet SO 2 (ranges 95 to 98%) SO 2 removal efficiency is higher than predicted EUEC(8) - 19

20 Killen observations CT-121 FGD system has demonstrated: Stable chemistry under normal load variations >97% SO 2 removal efficiency capability Reaction tank slurry density control within ±1 wt% ph control within ±0.2 unit Produces commercial-grade gypsum EUEC(8) - 20

21 PowerSouth Lowman Units 1 and 2 EUEC(8) - 21

22 PowerSouth Lowman Units 1 and 2 New FGD (CT-121) on Units 1 and 2 Combined flow New chimney FGD Upgrade on Unit 3 Utilizing existing Units 2 and 3 FGD Limestone conversion DCS controls conversion SCR on Units 2 and 3 No bypass Doubled gypsum production Environmental bottom line 6,963 tons NO X removed 14,102 tons SO 2 removed EUEC(8) - 22

23 FGD design parameters Limestone forced-oxidation FGD Single FGD module serving Units 1 and 2 Alloy 2205 tank with alloy 255 at the bubbling zone 68-0 diameter 98% SO 2 removal Design coal: 2.5% sulfur bituminous EUEC(8) - 23

24 FGD operation Initial startup on November 27, 2007 with Unit 2 returning from outage Full load operation of Unit 2 achieved before a scheduled turbine inspection System tuning to be completed in late January; meanwhile SO 2 removal and scrubber operation support unit operations EUEC(8) - 24

25 AEP Cardinal Unit 2 EUEC(8) - 25

26 AEP Cardinal Units 1, 2, and 3 New FGD (CT-121) on Units 1, 2, and 3 Nominal 600 MW units (each) Common BOP facilities Limestone / gypsum systems located near JBRs for Units 1 and 2 Wastewater treatment AEP performing balance draft conversion and DCS retrofits on Units 1 and 2 EUEC(8) - 26

27 FGD design parameters Limestone forced-oxidation FGD Single FGD module per unit Alloy 2205 tank with alloy 255 at the bubbling zone 89-0 diameter (Unit 1 or Unit 2) 95-0 diameter (Unit 3) 98% SO 2 removal Design coal: 7.5 lb / MBtu SO 2 bituminous EUEC(8) - 27

28 FGD status Initial Unit 2 startup on December 15, 2007 with unit returning from outage Tuning and testing of the Unit 2 FGD has not yet occurred Unit 1 FGD essentially complete; awaiting tie-in outage opportunity Unit 3 FGD construction continues EUEC(8) - 28

29 Discussion EUEC(8) - 29