United States
              Environmental Protection
              Agency	
Air and Energy Engineering
Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
              Research and Development
                                                EPA/600/SR-92/115  December 1992
EPA       Project Summary
               Demonstration  of  Sorbent
               Injection  Technology on a  Wall-
               fired  Utility Boiler  (Edgewater
               LIMB Demonstration)
               P.S. Nolan, T.W. Becker, P.O. Rodemeyer, and E. J. Prodesky
                This document summarizes results
               of the full-scale demonstration of Lime-
               stone Injection Multistage Burner (LIMB)
               technology conducted on the coal-fired,
               105 MWe, Unit 4 boiler at Ohio Edison's
               Edgewater Station.   Developed  as a
               technology aimed at moderate levels
               of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen ox-
               ides (NOX) emissions control for rela-
               tively low-cost retrofit applications on
               older plants, LIMB operation at a cal-
               cium to sulfur (Ca/S) molar ratio of 2.0
               is  shown to be capable of achieving
               approximately 55 to 72% SO2 removal
               at capital costs significantly lower than
               wet flue gas desulfurization systems
               for units under 300  MWe and equal or
               lower operating costs.  The removal
               depends upon the specific sorbent in
               use  and the degree of flue gas
               humidification employed.  Sorbents
               tested include a commercial calcitic hy-
               drated lime, both with and without a
               small amount of calcium  lignosulfon-
               ate, a material added to improve reac-
               tivity.   Results are presented for
               humidification of the flue  gas both to
               an 11°C approach to the saturation tem-
               perature (where an increase of 10% [ab-
               solute] in SO2 removal efficiency is ob-
               tained), and for minimal humidification
               (where water is added solely to main-
               tain adequate electrostatic precipitator
               [ESP] performance). The performance
               of the DRB-XCL™ low-NO^ burners, with
               an overall average emission of 206 ng/
               J  (0.48 lb/106 Btu), is also presented.
                  The document also discusses the im-
               pact of LIMB technology on boiler and
               plant operations.  The effects are re-
 lated primarily to the increased quan-
 tity of particulate matter that must flow
 through the boiler, ESP, and ash han-
 dling equipment. The need for effec-
 tive sootblowing is seen as the single
 most important requirement when con-
 sidering application of the technology:
 without it, the increased particulate
 loading can decrease heat transfer effi-
 ciency between sootblowing cycles.
 The other effects discussed in some
 detail result from the quicklime compo-
 nent of the ash and the precautions
 that must be taken to avoid the poten-
 tial  for deposits at wet/dry interfaces
 and for high pH conditions associated
 with ash handling.
   Finally, the application and econom-
 ics of the technology are discussed in
 terms  of a hypothetical  LIMB system
 on a 150 MWe boiler. This forms the
 basis for a comparison of the capital
 and operating costs of the technology
 with those of a conventional limestone
 wet scrubbing system.
   This Project Summary was developed
 by EPA's Air and Energy Engineering
 Research Laboratory, Research Tri-
 angle Park, NC, to announce key find-
 ings of the research project that is fully
 documented in a separate report of the
 same title (see Project Report ordering
 information at back).

 Introduction
   With the growing concern about acid
 rain and the improved understanding of
 its  origins, an active program has been
 underway in the U.S. for many years to
 develop  and utilize technology for acid
                                                               Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
  rafn control. The focus of this effort has
  been on control of sulfur dioxide and ni-
  trogen oxides,  (SO2 and NOX), from coal-
  fired utility boilers, since they represent
  the major source of these acid rain pre-
  cursors.  National point source SO and
  NOX emission standards were established
  for utility boilers in the 1970s; however,
  these standards apply only to newly con-
  structed boilers.  There exist today many
  coal-fired boilers built before establishment
  of these regulations. Many of these units
  have 20 to 30  years of remaining useful
  life, and the new acid rain legislation re-
  cently enacted by Congress will require
  some level of control for older units.
   The SOa emission standards for new
  boilers are based on the use  of flue gas
  scrubbing technology, an option that may
  not be  technically or  economically fea-
  sible for existing boilers.  Space for locat-
  ing the scrubber or disposing of its waste
  may not be available and/or the high capi-
  tal cost may not be justified for a boiler
  With a relatively short remaining lifetime.
  As a result, there is a need for low capital
  cost, easily retrofitted, control technolo-
  gies.  The  proposed acid rain legislation
 suggests that such technologies,  which
 do not achieve  the high removal efficien-
 cies of scrubbers, can still be important in
 meeting overall  removal goals for existing
 boilers.
   One technology which could play a role
 in a utility's compliance with new acid rain
 legislation is LIMB  (Limestone Injection
 Multistage Burners),  which is  based on
 the Injection of a dry sorbent into the boiler
 for direct capture of SO  in the flue gas,
 combined with the use of low-NO  burners
 for reduction of NOX emissions. l!lMB is a
 control  technology for  coal-fired boilers
 which requires low capital investment and
 is easily retrofitted to existing boilers. Al-
 though  it achieves  removal efficiencies
 lower than flue  gas scrubbers, the  cost
 per  unit  of SO., removed is  much  lower
 than that for scrubbers.  Research and
 development work by the U.S. EPA and
 others in the late 1970s and  early 1980s
 established  the  technical foundation for
 the design and operation of a LIMB sys-
 tem on a coal-fired boiler.
  In 1983 the LIMB process was consid-
 ered sufficiently  developed to plan a full-
 scale demonstration of the technology on
 an operating utility boiler.  EPA formally
 Initiated the demonstration in 1984  with
 matching co-funding by the Ohio Coal De-
velopment Office.   Babcock &  Wilcox
 (B&W) was selected as  the primary con-
tractor and Ohio  Edison's Edgewater Sta-
tion in Lorain, Ohio, was selected as the
host  site; both of these organizations pro-
  vided funding support.  The system was
  designed for Edgewater's 105 MWe Unit
  4 boiler, a coal-fired unit burning a nomi-
  nal 3% sulfur Ohio coal.
    The LIMB system was started  up  in
  July  1987 after a thorough  review of the
  research and development data base and
  subsequent design and installation.  Initial
  operation showed that LIMB was highly
  effective in removing SO2,  but  that the
  system could be operated for only a few
  hours at a time  due to the inability of the
  electrostatic precipitator (ESP) to control
  particulate emissions. This  problem was
  diagnosed as being due to the inordinately
  high electrical resistivity of the LIMB ash.
  This situation made long-term, continuous
  operation  impossible due to the need to
  maintain particulate emissions within the
  mandated opacity limit of 20% and 43 ng/
  J.  The Edgewater LIMB system was op-
  erated for several weeks intermittently in
  a series of 2 to 5 hour runs to gather SO2
  removal data; then the system was shut
  down until the particulate removal prob-
  lem could be resolved.   A  maintenance
 shutdown of the  Edgewater boiler had al-
 ready been scheduled at this  time, so little
 project time was actually lost.
   At about this time B&W's  dry scrubber
 experience and dry sorbent injection work
 by  Consolidation Coal  indicated  that
 humidification of a flue gas stream in the
 presence of an active sorbent resulted in
 additional  activation of the  sorbent and
 enhanced SO   removal  from  the gas
 stream. For LlMB, humidification offered
 the  promise of increasing  overall  SO2 re-
 moval  and  sorbent utilization at a  rela-
 tively  small increase  in cost.  Flue gas
 humidification was also shown to solve
 the  LIMB particulate problem, since mois-
 ture in the gas reduces the electrical re-
 sistivity of the ash, reduces the volume of
 the gas, and improves other electrical con-
 ditions. With the promise of increased SO2
 removal beyond what was originally pro-
 jected and resolution of the ESP  operat-
 ing  problems, a  developmental program
 was initiated to design and install a first-
 of-a-kind flue  gas humidification  system
 for Edgewater.
  A bypass  arrangement  was used at
 Edgewater due to the uncertain reliability
 of the humidifier at the time.  Humidification
 in existing  ductwork is envisioned for a
 commercial system, if site-specific limita-
tions and design  parameters  permit suit-
 able residence time.
  The  system started up  again  in Sep-
tember 1988 and operated until June 1989
under a variety of test conditions,  includ-
ing some relatively long, steady-state, op-
erating periods.  The remaining portions
  of this document give results of the tests
  performed, and describe operating experi-
  ence with the Edgewater LIMB system.

  Results and Discussion of SO2,
  NOX, and Particulate Emission '
  Control
    The  original project goal  for SO2 cap-
  ture, based on extensive bench  and pilot
  scale tests, was 50% using sorbent at a
  calcium/sulfur (Ca/S) molar ratio of 2.0.
  During the initial test runs of LIMB in Sep-
  tember 1987, SO2 removal  was approxi-
  mately 55 to 60% at a Ca/S of 2.0.  With
  start-up of the humidifier in 1988, extended
  LIMB run times could be realized because
  of improved ESP operation,  and the sys-
  tem could be adjusted and optimized. The
  humidifier added a potential complicating
  factor  in the determination of LIMB SO
  removal,  since SO  could  also  be  cap-
  tured in the humidifier itself.  It was soon
  confirmed, however, that this removal oc-
  curred only at close approach to the adia-
  batic  saturation  temperature of  the flue
  gas (about 52°C).  Data taken while the
  humidifier was operated at high tempera-
 tures, typically about  135°C where  ESP
 operation improved but no SO2  removal
 occurred, were used to determine  SO
 removal  in the furnace. Later tests  with
 humidifier outlet gas temperatures ap-
 proaching the saturation point were used
 to  define the incremental removal in the
 humidifier.  However,  unlike the 1987 tri-
 als when tests were limited to only a few
 hours,  humidification  stabilized ESP op-
 eration and thus permitted continuous op-
 eration and rigorous test  periods  with no
 significant changes in operating conditions
 extended to as long as 15 hours.
   The  September  1987 tests included
 some runs using commercial, hydrated cal-
 citic lime treated with calcium lignosulfon-
 ate, an additive that appeared to improve
 SO2 removal in earlier bench scale stud-
 ies. Additional tests with  more extensive
 use (1518 metric tons over two periods of
 10  and  25 days each)  of the modified
 sorbent were included in the 1988-89 dem-
 onstration.  Tests were conducted with
 commercial hydrated calcitic lime  both at
 "minimal humidification" and  at an 11°C
 approach to saturation. The former term
 covers results obtained both before  the
 humidifier was installed and when  the hu-
 midifier was used just to maintain a suit-
 able flue  gas temperature and humidity
for effectiye electrostatic precipitation, nor-
 mally about 135°C.  Corresponding tests
were performed using lignosulfonate-doped
sorbent.  The data indicate that the modi-
fied sorbent increases  SO2 removal from
55 to 63% with  minimal  humidification,

-------
and from 65 to 72% at close approach to
saturation, when operating  at a Ca/S of
2.0. The increase is believed to be due to
a combination of the finer  size and the
nonagglomerating properties of the modi-
fied sorbent, as well as the sorbent's abil-
ity to resist sintering.

SO2 Capture in the Furnace
  SO  removal is determined by measur-
ing SO at the stack and comparing this
level with an uncontrolled calculated SO2
level based on  the coal sulfur content.
Typically the SO2 concentration falls rap-
idly when sorbent is first injected into the
boiler,  and  then  continues  to decrease
gradually  to a steady state value within
about  30 minutes.  This incremental in-
crease in SO2 removal  is thought to be
due to supplemental reaction  of sorbent
that settles  out on boiler surfaces.  After
this initial acclimation of the  boiler, the
SO2 levels remain relatively unaffected by
sootblowing and other boiler  operations
since  normally there is  a continual  re-
newal  of the deposits throughout such ac-
tivities.
   Since pilot scale tests  had indicated
that SO2 removal was particularly depen-
dent upon the temperature at the injection
point,  limited parametric optimization tests
were conducted to quantify the effects at
full scale.  The variables, all of which are
 related to the temperature,  included injec-
tion at different elevations in the furnace,
 momentum flux  ratio (essentially injection
velocity and furnace penetration at a given
 load),  the angle of injection (nozzle tilt),
 and boiler  load.  The results show that
 these  parameters have little effect on SO2
 removal in the Edgewater boiler over most
 of the ranges tested, indicating that the
 system  is very insensitive to minor
 changes, if the initial design  parameters
 enable near-optimum operation.
   The only factors that  influenced SO2
 removal significantly were those related to
 sorbent injection  at the low  end of the
 1260  to 871 °C sulfation temperature win-
 dow or with a gross reduction in injection
 velocity.  These conditions occurred when
 sorbent was injected at the upper eleva-
 tion in the  furnace,  and  during  periods
 when the boiler was at minimum load and/
 or when the top row of burners were off.
 Under such conditions the estimated tem-
 perature at the injection point was 1038°C
 or lower and the increased residence time
 did not appear to be sufficient to compen-
 sate for the difference.
    At  one point outside of the test period,
 the booster air was turned  off entirely,
 leaving the lime transport air as the sole
 means of conveying the lime into the fur-
nace.  A dramatic loss in efficiency re-
sulted, indicating that there is a point at
which the momentum flux ratio becomes
important.  The condition was beyond the
range of control  on the booster air flow,
however, and could not be readily tested.
Injection into  higher temperature  zones
was attempted in the form of tilting the
injection nozzles at elevation 181  down
15°  from  horizontal.   No  appreciable
change in  SO2  capture  was  apparent.
While this was not expected to lead to a
dramatic difference, it leads one to sus-
pect that elevation  181,  where the  tem-
perature is  about 1260°C, was very close
to an optimum injection point for this boiler.
Injection ports could have been located at
a lower elevation where temperatures are
higher;  however, recirculation in the lower
furnace would probably have resulted in
sintering and decreased efficiency.

SO2 Removal by Humidification
   The  Edgewater project  demonstrated
that LIMB SO2 removal could be enhanced
by humidification of the flue gas. Most of
the tests conducted at close approach to
the flue gas saturation temperature were
limited to a period of 8 to 12 hours so that
the  baseline  removal  could be certified.
The longest continuous run with no inter-
ruption was 29 hours.  Subsequently, how-
ever, the humidifier has been operated
continuously for as long as 11  days at an
 11 to 14°C approach temperature as part
of the  Coolside process tests under the
 U.S. Department  of  Energy-sponsored
 LIMB Demonstration Project Extension.
   Humidification to an 11 °C approach tem-
 perature increases SO2  removal from 55
 to 65% at a Ca/S of 2.0.  The tests run at
 22 and 33°C  approach temperatures sug-
 gest that the  enhancement is lost some-
 where  slightly above  a  33°C  approach.
 However,  the few data points obtained
 are not considered sufficient to define a
 truly representative curve.  Pilot work and
 dry scrubber  experience predict an expo-
 nential increase in SO2 removal when ap-
 proaching the saturation temperature.

  NOX Emission Control
    In order to reduce NOX  emissions, the
  existing circular  burners were replaced with
  B&W's DRB-XCL™ burners as part of the
  demonstration project. Discrete baseline
  tests with the  older  burners  had shown
  emission levels of about 301 and 387 ng/
  J at 63 and  97 kg/sec  main steam flow
  (mid  and  peak load  conditions,  respec-
  tively). The DRB-XCL™ burners do not
  appear to be as  sensitive to load  condi-
  tions.  An overall  average NOX emission
  level of 206  ng/J was obtained over the
full range of  operating conditions during
the January - June 1989  period.  Aver-
ages of the weighted 24-hour and 30-day
rolling averages of 202 and 211 ng/J were
calculated for the periods of January 8 to
26 and February 21  to April  22,  1989,
respectively.
   The DRB-XCL™ burners operate  at
about  1.0 to 1.2 kPa pressure  drop, in
comparison to the 0.5 to 0.7 kPa  required
by the circular burners.   The unburned
carbon content averaged  1.54 wt  % for
four  LIMB  ash   samples  collected
isokinetically  while sorbent was being  in-
jected at a Ca/S of 2.0 and NOX emissions
were  about 206 ng/J. This would equate
to about 4.6 wt % in an ash undiluted by
reaction products and excess sorbent.  It
was also noted that there  appeared to be
no interactive effects between  sorbent in-
jection and NOX reduction.

Particulate Emission Control
   An early concern of the LIMB demon-
stration was  the ability of the  Edgewater
ESP  to  handle the  two-  to threefold  in-
crease in particulate loading that accom-
panied sorbent injection.  While the load-
ing and the finer size of the particulate are
issues that must be addressed, the pre-
liminary  tests  in 1987 dramatically indi-
cated that the extremely high  electrical
 resistivity of unconditioned LIMB ash was
by far the most immediate impediment to
continuous operation.  As noted  earlier,
the high resistivity, in particular, precluded
 continuous operation beyond several hours
 as the opacity climbed toward  the 20%
 limit at that time. Fortunately,  the humidi-
 fier installed for the 1988-89 operations
 proved to be an effective  means of condi-
 tioning the ash and restoring the  efficiency
 of the ESP to near normal levels.
    Although the Edgewater humidifier was
 designed to accommodate close  approach
 to saturation for SO2 removal  purposes, it
 was  soon found that adding even  modest
 amounts of  water  (lowering the flue  gas
 temperature to about 135°C) was suffi-
 cient to maintain opacity generally in the 1
 to 7% range throughout the  demonstra-
 tion.  Specific ESP  tests included mea-
 surement of resistivity in situ,  operating
 voltage and current, and inlet and outlet
 gas  flow, mass loading, and particle size
 distribution.   These  intensive tests were
 conducted  during  the week  of May 22,
 1989,  and cover  operation of  the ESP
 with both three and five of the six fields in
 service while the unit was operating at 75
 MWe, due  to  operational  concerns be-
 yond the control of the project.  Neverthe-
 less, the conditions were  such that the
 humidifier was operating  at the full design

-------
 flow since repairs to various sources of air
 In-leakage in the boiler had not been fully
 successful.
   For the tests, the ESP inlet temperature
 was maintained at 135°C except for one
 test with  an inlet temperature  of  74°C.
 The results  of these tests, coupled with
 those from associated laboratory tests and
 mathematical modelling,  indicate that
 humidiflcation to 135°C lowered  resistivity
 to 2.3 x 10" ohm-cm, permitted continu-
 ous operation  at acceptable opacity lev-
 els, and resulted in  paniculate emissions
 on the order of 1.7 to 8.6 ng/J or less at
 the  conditions tested.

 LIMB Commercial Design and
 Economics
   Two LIMB retrofit systems were de-
 signed for a 150 MWe  boiler  to  allow
 comparison of the costs and impacts with
 those  of  a wet flue gas desulfurization
 (FGD) system.  Previous economic stud-
 ies had shown LIMB to have cost advan-
 tages over wet  FGD for units under 300
 MWe,  while wet FGD was more cost ef-
 fective for larger units.  A representative
 unit firing 2% sulfur  coal  was used as a
 basis.   Complete costs of the two  LIMB
 system designs  were estimated,  and the
 resultant  operational  changes analyzed.
 The two systems were selected  to cover
 the  range between the  high  cost when
 humidification to an  11°C approach tem-
 perature is used to obtain maximum sulfur
 capture and the lower cost system where
 minimal humidification only restores ESP
 performance.   The main difference be-
 tween  the systems  is the inclusion of a
 humidification chamber for the maximum
 humidification case,  while  the  minimal
 humidification design included installation
 of humidifier lances in existing flues.
   Results of the analysis show that LIMB
 system capital costs are in  the range of
 30 to 43% of  a wet FGD system,  and that
 the costs per ton of SO2 removed are
 lower than those of equivalent performance
 Wet  FGD  systems.  Additionally, the ad-
 vantages  of  the LIMB systems  include:
 simplicity of operation and ease of main-
 tenance, reduced outage time for installa-
 tion,  shorter lead time for material supply,
 smaller space requirement, and lower re-
 duction of plant electrical output


 Operational Considerations

 LIMB Effects on Boiler
 Operation
  The impact  of LIMB technology on boiler
operation is related primarily to increased
particulate  loading and  depends heavily
 on the adequacy of the sootblowing sys-
 tem.  With sorbent injection in the upper
 furnace as was done at Edgewater, LIMB
 technology results in a higher rate of ash
 accumulation on  tubes and other avail-
 able surfaces, roughly in proportion to the
 additional particulate matter.  Virtually  all
 of the sorbent appeared to follow the gas
 stream through the convective pass, rather
 than being reported as bottom ash. Thus
 injection at the elevation of the nose and
 above  avoids the potential  for sintering
 and slagging conditions that would prob-
 ably have resulted had the sorbent been
 introduced at a higher temperature and/or
 a lower elevation. The four new steam
 sootblowers added in the primary super-
 heat area as part of  the project were ef-
 fective within their range, but did not make
 up for limitations elsewhere.
   The  LIMB ash that did accumulate on
 the tubes was found to be about as easily
 dislodged by sootblowing as is normal coal
 fly ash.  The most notable difference was
 that,  instead of  operating on  a normal
 once-per-shift basis, the sootblowers were
 run about three times as frequently, effec-
 tively in almost continuous  cycles.  As
 one might expect, this strained the capac-
 ity of the compressed  air system  at
 Edgewater, to the point that all but the
 four air heater blowers were converted  to
 a  steam-driven system for the  LIMB ex-
 tension work to follow.  This is not to say
 that an air system would not work, only
 that the capacity of the Edgewater system
 could not  keep up with the heavier duty
 cycle.
   The overall effect of ash accumulation
 on the tubes was a decrease in heat trans-
 fer and higher  flue  gas  temperatures
 throughout the boiler.  Heat transfer rates
 through the tubes appeared to return to
 normal immediately after being blown, only
 to begin the cycle once more. Because of
 this and the relatively low capacity of the
 air-driven  sootblowers, the net result was
 a flue gas temperature of about 177°C at
 the air heater outlet, compared to a more
 normal temperature of about 149°C under
 steady state conditions.  However, effec-
 tive sootblowing  is expected to -reduce
 this temperature  rise significantly.
  The other source of energy loss neces-
 sarily associated with  LIMB is the excess
 air used both for sorbent dispersion in the
furnace  and water atomization in the hu-
 midifier.  At Edgewater, ambient air was
 used  for  both, although preheated  air,
 recirculated flue  gas,  or even  mechani-
cally assisted  devices could be used for
sorbent  dispersion in  another installation.
While the data have not been reduced in
terms of  a  specific  energy  loss, the
 "booster air fan" arrangement at Edgewater
 used about 3.78 kg/sec of air to feed 1.51
 kg/sec of sorbent into 126  kg/sec of flue
 gas. Humidification to an 11°C approach
 to saturation required about 2.52kg/sec of
 air to atomize 5.54kg/sec of water.  The
 atomization system was designed conser-
 vatively with an air compressor motor rated
 at 876 kW, to ensure the production of the
 fine droplet size required.  Close approach
 to saturation  at Edgewater  also required
 flue  gas reheat for  plume buoyancy.  A
 steam coil reheater  with the capability of
 raising the flue gas temperature 22°C was
 installed for this purpose at the outlet  of
 the ESP, just before the induced draft fan.
 In applications  where only  minimal
 humidification would be required for ESP
 operation, the energy penalty associated
 with  high  levels of humidification  and re-
 heat would be significantly lower.

 Humidifier Operation
   The humidification system installed  at
 Edgewater proved to be  relatively prob-
 lem-free and  achieved the  purposes for
 which it was designed.  Early mathemati-
 cal and plastic flow modelling and quarter-
 scale simulation tests,  all conducted  in
 the early design phase,  provided  mean-
 ingful insight  into the flow  patterns  and
 evaporation processes involved.   For the
 most part, the wet/dry interface problems
 were limited to relatively small, manage-
 able areas. The most significant problem
 was a buildup of material near some of
 the atomizers.  The  material would build
 to several  centimeters in length and then
 fall to the floor of the horizontally config-
 ured chamber where material would accu-
 mulate. A modified airfoil lance assembly
 for the atomizer array was designed and
 installed in 3 of the 22 lance locations for
 the last 3 months of the program.  These
 modified assemblies had a greatly reduced
 tendency  for deposit formation, and  the
 complete atomizer array was replaced be-
 fore continuing with the Coolside process
 tests.
  When  the humidifier was operated at
 outlet temperatures 22°C  and  above  the
 saturation temperature, essentially no dif-
 ficulties were encountered. Moreover, the
 presence of unreacted quicklime, CaO, in
 the ash  undoubtedly  contributed to favor-
 able conditions by virtue of its exothermic
 reaction with water. Although the quantity
 of water vapor present in the flue gas as a
 result of combustion was more than suffi-
 cient for total rehydration of the CaO,  the
 gas/solid reaction kinetics appeared to be
 quite slow when  the humidifier was oper-
 ated considerably  above  the  saturation
temperature.  Under this operating condi-

-------
tion, much steam evolved when mixing
LIMB ash with liquid water just prior to
disposal  (described in more detail later).
Notably less steaming occurred when the
humidifier was operated at close approach
to saturation,  suggesting that,  whatever
the mechanism(s), the excess CaO has a
strong affinity for liquid water.
  Predictably, deposits formed in the cen-
ter  area of the humidifier  outlet turning
vanes after extended operation precisely
at an 11°C approach to saturation.  The
deposits built to a thickness of about 10cm
and then sloughed off  onto the floor.
These deposits are not considered to be
a problem because the chamber was be-
ing tested at  the  extreme limit  of its de-
sign and several remedial alternatives
could be used in  a commercial system.
These  include not only  operation  at a
slightly higher temperature, but also inten-
tional capture of large, unevaporated drop-
lets  with periodic  deposit collection and
removal through a hopper system. If site-
specific  spatial limitations permit, a verti-
cal, down-flow configuration with a hopper
for solids collection would be preferred for
a commercial humidifier required to oper-
ate at close approach temperatures.

Ash Handling and Disposal
  LIMB technology also has significant im-
pacts on the  power plant's ash  handling
and disposal practices. The most obvious
of these  is the sheer quantity of material
that must be  processed.  As implied ear-
lier, operation at a Ca/S of 2.0 with a 10%
ash, high sulfur  coal almost triples the
rate at which ash must be collected by the
ESP and then transferred to the ash silo.
As long as lines were free of obstructions
and the transfer equipment was in good
working order, the increased quantity gen-
erally did not pose a problem since nor-
mal demand  and  the basic design of the
ash handling  system could accommodate
such amounts. By the same token, it was
important to react to upsets quickly since
there was  less time available  to make
required repairs.
  Beyond the quantity of ash  itself, the
other major considerations regarding LIMB
ash handling  and  disposal stemmed from
the quicklime component and the pozzo-
lanic properties of the ash. At Edgewater,
ash  is pneumatically conveyed from the
ESP hoppers into the ash  storage silo.
Even during  the  relatively short tests in
1987, LIMB ash tended to bridge over at
the wet/dry interface near the aspirating
water jets used to create the vacuum. A
device designed to ram through the de-
posit periodically  was successfully  de-
signed  and  installed to overcome this
seemingly small, but critical, problem.
  Greater difficulty was encountered due
to the amount of steam generated by the
water/quicklime reaction occurring in the
beds of the trucks used to haul ash to the
landfill.  Water was mixed with dry LIMB
ash from the silo in a pug mill that dis-
charged directly into the truck waiting be-
low.   As the level  rose in the bed,  the
steam that resulted soon  made it impos-
sible for the  operator to  see how much
room  remained.   As noted earlier, this
was  true  especially when  minimal
humidification  was  employed.   Although
the problem had been anticipated and  a
large  fan had been mounted to blow or
suck the steam away, the severity of the
steaming was far beyond the fan's capa-
bility.  After considering a number of alter-
natives including weighing and sonic tech-
niques, a system  was devised  that in-
volved the operator's  lowering a freely
hanging thermocouple to the desired fill
level in the empty truck bed.  The thermo-
couple then read ambient temperature up
until the time it would begin to sense the
hot ash. While not regarded as a perma-
nent "commercial" solution to the problem,
it proved  to  be  an expedient, practical
remedy for the purposes of the demon-
stration.  In time,  a "reference" thermo-
couple was added in the discharge chute
of the pug mill,  since some variation in
temperature did occur, typically in the 66
to 121°C range, depending on the stoichi-
ometry and degree of humidification.
  For future commercial systems, a more
sophisticated design including those based
on gravimetric, sonic, or even spectropho-
tometric techniques  is envisioned, if treat-
ment  is restricted  to an  ash  unloading
system such as exists at Edgewater. As-
suming that rehydration of the quicklime
component is the preferred method of ash
disposal,  another   extreme  is possible
where there are pre-existing facilities, such
as a  pug  mill and  radial  stacker at  the
disposal site, which can readily accommo-
date steam from the ash.  The steam
emanating  from  the surface of the ash
presents  no sustained problem in that  it
subsides  to faint wisps within about 15
minutes.
  Before the  steaming problems were
brought under control, they gave rise to  a
further complication that had been under-
estimated.   While   underfilling the truck
was the norm, on a couple of occasions
overfills did occur that had to  be picked
up with a front end  loader.  The area then
was washed down as a final cleanup mea-
sure.  When this was done, the lime-rich
ash would raise the pH of water draining
toward the plant's ash pond.  While provi-
sion had been made for sensing and neu-
tralizing high pH water that could  result
from a failure  in the pneumatic ash con-
veying system and from minor yard spills
of lime or ash,  the amount  that spilled
from overfilling the truck had not been
anticipated.  Moreover, sumps that accu-
mulate significant quantities of lime or LIMB
ash  due to low flow or  agitator failure
could also produce undesirably high pH.
The solution to all of these related difficul-
ties  was  rerouting all  of the potential
sources through the neutralization system.
  Most of the  LIMB ash from Edgewater
was placed in  Ohio Edison's ash disposal
site,  adjacent to the normal ash disposal
area.   Despite  apprehensions that the
cementitlous properties of the ash might
cause some difficulty with the bulldozers,
no significant problems were encountered,
probably because the pozzolanic reactions
did not proceed to any appreciable extent
at the relatively low water/ash ratios used
to produce a material that can be readily
dumped from the truck.  In addition to the
routine LIMB ash disposal, approximately
140  truckloads were placed  in two  test
cells in an isolated area of the disposal
site for study over the next several years
under a related DOE-sponsored program.

Summary and Conclusions
  The  results  of the LIMB demonstration
project  on a  full-scale,  coal-fired utility
boiler show that the technology has  met
or surpassed program goals with respect
to SOg and NO  emission control.  More-
over, in spite of early difficulty in control-
ling particulate emissions with the ESP,
the design and installation of a full-scale
humidification  system  appears to have
overcome the  adverse  aspects of the in-
creased quantity of fine,  high  resistivity
ash.  Specifically, the use of a lignosulfon-
ate-doped hydrated calcitic lime, produced
in bulk by a commercial supplier, and op-
eration  of the  humidifier  at an 11°C ap-
proach to saturation resulted in SO re-
moval efficiencies of up to 72% at a Ca/S
of 2.0,  far in excess of the 50% program
goal.  Even without the lignosulfonate ad-
ditive,  up  to 65%  capture was possible
under the same conditions. Removal effi-
ciencies of about 62 and 55% were ob-
tained in the absence of humidification to
the close  approach temperature for the
modified and unmodified sorbents, respec-
tively.   The SO2 data  have also been
reduced and presented in a form that char-
acterizes the  removal  over  a  range of
stoichiometric  ratios.  At the  same time,
an overall average NOx emission level of
206  ng/J was  achieved  over months of
operation with  the DRB-XCL™ burners in-
stalled  to meet a goal of 215  ng/Jor less.
Particulate emission control was effectively
restored by modest levels of humidification

-------
as indicated by opacity measurements at
the ESP outlet.   Particulate mass emis-
sion levels of 4.3 to 8.6ng/J were found
to be far below the 43ng/J goal, although
the tests had to be conducted at  condi-
tions representing approximately 75% of
the full boiler load.  This load limitation
was imposed because long-term  loss of
refractory  material had exposed support
beams in the vicint'ry of the nose arch to
unaccepatably high temperatures.
  The  designs of two  150 MWe LIMB
systems,   one   with   only   minimal
humidification to  restore ESP  efficiency
and another with the capability of operat-
ing at close approach to  saturation, were
used as a basis for cost comparisons with
wet limestone FGD.   Economic studies
have shown that the capital and operating
costs of LIMB technology compete favor-
ably for units up to about 300 MWe.  Ad-
ditional benefits of LIMB include ease of
operation  and maintenance,  relatively
simple installation, smaller space require-
ment, and a lower reduction of the plant's
generation capacity.
  The overall impact LIMB technology had
on  boiler  and  plant operations  at
Edgewater is particularly notable in a few
areas, all  of which are considered man-
ageable when viewed from the perspec-
tive of further commercialization. The single
greatest impact comes simply from  in-
creased particulate  loading  through the
boiler, ESP,  and ash  handling system.
Unless restored by effective  sootblowing,
heat transfer efficiency in the boiler de-
creases in proportion to the amount of
sorbent injected.  At higher Ca/S ratios
the limitations of the compressed air
sootblowing system at Edgewater  soon
pointed toward the need for future com-
mercial systems to  address sootblowing
capability  more thoroughly than had origi-
nally been anticipated for the demonstra-
tion project.   In comparison with these
effects, the impact of increased gas flow
from air used to disperse the sorbent and
to atomize water in the humidifier is thought
to be quite low, especially if only moder-
ate  humidification to perhaps 135°C is re-
quired to  restore ESP  efficiency.  While
the  data indicate an overall  energy pen-
alty of about  1.5% in boiler efficiency for
the  combined impacts, it is  strongly be-
lieved that this can be recovered with more
effective sootblowing.
  Again because of the increased quan-
tity  of  material, LIMB technology makes
additional demands  upon the ash han-
dling system  that must be taken into ac-
count in the  application for future com-
mercial systems. Beyond this, the chemi-
cal  composition of the LIMB  ash, and the
quicklime  component in particular, should
be  reviewed  carefully in light of possible
deposit formation  at wet/dry  interfaces
where the pozzolanic  properties  of the
ash can be important.  Likewise the lime
component of the ash is  important with
regard to potentially high pH conditions in
any wetting operation that might be used
as part of the ash disposal process.
 •U,S. Government Printing Office: 1993 — 750-071/60164

-------

-------
   P. Nolan, T. Becker, P. Rodemeyer, andE. Prodeskyare with the Babcock& Wilcox
     Co., Barbeton, OH 44203.
   David G. Lachapelle is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
   The complete report, entitled "Demostration ofSorbent Injection Technology on a
     Wall-fired Utility Boiler (Edgewater LIMB Demonstration)," (Order No. PB92-201
     136/AS; Cost: $35.00, 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, NC 27711
United States
Environmental Protection Agency
Center for Environmental Research Information
Cincinnati, OH 45268

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
     BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
         EPA
   PERMIT No. G-35
EPA/600/SR-92/115

-------