REPP logo banner adsolstice ad
site map
Google Search REPP WWW register comment
home
repp
energy and environment
discussion groups
calendar
gem
about us
employment
 
REPP-CREST
1612 K Street, NW
Suite 202
Washington, DC 20006
contact us
discussion groups
efficiencyefficiency hydrogenhydrogen solarsolar windwind geothermalgeothermal bioenergybioenergy hydrohydro policypolicy
Bioenergy Archive for April 2002
94 messages, last added Tue Nov 26 17:13:50 2002

[Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Research Topics



Dear Fred,
 
 you write:
Natural gas can't be easily used in an existing coal-fired plant, so just switching to gas is not an answer in itself, even if you assumed that enough gas was available to fire coal-fired units -- a bad assumption, in the US, at least.
Just a comment for interested Listers:
 
Natural gas can in fact be fired quite easy in an utility style coal plant, provided of course that gas burners have been installed.
The funny thing is that it is easier to fire full power on gas, than to cofire gas with coal on a -say-  50/50 basis.
The reason being that the water vapor in the flue gas from natl gas and the fly ash in the flue gas from coal don't like each other very well......
After a while it gets quite messy in the ESP (electrostatic fly ash filters) from condensation mixed into the fly ash. And the fly ash transportation systems may not handle the resulting drab.
 
So, full power on gas in a coal boiler with gas burners...runs like a champ.
A smaller percentage of gas cofired, say up to 20%........no sweat, the coal flue gas keeps the temperatures high enough to avoid much condensation.
A large percentage of gas cofired, say above 40%.......requires careful special design.
 
In reality, gas firing, even in a modern coal boiler at 40-44% efficiency, is unattractive since a Gas turbine plant delivers 55-60% efficiency (which is about half as much again over that coal plant).
We have used natl gas for years as a 100% back-up fuel in case coal circuit disruptions or FGD (desulphurization) plant downtime. 
 
Andries

 
-----Original Message-----
From: FMurrl@aol.com [mailto:FMurrl@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2002 3:06 PM
To: kchisholm@ca.inter.net; Andries.Weststeijn@Essent.nl; Harry.Parker@ttu.edu; Carefreeland@aol.com; anouk@shaw.ca
Cc: bioenergy@crest.org
Subject: Re: Research Topics

In a message dated 4/21/02 3:07:02 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kchisholm@ca.inter.net writes:


In addition to its fossil carbon content, it also has a significant sulphur
and ash disposal cost. This is just a wild guess on my part, but the guess
is that the price of natural gas in large quantities is very close to the
cost of coal energy plus the cost of sulphur and ash disposal.



A couple of thoughts on this:

Coal is widely available delivered to power plants in the US at prices less than $1.30/MMBtu, while gas comes in now at just over US$3.00/MMBtu with some additional cost for delivery. 12 months ago or so, gas was at $10/MMBtu. Four months ago, $2/MMBtu.

Natural gas can't be easily used in an existing coal-fired plant, so just switching to gas is not an answer in itself, even if you assumed that enough gas was available to fire coal-fired units -- a bad assumption, in the US, at least.

Disposing coal ash and controlling sulfur has not taken the total delivered price of power of coal plants above that of gas plants in situations where gas is at or above US$2.70/MCF.

On the other hand, biomass can be burned in many coal-fired plants, and even more will be usable once we can control the bad actors of many biomass fuels, such as alkalinity, phosphates and some heavy metals (in some sewage and feedlot waste).

Fred Murrell
Biomass Development
Bradenton Florida USA