Ammonia Based Desulferization.pdf
- 1. Ammonia Based Desulfurization September 12th, 2018
- 2. 2 Topics • Company Profile • Technology Overview • Reference Projects • Case Studies
- 3. 3 JET Partnership Create Jobs and a needed byproduct (fertilizer) Reduce Plant’s Emissions JET Invests Capital to Build Plant Provide Additional Revenue Stream to Plant Reduce Plant’s Operating Cost/Increase Capacity Factor JET’smissionistopartnerwithplantsto helpachievelongtermviability
- 4. Introduction to JET 4 JNEP Headquarters (Nanjing, China) JET Global Headquarters (Ridgefield Park, NJ) Global leader with 80% market share in Ammonia-Based Desulfurization 65 patents and patent applications (8 International) 150+ projects with more than 300 installed units 20+ installations with capacity bigger than 300 MW JNEP (China Headquarters)
- 5. 5 Qualifications and Awards Grade A Design Qualification in Environmental Protection Projects Grade A Design Qualification in Chemical Engineering Projects Grade A Operation Qualification for Environmental faculties Contract Qualification for Environmental Projects Certificate of High and New Tech Enterprises ISO 9001 Quality Management System ISO14001 Environmental Management System OHSAS18001 Occupational Health and Safety Management System
- 6. 6 20 Year History Ammonia Based FGD Year Features NH3 recovery SO2 emission ppm Total dust lb/MMSCF Performance 1st Gen 1998 Basic NH3 based deSOx not controlled ~ 70 Meets SO2 emission limit 2nd Gen 2010 NH3 based deSOx with NH3 recovery control ≥ 97% < 35 Meets HG2001-2010 standard 3rd Gen 2013 Fine PM control ≥ 98% < 17.5 ≤ 4.72 Meets GB13223-2011 special emission limit 4th Gen 2015 Ultrasound-enhanced deSOx and PM-removal integration ≥ 99% < 12 ≤ 1.18 Meets ultra-low emission limit* Performance: • SO2 emission ≤ 12 ppm • Particulate Matter Emissions ≤ 1.18 lb/MMSCF • Ammonia Slip ≤ 3 ppm • Ammonia Recovery Rate ≥ 99% Over 300 units installed worldwide
- 7. 7 Advantages of Ammonia Based FGD Technology High SO2 removal efficiency: 99% or higher Environmentally friendly: no waste water, solid waste or additional CO2 emissions Extra profit: produce 3.8 ton fertilizer per 1 ton ammonia High turndown ratio: 30% Favorable economics: less power consumption & operating cost
- 8. 8 Technology: Process Description Process Mechanism Process Systems SO2 + H2O + x NH3 → (NH4)xH2-xSO3 (1) (NH4)xH2-xSO3 + ½ O2 + (2-x) NH3 → (NH4)2SO4 (2) Flue gas system Absorption system Oxidation system Ammonium sulfate system 8
- 9. 9 Technology: Desulfurization and PM Control Demisting: Acoustic agglomeration (< 1 μm) Demisting device design Scrubbing & Agglomeration: Efficient scrubbing and cooling, fine particulate agglomeration (1-20 μm) Absorption: Optimized spray, gas-liquid distribution, and oxidation control High Reactivity of NH3 High Absorption Efficiency Low Liquid Recirculation Low System Pressure Low Power Consumption
- 10. 10 Technology: Ammonium Sulfate System Hydrocylone Centrifuge Dryer Packaging Machine Ammonium Sulfate Fertilizer
- 11. Oxidation blowers 11 Oxidation Air System
- 13. Hydrocyclone 13
- 14. Centrifuge 14
- 15. Dryer 15
- 16. 16 Ammonium sulfate by-product Ammonium Sulfate Product
- 17. 17 Ammonium sulfate by-product Ammonium Sulfate Product
- 18. 18 Fertilizer Outlook “Application of Ammonium Sulfate on diverse crops and growing demand for sulfur as a secondary nutrient are large drivers of the growth in North America. Growing use on specialty crops is a key driver of growth, and blending ammonium sulfate with other nutrients such as urea for additional nitrogen content has also increased.” -Green Markets Research Report “As sulfur becomes more and more a factor in cropping systems, there continues to be a need to satisfy the demand with dry fertilizer formulations. The number one choice for sulfur in combination with nitrogen is ammonium sulfate and all interviewees believe this desirability based on economic utility will continue in the foreseeable future.” -Green Markets Research Report
- 20. Some Reference Projects No. Client Name Capacity Contract date Startup date 1 Sinopec Corp., Hubei Fertilizer Company 1×120MW+1×50MW 2006.08 2007.08 2 Nanjing YPC Refining & Chemical Co., Ltd. 2×150MW 2007.03 2008.03 3 Ningbo Jiufeng Power Co., Ltd. 1×125MW 2011.08 2012.06 4 Wanhua Chemical (Ningbo) Thermal Power Co., Ltd. 1×150MW+1×100MW 2012.05 2012.12 5 Sinopec Qilu Branch Thermal Power Plant 2×200MW 2011.09 2013.03 6 Inner Mongolia Datang International Keshiketeng Coal to Gas Co., Ltd. 160,000 t/year SRU 2010.04 2013.12 7 Yantai Wanhua Polyurethane Co., Ltd. 1×50MW+3×100MW 2012.09 2013.12 8 Lianyungang Hongyang Power Co., Ltd. 4×135MW 2012.01 2014.02 9 Ethylene Plant of Sinopec Qilu Petrochemical Co., Ltd. 2×100MW 2014.02 2015.08 10 Shenhua Ningxia Coal Group Co., Ltd. 10×200MW 2014.09 2015.12 11 Liaoyang Guocheng Power Co., Ltd. 3×150MW 2015.04 2016.01 12 Shandong Hualu Hengsheng Chemical Engineering Co., Ltd. 1×180MW+1×60MW+1×36MW 2016.05 2017.03 13 Xinjiang Meihua Amino Acid Co., Ltd. 2×450MW 2016.06 2017.06 14 Shenhua Ningxia Coal Group Co., Ltd. (Coal to Olefin) 6×150MW 2016.12 2017.06 15 Shaanxi Changqing Energy & Chemical Co., Ltd. 10,000 t/year SRU 2016.12 2017.6 16 Inner Mongolia Yitai Chemical Co., Ltd. 20,000 t/year SRU 2015.06 2017.09 17 Ningxia Ziguang Tianhua Methionine CO., Ltd. 10,000 t/year SRU 2016.10 2017.11 18 China National Offshore Oil Corporation Dongying Petroleum Co., Ltd. 10,000 t/year SRU 2016.10 under construction 19 Sinopec Corp. Jinling Branch 150,000 t/year SRU 2017.03 under construction 20 Sino-Kuwait joint-venture Refinery Integration Project in Guangdong 3×130,000 t/year SRU 2017.12 under construction
- 21. 21 EADS Experience Boiler/power plant flue gas desulfurization • 150+ projects • 300 units • 40+ Ultra-low emission projects Sour/acid gas treatment + SRU tail gas treatment • 15 projects FCCU & Sintering machine flue gas desulfurization and PM control • 6 projects
- 22. 22 Ningbo Jiufeng Power Co., Ltd. Client Name Ningbo Jiufeng Power Co., Ltd. Location Ningbo, Zhejiang Capacity Phase I：3×130t/h boilers； Phase II：1×130+1×410t/h boilers EADS Generation 4th generation Absorber Configuration 1# absorber is corresponding to boilers of Phase I 2# absorber is corresponding to boilers of Phase II Stack Configuration Steel stacks on top of the absorbers, 90 meters above ground Absorbent 20% aqueous ammonia Byproduct 1# and 2# absorbers share one set of ammonium sulfate treatment system, and the production capacity is 6.5t/h
- 23. 23 Projects performed at Shenua Ningxia Coal Chemical Complex
- 24. 24 World’s largest Ammonia FGD Project Client Name Shenhua Ningxia Coal Industry Group CTL Project Location Yinchuan, Ningxia Province, China Capacity 10×200 MW units EADS Generation Currently 3rd generation, being upgraded to the 4th generation Absorber Configuration 1 absorber for 1 unit, total 10 absorbers Absorber diameter: 10.5m, Height: 45m Stack Configuration Two concrete stacks with metal liner Absorbent 99.6% anhydrous ammonia, consumption: 8.5 t/h (maximum capacity load) Byproduct Ammonium sulfate in bags, production: 42.9t/h (maximum capacity load)
- 25. 25 Test Report of #5 FGD Project at Wanhua Power Co., Ltd. Project Background Information • Location • Ningbo, China • EADS Generation • 4th Generation • Capacity • 100 MW • Flue Gas Flow • 314,078 SCFM • Inlet SO2 Concentration • 1,040 ppm FGD Performance • Outlet SO2 Concentration • 1.76 ppm • Outlet PM Concentration • 0.27 lb/MMSCF • Ammonia Slip • 0.33 ppm
- 26. 26 Economics S.N. Item Spec Unit Hourly consumption Annual operating hours Annual consumption 1 Anhydrous Ammonia 99.6% ton 17.37 6,300 109,444 2 Process water ton 381.39 6,300 2,402,778 3 Power 13kV/480V kWh 13,948.00 6,300 87,872,400 4 Steam 120 psi ton 30.74 6,300 193,681 5 Instrumental air 100 psi 1,000 SCF 7.60 6,300 47,880 6 Cooling water 50 psi ton 220.00 6,300 1,386,000 7 Packaging bags 100 lb ea 1,331.35 6,300 8,387,500
- 27. 27 Economics S.N. Item Spec Unit Unit price (USD) Annual consumption Annual cost(USD) 1 Anhydrous ammonia 99.6% ton 450 109,444 49,250,000 2 Process water 0.0% ton 0.40 2,402,778 961,000 3 Power 13kV/480V kWh 0.025 87,872,400 2,197,000 4 Steam 120 psi ton 8 193,681 1,549,000 5 Instrumental air 100 psi 1,000 SCF 0.60 47,880 29,000 6 Cooling water 50 psi ton 0.02 1,386,000 28,000 7 Packaging bags 100 lb 0.40 8,387,500 3,355,000 8 Labor $ 1,760,000 9 Maintenance $ 1,650,000 10 Total cost 60,779,000 11 Sales of ammonium sulfate ton 200 419,362 83,872,000 12 Annual SO2 removed ton 201,118 13 Total operation cost -23,093,000
- 28. 28 Applicability to US Power Plants
- 29. 29 Why Ammonia FGD is a Better Choice than Limestone Process? Limestone Process EADS Process Absorbent Limestone Ammonia By-Product Gypsum Ammonium Sulfate Fertilizer SO2 Removal Efficiency ≥ 95% ≥ 99% Waster Water 55 lb/ hr/ MW None CO2 Emissions 0.7 t/ t SO2 Removed None Power Consumption Base 35-50% Less than Base Operating Cost Base None
- 30. 30 Side by Side Comparison
- 31. 31 Case Study 2 • Plant burning high sulfur coal (~3% Sulfur) • ~2600 MW • ~50% Capacity Factor • Plant receives: • Operating cost reduction of $55,525,000 ($3.99/MWh)* *excludes waste water cost reduction Total long term positive impact of $55,525,000 ($3.99/MWh) Generation in 2016 (MWh) 13,924,000 Operation Cost Savings from JET’s Solution $55,525,000 Cost savings in dollars per MWh $3.99
- 32. 32 Operational Cost Impact on Plant Capacity Factor Source: EIA 2017 Wholesale Energy Prices in PJM Western Hub 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 % of Days Average Wholesale Price Exceeds Generation Cost $/MWh - Generation Cost
- 33. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 % of Days Average Wholesale Price Exceeds Generation Cost $/MWh - Generation Cost Current Generation Cost ($32/MWh) ~50% Capacity Factor 33 Operational Cost Impact on Plant Capacity Factor Source: EIA 2017 Wholesale Energy Prices in PJM Western Hub
- 34. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 % of Days Average Wholesale Price Exceeds Generation Cost $/MWh - Generation Cost Current Generation Cost ($32/MWh) ~50% Capacity Factor With JET FGD ($28.01/MWh) ~83% Capacity Factor 12.5% Cost Reduction 34 Operational Cost Impact on Plant Capacity Factor Source: EIA 2017 Wholesale Energy Prices in PJM Western Hub
- 35. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 % of Days Average Wholesale Price Exceeds Generation Cost $/MWh - Generation Cost Current Generation Cost ($32/MWh) ~50% Capacity Factor Stage 1 – with JET FGD ($28.01/MWh) ~83% Capacity Factor 12.5% Cost Reduction 35 Operational Cost Impact on Plant Capacity Factor Source: EIA 2017 Wholesale Energy Prices in PJM Western Hub Additional Power Generation Revenue for 83% Capacity Factor vs. 50% Capacity Factor: $146,000,000
- 36. 36 Conclusions • Ammonia Desulfurization is a mature, viable technology • EADS offers significant potential for US Coal Plants as a replacement for existing sulfur removal strategy