United States
 Environmental Protection
 Agency
Air and Energy Engineering
Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
 Research and Development
EPA/600/S8-88/065  Apr. 1988
 Project Summary
 Industrial  Boiler  Furnace
 Sorbent Injection Algorithm
 Development
Julie Maddox
  The Industrial Combustion Emissions
 (ICE) Model is one of four stationary
 source  emission and control cost
 forecasting models developed by EPA
 for tne National Acid Precipitation
 Assessment Program (NAPAP). The
 ICE Model projects air pollution emis-
 sions (sulfur dioxide, sulfates, nitrogen
 oxides, and particulate matter), cost,
 and fuel mix for industrial fossil-fuel-
 fired (natural gas, distillate and residual
 fuel oil, and coal) boilers by  state and
 year (1980 baseline,  1990,  1995,
 2000, 2010, 2020, and 2030).
  The report describes the  develop-
 ment of a performance and control cost
 algorithm  for the ICE Model. This
 algorithm enables the ICE Model to
 consider, on an economic basis, the use
 of hydrated lime injection  for S02
 control when a S02 emission reduction
 strategy is implemented. The  algo-
 rithms  described in this report have
 been incorporated  into ICE Model
 Version 6.0.
  This Project Summary was devel-
 oped by EPA's Air and Energy  Engi-
 neering Research Laboratory. Research
 Triangle Park. NC. to announce key
 findings of the research project that is
 fully documented in a separate report
 of the same title (see Project Report
 ordering information at back).

 Introduction
  The full report documents the devel-
 opment of the furnace sorbent  (hydrated
 lime) injection cost algorithm  for coal-
fired  industrial  boilers. This  document
describes the methods used to develop
capital, operating, and annualized costs.
The boiler size range examined covers
units with capacities from 100  million to
1300 million BtuVhr input. All costs are
in June 1985 dollars.

Design Bases
 The furnace injection scheme involves
pneumatic injection of the sorbent into
the flue gas (in the upper furnace) with
subsequent  collection of particulate
matter (PM)  downstream.  The injected
sorbent reacts with the S02 in the flue
gas to form solid products. The reaction
product and  the unreacted sorbent are
then collected downstream with  the fly
ash in  a baghouse or electrostatic
precipitator (ESP).
 For this cost analysis, hydrated lime
is the sorbent. By purchasing hydrated
lime, the industrial  boiler  operator
eliminates the  need for limestone pul-
verizers,  crushers, and bulky storage
piles. Also, lime has exhibited higher SO2
capture than  limestone.
 Furnace sorbent injection alters the
quantity and  chemical characteristics of
PM emitted from the boiler. This results
in  modifications of the  PM control
system, which are based on:

• It is assumed that all existing boilers
  with heat inputs greater than or equal
  to 250 million Btu/hr have an existing
  ESP. This assumption is  based  on the
  requirement that all boilers with heat
  inputs greater than or equal to 250
  million Btu/hr meet a 0.1 Ib** PM/
  million Btu*** emission limit.

• In order to control the additional PM
  loading in  an ESP, additional collec-
  tion area is required. Also, an S03flue
 *1 million But/hr = 0 29 MW.
 "1 lb = 0.45kg.
***1 million Btu = 1.05 GJ.

-------
   gas conditioning  system  must be
   installed in order to adjust the resis-
   tivity into a range which optimizes the
   ESP collection efficiency.

• All existing units with  heat inputs  of
   less than 250 million Btu/hr will need
   to retrofit a fabric filter.

• It is assumed that all units employing
   fabric filters to control  PM will incur
   a sorbent savings of 10% due to the
   additional SOZ removal across the bag
   filters.

• Due to the sorbent savings, all new
   units will install fabric filters to control
   PM.

Algorithm  Development
  The  costs  of  the  sorbent  injection
system are based on data  gathered from
manufacturers  and literature  sources.
The major  capital cost components
include  the  storage  silo, feed bins,
gravimetric  feeders,  and pneumatic
conveyors.  Most  of  the  capital  costs
depend on the sorbent feed rate into the
boiler.
  The cost equations for fabric filters and
ESPs are based on algorithms developed
for  industrial boilers.  These  cost equa-
tions were  developed  as part of the
Industrial Boiler New  Source Perfor-
mance Standard. For fabric  filters, the
capital costs depend on the flue gas flow
rate.  Since  sorbent injection has little
effect on the flue gas flow rate, the capital
costs are  unaffected. The  increased PM
loading   due  to  sorbent  injection
increases the fabric filter operating costs.
The injection of sorbent into the flue gas
stream causes a large increase in the PM
loading. The total collection  plate area
needed in the ESP depends  on the PM
loading of the  flue gas. The additional
collection area needed  is  calculated
based on the percent increase in PM
loading due to sorbent injection. Sorbent
injection  also increases the resistivity of
PM  in the  flue gas to  levels which
significantly reduce ESP  collection
efficiency.                            |

Case Studies
  Tables 1  and 2 present the results of
several case studies examined in this
report. Capital, operating, and annualized
costs are calculated for new and retrofit
units ranging in  size from 100 to 400
million  Btu/hr. The algorithms further
break down the costs into direct furnace
sorbent injection system  costs and PM
control costs. Appendices A,  B, and C of
the report  list Lotus spreadsheets used
to estimate the costs.
Table  1.    Furnace Sorbent Injection Costs for New Boilers

                                    Capital Costs ($)

                             Furnace   Paniculate    Total
                             Injection     Matter     Capital
Boiler Type/Size (million Btu/hr)   System     Control      Cost
                    Annual Operating Costs ($/yr)

                   Furnace   Paniculate    Total
                   Injection     Matter    Operating
                   System     Control      Cost
            Annualized Costs ($/yr)

        Furnace   Paniculate    Total
        Injection    Matter   Annualized
        System    Control      Cost
Spreader Stoker Boiler
100-50% Removal
100-7 5% Removal
250-50% Removal
250-75% Removal
Pulverized Coal Boiler
250-50% Removal
250-75% Removal
400-50% Removal
400-75% Removal

384.393
462,304
594. J 65
768,316

594,165
768,316
795.688
1.061,250

1.138.313
1.144.649
2.279.192
2,295,031

2,218.192
2.234,081
3.157.157
3,182.499

1.522,908
1.606.953
2.873.357
3.063,347

2.812.357
3,002,347
3.952,845
4.243,749

231.460
380,149
442,118
813,418

442,118
813,418
652.607
1.246.413

1 72.344
197,686
373,021
436,376

367,328
430,683
570,479
671.847




1


1
1
1

403,804
577.835
815,139
,249.794

809.446
.244.101
.223.086
,918,260

298,758
453.119
536.603
981.140

536.603
981,140
777.903
1.406,648

364,957
390,983
758,137
823,076

742.072
807.011
1.103.072
1,206.974



1
1

1
1
1
2

658,715
844,052
,294,740
.754.216

,278,675
.738.151
.880.975
.613,622
 Table 2.    Furnace Sorbent Injection Costs for Retrofit Boilers

                                    Capital Costs ($)

                             Furnace  Paniculate    Total
                             Injection    Matter     Capital
 Boiler Type/Size (million Btu/hr)  System    Control     Cost
                    Annual Operating Costs ($/yr)
             Annualized Costs ($/yr)
                   Furnace  Paniculate    Total     Furnace   Paniculate     Total
                   Injection    Matter   Operating   Injection    Matter   Annualizei
                   System    Control     Cost     System    Control      Cost
Spreader Stoker Boiler
100-50% Removal
100-75% Removal
250-50% Removal
250-75% Removal
Pulverized Coal Boiler
250-50% Removal
250-75% Removal
400-50% Removal
400-75% Removal

519.382
589,467
817,709
973.242

800.409
945.056
1.074.967
1.293.178

1.470.635
1.476,032
2.943,186
2,956,677

5.171,169
6,376,607
6.277.127
7.823,546

1.990.O17
2,065,499
3,760,895
3.929.919

5.971,578
7.321.663
7.352.094
9.116,724

287,093
406.235
581.029
878,567

577,663
873,136
869,365
1,341,907

179,424
201.009
390.719
444,681

214,057
310,599
330,931
483.185




1


1
1
1

466,517
607,244
971,748
,323,248

791,720
.183,735
,200,296
.825.092

419.351
552.632
782,906
1,110,356

792.795
1.117,168
1.153.079
1.667.855

579.734
601.859
1.190.356
1,245.667

1.774,464
2.232.371
2.221.439
2.835.830


1
1
2

2

999.085
,154,491
,973,262
,356,023

,567,259
3,349,539
3
4
,374,518
,503.685

-------
     Julie Maddox is with Radian Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.
     Larry G. Jones is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
     The complete report,  entitled "Industrial  Boiler Furnace Sorbent Injection
       Algorithm Development," (Order No. PB 88-184  890/AS; Cost: $14.95,
       subject to change) will be available only from:
             National Technical Information Service
             5285 Port Royal Road
             Springfield, VA 22161
             Telephone: 703-487-4650
     The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
             Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory
             U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
             Research  Triangle Park, NC27711
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
                                                       :'r      ''-;:\  r.vrv I  lj.i.[>0l'!/tb
                                                        MY.c'liS   !  '";,:_ !
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

EPA/600/S8-88/065
         0000329   PS
                                                M
                                                                                •frU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1988—548-013/8

-------