System design study to reduce capital and operating costs and bench-scale testing of a circulating-bed AFB [atmospheric pressure fluidized bed] advanced concept: Phase 1, Design, cost estimate, and cost comparison for MWK circulating fluid bed combustor and oil-fired boilers: Final report

Technical Report · Sun Jun 01 04:00:00 EDT 1986

OSTI ID:719228

Sadhukhan, P; Lin, Y Y; Hsiao, K H; Richards, S R; Wagner, C; Settle, W H; Bryant, J; Gorman, W A; Newlin, T; Shires, P J; James, J L

The Department of Energy (DOE) issued an RFP for a "System Design Study to Reduce Capital and Operating Cost and Bench Scale Testing of a Circulating-Bed AFB Advanced Concept." The design and cost study of a 150,000 pounds per hour steam boiler comprised Phase-I of the RFP. The objective was to produce a design with improved performance and reduced capital and operating costs compared with conventional atmospheric pressure fluidized bed (AFB) boilers. The final result was a significant reduction of capital cost - 36% below the lowest AFB plant cost. The steam cost was 24% below the corresponding cost for the AFB process. In June 1985, DOE issued a Change Order (C001) to the Phase-I study in order for MWK to design and estimate the cost for a scaled-down coal-fired (Illinois No. 6, 3% S) CFBC plant producing low pressure and low temperature steam (75,000lbs/hr, 200 psig, 387{degree}F), and to compare the costs -capital and steam costs -with those for a packaged high sulfur (3%) fuel oil-fired boiler, which is of the same capacity and requires SO{sub 2} removal. An additional objective was to estimate the cost for a No. 2 fuel oil-fired boiler that does not need any SO{sub 2} scrubber. An evaluation of the sensitivity of the steam cost to the oil-fired boiler capital cost and to fuel prices was also to be undertaken. The cost of steam produced by the No. 6 fuel oil boiler is 52% higher than the cost for CFBC, and the corresponding cost for the No. 2 fuel oil plant is 43% higher. Again, a large advantage for the CFBC comes from the low price of coal relative to that of oil. The large cost advantage of steam calculated for the MWK CFBC using coal as a fuel over the oil-fired boilers would remain even in the worst case scenario of a declining oil price accompanied by a steady coal price. 7 refs., 25 figs., 34 tabs.

• Research Organization: Kellogg (M.W.) Co., Houston, TX (United States)
• Sponsoring Organization: USDOE
• DOE Contract Number: AC21-84MC21173
• OSTI ID: 719228
• Report Number(s): DOE/MC/21173--2083; ON: TI86012580
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT
BENCH-SCALE EXPERIMENTS
BOILERS
CAPITALIZED COST
CIRCULATING SYSTEMS
COAL
COMPARATIVE EVALUATIONS
COST
COST ESTIMATION
DESIGN
DESULFURIZATION
FLUE GAS
FLUIDIZED-BED COMBUSTION
FLUIDIZED-BED COMBUSTORS
FUEL OILS
LIMESTONE
MATERIAL BALANCE
OPERATING COST
PRICES
PROGRESS REPORT
SCRUBBERS
SENSITIVITY
SPECIFICATIONS
STAGED COMBUSTION
STEAM