Proposal:
Enviro-Plant Project
Joint Venture Investment:
Air Pollution Control Equipment for two 700 MW
Fossil Fuel Power Plants in Nizhniy Novgorod
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Company Information
3. Control Strategy
1. Introduction
2. Electrostatic Precipitator
3. Dry Flue Gas Desulfurization
4. Natural Gas Reburners
4. Cost Considerations
5. Economic Adjustments
1. Russian Company Ventures
2. Workers
6. Future Pollution Control Strategies
1. Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle
2. Continuous Emissions Monitoring Equipment
7. Appendices
1. Russian Companies
2. Financial Outlook, 15 years
1. Introduction
Owner:
*(Seller)
Contractor:
Nizhniy Novgorod Power Authority
Rensselaer Engineers & Constructors (REC)
Site Location:
The plant site is located in Nizhniy Novgorod, Russia;
adjacent to the junction of the Volga and Oka Rivers, southsoutheast of Moscow.
Project Aims:
The primary goal of this venture is to retrofit two separate 700 MW power
systems with the appropriate air pollution control technology, in order to reduce
the NOx, SOx, CO2 and particulate emissions leaving the stacks of the plants.
These control systems must maximize environmental reduction of pollutants and
be economically feasible; which must therefore include purchasing much of the
equipment from Russian corporations. A subsequent benefit of such company
interactions will be opportunities for increased investments for America in Russia,
which will inevitably stimulate economic growth and increase the pollution control
technological knowledge of both parties.
Due to the rapidly increasing pace of technological advancement in the
energy sector, it is important to realize the trends of tomorrow and try to
incorporate more environmentally advanced controls today. A five-year
projection included in this proposal takes into account several ecology friendly,
energy efficient strategies with various cost projections, for the Seller to evaluate
and consider for future plant alterations.
2. Company Information
Rensselaer Engineers and Constructors was founded in 1980 and focused
on the overall design of power plants in the United States. The company has
focused mainly on pollution reduction while retaining the system efficiency as
much as possible. Due to the dwindling market in the United States, where most
energy users already have a local power supply, future business ventures have
focused on developing countries such as Egypt, India and Indonesia. A major
difference between these developing countries and the former Soviet Union, is
that the overall powering systems are already intact in Russia, but in need of
serious upgrading. This presents a specialized problem for contractors, since
there are more restrictions on the type of control equipment used.
Due to this new global outlook, REC has been focusing on developing
control systems to handle the large power systems typical of Russian plants for
several years in order to gain a foothold in foreign markets. This will present an
opportunity to promote environmental considerations in heavily polluting Russian
industries, such as the power industry.
Supervisor of Foreign Negotiations:
Elmar Altwicker
Co-Directors of Design and Relations: Katie Dusett
Kenneth Huff
3. Control Strategy Proposition
1. Introduction:
Today’s air pollution control technology is fairly standard for power plants
of tremendous size, as are the Nizhniy Novgorod systems. Electrostatic
precipitators, flue gas desulfurization unit, and catalytic reduction are usually
implemented for the removal of particulates, SO2, and NOx. Some other
technologies available for alternate coal systems are gasification, liquidation, and
fuel cells to name a few. However, these systems are not yet equipped with the
means to handle such a heavy load as is often found with Russian power plants.
Projections for completion by the year 2000 are not definite, and it seems most
beneficial for completion by 3 years, to implement the more steadfast methods.
Some other systems would include a long design period, and may not even turn
out to be compatible with the requirements of a large generating system. The
systems presented below will give the required emissions, and future control
strategies will be heavily based on the research and development of new
systems.
2. Electrostatic Precipitator (ESP):
Efficient removal of particulates from stack emissions is achievable with
an Electrostatic Precipitator (ESP). An ESP is a device that uses electric forces
to separate particles from the gas. The particles are charged, then attracting to
plates arranged in parallel within the precipitator. Three parameters that have a
direct affect on the efficiency of the system are the gas flow rate, area of the
plates, and the drift velocity of the particles. Drift velocities are heavily affected
by the characteristics of the electric field, including the voltage and currency
maintained in the precipitator. These must be controlled in order to keep
efficiencies high. Another challenge in retaining maximum performance is the
electronic charge distribution, which must be kept uniform in order to ensure that
the electric field is fully utilized by the particles.
The collected particles are removed from the charged plates by means of
an electronic rapper, which is time to strike the plates, causing them to vibrate
and knock the particle cake into collection bags, or hoppers. The collected
flyash, or wastes, are usually landfilled, although portions of it can be sold to
cement manufacturers. Some other drawbacks include corrosion, which occurs
when acidic particles such as sulfur are left on the plates. This can be partially
avoided by heating the ESP during start-up and shutdown.
Overall, the ESP is desirable because of the low-pressure drops, range of
particle size collection, simple maintenance, and ability to handle high gas flow
rates. Collection efficiencies are on the order of 99.9%, which makes the ESP a
very reliable pollution control addition.
Calculations
Desired Reductions
Uncontrolled Particulates
Percent Reduction
99.9%
Resultant Particulates
40494 lb/hr
40 lb/hr
Total cost for ESP = $6,850,000 (each)
3. Dry Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD):
Removal of SO2 can be readily directly after the Cyclone and ESP rid the
gas of most of the particulates. Dry FGD use the injection of dry limestone into
the boiler, creating CaO. The particles are removed in the ESP along with the
particulates as described above. For high collection efficiency in an FGD, excess
reagent must be added in order to collect the SO2 properly. This increases the
cost of the system, as well as the load on the ESP. Although it is more common
to utilize the wet limestone desulfurization system on a plant, there are several
disadvantages with respect to the waste created. In the case of wet systems, the
wet limestone slurry can often be too moist to be landfilled, requiring a pond
slurry on-site for disposal. Although the dry FGD system also has a large waste
stream that necessitates landfilling, the installation costs are at less than that of
wet systems. The waste can also be separated and sold for cement and other
forms of manufacturing, however the process is quite expensive to add on. Flue
gas reheating and wet chimney restructuring are not required with the dryer
system. Other system controls, such as the catalytic oxidation process, are
limited with such a large plant system, and restricted to cases where only a low
amount of by-products are captured.
Efficiencies of the dry FGD system are very high with today’s
technologies, a conservative estimate being 90%. This system is also proven
compatible with the ESP, which will allow high efficiency of removal.
Calculations
Uncontrolled SO2
Percent Reduction
Resultant SO2
26542 lb/hr
90%
2654.2 lb/hr
Total cost for dry FGD = $3,200,000 (each)
4. Natural Gas Reburning (NGR):
For the reduction of NOx in the exiting gas, a natural gas reburning system
has been integrated. Although conventionally a selective catalytic reduction
(SCR) technique is applied, the costs associated with the catalyst is usually quite
high, making the retrofit very expensive. NGR has a much-reduced economic
impact, operating at 50-75% of SCR costs, while still maintaining reductions of
over 60%. Natural gas is injected in area above where the coal is burned in the
reactor. This creates a very fuel rich zone, where chemical reactions reduce the
NOx immediately. Adding an N-rich substance near the final boiler reaction stage
can further reduce NOx particles. Usually, the gas is only injected at 5-10% of
the total power, and is only ancillary to coal as a fuel.
Some major incentives for including natural gas in a Russian power
system are:
1) The extremely low emissions associated with natural gas as opposed
to coal.
2) Natural gas reserves in Russia are considerable, and would be
relatively cheap and easily accessible.
3) As a future prospect, natural gas is highly regarded both for it’s clean
emissions and amount of reserves available.
Calculations
Uncontrolled NOx
Percent Reduction
Resultant NOx
5497 lb/hr
60%
2218.8 lb/hr
Total cost for natural gas reburning = $1,540,000 (each)
4. Cost Considerations
An especially difficult aspect of this project, is the lack of government
involvement in Russia’s environmental regulation. The lack of regulations helps
facilitate the environmental exploitation that currently takes place with industry
today. Any power company from the US could take advantage of the political
situation and attempt to achieve economic success at the expense of the
environment. REC intends to place heavy emphasis on the pollution control
systems retrofitted on the NNPA stacks, which are usually much more expensive
than the original plant equipment. It is the responsibility of outside investors to
help promote environmental causes, for the problems in Russia will inevitable
become ours in the future. With the aid of other foreign investors such as but not
limited to the World Bank, this project can be funded and completed. Other
private investors will be attracted to the research and design outlooks presented
in the proposal, which will further offset much of the cost.
5. Economic Investments
1. Russian Company Ventures
Much of the equipment can be manufactured from companies already
located in Russia. This is essential to project completion, since the shipping and
tariff costs are extremely high from the United States to Russia. Components for
transformers, industrial switches, and other electrical parts can be purchased
through Electroizolit, turbines and related parts can be found through Electrosila,
and several other companies listed in Appendix A can be approached for these
parts. This stimulates Russian industrial growth and creates jobs, while reducing
the capital costs for the control systems.
Other forms of economic investments include the subsidizing of pollution
control research, with combined efforts from local engineering firms. Benefits of
this venture are vast, for the NNPA power plant will have very new technologies
at their fingertips, jobs will be created, and knowledge accumulated, which will
improve local economy. REC requires only 15% of profits for the technology
developed for five years after development, however this profit is not included in
the financial analysis. Some project considerations are outlined by REC in
“Future Pollution Control Strategies.”
2. Workers
In order to ensure that this venture benefits the people and economy of
Russia, REC has come up with several investment programs for the local
economy, including a system of payment for the workers, including the coal
miners. If the economy shows increased activity and growth, and this one surely
will, the drawbacks of non-payment will decline, and a more aggressive business
collecting policy will aid in this. Further ensuring the success of the program
would be the Russian government, and the implementation of the proper tax
reformation. Although REC does not plan to become politically active, it will be
supportive of tax rehabilitation programs in Russia.
Lack of payment is considered one of the most prominent problems for
Russian economy, and in the worst case is 50%. This simply raises the electric
costs for those still paying bills. The addition of pollution control strategies on the
plant itself will not affect the prices, due to the investments of several groups.
However, by requiring other plants to meet the same control measures, and
creating pollution taxes would be the ultimate solution to the heavy pollution
problems in the area.
6. Future Pollution Control Strategies
1. Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)
The IGCC system turns coal into a gas, then removes pollutants such as
particulates, SO2, NOx, etc. This makes the final emission gas much cleaner
than if the coal was burned as a solid. The solid coal is placed in an oxygenblown gasifier, which turns it into a gas. Standardized control equipment, such
as the FGD, requires cooler gas for operation, which decreases the overall
system efficiency, causing increased operations costs.
In the IGCC system, a hot gas control system is utilized to clean up the
gas without first cooling it. The cleanup system consists of a moving bed of
oxidizing material, which removes both SO2 and particulates. Clean gas then
exits the control system, enters a combustion turbine, and creates electricity.
The exhaust from the first turbine is recovered, and enters a second steam
turbine. This dual turbine system greatly increase the efficiency of the overall
power process. Reductions for several pollutants are shown in the table below.
Pollutant
Percent
Reduction
CO2
35%
NOx
90%
SO2 and particulates 99%
More economic benefits are the products of the process, which include
sulfur, and solidified slag, which are both marketable. This income can help
offset the overall installation costs of such a system. Other benefits include the
capability of handling power demand fluctuations and a range of coal types.
Paramount to NNPA is the installation flexibility, for the IGCC can be integrated
onto existing plants relatively easily. The IGCC system is also compatible with
fuel cell system, another power alternative making great technological strides
today. Although fuel cell development has not reached power plant load
capacities yet, much capital has been invested in researching this alternative, as
it has incredibly low emissions.
Overall, the IGCC system, and several other related systems would
greatly benefit the world of power generation, and research and development in
such blossoming technologies is worthwhile and necessary to continue lowering
emissions. Due to the level of research and development in Russia, it seems
likely that with initial boosts, they will continue to pave a technological path of
their own. REC considers investing in this type of research is an aggressive,
intelligent choice for this project, and plans to implement and heavily promote it.
2. Continuous Emissions Monitoring Equipment (CEM)
A continuous monitoring system is a necessity for pollution control. To
minimize human error in sampling, as well as greatly enhance the knowledge
NNPA will have about the day to day variances in plant operation as power loads
change, and other problems arise, is a necessity. Due to the wide variety of
individualized monitoring systems, it is the view of REC that this system is
developed by Russian engineers and scientists as part of the research and
development funded through the plants’ profits, and the profits of other joint
venture companies. The system will help identify problem areas and point out
any significant pollution violations.
Appendix A
Russian Power Manufacturers
Company
Products
Elektrosila
Water-wheel generators, turbogenerators, AC/DC electrical machines,
low-voltage electrical machines
Steam, hydraulic, and gas turbines
Steam and waste-heat boilers, vessels,
heat exchangers
High-pressure valves
Boilers, pipelines
Leningrad Metal Works
Podolskiy Machine-Building Plant
Chekhovenergomash
Belgorod Power Plant Engineering
Works
Barnaul Boiler Plant
Uralelektrotyazhmash
Uralgidromash
Rotor Blade Plant
Steam and hot-water boilers
High-voltage equipment, electrical
machines, transformers, semiconductor
converters
Axial-flow, mixed-flow, centrifugal, and
immersion pumps
Rotor blades for steam and gas
turbines