Mercury Monitoring Update for the Utility MACT Working Group
Mercury Control Technologies Utility MACT Working Group May 30, 2002.
-
Upload
arlene-carter -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
2
Transcript of Mercury Control Technologies Utility MACT Working Group May 30, 2002.
![Page 1: Mercury Control Technologies Utility MACT Working Group May 30, 2002.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082612/56649efc5503460f94c0f3be/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Mercury Control Technologies
Utility MACT Working Group
May 30, 2002
![Page 2: Mercury Control Technologies Utility MACT Working Group May 30, 2002.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082612/56649efc5503460f94c0f3be/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Mercury Control Overview
• Mercury emissions dependent on:– mercury content of coal– combustion and physical characteristics of unit– emission control technologies employed
![Page 3: Mercury Control Technologies Utility MACT Working Group May 30, 2002.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082612/56649efc5503460f94c0f3be/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Mercury Content of Coal
• Assumptions on the mercury content of coal are derived from EPA’s ICR data
– over 40,000 data points indicating coal type, sulfur content, and mercury content
• ICR data points grouped by IPM coal types and IPM coal supply regions
– clustering analysis was used to map the weighted average mercury content for a specific coal type-supply region
![Page 4: Mercury Control Technologies Utility MACT Working Group May 30, 2002.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082612/56649efc5503460f94c0f3be/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Mercury Content of Coal
![Page 5: Mercury Control Technologies Utility MACT Working Group May 30, 2002.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082612/56649efc5503460f94c0f3be/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Mercury Emission Modification Factors
• ICR data was used to derive EMFs
• EMF dependent on unit’s burner type, particulate control, and NOx and SO2 control
• Mercury reduction achieved is 1-EMF
• EMF varies by the type of coal
– subbituminous and lignite coal assumed to have same EMFs
![Page 6: Mercury Control Technologies Utility MACT Working Group May 30, 2002.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082612/56649efc5503460f94c0f3be/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Mercury Emission Modification Factors
![Page 7: Mercury Control Technologies Utility MACT Working Group May 30, 2002.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082612/56649efc5503460f94c0f3be/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Mercury Control Capabilities
• Two retrofit options in IPM for mercury control:
– Activated carbon injection (ACI)
– SO2/NOx retrofits
• Wet FGD + SCR
• Wet FGD + SNCR
• Mercury removal for SO2/NOx retrofits based on EMF assumptions
• Mercury removal for ACI currently at 80%
![Page 8: Mercury Control Technologies Utility MACT Working Group May 30, 2002.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082612/56649efc5503460f94c0f3be/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
ACI Costs
• ACI cost and performance were obtained from study by DOE NETL and EPA ORD
• NETL-ORD study developed capital, FOM, and VOM costs of different components of ACI retrofit– Spray cooling– Sorbent injection– Sorbent disposal– Pulse-jet fabric filter
• Separate cost functions for 26 control configurations and coal types were developed for a range of mercury removal rates
• Equations found in Appendix 5.3
![Page 9: Mercury Control Technologies Utility MACT Working Group May 30, 2002.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082612/56649efc5503460f94c0f3be/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
ACI Costs
![Page 10: Mercury Control Technologies Utility MACT Working Group May 30, 2002.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082612/56649efc5503460f94c0f3be/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
ACI Costs
• Several steps were taken to adapt these equations for use in IPM:– NETL/ORD equations reduce to function of unit
capacity and heat rate– Used average heating values of coal to convert sulfur
by weight into lbs of sulfur per mmBtu– Polynomial fits used to incorporate equations into IPM– Assumption of 80% removal used to develop
polynomial fits• Table 5.8 provides example costs for 500 MW unit with
heat rate of 10,000 Btu/kWh
![Page 11: Mercury Control Technologies Utility MACT Working Group May 30, 2002.](https://reader036.fdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082612/56649efc5503460f94c0f3be/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
ACI Costs