1.

Introduction

Power generation is a significant source of pollutants that can impair human health and the environment, including sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxide (NOx), and mercury. The Clean Air Act has been successful in reducing these emissions, but power generation still contributes approximately 70% of SO2, 20% of NOx, and 40% of mercury emissions into the environment. These emissions from power generation contribute to a range of human health and environmental problems, and interstate and long range transport of emissions continue to play significant roles in these problems. Cap and trade programs benefit human health and the environment and address transport by significantly reducing emissions over large geographic areas. When emitted into the atmosphere, SO2 and NOx react with water and other compounds to form various acidic compounds, fine particles, and ozone. These pollutants can remain in the air for days or even years. Prevailing winds can transport them hundreds of miles, often across state and national borders. The pollutants then fall to the earth in either a wet form (rain, snow, and fog) or a dry form (gases and particles). Impacts include impaired air quality; damage to public health; degradation of visibility; acidification of lakes and streams; harm to sensitive forest and coastal ecosystems; and accelerated decay of materials, paints, and cultural artifacts such as buildings, statues, and sculptures nationwide. Mercury, a product of coal-burning, can be deposited locally or it can be transported through the atmosphere for days to years before being deposited into water bodies. Once mercury reaches lakes, rivers and oceans, it can be transformed into methylmercury and bioaccumulate in the food chain. This results in predatory fish and fish-eating birds and mammals accumulating mercury concentrations millions of times higher than what is found in the water or air.

2.
2.1

Power Plant Impacts Human Health

SO2 and NOx emissions form fine particles in the atmosphere. Particulate matter is the term used for a mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air; fine particles (PM2.5) are smaller than 2.5 microns (millionths of a meter) in diameter. Power plants emit particles directly into the air, but their major contribution to particulate matter air pollution is emissions of SO2 and NOx, which are converted into mammals and birds are also exposed in this manner. The primary symptoms of mercury exposure are neurological, including brain damage, lack of motor skills, impaired cognitive skills, and difficulty speaking and hearing. These effects are most pronounced on those exposed during the development of the nervous system, such as fetuses and young children. Forty-four states have advisories warning the public to restrict eating fish from their lakes, rivers, streams, and/or coastal waters due to methylmercury. EPA estimates that 12 million acres of lakes and 475,000 miles of rivers, as well as the coastal waters of 11 states, are impaired by mercury.
2.2

Environment

SO2 and NOx emissions react in the atmosphere to form acidic compounds that harm lakes and streams. When the acidic compounds that are formed as a result of SO2 and NOx emissions are deposited to the earths surface, they can acidify lakes and streams. Acidification (low pH) and the chemical changes that result, including higher aluminum levels, make it difficult for some fish and other aquatic species to survive, grow, and reproduce. In the 1980s, acid rain was found to be the dominant cause of acidification in 75% of acidic lakes and 50% of acidic streams. Acid deposition harms forests and trees. Acid rain can harm forest ecosystems by directly damaging plant tissues. One of the best examples of direct damage
2

involves the leaching of nutrients from the needles of red spruce, which reduces the ability of the trees to tolerate cold winter temperatures and has contributed to the decline of red spruce forests throughout the mountains of the eastern U.S. In other cases, acid rain can combine with other pollutants, such as ozone, to weaken trees and make them vulnerable to threats such as sulfate and nitrate particles in the atmosphere. These particles make up a large proportion of the fine particle pollution in most parts of the country. A substantial body of published scientific literature recognizes a correlation between elevated fine particulate matter and increased incidence of illness and premature mortality. The health effects of PM2.5 include: Increased incidence of premature death, primarily in the elderly and those with heart or lung disease; Aggravation of respiratory and cardiovascular illness, leading to hospitalizations and emergency room visits for children and individuals with heart or lung disease; Decreased lung function and symptomatic effects, including acute bronchitis, particularly in children and asthmatics; New cases of chronic bronchitis; Increased work loss days, school absences, and emergency room visits.

2.2.1

NOx emissions

NOx emissions react in the atmosphere to form ozone. NOx and volatile organic compounds react in the atmosphere in the presence of sunlight to form groundlevel ozone. Ground-level ozone is a major component of smog in our cities and in many rural areas as well. Though naturally occurring ozone in the stratosphere provides a protective layer high above the earth, the ozone that we breathe at ground level has been linked to respiratory illness and other health problems, including:
3

 Decreases in lung function, resulting in difficulty breathing, shortness of breath, and other symptoms; Respiratory symptoms, including bronchitis, aggravated coughing, and chest pain; Increased incidence/severity of respiratory problems (e.g. aggravation of asthma, susceptibility to respiratory infection) resulting in more hospital admissions and emergency room visits; Chronic inflammation and irreversible structural changes in the lungs, that, with repeated exposure, can lead to premature aging of the lungs and other respiratory illness.

2.2.2 Mercury emissions

Mercury emissions are deposited in watersheds and transformed into methylmercury, which contaminates fish. In the U.S., human exposure to mercury is primarily the result of consumption of fish contaminated with methylmercury. Other fish-eating pests, which cause mortality. Acid deposition can also affect forest ecosystems indirectly by changing the chemistry of forest soils, including the leaching of plant nutrients from soils. It can also elevate levels of aluminum in soil water, which impairs the ability of trees to use soil nutrients and can be directly toxic to plant roots.

2.2.3 Nitrogen deposition

Nitrogen deposition contributes to impaired coastal water quality. Nitrogen deposited from the atmosphere is a substantial source of nitrogen in many estuaries and coastal waters. Large amounts of nitrogen in estuaries and coastal waters can have significant ecological impacts, including massive die-offs of estuarine and marine plants and animals, loss of biological diversity, and degradation of essential coastal ecosystem habitat such as seagrass beds. For many species of fish and
4

shellfish, these seagrass beds are essential nurseries and places to escape from predators. Excessive amounts of nitrogen in coastal waters from atmospheric deposition are thought to be a contributor to harmful algal blooms, such as red tides, that kill millions of fish each year and can be toxic to humans as well.

2.2.4 CO2 Emissions

Coal is the only natural resource and fossil fuel available in abundance in such country. Consequently, it is used widely as a thermal energy source and also as fuel for thermal power plants producing electricity. In some country about 90,000 MW installed capacity for electricity generation, of which more than 70% is produced by coal-based thermal power plants. Hydro-electricity contributes about 25%, and the remaining is mostly from nuclear power plants (NPPs). The problems associated with the use of coal are low calorific value and very high ash content. The ash content is as high as 5560%, with an average value of about 3540%. The installed electricity generating capacity has to increase very rapidly (at present around 810% per annum), as India has one of the lowest per capita electricity consumptions. Therefore, the problems for the future are formidable from ecological, radio-ecological and pollution viewpoints. A similar situation exists in many developing countries of the region, including the Peoples Republic of China, where coal is used extensively. The paper highlights some of these problems with the data generated in the authors laboratory and gives a brief description of the solutions being attempted. The extent of global warming in this century will be determined by how developing countries like India manage their energy generation plans. Some of the recommendations have been implemented for new plants, and the situation in the new plants is much better. A few coal washeries have also been established. It will be quite some time before the steps to improve the environmental releases are implemented in older plants and several coal mines due to resource constraints.
5

Fossil fuels, particularly coal, also contain dilute radioactive material, and burning them in very large quantities releases this material into the environment, leading to low levels of local and global radioactive contamination, the levels of which are, ironically, higher than a nuclear power station as their radioactive contaminants are controlled and stored. Coal also contains traces of toxic heavy elements such as mercury, arsenic and others. Mercury vaporized in a power plant's boiler may stay suspended in the atmosphere and circulate around the world. While a substantial inventory of mercury exists in the environment, as other man-made emissions of mercury become better controlled, power plant emissions become a significant fraction of the remaining emissions. Power plant emissions of mercury in the United States are thought to be about 50 tons per year in 2003, and several hundred tons per year in China. Power plant designers can fit equipment to power stations to reduce emissions.
3

Emission Control Technologies

The availability and cost of technology to control emissions of harmful air pollutants from electric power plants have been key factors in the development of environmental regulations and standards over the past several decades. Emissions from coal-fired power plants have been the subject of substantial scrutiny and attention. Today, power plant emissions are again the subject of intense study in the context of a new environmental to adverse human health effects (particulate matter, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and, most recently, mercury), the climate change issue centers primarily around emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2 ), a greenhouse gas widely linked to global warming and climate change impacts. In looking prospectively at potential technological options for controlling power plant emissions of CO2 , historical experience in controlling other major pollutants can

serve as a guide for expectations (and projections) of future cost trends for similar environmental technologies. The historical development of two widely used emission control technologies now required on all new coal-fired power plants in the US and elsewhere. These technologies are flue gas desulphurisation (FGD) systems used to control SO2 emissions, and selective catalytic reduction (SCR) systems used to control NO x emissions. These two technologies are post-combustion control systems applied to the flue gas stream emanating from a coal-fired boiler or furnace. In contrast to other environmental control technologies that are applied either prior to or during combustion, FGD and SCR systems represent technologies having the highest pollutant removal efficiencies currently available for coal-burning plants. They are also the most expensive technologies for emission control, and for this reason, requirements for their use have been highly controversial.
3.1

Regulatory requirements for SO 2 control

Although the earliest applications of FGD at coal-burning power plants can be traced back to the early 1930s in England, the modern era of environmental controls dates from the late 1960s and early 1970s. In the US, the 1970 Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) adverse effects on human health and welfare. The principal sources of SO2 at that time were (and continue to be) coal-burning power plants. When burned, the sulphur in coal is converted primarily to SO2 and released to the atmosphere. The sulphur content of coals varies widely, from less than 0.5% to over 5% by weight, depending on coal type and source. In the early 1970s, the average sulphur content of coals burned at US power plants was approximately 2.5%. For new power plants, SO 2 emission regulations were directly established by the EPA in the form of New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) requiring the use of for coal-fired power plants, established in 1971, defined BACT as a performance-based standard limiting SO 2 emissions to 1.2
7

pounds per million Btu (lb/MBtu) of fuel energy input to the boiler. This emission standard corresponded to roughly a 75% reduction from the average emission rates at the time, but it allowed new plants to comply either by burning a sufficiently low-sulphur coal or by installing an FGD system while burning high-sulphur coals. Table 1 also lists the more recent SO 2 control requirements stemming from the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act. To address the problem of acid deposition, EPA established a national emission cap for SO 2 at a level of 9.8 million tons/yr, to be achieved by the year 2000. To achieve this limit, existing power plants were required to further reduce their SO 2 emissions by roughly 40% below their 1990 levels. Power plants could comply either by switching to cleaner (low-sulphur) fuels, by installing an FGD system, purchasing emission credits under a newly created emission trading scheme, or by some combination of these approaches.
Table 1 Major US regulations for SO 2 emissions from electric power plants

Figure 1 depicts the worldwide growth in FGD installations over the past three decades. The y-axis measures the total electrical capacity of power plants whose flue gases are treated with wet lime or limestone scrubbers. The onset of FGD use in each country corresponds to the time at which regulations were adopted that were sufficiently stringent so as to require or encourage the use of FGD as an emission control strategy. Figure 1 also shows that USA has dominated in the deployment of this technology. Today, approximately 30% (90 GW) of US coalfired capacity is equipped with FGD systems, most of them wet limestone scrubbers.
Figure 1 Cumulative installed capacity of wet lime/limestone FGD systems in different countries

3.2

Regulatory requirements for NO x control

In addition to SO2 , the 1970 CAAA also identified nitrogen dioxide (NO2 ) and ground-level ozone (O3 ) as criteria that linked air pollutants to adverse human health effects. Both pollutants are formed by chemical reactions that occur in the atmosphere, although some NO2 is also emitted directly from high-temperature combustion processes such as that occurring at power plants. Nitric oxide (NO) is formed in much greater quantities during combustion and is gradually oxidised to NO2 once emitted to the atmosphere. The combination of NO and NO 2xacid rain
9

and (together with volatile organic compounds) the formation of ground-level ozone. In the US, the control of NO x emissions from power plants initially followed the same timetable and regulatory approach as for SO 2 (see Table 2). The key difference was the stringency of applicable requirements. Under the 1970 CAAA, existing power plants were largely unaffected by state-level requirements to achieve the NO 2 air quality standards. For new plants, the EPA New Source Performance Standards imposed only modest requirements that could be met at low cost using improved low-NO x burners (LNB) for combustion. During the 1970s and 1980s, as SO 2 emission restrictions grew more stringent (and more costly), NO x emission requirements for coal plants changed only slightly as LNB technology improved.
Table 2 Major US regulations for NO x emissions from electric power plants

10

In contrast to the US situation, the use of SCR in other industrialised countries began many years earlier in response to stricter NO x emission limits. Japan first enacted strict requirements in the 1970s and pioneered the development of SCR technology for power plant applications. In the mid-1980s, Germany required the use of SCR systems on large coal-fired power plants as part of its acid rain control program. Subsequently, other European countries also began to adopt this technology. SCR systems also have been deployed at some power plants burning oil or natural gas, including gas turbine plants used for peak power generation. Figure 2 shows the historical trend in the worldwide growth of SCR capacity. As with FGD systems, the onset of growth reflects the stringency and timetable for NOx reductions in different countries. The earliest use of SCR is seen in Japan beginning in the 1970s, followed by widespread adoption in Germany in the mid1980s. The US has been the laggard in SCR use, with the first units on coal-fired plants installed only in 1993.
Figure 2 Cumulative installed capacity of SCR systems on coal-fired power plants in different countries

11

3.3

Conventional Technologies

Babcock & Wilcox (B&W), through its Environmental Equipment and Research & Development Divisions, has been an active participant in the development, demonstration, and commercialization of many of these technologies. With wet scrubber sales of 16,859 MWe and dry scrubber sales of 1017 MWe, it is one of the major worldwide suppliers of FGD systems. In addition, B&W has been and is participating in four sorbent injection projects (one 5 MWe and three ~100 MWe demonstrations) sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It is from this perspective that the balance of this paper seeks first to provide the reader with a background appreciation of some of the more important features of the conventional wet and dry scrubbers offered by B&W today. This forms the basis from which the development of the lower capital
cost

sorbent injection technologies preceded. The

paper goes on to describe the results of these efforts as the technologies begin to be accepted as fully commercial.
3.4 Wet Scrubbing

Current state-of-the-art systems offer significantly improved performance compared to the first-generation FGD systems. Much of this is attributed to engineering designs developed to conform better with fundamental process chemistry. The largest single improvement has been the development of sulfite oxidation control. Scale formation in the early systems tended to occur as the result of uncontrolled crystallization of the naturally oxidized product calcium sulfate (CaSO4 2H2O [gypsum]) from the recirculating slurry. The blocky gypsum crystals typically represented 15 to 50 mol % of the absorbed SO2 and, when intermingled with those of unoxidized calcium sulfite (CaSO3 1/2H2O) platelets in the slurry, were responsible for much of the difficulty in dewatering. For limestone systems, blowing air into the slurry to force oxidation to near 100%
12

provides seed crystals that minimize scaling, while at the same time producing more homogeneous slurries that dewater to concentrations in excess of 90% solids. For these reasons, the Limestone Forced Oxidation (LSFO) system has become the preferred technology worldwide. The prime benefits of scale control derived from forced oxidation are greater scrubber reliability and availability. Confidence in the design and operation of these wet systems has risen to the point that a number of utilities in the U.S. and Canada are now specifying and/or buying single absorber systems, with no redundant absorber towers, to satisfy their compliance requirements. Figure 3 shows the primary components of the absorber towers currently being offered by B&W.
Figure 3 B&W wet FGD absorber tower.

13

3.5

Dry Scrubbing

Commercial utility installations using dry scrubber technology first appeared in the U.S. in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Derived from spray drying technology, this method of SO2 emission control relies on the atomization of a sorbent most commonly an aqueous lime slurry in a reaction chamber upstream of a particulate collection device. Typically, the systems are designed to operate at a 15 to 25C (27 to 45F) approach to the adiabatic saturation temperature of the flue gas. The fine droplets absorb SO2 and form the product calcium sulfite and sulfate as the water evaporates. The B&W dry scrubber in use at two utilities is shown in Figure 4. The design incorporates a patented, dual-fluid atomizer design that has proven to be particularly effective and durable.
Figure 4 B&W dry scrubber module.

A downstream electrostatic precipitator (ESP) or baghouse collects the dry salts along with fly ash present in the flue gas. Use of a baghouse enhances the performance of the dry scrubber because additional SO2 absorption occurs as the flue gas passes through the accumulated cake on the bags. Operation nearer the

14

flue gas saturation temperature further promotes the increased removal efficiency obtained through the intimate contact in this configuration.
3.6 Advanced Technologies

While the wet FGD systems provided the benefits of high removal efficiencies, their relatively high capital cost made them unattractive for those applications where it was desirable to minimize the initial investment. In the late 1970s, interest in developing lower cost technologies heightened when one eastern U.S. utility determined that a 25% SO2 removal technology, when combined with coal cleaning, would permit it to meet the regulated emission limit on one of its units. At about the same time, the U.S. EPA was continuing support of bench- and pilotscale projects to develop low capital cost processes for many of the smaller and older units not regulated by the original Clean Air Act of 1970. Initially using limestone injection through staged low-NOx burners, these studies went on to show that moderate levels of SO2 emission control were possible by injecting sorbent within certain windows within a boilers time-temperature profile.
3.6.1 Furnace Sorbent Injection (LIMB)

Furnace sorbent injection for SO2 emission control was first attempted on a commercial scale in England in the 1930s, and was the subject of several studies in the U.S. just preceding passage of the Clean Air Act in the late 1960s. These early efforts, using limestone as the sorbent, typically produced low (20 to 30%) removal efficiencies that were generally regarded as less than adequate for the objectives set at the time. It was only when interest rekindled in the late 1970s and early 1980s that more detailed investigations determined how to overcome some of the chemical and mechanical limitations involved. The LIMB projects at Edgewater went on to demonstrate that furnace sorbent injection represents a low capital cost technology capable of achieving moderate levels of SO2 control. As such, it is particularly applicable for older, smaller units burning lower sulfur coals.
15

The first (EPA-sponsored) LIMB project at Edgewater had the primary objective of attaining in excess of 50% SO2 removal at an inlet Ca/S ratio of 2.0 while the unit burned 3% sulfur coal. To accomplish this, the project: undertook an extensive review of the literature to determine the limiting factors, both chemical and mechanical, thought to be responsible for the lower removals observed previously recommended and conducted further supporting studies in those areas where more information was required developed and installed a system accordingly designed for calcitic hydrated lime injection in that region of the upper furnace where the sulfation reactions would be maximized developed a humidifier design, based on B&Ws dry scrubber experience, that not only overcame the adverse impact of sorbent injection on the electrostatic precipitator (ESP), but also provided a mechanism for enhanced SO2 removal by being capable of operating at an 11C (20F) approach to the adiabatic saturation temperature of the flue gas
Figure 5 The LIMB process at the Edgewater Station.

16

Figure 5 shows the LIMB process flow diagram as operated at the Edgewater Station. The hoppers shown under the humidifier in the diagram were covered by steel plates throughout all testing, so that humidification was effectively carried out as an in-duct process. (The humidifier was constructed in a bypass loop over the hoppers of a retired ESP as a precautionary measure. If major ash deposits had formed as the result of humidification, this part of the process could have been isolated and hoppers used for removal. Fortunately, they were never needed.) The DOE-sponsored LIMB Extension Project sought to demonstrate the generic applicability of the process by characterizing the performance to be expected for a variety of sorbents and coals. Sorbents tested included limestones reflecting three increasingly finer grinds, commercial calcitic and dolomitic hydrated limes, and lingo lime. Tests were conducted while the unit burned coals containing 1.6, 3.0, and 3.8% sulfur. Characteristic curves showing the relative importance of the more important variables are summarized in Figures 6, 7, and 8.
Figure 6 Effect of different sorbents on SO2 removal while burning 1.6% sulfur coal and injecting at elevation 55.2 m (181 ft).

17

Figure 7 Effect of limestone grind on SO2 removal while burning 1.6% sulfur coal and injecting at elevation 55.2 m (181 ft).

[Note: These figures portray a first-order relationship between SO2 removal efficiency and Ca/S ratio. This is approximately true over the range of conditions tested, as can be seen in Figure 7. A second-order fit with a diminishing increase in removal would describe the dependency more appropriately at higher stoichiometries.]
Figure 8 Effect of humidification on SO2 removal.

18

The effects of such variables as injector tilt, coal sulfur content, injection level (temperature), and momentum flux ratio (velocity) were also examined. Factors associated with the time-temperature profile (temperature and velocity) can, however, be system-dependent. It is believed that the relative insensitivity of the Edgewater system to these parameters was due to design near the optimal operating conditions. The LIMB demonstration at Edgewater also provided an opportunity to observe the effects of furnace sorbent injection on boiler and ash collection and handling equipment operation. The increased dust loading associated with the process can cause additional ash accumulation on tubes. Depending on the amount of sorbent to be injected, and the number, capacity, and position of any existing sootblowers in a retrofit situation, it may be necessary to add sootblowers to clean convection pass surfaces. The LIMB ash was found to be as easily removed as normal fly ash. It was also observed that the hydrated limes had a much greater tendency to coat the tubes than did the coarsely ground limestone. While the opposite had been anticipated as the result of inertial impaction, it may be that the larger particles were self-scouring. There were no means available to establish any quantitative relationships, however.
3.6.2 Duct Sorbent Injection (Coolside)

Similar to the furnace sorbent injection systems, the duct sorbent injection systems utilize the duct between the air heater outlet and the particulate collector inlet to capture SO2 with either lime- or sodium-based compounds. Limestone sorbents are quite unreactive in the 175C (347F) to 60C (140F) temperature range of interest for this technology. While the sodium-based systems can be effective, concern over the solubility of the product salts in the waste effectively limits application to a few units in the western U.S.

19

Duct sorbent injection systems have undergone extensive testing just within the past few years. The largest of these was performed as the Coolside process demonstration in conjunction with the DOE-sponsored LIMB extension project on the 105 MWe unit at the Edgewater Station. Initially developed by CONSOL Inc., the process entailed injection of dry calcitic hydrated lime at the inlet of the same humidifier that had been used during the LIMB demonstration. Most of the tests were conducted with the humidifier operating in the range of an 11 to 17C (20 to 30F) approach to the saturation temperature. Figure 9 depicts typical performance achieved in the course of the Coolside process tests. Although the added NaOH was directly responsible for some of the SO2 removal, results indicate that the sodium salts improve lime utilization, presumably because their hygroscopic nature maintains a humid environment in the vicinity of the particles. Similar behavior was noted during CONSOLs pilot tests with neutral sodium salts added.
Figure 9 SO2 removal for the Coolside process.

20

3.6.3 Limestone Injection Dry Scrubbing (LIDS)

Experience with both dry scrubbing and furnace sorbent injection prompted B&W to integrate the two into the LIDS process, as it offered the advantages of combining the use of the lower cost limestone sorbent with higher overall SO2 removal and sorbent utilization. Figure 10 shows the flow diagram of the process with particulate collection by either a baghouse or an ESP. In the process, injection of limestone into the furnace effects SO2 removal as represented in Figure 7. The unreacted quicklime continues through the system until it is collected in the baghouse or ESP. Depending on the SO2 removal efficiency desired, a portion of the collected ash is slurried with water through an appropriately sized slaking device. The slurry is then fed to the dry scrubber where the bulk of the SO2 removal occurs. Significant additional SO2 removal may also occur during particulate collection, especially if the flue gas must pass through a baghouse at a temperature relatively close to saturation.
Figure 10 LIDS process flow diagram

B&Ws Research and Development Division carried out the LIDS tests at its Alliance Research Center in Alliance, Ohio. A major portion of the facility already existed as a pilot-scale combustion furnace called the small boiler simulator (SBS). Rated at 1.8 MJ/s (6.0 x 106 Btu/hr), the SBS had much of the auxiliary equipment in place as the result of earlier furnace sorbent injection tests. To this was added a cylindrical, down-flow dry scrubber designed for testing with gas residence times
21

in the 5 to 10 s range. Its dimensions were 9.1 m (30 ft) high and 1.5 m (5 ft) in diameter. The baghouse contained 46 Nomex bags 3.0 m (10 ft) long and 12 cm (4.6 in.) in diameter, providing a design air-to-cloth ratio of 51 m/hr (2.8 ft/min) at 66C (150F). The cost of achieving continuous operation to achieve true steady-state conditions made simulation of recycle necessary. This was accomplished by operating the pilot in a batch mode, and collecting the ash produced each day for preparation of the following days slurry in a 7.57 m3 (2000 gal) stirred tank. Recycle ratios, defined in terms of mass of recycled ash per mass of fresh sorbent, ranged from 0.4 to 1.9 for the tests conducted.
Figure 11 LIDS combined furnace and dry scrubber SO2 removal.

The LIDS test program characterized the SO2 removal efficiency over a range of stoichiometries and approaches to the saturation temperature. The results are summarized in Figures 11 and 12 which show the overall removals obtained at the outlet of the dry scrubber and the baghouse, respectively.

22

Figure 12 LIDS combined furnace, dry scrubber, and baghouse SO2 removal.

3.6.4 SOx-NOx-Rox Box (SNRB)

B&W is developing the SNRB process as a combined SOx, NOx, and particulate (Rox) emission control technology by which all three pollutants are removed from flue gas in a high-temperature baghouse. SNRB incorporates lime- or sodiumbased sorbent injection to capture SOx, selective catalytic reduction (SCR) of NOx by ammonia (NH3), and particulate removal in a high-temperature, pulse-jet baghouse, as depicted in Figure 13.
Figure 13 The SOx-NOx-Rox Box (SNRB) process.

The tests run thus far have concentrated on characterizing SO2 removal with calcitic hydrated lime injected at various temperatures and stoichiometries. Preliminary results indicate that inlet Ca/S ratios near 2.0 reduce SO2 emissions by
23

80 to 90%, well beyond the original 70% goal. Part of this is ascribed to more complete conversion in the baghouse than anticipated, although the removal appears to be sensitive to the baghouse temperature (Figure 14).
Figure 14 SNRB SO2 removal.

Results on NOx and particulate emissions control have also been promising. Figure 15 shows typical data being developed on NOx reduction for the process. Removal efficiency in excess of 90% has been achieved near NH3/NOx stoichiometry of 0.85. At the same time ammonia slip, a term describing the undesirable bypass of unreacted NH3, has generally been measured at levels of less than 4 mg/ Nm3 (5 ppmv).
Figure 15 SNRB NOx removal

24

Conclusion Flue gas desulphurisation (FGD) systems and selective catalytic reduction

(SCR) systems are the most widely used environmental technologies for highefficiency removal of SO 2 and NO x , respectively, at coal-fired electric power plants. These systems also are the most expensive environmental technologies employed at power plants worldwide. Nonetheless, substantial decreases in capital costs have been realised over the past several decades as a result of investments in R&D, learning by doing at power plant facilities, competition among equipment manufactures, and other factors. The combined effect of these activities has been represented in this paper by experience curves that quantify historical rates of cost decrease as a function of the cumulative installed capacity (the measure of experience) of FGD and SCR systems at coal-fired power plants. These rates were found to be similar to those of other energy-related and market-based technologies. The empirical data also show that widespread deployment of high-efficiency (but costly) environmental technologies like FGD and SCR systems requires the adoption of sufficiently stringent government regulations, policies, and other actions to create and sustain a market for these technologies. Given such policies, failure to account for the effects of technology innovation can lead to erroneous. The control of SO2 emissions from fossil fuel-fired boilers has progressed dramatically over the past 25 years. Wet scrubbers, and especially those employing the LSFO and MEL technologies, have become the state-of-the-art methods for achieving removal efficiencies in the 90% to 98% range. (Spray) dry scrubbing with lime slurries for lower removal efficiency is seen as a technology more useful for lower sulfur coals. However, it may prove to be economically viable for some higher sulfur coal applications as well, especially when combined with sorbent injection as is done in LIDS. Interest in the sorbent injection technologies alone,

25

for moderate levels of removal at relatively low capital cost, at first grew out of anticipation of the CAAA in the U.S

5 1

References Soud, H.N. (1994) FGD Installations on Coal-Fired Plants, IEA Coal Research, London.

2 3

Soud, H. (2001) Personal Communication, IEA Coal Research, London. for the NOx SIP call, FIP, and section 126 Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation, Washington DC.

Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management, Progress Report Boston, MA, May 2001.

McIlvaine Company (2002) Utility Data Tracking Service, SCR Projects: Bid and Award Tracking, http://www.mcilvainecompany.com/, October 30.

U.S. EPA (2002) EPA Clean Air Market Program: Emissions Data & Compliance Reports, http://www.epa.gov/airmarkt/emissions/, June, 2002.

26