United States
                    Environmental Protection
                    Agency
 Industrial Environmental Research
 Laboratory
 Research Triangle Park NC 27711
                    Research and Development
 EPA-600/S7-83-042 Oct. 1983
<&ER&          Project  Summary
                    Evaluation of Combustion
                    Modification  Effects  on  Emissions
                    and  Efficiency  of Wood-Fired
                    Industrial  Boilers

                    R. J. Tidona, W. A. Carter, H. J. Buening, and S. S. Cherry
                     Results of full-scale tests to evaluate
                    combustion modifications for emission
                    control and efficiency enhancement on
                    two wood-fired  industrial boilers are
                    reported. These modifications consisted
                    of lower excess air and variations in the
                    overfire air system operation.
                     The boiler at Location 3 was fueled
                    with a combination of wood bark and
                    coal. The implementation of lower
                    excess air reduced NO> emissions by
                    37.2 percent and improved thermal
                    efficiency by 1.2 percent. Variations in
                    the overfire air system reduced NO> by
                    20.7 percent and improved efficiency
                    by 1.63 percent.
                     The boiler at Location 6 was fired with
                    hogged wood as the primary fuel and oil
                    as the supplemental fuel. The effective-
                    ness of lower excess air in reducing NO*
                    was 12.5 percent with a slight improve-
                    ment in efficiency (0.6 percent). Adjust-
                    ment of the auxliary air dampers producd
                    a 17.2 percent NO. reduction and a 1.7
                    percent improvement in efficiency.
                    Polycyclic  organic matter (POM) was
                    sampled at both baseline and optimum
                    low-NO» conditions. On a ftg/m3 basis.
                    the POM for low-NO> conditions ex-
                    ceeded the baseline results by a factor
                    of two to three. The results obtained are
                    compared to previous POM sampling
                    on industrial steam boilers.
                     This Project Summary was developed
                    by EPA's Industrial Environmental
                    Rasearch Laboratory, Research Triangle
                    Park. NC. to announce key findings of
                    the research project that is fully docu-
                    mented in a separate report of the same
title (see Project Report ordering
information at back).

Introduction
  The activities  reported here include
tests performed  on a wood bark/coal-
fired boiler (Location  3) and a hogged
wood fuel boiler (Location 5). Oil was the
supplemental fuel at Location 5. Varia-
tions in load, excess air and overfire air
system adjustments were the combustion
modifications common to both boilers. In
addition, lower combustion air preheat
and supplemental fuel oil air damper
positioning were implemented at Location
5. Polycyclic organic matter (POM) was
also sampled at Location 5 at both baseline
and optimum low-NO* conditions.
  Table 1 summarizes the reductions in
NO and changes in efficiency measured
at Location 3 for each combustion
control. The overfire air system modifica-
tion consisted of increasing the overfire
airports from 1 to 1.5 in. (2.54 to 3.81 cm)
diameter. As noted, the lowest NO level
obtained resulted from implementing
lower excess air  before the modification
of overfire air ports. This arrangement
also produced  an increase in  boiler
efficiency of 1.2 percent.
  Table 2 summarizes the NO reductions
achieved at Location 5 and the change in
efficiency for all modifications except
reduced combustion air preheat. This
modification could not be fully imple-
mented since the combustion air tem-
perature could be reduced by only 16-22
K. Also noted in this table is the NO mass
emission factor  measured after each

-------
"**"
  modification had been  implemented.
  Increased load (18 percent) actually
  reduced the NO concentration and mass
  emission factor. This NO characteristic is
  somewhat unusual; i.e., peak NO occurs
  in the mid-load range. This occurrence
  may be due to the boiler's O2 vs. load
  characteristic  which could produce a
  maximum NO concentration at less than
  full  load.
    Polycyclic organic matter (POM) samples
  were collected and  analyzed for boiler
  operation at both baseline and low-NO.
  (auxiliary air damper adjustment) condi-
  tions. The significant finding was that the
  total POM  at the low-NO, condition was
  two to three  times  higher than that
  measured under  baseline conditions.
  This large difference could be due more to
  fuel property variations than to combustion
  modification, although the trend of higher
  POM with  lower NO, has been observed
  previously.

  Emissions Test
  Instrumentation
   All emission measurement instru-
  mentation for the full-scale testing was
  carried out in an 8 x 42 ft (2.4 x 1 2.8 m) mo-
  bile laboratory trailer. The gaseous species
  measurements were made with analyzers
  located in the trailer.  The emission
  measurement instrumentation used is
  listed in Table 3.

  Results

  Location 3,  Wood Bark/ Coal
Table 1.    Summary of Combustion Modifications At Location 3
   Combustion modifications implemented
 consisted of lower excess air, variation in
 overfire air damper positioning, and load
 changes. In addition, the overfire air
 system  nozzle size was increased, and
 the effect of lower excess air was re-
 evaluated.
   Figure 1 depicts the effect of oxygen on
 NO emissions before the increase in
 overfire air nozzle  size. Reducing  the
 oxygen  from 9.3 percent (as found. Test
 1) to 7.8 percent (Test 4) lowered the NO
 emissions by 37.2 percent while in-
 creasing the efficiency by 1.2 percent. As
 noted in Figure 2, the effectiveness of
 lower excess  air after the  overfire air
 modification was less pronounced.
   With  respect to boiler operation at 80
 percent of rated load (Test 31) only a 7.9
 percent reduction in NO was measured
 when the load was reduced by 51 percent
 (Test 29) as shown  in Figure 3. This
 control  caused  the boiler efficiency to
 decrease by 4 percent.
    Variations in  the overfire air damper
 positioning, at constant overall oxygen
Control
Lower Excess Air" (146?
Lower Excess Air" (184)
Overfire Air Dampers" (1 74)
Load Reduction <51%f* (140)
NO Reduction.
%
37.2
18.5
20.7
7.9
Efficiency
Change, %
+1.2
+0.9
+ 1.6
-4.0
NO After Control
ng/J*
92
150
138
129
'NO as NO*
^Before overfire air system modification.
c Value in parentheses is baseline NO (ng/J) before combustion modification.
"After overfire air system modification.
'Load reduction referenced to nominal operation at 80% of rating.
Modification
Lower Excess Air (4Of
Increase Overfire Air (46)
Auxiliary Air Damper (36)
Load Change"
+18% (40)
-30% (40)
NO Reduction,
%
12.5
21.7
17.2
27.5
3O.O
Efficiency NO After Modification
Change, % ng/J*
+O.6
-1.3
+1.7
+0.9
+1.8
35
36
3O
29
28
'NO as NOz.
''Value in parentheses is baseline NO (ng/J) before combustion modification.
"Load change referenced to nominal operation at 76.5% of rating.
 Table3.   Emissions Measurement Instrumentation
Species
Hydrocarbon
Carbon Monoxide
Oxygen
Carbon Dioxide
Nitrogen Oxides
Particulates
Sulfur Dioxide
Manufacturer
Beckman Instruments
Beckman Instruments
Teledyne
Beckman Instruments
Thermo Electron Co.
Joy Manufacturing Co.
DuPont Instruments
Measurement Method
Flame lonization
IR Spectrometer
Polargraphic
IR Spectrometer
Chemiluminescent
EPA Method 5 Train
UV Spectrometer
Model
No.
402
865
326A
864
10A
EPA
400
(9.8-9.9 percent), were shown to reduce
NO emissions by  20.7 percent  and
increase efficiency by 1.6 percent. This
result was obtained by partly closing the
lower row of overfire air ports and fly-ash
reinjection ports.
  Total  and solid particulate emissions
were measured downstream of the
multiclone at the low-NO, condition.
Total  particulate was 138 ng/J (0.320
lb/106 Btu) and the solid particulate was
118  ng/J (0.274 lb/106 Btu) with the
unit operating at 8.2 percent 62.
  The low-NO, cascade impactor test is
shown in Figure 4. Particulate diameter
as a function of cumulative proportion of
impactor catch  is  plotted. About  27
percent of the particles are below 3 //m
aerodynamic diameter.  The geometric
mean and geometric dispersion are 6 and
1.099 //m, respectively. A comparison of
the baseline and low-NO, results indicates
that the geometric mean particle size for
baseline operation is approximately 50
percent of that measured during low-NO,
operation (3.2 fjm vs. 6 (im). Closing the
dampers for the overfire air and fly-ash
reinjection (low-NO, configuration) re-
sulted in the production of larger partic-
ipates, but  at a reduced mass rate (118
vs. 155 ng/J).

Location 5, Hogged Wood
Boiler
  NO emissions from  this boiler were
very low: only one measurement exceeded
100 ppm.  Combustion modifications
implemented were lower excess air, load
variations,  increased overfire  air flow,
and auxiliary air damper positioning. The
effectiveness of reduced combustion air
preheat could not be established since
only a modest (16-22 K) reduction was
possible when the steam coil portion of
the air heater was bypassed.
  The effect on NO of excess air variations
is shown in Figure  5 for three different
loads. With respect to nominal operation
at 19.3 kg/s (153,000 Ib/hr) steam flow
and 7.2 percent O2 (Test 5/2-1 A), a load

-------
 reduction of 30 percent produced a NO
 reduction of 30 percent and an efficiency
 increase of 1.8 percent.
  The effectiveness of lower excess air at
 constant load is also shown in Figure 5.
 At a load of 19.3 kg/s (153,000 Ib/hr) nd
 7.2 percent 02, a 12.5  percent reduction
 in NO was computed when the Oz was
 lowered to 5.7 percent (Test 5/2-4).
  The overfire air flow, as a percentage of
 total combustion air, was increased from
 a baseline value of 5.7 percent to  9.7
 percent. This had the effect of reducing
 the  primary combustion air admitted
 under  the grate. This modification
 reduced the NO emissions by 21.7
 percent; however, the  boiler efficiency
 was also lowered by 1.3 percent.
  Each auxiliary oil  burner  has  an
 independent air supply. Opening this air
 supply (with the burner off) implements
 another form of staged combustion. Tests
 conducted  in  this configuration, when
 compared to all baseline tests, produced a
 NO reduction of 17.2 percent and a  1.7
 percent increase in efficiency.
  Figure 6 presents all paniculate meas-
 urements made at the  boiler outlet as a
 function of the corresponding NO levels.
A trend of lower particulate emissions
with lower NO emissions is  noted. The
 reason for this behavior is not known at
 present.
  Polycyclic organic matter (POM) samples
were obtained at the boiler outlet under
 both baseline and  low-NO. (auxiliary oil
 burner  air dampers open)  conditions.
Table 4 presents the speciated analyses
from which it is noted that the total POM
 under Iow-N0x conditions is two to three
times greater (on a /jg/m3 basis) than for
 baseline operation. This trend (i.e., higher
 POM with lower  NO*) was observed
 previously,* and is attributed to  more
fuel-rich conditions in the burning zone.
 •Carter, W. A., and Buening, H. J., "Thirty-Day Field
 Tests of Industrial Boilers, Site 1—Coal-Fired
 Spreader Stoker," EPA-600/7-80-085a (NTIS PB
 80-211386), April 1980.
   400
   300
   200
   100
           Fuel: ^ 70% Coal
               s 30% Wood Bark
               ( ) Test Number
           Boiler Load; 37.2-37.7 Mg/h
                                                            (4)
                                                            Smoke Limit'
                                                            @ 7.8% Oz
                                                                      10
                                                                            11
                                      Oi %. dry
Figure 1.    Location 3—NO emissions as a function ofOt before overfire air nozzle modification.

-------


400

300
200
100
(
0 Baseline before modification
H Oz Variation before modification
& Overfire air O
~ O Baseline after modification |
Q Oz Variation after modification
O Coal only
OH
8H-
^ 0
•
Fuel. ^80% Coal
a 20% Wood Bark
Boiler Load 34.9-38. 1 Mg/h
1 I t I I 1 i 1 I I
32465/0
JUU



200
X
Q
C3
I
O'
* 700

Stack Oxygen. %. dry
ure 2. Location 3 — NO emissions as a function of stack O»
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
(32) (?)
7
rj^^
\ -ST^T^" -
-
f ) Test Number

I 1 i I I 1 1 I 1 1
     0       20       40       60       80       100
                    Load. 103 Ib steam/hr
Figure 3.    Location 3—NO emissions as a function of load.

-------
   10
 s
Q
a  0.5
Q
i
O
    0.1
Location 3 Wood Bark Boiler
Test No. 3-24
21% Wood Bark. 79% Coal
Load: 34.9 Mg/h
O2 = S.S%
Brink Impactor
Downstream of Multiclone
      0.01     2    5  10 20   50          95 9899
        Cumulative Proportion of Impactor Catch. % by mass
 Figure 4.    Aerodynamic particle diameter— Iow-N0t conditions.
                                                                       140
                                                                       120
                                                                    ^  100
80
                                      i'
                                                                       20
          i   i    i   i    i   i   i    i   i    i   i   r
                               Steam Flow:
                             kg/s(103lb/hr)
                             	 O 19.31153)
                             	n 22.7(180)
                             	A 13.5(107)
                           Fuel: Hogged Wood (100%)


                          O
                        5/2-2
                  5/3-2    5/3~3A
                                                                                                                  1
                                                                                                                         1
                                                                          024      6     8     tO     12     14

                                                                                           Stack Oxygen,  %. dry

                                                                     Figure 5.    NO emissions as a function of stack oxygen for three
                                                                                 loads in a hogged fuel boiler.

-------
i

ti
I

     3870
     (9.0)
     3440
     (8.0)
     3010
     (7.0)
     2580
     (6.0)
2150
(5.0)
      7720
      (4.0)
^    '290
.o    (3.0)
      860
      (2.0)
       430
       - 5/2- IE
                              5/7-2
                                         5/2-4A
                                         Q 5/4-2A
40         50        60         70
               NO. ppm. dry @ 3%. O2
                                                              80
                                                                  90
100
 Figure 6.    Location 5—Boiler total paniculate emissions as a function of NO emissions.

-------
Table 4.   Summary of POM Analyses For Location 5—Wood-Fired Spreader Stoker
Low NO, Test
XAD-2
POM
Phenanthrene
Anthracene
Methyl Anthracenes/
Phenanthrenes
Fluoranthene
Pyrene
Methyl Pyrene/ Fluoranthene
Benzoldphenanthrene
Benzfa/anthracene
Chrysene
Methyl Chrysenes
Dimethylbenz anthracenes
Benzofluoranthenes
Benzofajpyrene
Benzofe/pyrene
Perylene
Methylcholanthrenes
lndeno(1,2. d-cdjpyrene
Benzofg.h. i/perylene
Dibenz anthrancenes
Dibenzpyrenes
Coronene
TOTAL"
Sample volume, rrf
H9
0.7
A/0*
0.7

<0.5
NO

3.2
<0.4
3.4

0.8<1.3
1.0
0.7<1.2
ND
ND

-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
                                                                                          ft U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1983-759-102/0783

-------