47 resultados para 660101 Coal-electricity
Resumo:
The Niger Coal Society (Societé Nigérienne de Charbon – SONICHAR) produces electricity for local consumption in Tefereyre, 75 km north-west from Agadez, Niger. The coal combustion residuals production is about 150,000 tons per year. In order to reduce this environmental burden and to valorize these by-products, a study focusing on their physical and chemical features as well as on the mechanical resistance of compressed brick has been undertaken. Physical characterization of coal slag, chemical and lixiviation tests have been carried out, assessing the material main parameters, verifying the presence of hazardous composites and elements and comparing the obtained results with the findings of an in-deep literary review. Cement powder has been chosen as stabilizing agent as a preliminary option. Four different dosages have been tested and bricks have been produced with a hand-operated press. Compressive strength has been tested at different days of curing. Results show remarkable uniaxial compressive strengths (UCS) for all the mixes after cure, ranging from 4MPa up to more than 20MPa for the highest stabilization ratio. UCS higher than 5MPa have been observed for 20% and 30% cement stabilization ratios after only 7 days of cure, reaching respectively about 11MPa and 13MPa after 45 days. In conclusion obtained bricks show good mechanical resistance and low weight. No health threat has been detected from the obtained sample. Study developments are oriented towards the feasibility of the utilization of low-cost, locally available stabilization means, notably clay and cohesive soils, and on thermal properties assessment.
Resumo:
Torrefaction based co-firing in a pulverized coal boiler has been proposed for large percentage of biomass co-firing. A 220 MWe pulverized coal-power plant is simulated using Aspen Plus for full understanding the impacts of an additional torrefaction unit on the efficiency of the whole power plant, the studied process includes biomass drying, biomass torrefaction, mill systems, biomass/coal devolatilization and combustion, heat exchanges and power generation. Palm kernel shells (PKS) were torrefied at same residence time but 4 different temperatures, to prepare 4 torrefied biomasses with different degrees of torrefaction. During biomass torrefaction processes, the mass loss properties and released gaseous components have been studied. In addition, process simulations at varying torrefaction degrees and biomass co-firing ratios have been carried out to understand the properties of CO2 emission and electricity efficiency in the studied torrefaction based co-firing power plant. According to the experimental results, the mole fractions of CO 2 and CO account for 69-91% and 4-27% in torrefied gases. The predicted results also showed that the electrical efficiency reduced when increasing either torrefaction temperature or substitution ratio of biomass. A deep torrefaction may not be recommended, because the power saved from biomass grinding is less than the heat consumed by the extra torrefaction process, depending on the heat sources.
Resumo:
Displacement of fossil fuel-based power through biomass co-firing could reduce the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from fossil fuels. In this study, data-intensive techno-economic models were developed to evaluate different co-firing technologies as well as the configurations of these technologies. The models were developed to study 60 different scenarios involving various biomass feedstocks (wood chips, wheat straw, and forest residues) co-fired either with coal in a 500 MW subcritical pulverized coal (PC) plant or with natural gas in a 500 MW natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) plant to determine their technical potential and costs, as well as to determine environmental benefits. The results obtained reveal that the fully paid-off coal-fired power plant co-fired with forest residues is the most attractive option, having levelized costs of electricity (LCOE) of $53.12–$54.50/MW h and CO2 abatement costs of $27.41–$31.15/tCO2. When whole forest chips are co-fired with coal in a fully paid-off plant, the LCOE and CO2 abatement costs range from $54.68 to $56.41/MW h and $35.60 to $41.78/tCO2, respectively. The LCOE and CO2 abatement costs for straw range from $54.62 to $57.35/MW h and $35.07 to $38.48/tCO2, respectively.
Resumo:
In this paper NOx emissions modelling for real-time operation and control of a 200 MWe coal-fired power generation plant is studied. Three model types are compared. For the first model the fundamentals governing the NOx formation mechanisms and a system identification technique are used to develop a grey-box model. Then a linear AutoRegressive model with eXogenous inputs (ARX) model and a non-linear ARX model (NARX) are built. Operation plant data is used for modelling and validation. Model cross-validation tests show that the developed grey-box model is able to consistently produce better overall long-term prediction performance than the other two models.
Performance of a Sequential Reactive Barrier for Bioremediation of Coal Tar Contaminated Groundwater
Resumo:
Following a thorough site investigation, a biological Sequential Reactive Barrier (SEREBAR), designed to remove Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) and BTEX compounds, was installed at a Former Manufactured Gas Plant (FMGP) site. The novel design of the barrier comprises, in series, an interceptor and six reactive chambers. The first four chambers (2 nonaerated-2 aerated) were filled with sand to encourage microbial colonization. Sorbant Granular Activated Carbon (GAC) was present in the final two chambers in order to remove any recalcitrant compounds. The SEREBAR has been in continuous operation for 2 years at different operational flow rates (ranging from 320 L/d to 4000 L/d, with corresponding residence times in each chamber of 19 days and 1.5 days, respectively). Under low flow rate conditions (320-520 L/d) the majority of contaminant removal (>93%) occurred biotically within the interceptor and the aerated chambers. Under high flow rates (1000-4000 L/d) and following the installation of a new interceptor to prevent passive aeration, the majority of contaminant removal (>80%) again occurred biotically within the aerated chambers. The sorption zone (GAC) proved to be an effective polishing step, removing any remaining contaminants to acceptable concentrations before discharge down-gradient of the SEREBAR (overall removals >95%).
Resumo:
Chemical Engineering Journal, 124 (2006) 103.
Resumo:
The interactions of coal with CO2 at pressures of up to 30 bar concerning mechanisms of diffusion, the strength of interactions, and the irreversibility of uptake for the permanent disposal of CO2 into coal fields have been studied. Differential scanning calorimetry was used to investigate coal/CO2 interactions for North Dakota, Wyodak, Illinois No. 6, and Pittsburgh No. 8 coals. It was found that the first interactions of CO2 with coals led to strongly bound carbon dioxide on coal. Energy values attributed to the irreversible storage capacity for CO2 on coals were determined. The lowest irreversible sorption energy was found for North Dakota coal (0.44 J/g), and the highest value was for the Illinois No. 6 coal (8.93 J/g). The effect of high-pressure CO2 on the macromolecular structure of coal was also studied by means of differential scanning calorimetry. It was found that the temperature of the second-order phase transition of Wyodak coal decreases with an increase in CO2 pressure significantly, indicating that high-pressure CO2 diffuses through the coal matrix, causes significant plasticization effects, and changes the macromolecular structure of the Wyodak coal. Desorption characteristics of CO2 from the Pittsburgh No. 8 coal were studied by temperature-programmed desorption mass spectrometry. It was found that CO2 desorption from the coal is an activated process and follows a first-order kinetic model. The activation energy for CO2 desorption from the Pittsburgh No. 8 coal increased with the preadsorbed CO2 pressure, indicating that CO2 binds more strongly and demands more energy to desorb from the Pittsburgh No. 8 coal at higher pressures.