Practical experience with the input/loss method as applied to a CFB power plant
In late 1995 the Input/Loss Method was installed for on-line monitoring of an independent power producer located in Colver, PA. Colver is a 115 MWe Circulating Fluidized Bed (CFB) steam generator burning poor quality coal, having typically {+-}20% variation in As-Fired heating value, providing considerable difficulties to operating staff. The Input/Loss Method provides a complete thermal understanding of a power plant through explicit determinations of fuel flow, emission flows, fuel chemistry, fuel heating value and thermal efficiency. Direct measurements of fuel or emission flows are not made. In addition, the Method employs a Fuel Consumption Index (FCI) technology to alert the operator as to which components/processes within the system have higher irreversible losses--in terms of higher fuel consumptions for a given power level--thus where improved heat rate can be found. The Method also uses a Sulfur Function Optimizer (SFO) parameter, which assist the operator in minimizing the use of limestone, while meeting regulatory SO{sub 2} effluents. This paper discusses a number of actual operational situations, taken over the past four years, which were resolved with the help of the Input/Loss Method. For example: the usefulness of the SFO parameter, tracking FCI for key processes, plant-evaluated economics, etc. Problems with required effluent (CEMS) instrumentation, experience with a CEMS error analysis procedure, stoichiometric assumptions, air leakage assumptions, etc. are discussed.
- Research Organization:
- A/C Power Colver Operations, Colver, PA (US)
- OSTI ID:
- 20014107
- Resource Relation:
- Conference: 1999 International Joint Power Generation Conference, Burlingame, CA (US), 07/25/1999--07/28/1999; Other Information: PBD: 1999; Related Information: In: Proceedings of the 1999 international joint power generation conference (PWR-Vol. 34). Volume 2: Power, by Penfield, S.R. Jr.; Hayes, R.H.; McMullen, R. [ed.], 752 pages.
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
Performance of two identical 110 MWe high pressure PYROFLOW CFB boilers firing two different categories of waste fuels
CFB evaluation of high-ash Ukrainian anthracite coal