EPA-450/3-74-002
February 1974
EVALUATION
OF THE CONTROLLABILITY
OF POWER PLANTS
HAVING A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
ON AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Water Programs
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park Park, North Carolina 27711
-------
EPA-450/3-74-002
EVALUATION
OF THE CONTROLLABILITY
OF POWER PLANTS
HAVING A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
ON AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
by
The M.W. Kellogg Company
1300 Three Greenway Plaza East,
Houston, Texas 77046
Contract Number 68-02-1308
EPA Project Officer: Robert T. Walsh
Prepared for
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Water Programs
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
February 1974
-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to
report technical data of interest to a limited number of readers.
Copies are available free of charge to Federal employees, current
contractors and grantees, and nonprofit organizations - as supplies
permit - from the Air Pollution Technical Information Center,
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina 27711, or from the National Technical Information Service,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22151.
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency
by The M.W. Kellogg Company, Houston, Texas, in fulfillment of
Contract No. 68-02-1308. The contents of this report are repro-
duced herein as received from The M.W. Kellogg Company. The
opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed are those of the
author and not necessarily those of the Environmental Protection
Agency. Mention of company or product names is not to be con-
sidered as an endorsement by the Environmental Protection Agency,
Publication No. EPA-450/3-74-002
11
-------
MWKLG-RED-74-1283
EVALUATION OF THE CONTROLLABILITY OF
POWER PLANTS HAVING A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
ON AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
TASK NO. 1 FINAL REPORT
CONTRACT NO. 68-02-1308
by
THE M.W. KELLOGG COMPANY
RESEARCH & ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT
HOUSTON, TEXAS
Submitted to
CONTROL SYSTEMS DIVISION
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, N.C. 27711
Prepared for
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND MONITORING
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
JANUARY 31, 1974
-------
en
RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT
EVALUATION OF THE CONTROLLABILITY
OF POWER PLANTS HAVING A SIGNIFICANT
IMPACT ON AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
TASK NO. 1 FINAL REPORT
Submitted to
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND MONITOIRNG
CONTROL SYSTEMS .DIVISION
CONTRACT NO. 68-02-1308
Approved:
Chemical Engineering Development
Research and Development
-------
THE M. W. KELLOGG COMPANY
Engineering Research Division
/AA\
un
\w/
Page No.
Report H-RED-74-1Z53
EVALUATION OF THE CONTROLLABILITY
OF POWER PLANTS HAVING A. SIGNIFICANT
IMPACT ON AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
TASK NO. 1 FINAL REPORT
EPA-ORM-CSD CONTRACT NO. 68-02-1308
JANUARY 31, 1974
Staff:
Period Covered:
RDO No.:
Distribution:
D.O. Moore Jr., J.J. O'Donnell, L.D. Fraley,
M.J. Cambon, V. Rickey and MWK Estimating Dept,
Personnel
July, 1973 to January, 1974
4118-01
Office of Control Technology, EPA
L.C. Axelrod
M.J. Cambon
C.F. Chatfield
C.W. Crady
C.J. Donovan
J.B. Dwyer
J.A. Finneran
L.D. Fraley
S.E. Handman
D.O. Moore, Jr.
J.J. O'Donnell
V. Rickey
W.C. Schreiner
A.G. Sliger
M.J. Wall
R.I.D. (4)
Authors
Copy No,
1-200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216-219
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
I. Introduction 1
II. Summary and Conclusions 4
A. General Conclusions
B. Specific Conclusions Regarding Each Plant
III. Basis of Design 17
IV. Process Description 23
A. Limestone Handling, Grinding, and the Effluent System
B. Scrubbing System
V. Specific Plant Descriptions 29
VI. Capital Investment Data 56
VII. Operating Cost Data 60
VIII. Appendices 61
A. Process Flow Sheets: Limestone and Effluent System;
Scrubbing System (Figures 1,2) 62
B. Equipment List (Table 1) 65
C. Standard Scrubber Modules (Figures 3, 4, 5) 70
D. Standard Limestone System Plan and Elevation
(Figure 6) 74
E. Absorber-Venturi Standard Sizes (Table 2) 76
F. Slurry Pond Size Sheet (Table 3) 78
G. Power Plant Input Data & Design Data (Tables 4-27) 80
H. Plot Plans for each Plant Showing Scrubbing
System (Figures 7-18) 139
I. Glossary 152
ABSTRACT 155
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Title Page No.
1 Equipment List 65
2 Absorber-Venturi Standard Sizes 76
3 Slurry Pond Size Sheet 78
4 Power Plant Input Data - W.H. Saramis Plant 81
5 Limestone Handling System - W.H. Sammis Plant 86
6 Limestone Scrubbing System - W.H. Sammis
Plant 8R
7 Power Plant Input Data - W.C. Beckjord Plant 89
8 Limestone Handling System - W.C. Beckjord
Plant 94
9 Limestone Scrubbing System - W.C. Beckjord
Plant 96
10 Power Plant Input Data - Cardinal Plant 97
11 Limestone Handling System - Cardinal Plant 100
12 Limestone Scrubbing System - Cardinal Plant 102
13 Power Plant Input Data - Muskingum Plant 103
14 Limestone Handling System - Muskingum Plant 108
15 Limestone Scrubbing System - Muskingum Plant 110
16 Power Plant Input Data - Eastlake Plant 111
17 Limestone Handling System - Eastlake Plant 116
18 Limestone Scrubbing System - Eastlake Plant 118
19 Power Plant Input Data - Lake Shore Plant 119
20 Limestone Handling System - Lake Shore Plant 124
21 Limestone Scrubbing System - Lake Shore Plant 126
-------
LIST OF TABLES CON'T.
Table No. Title Page No
22 Power Plant Input Data - Conesville Plant 127
23 Limestone Handling System - Conesville Plant 130
24 Limestone Scrubbing System - Conesville Plant 132
25 Power Plant Input Data - Poston Plant 133
26 Limestone Handling System - Poston Plant 136
27 Limestone Scrubbing System - Poston Plant 138
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Title Page No.
1 Process Flow Diagram - Limestone & Effluent
Systems 63
2 Process Flow Diagram - Scrubber System 64
3 Standard Scrubber Module - Type A: Size I VI
4 Standard Scrubber Module - Type B: Size I 72
5 Standard Scrubber Module - Type C: Size I 73
6 Plan and Elevation - Limestone Handling and
Grinding 74
7 Plot Plan - W.H. Sammis Plant 140
8 Plot Plan - W.C. Beckjord Plant 141
9 Plot Plan - Cardinal Plant 142
10 Plot Plan - Muskingum Plant 143
11 Plot Plan - Eastlake Plant - Limestone System 144
12 Plot Plan - Eastlake Plant - Scrubbing System 145
13 Plot Plan - Lakeshore Plant 146
14 Plot Plan - Conesville Plant - Limestone System 147
15 Plot Plan - Conesville Plant - Scrubbing System 148
16 Plot Plan - Conesville Plant - Slurry Pond 149
17 Plot Plan - Poston Plant - Limestone and Scrubbing
Systems 150
18 Plot Plan - Poston Plant - Slurry Pond 151
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of a study performed for
the Environmental Protection Agency under contract No. 68-02-1308.
The objective of the study was to determine the feasibility and
cost of retrofitting eight selected coal-fired power plants,
located in Ohio, with a wet limestone SO removal system* The
candidate plants, which were selected by EPA, are:
PLANT UTILITY
W.H. Sammis Ohio Edison Co.
W.C. Beckjord Cincinnati Gas & Electric Co.
Cardinal Ohio Power Co.
Muskingum Ohio Power Co.
Eastlake Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co.
Lake Shore Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co.
Conesville Columbus & Southern Ohio Electric Co.
Poston Columbus & Southern Ohio Electric Co.
To obtain the data needed to establish an evaluation basis
for each plant, visits were made to each of the utilities in-
volved. In all but three cases, where the plants were on strike,
visual inspections also were made at the plant sites. Much of
the necessary information for establishing process requirements
was obtained from a yearly report prepared by the utilities for
the Federal Power Commission, viz., FPC Form 67. This information
was modified and expanded through discussions with the utility
personnel. Plant drawings were obtained, as available, and
photographs were taken at the plant sites visited to complete
the collection of data.
*The time and man-hours allocated for this study precluded evaluation
of more than one scrubbing system. However, the space required for
installing gas scrubbers is approximately the same for all systems
so the layouts presented herein also should be applicable to
other processes with very little modification.
-------
As a basis for the limestone system, the design proposed by
the Tennessee Valley Authority for their Widows Creek Unit 8 was
used. Slight modifications were made in developing process
designs for both the limestone handling and scrubbing systems; these
designs included process flow sheets, equipment summaries, piping
sizes, typical arrangements, etc.
Since variations in individual boiler size require one or
more scrubbing trains of different capacity, it was decided to
develop several different standard size scrubber "modules".
This was done to reduce the design and estimating work to a level
commensurate with the time available while minimizing the loss of
accuracy. Six standard modules were developed from which the
appropriate size and number could be selected for each boiler.
A single, individually designed, limestone storage and handling
system was used for each plant. The limestone storage and handling
system plus all of the required scrubber modules comprises the total
limestone system for each plant.
Utilizing the drawings obtained from the utilities, layout
sketches were made showing the size, location, and orientation of
all scrubbing modules, limestone storage, and limestone handling
facilities. In addition, major revamp work and modifications to the
power plant required for installation of a complete limestone
facility were tabulated.
Based on the information developed as previously described,
a capital cost estimate was prepared for each plant. Costs for
major equipment are based primarily on budget-type verbal quotes
from vendors. The remaining construction costs were estimated
by Kellogg's Estimating Department and include all those costs
associated with the installation of a complete scrubbing system
at the particular plant site, including all revamp and plant
modification costs. Consideration of the time limitations for the
study, order of accuracy of vendor quotes, lack of a completely
definitive design, and other factors limits the overall accuracy
of the estimates to about 30-35% with very little probability of underrun,
-------
The estimation of operating costs was not included as
part of the study. However, estimates have been made for
utilities consumptions, limestone usage, sludge disposal
requirements, etc., which would be needed to determine the
operating cost.
-------
II SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS
A. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of our present study we conclude that all
eight coal-fired steam electric power plants studied can be
retrofitted with a wet limestone scrubbing process for removal
of SO~ and remaining particulate matter.
The following table summarizes the estimated capital invest-
ment cost for installing S09 control systems on the eight
selected Ohio power plants:
CAPITAL
PLANT MW INVESTMENT: $ $/KW
W.H. Sammis 2303.5 100,900,000 43.80
W.C. Beckjord 1221.3 63,700,000 52.20
Cardinal 1180 43,700,000 37.00
Muskingum 1466.8 74,900,000 51.10
Eastlake 1350 66,100,000 49.00
Lake Shore 550 44,400,000 80.70
Conesville 1276 80,600,000 63.20*
Poston 254 22,400,000 88.20*
Based on past experience, the accuracy of the estimates would
be expected to fall within a range of 30-35% with little
probability of underrun.
The feasibility of installing the scrubbing facilities is
largely dependent on cost which is highly variable, ranging
from $37-88/KW. Major factors influencing cost are:
*Capital investment for the Conesville Plant includes cost for a
large disposal pond for 20 years storage while that for the Poston
Plant includes cost for a pond of moderate size for the remaining
life of the plant.
4
-------
- Plant generating capacity: In large plants (.1000 MW or larg-
er) , the costs associated with retrofitting the system
(relocating equipment, additional ductwork, etc.) are
normally relatively small compared to the cost of the
scrubbing trains and the limestone system. Therefore
the total capital investment expressed in $/KV\f normally is
much lower for large plants than for small plants. This
conclusion is also valid when installing wet limestone
scrubbing facilities in new plants. It naturally follows
that the operating costs for the large plants will be
much lower since the capital-related costs are expected
to be about 55-70% of the total cost.
- Degree of difficulty of the installation: Some plants
are located in relatively open areas with an adequate
amount of space available near the stack for the scrubbing
trains and elsewhere for the limestone receiving,
storage, and grinding facilities. The cost of retrofitting
these plants with wet limestone scrubbing facilities is
about the same as the cost of installing the facilities
in a new plant. Other plants may present a very difficult
arrangement problem. Space in these latter plants may be
almost totally utilized with buildings, railroad tracks,
coal piles, ash ponds, power transmission lines and
electrical switchgear. These plants will require large
expenditures for extra ductwork, foundations, steel
structures, and relocation of existing equipment.
- Sulfur content of the coal: Capital investment
costs will be.higher for plants burning high sulfur coals
owing to the higher cost of the limestone system and the
higher cost of the sludge disposal pond (if a large
pond is to be installed).
- Individual boiler size: Capital investment costs
will be lower for plants which are able to utilize the
larger size scrubbing trains. For example, the capital
*Refer to Glossary in Appendix I for abbreviations.
5
-------
cost for SO- control for a 1000 MW plant would be lower
if the plant had 6-167 MW boilers utilizing 6 scrubbing
trains than it would be if the plant had 10-100 MW boilers
utilizing 10 scrubbing trains.
* Flue gas flow rate per MW: Gas velocity in the absorber
is limited to 12.5 FPS; therefore, the number and size
of the scrubbing trains is dependent on the volumetric
flow rate of flue gas. Plants of a given generating capacity
with a high heat rate (Btu/KWH), which utilize greater
quantities of excess air than normal, or which have unusual-
ly high leakage in the air heater will require a higher
capital investment to retrofit them with scrubbing systems
than plants with lower gas flow rates per MW.
In this study, no spare scrubbing trains were used. Each
train may be isolated for maintenance as required by the
use of guillotine gate valves. During the time that a
scrubbing train is down for maintenance, the flue gas must
be diverted to the stack unless multiple trains are provided
for the boiler and it is running at less than peak capacity.
For example, if three trains are provided for a boiler and
the unit is operating at 67% load, then all flue gas can
be treated by two trains while one train is down. This is
not the case in many instances, however, where small boilers
are equipped with only one scrubbing train. If, on the average,
one spare scrubbing train was provided for each two to three
operating trains, the capital investment cost presented in
this study would increase by about 25-40%.
An important point brought out in the study is that the
existing fly ash removal equipment in many of the power
-------
plants is inadequate to meet pollution standards. The power
companies are planning to install additional electrostatic
precipitators on many of their boilers at an expected cost
of about $8-10/KW. If wet limestone scrubbing was used,
the fly ash would be removed in the venturi scrubbers (to
a loading of about 0.01 grains/ACF) such that the additional
precipitators would not be needed.
Disposal of sludge produced by a wet limestone scrubbing
process presents a major problem. This sludge is composed
mainly of hydrates of calcium sulfate and calcium sulfite,
unreacted limestone, and fly ash . The quantity produced
(2)
(at 40% solids) is about 3.3 tons of sludge/ton of lime-
stone feed (equivalent to about 15 tons/ton of sulfur removed
from the coal, at 90% removal of SO ) and the size of a sludge
^
pond to hold 20 years storage becomes quite large. For
example, a 1000 MW plant burning 2.5% sulfur coal would
require a sludge pond 241 acres in area (50 feet deep) '.
If the plant burned 5% sulfur coal, the pond would need to be
twice as large (482 acres). It should be noted that the ratio
of sludge produced to sulfur removed would be somewhat less
(hence smaller pond area required) if limestone utilization
higher than the 67% assumed for this study were achieved or if
the system used lime instead of limestone.
(1) It is assumed in this study that existing electrostatic
precipitators or mechanical collectors will remove 80-90% of
the flyash upstream of the scrubbing system. Therefore the
sludge contains only 10-20% of the total flyash produced.
(2) Based on data from TVA's pilot plant and EPA's test facilities
at the TVA Shawnee power plant, the weight percent solids in
settled sludge after settling for extensive periods ranges from
34 to 43. Therefore an average value of 40 weight percent solids
was chosen as a design basis. (Note that TVA used 40% solids
to design the sludge pond for their Widows Creek limestone
scrubbing facility.)
(3) A pond depth of 50 feet was chosen to be consistent with prior
detailed studies on limestone scrubbing and sludge disposal
(Catalytic, Inc., A Process Cost Estimate for Limestone Slurry
Scrubbing of Flue Gas, January , 1973) . Note that the volume'of
material removed in excavating a 241 acre area to a depth of about
3 feet is sufficient to build a 50 foot high dike around the
perimeter of the area.
-------
In most plants (6 out of 8) in this study, there simply was not
enough space available for an onsite sludge disposal pond large
enough to hold the sludge produced over a 20 year period. In
these cases, a thickener to produce 40% sludge and a small pond
for the thickened sludge were specified. The thickened sludge
then must be removed from the plant site via truck, rail, or barge.
An example of waste disposal costs follows. If sludge is hauled
away from the plant at $1.50/ton (basis total weight), the cost
to the power plant for sludge disposal will be about 0.26 Mills/KWH
for a plant burning 2.5% sulfur coal and about 0.52 Mills/KWH for
a plant burning 5% sulfur coal. If a large disposal pond is built
at the plant site, the capital charges on the pond (@ 18%) will
amount to about 0.20 Mills/KWH for a plant burning 2.5% sulfur
coal and about 0.38 Mills/KWH for a plant burning 5% sulfur
coal. The costs shown for disposal ponds exclude the cost of
the land itself which would have to be added to the values cited
along with any operating and maintenance costs to obtain total
sludge disposal costs.
Results of this study point to the following generalized
conclusions for scrubbing systems on plants without large
disposal ponds:
SCRUBBER COST; $/KW
PLANT SIZE; MW NEW PLANT RETROFIT
250 60-80 70-100
500 40-60 50-80
1000 35-45 40-55
1500 + 30-40 35-50
Addition of a large disposal pond (20 years storage) will add
about S7/KW for a plant burning 2.5% sulfur coal and about
$12/KW for a plant burning 5% sulfur coal to the above figures.
o Tie-in of an S0~ scrubbing system to the power plant will
take approximately two to three weeks in all cases. This is
essentially the same length of time the power plants are shut
down each year for boiler maintenance. Therefore, if an SO-
control system is installed, the construction schedule probably
could be developed such that tie-in to the power plant would
coincide with the annual shutdown thereby minimizing power
plant outage.
8
-------
B. SPECIFIC CONCLUSIONS REGARDING EACH PLANT
1. W.H. Sammis Plant
This plant has a large generating capacity (2303.5 MW) -
and does not require many major modifications to
install the wet limestone scrubbing system. There-
fore the cost of the system is relatively low; viz.,
about $100,900,000 or $43.80/KW.
Fourteen scrubbing trains (all No. I size) are
required. Ten of the trains (for Units 1-6) would
have to be installed in the narrow space between
the fan house and the railroad track to the east;
the remaining 4 trains could be installed south of
Unit 7. Installation of the scrubbing trains in
this manner would lead to a highly conjested area
around the stacks but, based on data provided to
M.W. Kellogg, it can be done.
Major revamp work to install the scrubbing system
includes moving about 1000 feet of railroad track
on the south side of the power house, moving a
portion of the coal pile, and installing a considerable
amount of extra ductwork for Units 5, 6, and 7 above
that which is furnished on a standard scrubbing module.
* Present electrostatic precipitators are operating
at 75-95% efficiency which is not adequate to meet
air pollution standards. Ohio Edison is conducting
studies in an attempt to upgrade the efficiency of
the units to 99%. The installation of a scrubbing
system would remove the residual particulate matter
such that improvement of the existing precipitator
performance would be unnecessary.
-------
W.C. Beckjord Plant
This plant has a relatively high generating capacity
(1221.3 MW). However, the arrangement of the boilers
leads to a difficult problem in installing the wet
limestone scrubbing system. The total cost of
scrubbing facilities is estimated to be $63,700,000
or $52.20/KW. The degree of difficulty of installing
scrubbing facilities at this plant leads to the con-
clusion that the use of low sulfur coal would be a
more attractive method to meet pollution standards.
However the scrubbing facilities can be installed
and the cost does not appear to be prohibitive.
Nine scrubbing trains (sizes II, III, and IV) are
required. Since all boiler houses are backed up
against the Ohio River, the scrubbing trains would
need to be installed in a steel structure mounted
on top of concrete piling driven to bedrock below
the river bottom. The complexity of the installation
raises the scrubbing system cost appreciably above what
it would be for a new plant of the same generating
capacity.
Major revamp work required to install the scrubbing
system includes the piling and steel structure over
the river, some additional ductwork for Unit 6,
and filling in a portion of the pond southeast of
the plant to provide space for limestone storage and
handling.
The installation of a scrubbing system would eliminate
the need for additional electrostatic precipitators
for residual fly ash removal. However, a new precipi-
tator has already been installed on Unit 3 and
construction is underway on Units 1 and 2. If the
10
-------
decision is made to install limestone scrubbing at
the Beckjord Plant, the orders for new precipitators
for Units 4, 5, and 6 can probably be cancelled.
These units generate 868.8 MW or 71.1% of the total
capacity.
3. Cardinal Plant
Generating capacity of the Cardinal Plant is 1180
MW. Retrofitting a wet limestone scrubbing system
into the plant does not appear to pose many major
problems and the cost of the system approaches
that for a new plant. The total cost is estimated
to be $43,700,000 or'$37,00/KW.
Ohio Power is planning to install a third 590 MW
boiler but it was not taken under consideration in
this study because neither the location of the
unit nor the start-up date could be furnished to us.
Six scrubbing trains (all No. I size) are required.
Four of the six units can be located adjacent to the
two stacks and the remaining two can be located
just west of the plant road.
Revamp work required includes relocation of about
600 feet of railroad track in the north side of the
power house, rerouting of four ash lines, relocating
a construction transformer and installing some
additional ductwork for the two scrubbing trains across
the road.
4. Muskingum Plant
Total generating capacity of the Muskingum Plant is
1466.8 MW. The plant has 5 boilers. Installation
of a scrubbing system would be relatively easy for
Unit 5 but would be fairly difficult on Units 1-4.
11
-------
Total cost of the scrubbing system for all five boilers
is estimated to be $74,900,000 or $51.10/KW.
Eleven scrubbing trains (sizes I and IV) are required.
Three standard trains (size I) located at grade on
the north side of the stack could be used for Unit 5.
Units 1-4 would each require 2 trains (size IV) and
present a difficult arrangement problem. It is proposed
that 6 of the 8 trains (for Units 1-3) be located on
a deck mounted over the river bank northeast of the
new stack. The 2 trains required for Unit 4 can be
located at grade in the open space just south of Unit
4.
Major revamp work required to install the scrubbing
system includes the piling and deck for the scrubbers
mounted over the river bank, relocation of a pond dike,
relocation of a construction office, and installation
of a large amount of extra ductwork for all trains.
Ohio Power Company has stated their intent to install
new precipitators on Unit 5. If a scrubbing system
is installed, additional precipitators will not be
needed.
5. Eastlake Plant
Eastlake has a total capacity of 1350 MW, generated
by 5 boilers. The site is fairly small, and although
not congested, there is little unused space. Installation
of a limestone scrubbing system would be difficult,
particularly for Units 1-4, requiring major modifi-
cations at the plant site. The total cost of the
scrubbing system, exclusive of a long-term sludge
storage pond, is $66,100,000 or $49.00/KW.
12
-------
Nine scrubbing trains of different sizes would be
required for the plant. All scrubbers would be elevated,
with those for Units 1-4 located over service
buildings. Although space is available near the units
for the scrubbers, their installation would make the
area quite crowded. The relatively small plant site
does not have sufficient room for a long-term sludge
disposal pond.
Installation of scrubbers for Units 1-4 requires the
demolition and reconstruction of two service buildings.
Additional revamp work needed at the plant includes
relocating a silo and part of a conveyor, and rerouting
a pipe bridge.
6. Lake Shore Plant
This plant which has a total capacity of 550 MW
coming from 5 boilers, occupies a small and somewhat
crowded site. There is sufficient space for installation
of scrubbers, but the arrangment would be difficult.
The total cost of a limestone system, without a long-
term sludge pond, would be $44,400,000 or $80.70/KW.
This high cost reflects the difficulty of installation
at the small site as well as the smaller capacity
of the plant compared to most other plants included
in the study.
The Lake. Shore plant would require 6 scrubbing trains,
all either size III or IV. The main problem with
retrofitting scrubbers is caused by a hill almost
adjacent to the boilers. All scrubbers would have
to be elevated, with some foundations extending into
the hill. Tanks and pumps would be imbedded in the
hill, and since gravity flow (the desirable arrangement)
could not be used, an additional set of pumps would
13
-------
be required for each scrubber beyond that needed for
a "normal" installation. There is no room on the site
for anything more than a nominal sludge pond (1 week
capacity).
Major revamp work consists of relocating two under-
ground oil storage tanks now buried in the hill,
plus the associated piping and pump house. However,
costs for this work are not as significant as those
resulting from the difficult construction problems
mentioned above.
7. Conesville Plant
This plant, located on a several hundred acre site,
has a total generating capacity of 1276 MW produced
by 4 boilers. In general, installation of scrubbers
would be easy, since there is ample open space
surrounding the stacks. The total capital investment
for the system is $80,600,000 or $63.20/KW. This
cost seems quite high, considering the plant size
and the ease of installation. However, there are
two prime reasons for this. First, the plant burns
unusually high sulfur coal, the highest of any of
the plants included in the study. In 1972, the
sulfur averaged 5.2% with a maximum monthly average
of 6.5%. This increases the cost of the limestone
preparation section. Second, this plant is one of
two in the study which has a long-term sludge pond
(20 years), included which, because of the very
high sulfur content of the coal, is unusually large
(665 acres). The pond adds substantially to the
cost.
The Conesville plant would require 9 scrubbing trains,
all but one size III. All scrubbers would be elevated
to maintain access room to the boilers. All tanks
and pumps would be at grade. Installation of the
14
-------
units should be quite easy.
The only major revamp work required would be to relocate
a large, diked oil storage tank which interferes
with the installation of scrubbers on boiler 4.
At present, boilers 1 and 2 have no fly ash control
devices and boiler 3 has a mechanical cyclone whose
efficiency is inadequate to meet state pollution
control standards. The company has proposed to
equip the first two units, and upgrade the third
boiler with electrostatic precipitators. Installation
of a limestone scrubbing system would obviate the
need for these precipitators.
Poston Plant
This plant has four boilers which generate a total
of 254 MW making this the smallest plant in the study.
A limestone scrubbing system could be retrofitted
quite easily, with no modification required to the
plant. Since the plant site is several hundred acres,
there is ample room for a long-term sludge pond and
this has been included in the design. The total cost
for the limestone system is estimated to be $22,400,000
or $88.20/KW. This cost is excessively high. It
reflects the fact that this is a complete system,
including pond, for a small size plant. Since the
remaining life of the plant is about 10-12 years, it
is difficult to justify the installation of a limestone
scrubbing system at such a high cost.
The plant would require a total of 4 scrubbing trains
(size V or VI). All scrubbers would be elevated to
maintain access way to the boilers, but pumps and
tanks would be at grade level.
15
-------
No revamp work is necessary.
At present, all boilers are equipped with low efficiency
mechanical cyclone fly ash collectors which do not
meet air pollution control standards. The company
has proposed to install electrostatic precipitators
on all units. The installation of scrubbers would
make this unnecessary.
16
-------
III. BASIS OF DESIGN
A. Design Values
The process design for the wet limestone scrubbing
system used in this study is based primarily on the design
proposed by the Tennessee Valley Authority for their Widow's
Creek Unit 8 SO- removal process. This design was used because
it incorporates up to date technology regarding wet limestone
scrubbing. However some modifications were made to both
the limestone system and the scrubbing system designs.
Values of the major overall design parameters are tabulated
be low:
Flue gas temperature: 250-350°F, average 300°F
Flue gas pressure: atmospheric
Minimum inlet S02 concentration: 1650 PPM (2.5% S coal)
Maximum inlet SO_ concentration: 3430 PPM (5.2% S coal)
Outlet S02 concentration: 160-320 PPM based on
90% removal (and dilution with water vapor)
Inlet particulate loading: 0.4-1.0 Gr/ACF based
on 80% electrostatic precipitator efficiency
Outlet particulate loading: 0.01-0.02 Gr/ACF
Reheat: 50°F above dew point (from 125 to 175°F)
Limestone Consumption: 150% stoichiometric quantity
based on sulfur content of coal
Limestone System
Unloading Hopper: 100 ton capacity
Dead Storage Pile: 30 days storage
Feeders, Conveyors: Capacity = 5 x Maximum Limestone Flow
Live Storage Silos: 3 days storage
Ball Mills: 3-33.3% Units
Limestone Slurry Storage Tank: 4 hours storage
17
-------
Effluent Slurry Surge Tank: 5 minutes storage
Limestone Slurry Feed Pumps: 1 pump/train with 1 spare for
each 3 operating pumps
Raw Water Pumps: 2-100% units
Pond Water Recycle Pumps: 2-100% units
Effluent Slurry Pumps: 2-100% units
Entrainment Separator Pumps: Number varies
Wash Water Pumps: 2-100% units
Thickener: 1-100% unit
Sludge Pond: 2-5 weeks storage for 6 plants
12 years storage for 1 plant
20 years storage for 1 plant
Scrubbing System (Each Train)
Fan: 1-100% unit
Type - Double inlet centrifugal
AP = 25" H20
Venturi Scrubber: Variable throat for constant AP
AP = 10" H20
L/G =16.1 GPM/MSCFM inlet
Slurry Concentration = 15% (wt.)
S0? removal = 25%
Circulating Tank - 5 minutes retention (similar to
Catalytic, Inc. design)
Pumps - 2-100% units
Absorber: Type - TCA with 3 beds
AP = 7" H20
L/G = 64.5 GPM/MSCFM (inlet gas to venturi scrubber)
Slurry Concentration = 10% (wt.)
SO2 removal = 87%
Gas Velocity =12.5 FPS
Circulating Tank - 5 minutes retention (similar to
Catalytic, Inc. design)
Pumps = 3-50% units
Entrainment Separator: Chevron vane type
Number passes = 2
AP = 2" H20
18
-------
Gas Velocity = 9 FPS
Wash water rate = 1 GPM/Ft2 CSA
Reheater: Type - indirect tubular
AT = 50°F (inlet temperature = 125°F;
outlet temperature = 175°F)
Heating Medium - 500 PSIG Steam (Saturated)
AP = 4" H20
B. Design Rationale
The design rationale used in the study are listed below:
The unloading hopper was sized to hold 100 tons in
order to accomodate unloading of railroad cars as
well as trucks.
The limestone dead storage pile was sized for 30
days storage to allow the plant to continue operating
in the event of an interruption in the supply of
limestone.
The live storage silos were sized for 3 days storage
to allow the plant to operate over a 3 day weekend
without receiving limestone.
The feeders and conveyors were sized at 5 times the
maximum limestone flow to allow the unloading of
limestone to take place during a 40 hour week while
the plant operates continuously.
Three 33.3% capacity ball mills were provided and
sized to allow the power plant to generate at
maximum capacity while burning high sulfur content
coal. During this time, all three mills will be in
operation but during normal operation only two
mills will be needed.
The limestone slurry storage tank was sized for 4
hours storage to allow the scrubbing trains to continue
operating while maintenance is being done in the
grinding area.
19
-------
In general, all pumps in the process are provided
with spares.
A thickener and small pond (2-3 acres) were used for
6 of the 8 plants because sufficient space for a
large pond was not available. The thickener concentrates
the effluent slurry from 15% solids to 40% solids and
the small pond will hold about 2-5 weeks production
of concentrated sludge. The sludge will have to be
removed from the plant site via truck, rail, or barge.
For the other 2 plants, ponds of sufficient capacity
to hold sludge for the remaining life of the plants
were installed.
The venturi scrubber was provided with a variable
area throat to allow operation at constant pressure
drop with changing flow rates. The unit is designed
for L/G of 16.1 GPM/MSCFM and a pressure drop of 10"
H-O. These design parameters are based on published
operating data for venturi scrubbers. The unit is
expected to remove about 20-30% of the SCL and about
99% of the particulate matter (to a level of about
0.01-0.02 Gr/ACF) based on published data.
A UOP* Turbulent Contact Absorber (TCA) was selected
for removal of the bulk of the S02- This unit has
3 beds of hollow plastic spheres which move randomly
between support grids and provide the contact area
necessary for mass transfer of SO- from the gas to the
liquid phase. The absorber is designed for an L/G
of 64.5 GPM/MSCFM (inlet gas to th.e venturi.) and
a pressure drop of 7" H20. Slurry concentration will
be 10%; gas velocity in the unit will be 12.5 FPS;
and SO_ removal is specified to be about 87%.
These design parameters were furnished by UOP.
The largest unit now being built by UOP is
*Universal Oil Products Company (Air Correction Division)
20
-------
15' x 40'. in cross-section and will treat 450,000 ACFM
of saturated gas (corresponding to about 182 MW nominal).
This was the maximum size absorber used in this study.
The smaller scrubber modules were reduced in increments
of 12.5% in capacity from this size with the smallest
unit having a rating of 37.5% of the largest (68 MW).
The venturi scrubber and the absorber each have circulating
tanks sized to provide a 5-minute retention time based
on the slurry circulating rate. This retention time is
essentially the same as that used by Catalytic, Inc.
in their design previously cited (Section II of this
report) and should provide sufficient time for desuper-
saturation and thus reduced scaling potential. However
if longer retention times are required, the incremental
cost would be small since the circulating tanks do not
represent large cost items.
The Chevron vane-type entrainment separator was selected
to remove mist which is carried over in the gas from
the absorber. This unit contains two stages of Chevron
vanes which are washed continuously with water at the
2
rate of 1 GPM/Ft of CSA. Superficial gas velocity through
the unit is 9 FPS and the pressure drop is expected to
be about 2" H_0. Design of the unit is based on
information from TVA and UOP.
The gas leaving the entrainment separator must be
reheated to desaturate it and provide buoyancy for
it for adequate atmospheric dispersion. The number
of degrees of reheat necessary is variable and
dependent on a number of factors such as stack height,
local weather conditions, population density, terrain
of the area, maximum allowable SO- ground level concen-
tration, etc. For this study, a reheat AT of 50°F was
used; this is believed to be about the minimum acceptable
value. Obviously, the lowest acceptable reheat AT
should be chosen since each increase of 50°F of the flue
21
-------
gas temperature requires about 1.3% of the gross heat
input to the plant. An indirect tubular heat exchanger
was selected for the reheater (as in the TVA design).
The first 30% of the rows of tubes are constructed of
Alloy 20 for corrosion resistance to the gas which
enters at its dew point. The remaining 70% of the
rows are constructed of carbon steel. Heating medium
for the unit is 500 PSIG saturated steam (at a temperature
of 470°F). Pressure drop through the reheater is cal-
culated to be about 4" H-O.
22
-------
IV PROCESS DESCRIPTION
(Reference to Appendix A)
A. Limestone Handling, Grinding and the Effluent System
This system is designed for receiving limestone by
both rail and truck from the limestone quarries. Limestone
is unloaded into a 100 ton hopper located in a concrete
pit below grade and is transferred from the hopper via a
feeder to the tunnel belt conveyor which transfers the
limestone to either the stacker feeding the dead storage
pile or to the plant conveyor which feeds the live storage
silos via the tripper belt.
The limestone system for each plant is designed for
running the power plant at peak capacity using coal containing
the maximum sulfur content (highest monthly average for 1972).
Limestone flow rate is based on 150% of the stoichiometric
quantity required. Design capacity for the feeder, conveyors,
stacker and tripper is five times the maximum limestone
consumption rate to allow for receiving limestone in a 40
hour week while the plant operates continually. A limestone
dead storage pile is sized for 30 days usage and the live
storage silos are sized to hold 3 days supply. The live
storage silos and ball mills are located in an enclosed
building.
Limestone is fed from the live storage silos to the wet
ball mills where it is ground in closed circuit from the
purchased size (3/4" x 0") to the final size (90% minus
200 mesh). The slurry from the ball mills.(about 65% solids)
is fed to the cyclone classifiers. Underflow from the
classifiers containing oversized particles is recycled to
the ball mills for regrinding.
23
-------
Overflow from the cyclone classifiers flows to a mill slurry
sump where sufficient water is added to reduce the solids
concentration to 40%. Mill sump pumps are used to transfer
the 40% limestone slurry to the limestone slurry surge tank.
Three 33% capacity ball mills are used in each plant
(based on the maximum limestone flow) allowing two mills
to handle the normal limestone requirement. The limestone
slurry surge tank is a carbon steel rubber-lined vessel with
an agitator. It has a capacity corresponding to 4 hours
storage at maximum limestone flow.
Limestone is fed to the scrubbing trains by rubber-lined
centrifugal limestone slurry feed pumps. One pump is used
for each individual scrubbing train with a spare provided
for each three operating pumps.
Effluent slurry containing about 15% solids flows from
the venturi scrubber circulating tanks to the effluent slurry
surge tank which is a rubber-lined carbon steel vessel with
an agitator. It is sized for 5 minutes storage capacity.
Rubber-lined centrifugal pumps send the slurry, in most cases,
to a thickener which concentrates the solids to about 40%.
Recycle water pumps return overflow water from the thickener
to the scrubbing trains and the ball mills. Net make-up
process water requirements comprise that which is evaporated
into the gas while cooling it in the venturi scrubber and
that which is lost in the sludge. This water is supplied
by make-up water pumps.
Sludge is sent from the thickener to a relatively small
lined holding pond. The solids portion of the sludge consists
mainly of hydrates of calcium sulfite and calcium sulfate,
unreacted limestone, and fly ash. Net sludge produced will
have to be removed from the plant site via truck, rail,
24
-------
or barge.
Alternatively the thickener can be eliminated and a
large settling pond used. However, lack of land precludes
using this disposal method in all but two instances. For
example, a 1000 MW plant burning 5% sulfur coal would require
a 482 acre by 50 feet deep pond to hold 20-years production
of sludge.
Wash water is pumped from a settling pond (fly ash pond)
2
to the entrainment separator pumps at the rate of 1 GPM/Ft of
C.S.A. Entrainment separator pumps return this water to the pond.
B. Scrubbing System
Flue gas leaves the electrostatic precipitators of the
power plant boilers at a temperature of about 300°F. It
has a fly ash loading of about 2-5 grains per actual cubic
foot (Gr/ACF) entering the precipitators. The fly ash
loading leaving the precipitators will be about 0.4-1.0
Gr/ACF (wet) assuming an efficiency of 80%. The S02 content
of the flue gas will range from about 1650 to 3430 PPM (wet)
with coal having an initial sulfur content of 2.5-5.2%.
Six standard sized scrubbing trains were designed for
use in this study. The largest trains will treat about 545,000
ACFM (hot gas) corresponding to about 182 MW. This is
currently the largest unit being built by U.O.P. The smallest
train will treat about 204,000 ACFM which corresponds to
about 68 MW. Each scrubbing train consists of a fan, venturi
scrubber, venturi scrubber circulating tank and pumps,
absorber, absorber circulating tank and pumps, an entrainment
separator, and a reheater.
25
-------
Flue gas from the existing electrostatic precipitators
enters the fan in a scrubbing train. The fans are double
inlet centrifugal units equipped with variable speed fluid
drives. Each fan is designed for a pressure differential
of 25" HO and a flow rate 10% above normal. The fans
supply the motive power for the scrubbing system.
A venturi scrubber is used to cool, saturate, and remove
residual fly ash and some SO,, from the flue gas. The unit
is designed for a pressure drop of 10" H-0 and a fly ash
removal efficiency of about 99%. SO., removal in the venturi
scrubber is expected to be about 20-30%. The venturi scrubber
is constructed of 316 L stainless steel with an abrasion
resistant lining and has a rectangular throat with a motor
operated variable throat mechanism. Velocity in the throat
is in the range of 200 Ft/SEC. Constant speed rubber-lined
centrifugal pumps are used to pump slurry (15% solids) from
the venturi scrubber circulating tank to the venturi scrubber.
Two pumps are provided per train - one operating and one spare-
and are designed to supply liquid to the venturi scrubbers
at a rate of 16.1 GPM/MSCFM of inlet gas (11 GPM/MACFM hot
gas). The venturi scrubber circulation tanks are rubber-lined
carbon steel vessels provided with agitators. They are designed
for a retention time of 5 minutes (85% full) based on the
venturi circulation rate.
Saturated gas from the venturi scrubbers (at 125°F)
flows to the absorbers. These units are U.O.P. Turbulent
Contact Absorbers (TCA's). The absorbers are rubber-lined
carbon steel vessels with 316 SS internals containing 3
beds of hollow 1-1/2" diameter thermoplastic spheres. Each
bed has a static ball depth of 12" and the beds are spaced 4 feet
apart. The absorbers are designed for a superficial gas
velocity of 12.5 FPS. They are rectangular in cross section
26
-------
with the largest unit being 15" x 40' and the smallest
being 15' x 15'. Overall height of the abosrbers from the
bottom of the hopper is 45'. Expected S0_ removal efficiency
in the absorber is about 87% of the remaining SO,, in the gas
from the venturi giving an overall SO^ removal efficiency of 90%
Pressure drop through the absorber is expected to be 7" H^O.
Rubber-lined centrifugal pumps equipped with variable
speed fluid drives are provided to pump slurry (containing
10% solids) from the absorber circulating tank to the
absorber. Three pumps are provided per scrubbing train -
two operating and one spare. The pumps are designed to supply
slurry to the absorbers at a rate of 64.5 GPM/MSCFM of inlet
gas to the venturi. This corresponds to about 44.2 GPM/MACFM
of hot gas or about 40 GPM/Ft2 of CSA.
The absorber circulating tanks are rubber-lined carbon
steel vessels provided with agitators. They are sized for
a retention time of 5 minutes (85% full) based on the absorber
circulation rate.
Gas leaves the absorber and flows to the entrainment
separator. This unit is a Chevron vane type (two pass)
located vertically in a horizontal shell. It is sized for
a superficial gas velocity of 9 FPS and has an estimated
pressure drop of 2" H20. The shell is rubber-lined carbon
steel and the vanes are 316 S.S. Faces of the vanes are
2
washed continuously with pond water at a rate of 1 GPM/Ft
of CSA.
Gas from the entrainment separator is heated from 125°F
to 175°F in the reheater . to desaturate and provide buoyancy
for the gas. This unit is an indirect tubular exchanger
utilizing saturated steam at 500 PSIG. Estimated pressure
drop in the unit is 4" HO. The first 30% of the rows of
tubes are constructed of Alloy 20 for corrosion resistance
to the gas which enters at its dew point. The remaining
27
-------
70% of the rows are constructed of carbon steel.
Steam operated soot blowers are provided at locations
where solids deposition is expected to occur. These locations
are the inlet duct to the venturi, the elbow between the
absorber and the entrainment separator, and the reheater.
Gas leaving the reheater flows to the stack. Positive
shut-off guillotine gates are provided at three locations -
the inlet to the fan, the exit from the reheater, and a by-
pass connecting the inlet and outlet ducts. These gates
will make maintenance possible on one scrubbing train while
the remainder of the trains continue operating.
Fresh limestone slurry, water recycle, and make-up
water are added to the absorber circulating tank. Limestone
is fed at 150% of the stoichiometric rate and water is
added in sufficient quantity to maintain the solids concen-
tration at about 10%. Overflow from the absorber circulating
tank goes to the venturi scrubber circulating tank. The
solids concentration in this tank will depend on the inlet
flue gas fly ash loading but will normally run about 15%.
Overflow from each venturi scrubber circulating tank goes
to the effluent slurry surge tank as described previously.
Clean flue gas flowing to the stack will have a fly ash
loading of about 0.01-0.02 Gr/ACF (wet) and an SO- content
of about 160-320 PPM based on 90% removal in the scrubbing
train.
28
-------
V. SPECIFIC PLANT DESCRIPTIONS
(See Appendix H for Plot Plans)
A. W.H. Sammis Plant
1. Description of Power Plant
The W.H. Sammis Plant is a coal-fired steam electric
power plant owned by the Ohio Edison Company. It is the largest
steam-electric power plant in Ohio having an installed
generating capacity of 2303.5 MW. Location of the plant is
just outside of Stratton, Ohio. The area is generally
rural regarding population but the entire Ohio River area
between Ohio and West Virginia is highly industrialized.
The plant is situated on a relatively small tract of land
(about 90 acres) which is bound on the east side by Ohio
State Highway 7 and on the west side by a railroad track.
The Ohio River runs parallel to Highway 7 and is only a
short distance to the east of it. Ohio Edison also owns
some land west of the railroad; however, this land is very
hilly and would be difficult to utilize.
W.H. Sammis has seven boilers and seven generators ranging
in capacity from 185 to 623 MW. The boilers were placed in
service from 1959 until 1971 and have a remaining life of
26-38 years (based on a 40 year life). Capacity factors for
the units range from 55 to 70%.
All seven boiler houses are enclosed and all units are
in a row parallel to the highway. The units are served by
four stacks located just east of the boiler houses between
the boilers and the highway.
Coal storage and ash removal facilities are located
on the north side of the power plant (adjacent to Unit No. 1).
The space between the turbine rooms and the 500 foot hills
toward the west is filled with electrical switchgear. There
are two small ash ponds located south of the plant (adjacent
to Unit No. 7 and about 900 feet west of it). These ponds
are rectangular in shape and measure about 300' x 700' each.
29
-------
Coal for the plant is furnished by some 30 different suppliers
The sources are Eastern Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Kentucky.
Most of the coal is received by barge and unloaded by two
separate barge unloading facilities. Other coal used is
received by truck. There is a limited amount of low sulfur
fuel available for intermittent use. Coal used in 1972
averaged 2.5% sulfur. The design coal feed rate is 877
tons/hour.
2. Description of Limestone Scrubbing System
The W.H. Sammis plant has a total of 7 boilers and would
require a total of 14 scrubbing trains - all the No. I (largest)
size. Boilers 1-4 would each require one scrubbing train.
Boiler 5 would require two scrubbing trains and Boilers 6 and
7 would each require four scrubbing trains. There is a
narrow strip of open space of about 75' in width from the
edge of the fan houses to a railroad track that parallels
State Highway 7. It is proposed that the scrubbing trains
for Units 1-6 be installed in this area. Fans for Units
1-4 could be installed on the roof of the existing fan houses.
If this is done, additional structural steel running through
the building is required. Fans for Units 5 and 6 could
be mounted in the structure above the venturi scrubbers for
these units. Unit 7 would utilize four standard scrubbing
trains with the fans located at grade. These would be located
just south of Unit 7 as shown on the plot plan . The location
of the scrubbers for Units 6 and 7 necessitates relocating
about 1000 feet of railroad track on the south side of the
power house. Scrubbing trains for Units 5,6 and 7 require
a considerable amount of additional ductwork which has been
accounted for.
Design limestone flow rate for the plant is 130 T/H, and the
normal rate is 69 T/H. It is proposed that the dead limestone
pile (93,600 tons) be located at the north end of the property,
30
-------
which will require moving a portion of the coal pile. The
grinding building and limestone slurry surge tank can be
located north of the power house and west of the existing
coal conveyors. The grinding building is 70 feet wide and
240 feet long. Limestone can be received by rail or truck
and unloaded into an underground hopper. If large shipments
are contemplated, additional facilities for barge unloading
would probably be required.
If a settling pond for 20 years storage of sludge for
the Sammis Plant was used, it would have to be 482 acres
in area by 50 feet in depth. The only place available for
a pond would be in the hills west of the plant. Since this
method of sludge disposal did not appear particularly feasible,
the decision was made to install a thickener and a small
pond, both of which will be installed south of the power
house. The pond will be lined and sized for holding two
to three weeks of sludge production. Sludge will be produced
at the rate of 401 T/H (40% solids) and will need to be
removed from the plant site. Barges potentially represent
the most economic method of sludge transportation due to the
large quantities produced.
31
-------
B. W.C. Beckjord Plant
1. Description of Power Plant
The W.C. Beckjord Plant is a coal fired steam electric
power plant owned by Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company.
It has a total installed generating capacity of 1221.3
MW. The plant is located in a rural area near New Richmond,
Ohio which is about 15 miles southeast of Cincinnati. Site
of the plant is a relatively narrow.flat strip of land of
about 230 acres. It is bound on the west side by the Ohio
River and on the east side by U.S. Highway 52. On the other
side of the highway the terrene is 200-300 foot hills.
Some of this property is also owned by the company but it
would be difficult to utilize because it is so hilly.
Discussions with power plant personnel revealed that
the company is installing a second electrostatic precipitator
in series with the first precipitator on each of the six
boilers. The units will be located over the turbine-generator
rooms. The new precipitator on Unit 3 was operating and apparently
quite effectively since no fly ash was visible in the stack
gas. Construction was underway on Units 1 and 2. Site
preparation was beginning on Units 4 and 5 (steel reinforce-
ment, etc.). The new precipitator for Unit 6 is on order
but no construction has begun. It should be noted that
the installation of stack gas scrubbing facilities would
remove residual fly ash and eliminate the need for a second
set of electrostatic, precipitators.
The plant has six boilers and six generators ranging in
capacity from 112.5 to 460.8 MW. The boilers were placed
in operation from 1952 to 1969 and have a remaining life of
12 to 29 years (based on a 33 year life). Capacity factors
for the units range from 55 to 70%.
32
-------
All six boiler houses are enclosed and all units are in
a row with the back of the boiler houses on a flood wall
directly against the Ohio River. The units are served by
five stacks located just west of the boiler houses. Stacks
for Units 1-4 are based on the structure just over the
edge of the river while the common stack for Units 5 and 6
is built on a structure out in the river. All fans and
original precipitators are on the roof of the boiler house.
Units 1-5 have I.D. fans while Unit 6 is a pressurized
boiler.
Coal is stored in a pile (60-90 days capacity) on the
north side of the plant adjacent to No. 1 Unit. Also
located on the north side of the plant are three fly ash
disposal ponds. These ponds are roughly rectangular in
shape and measure about 500' x 1400' each (about 16 acres
each). Fly ash is removed from the ponds on a contract basis
and trucked to a site in the hills. The bottom ash pond is
located south of the plant (on the No. 6 Unit side). The
four emergency generators and three oil storage tanks also
lie on the south side. Electrical facilities (switchgear)
occupy the space between the turbine rooms and the highway
(east of the power house). Power transmission lines leave
the plant at 138 KV and 345 KV.
All coal is received by barge. Capacity of the barges
ranges from 900-1200 tons. There are no railroad facilities.
Coal used in 1972 averaged 3.04% sulfur and the design coal
feed rate if 467.8 T/H (about 9000-9800 Btu/KWH) . The
power plant personnel voiced a strong preference for
using low sulfur coal and additional precipitators for
reducing S0« and particulate emissions rather than using a
wet limestone scrubbing system. They stated that they are
now negotiating a long term contract for low sulfur coal.
33
-------
2. Description of Limestone Scrubbing System
The W.C. Beckjord Plant has 6 boilers and would require
9 scrubbing trains. Boilers 1 and 2 would require one train
each (size IV) . Boiler 3 would require one train (size III) .
Boiler 4 would require one train (size II). Boiler 5 would
require two trains (size IV) and Boiler 6 would require three
trains (size III). It is proposed that all 9 scrubbing
trains be installed in a steel structure over the edge of
the Ohio River mounted on concrete piling driven to bed rock
(elev. 402') below the river bottom. Each pile would be
118 feet long and each would extend up to elevation 520'
(5 feet above maximum water level). The steel structure
extending up to the scrubbing train deck would be 56 feet
high. The structure supporting the scrubbing trains would
extend out over the Ohio River from the boiler wall a distance
of 60 feet. Fans for all scrubbing trains would be mounted
over the venturi scrubbers and all absorbers and venturi
scrubbers would be mounted over their respective circulating
tanks. The scrubbing trains for Unit 6 would require additional
ductwork.
Design limestone flow rate for the plant is 86 T/H with
the normal flow being 50 T/H. It is proposed that the dead
limestone pile (61,900 tons) be located southeast of the
existing oil storage tanks. This will require filling in a
portion of the existing ash pond (an area of about 300'
x 500'). The grinding building is 70 feet wide by 120 feet
long. This building and the limestone slurry surge -tank can
be located adjacent to Unit 6. However, we were informed
that the plant wanted to use this space for future oil
storage tanks. Limestone can be received by truck and unloaded
into an underground hopper. Additional facilities would
probably be needed if barge shipments of limestone are to
be received.
34
-------
A settling pond for the sludge produced at the Beckjord
Plant would need to be 324 acres x 50 feet deep for 20 years
storage. A more feasible alternate appeared to be installation
of a thickener and a small pond, both of which would be
placed south of the power house. The pond will be lined
and sized for holding about five weeks of sludge production.
Sludge containing 40% solids, produced at a rate of 250 T/H,
can be removed from the plant site by truck or barge.
35
-------
C. Cardinal Plant
1. Description of Power Plant
The Cardinal Plant is a coal fired steam electric power
plant owned by the Ohio Power Company. It has an installed
generating capacity of 1180 MW. Location of the plant
is near Brilliant, Ohio about 6 miles south of Steubenville,
Ohio. The area is rural regarding population but highly
industrialized. Site of the plant is just west of the Ohio
River on a narrow strip of land of about 140 acres. The
property is bound on the east by the Ohio River, on the west
by Ohio State Highway 7, and on the north by Ohio-Ferro Alloys
The Company also owns some property (about 300 acres) west
of Highway 7.
The plant has two boilers and two generators each with
a capacity of 590 MW. The boilers were placed in service
in 1967 and have a remaining life of 34 years (based on a 40
year life). Capacity factors for the two units ranged from
55-60% based on 1971 data. The Company plans to install a
third 590 MW boiler south of the existing units. They
could not tell us the exact location of the unit or the
start-up date so we did not consider it in this study.
The two boiler houses are side by side and are served
by two 825 foot high stacks located just west of the
electrostatic precipitators.
Coal is stored in a pile roughly rectangular in plan
measuring 500 feet in width by 1400 feet in length. The coal
pile is located about 600 feet south of Unit 2. Fly ash is
stored in a pit about 500 feet wide and 800 feet long located
just south of the coal pile. Bottom ash is stored in a pit
about 600 feet wide by 2600 feet long located just south of
the fly ash storage. All of the fly ash and a portion of the
bottom ash produced by the plant are used for land fill. The
36
-------
Wheeling and Lake Erie R.R. and the Pennsylvania R.R. run
in a north-south direction parallel to the Ohio River and
pass through the plant about 250 to 300 feet west of the
stacks. Electrical facilities (138 KV and 345 KV switch-
gear) occupy the area between the railroads and State High-
way 7 .
Coal was supplied to the plant from four different sources
in 1972. This coal had-an average sulfur content of 3.2%.
The design coal feed rate is 495 T/H (about 9200 Btu/KWH) .
2. Description of Limestone Scrubbing System
The Cardinal Plant has 2 boilers and would require 6
scrubbing trains-all the No. I size. Each boiler would
require 3 trains. There is a reasonably clear area of about
80 feet in width from the centerline of the two stacks
extending west to a plant road. It is proposed that 4 of
the scrubbing trains (2 for each boiler) be located in this
area. The other 2 scrubbing trains (1 for each boiler)
would be located just on the other side (west) of the plant
road. Circulating tanks for all scrubbing trains would be
located at grade and the absorbers and venturi scrubbers
would be mounted over their respective circulating tanks.
Fans for all units would be mounted over the venturi scrubbers.
Overall dimensions of each scrubbing train will be 60 feet
wide by 65 feet long by 95 feet high.
Some additional ductwork will be required for the scrubbers
located across the road. About 600 feet of railroad
track on the north side of the power house will have to be
relocated. Four ash lines (two from each boiler) will have
to be relocated. Also a construction transformer for Unit 2
will have to be moved.
37
-------
Design limestone flow rate for the plant is 80 T/H with
the normal flow being 44 T/H. The dead limestone storage
pile (57,600 tons) can be located west of the coal pile and
across the Pennsylvania Railroad tracks. The grinding
building is 70 feet wide and 120 feet long. This building
and the limestone slurry storage tank can be located north
of the dead storage pile. Limestone can be received by
rail or truck and unloaded into an underground hopper.
A settling pond for the sludge produced at the Cardinal
Plant would have to be 312 acres x 50 feet deep for 20
years storage. A more attractive alternate appeared to be
the installation of a thickener and a small pond, both of
which would be located near (probably just north) of the
limestone pile. The pond will be lined and sized for holding
about five weeks of sludge production. Sludge which is
produced at the rate of 264 T/H, can be removed from the
plant site by rail, truck, or barge.
38
-------
D. Muskingum Plant
1. Description of Power Plant
The Muskingum Plant is a coal fired steam electric power
plant owned by the Ohio Power Company. It has an installed
generating capacity of 1466.8 MW. Location of the plant is
in a rural area near Beverly, Ohio about 20 miles northwest
of Marietta, Ohio. Site of the plant is just south of a
bend of the Muskingum River on about 150 acres. The property
is bound on the north by the river and on the south by County
Highway 32. The Company also owns 300-400 acres of rather
hilly land on the south side of the highway and 22 acres just
across the river (north of the plant).
The plant has five boilers and five generators ranging
in capacity from 213 to 590.8 MW. The boilers were placed
in service from 1953 to 1968 and have a remaining life of
20 to 35 years (based on a 40 year life). Capacity factors
for the units range from 65-70%.
All boiler houses are enclosed. Units 1-4 are grouped
together and are arranged in a row perpendicular to the
Muskingum River with the side of Unit 1 being closest to
the river. The largest unit (No. 5) stands alone about
1800 feet southwest of the older facilities.
The original installation had cyclones and I.D.
fans for Units 1 and 2 and no dust collection equipment for
Units 3 and 4. Units 1 and 2 had their own stacks on
the roof while Units 3 and 4 shared a common stack standing
east of the boiler house. All units, however, have had a
new set of precipitators added as a final clean-up step.
The 3 original stacks have been abandoned and a large new
stack (825 feet high) has been added due east of Unit 2.
All four new precipitators were tied into the new stack.
Each breeching enters a different stack opening. Unit 1
39
-------
enters on the north side, Unit 2 enters the west, Unit 3
enters the south, and Unit 4 enters the east.
Unit No. 5 is a pressurized boiler. It presently has
2 precipitators in parallel each feeding into separate
stack openings. We were informed that there is an intent
to add a second set of precipitators in series with the first.
No construction is evident. The stack for Unit 5 is 825 feet
high and is situated due east of the precipitators.
Coal is stored in a large pile adjacent to the river
and just west of the original four boilers. Capacity of
the pile is 730,000 tons. Bottom ash ponds are located
southeast of Units 1-4 and south of Unit 5. Fly ash is slurried
under the highway to the hilly area previously mentioned.
The fly ash pond was formed by damming off 100-150 foot
valleys between the hills.
Power from Units 1 and 3 is transformed to 138 K.V..
Three separate transmission lines cross over the boiler-
precipitator area terminating on towers adjacent to a road.
The 138 K.V. switchyard is located just east of the new
stack serving Units 1-4. Power from Units 2,4, and 5 is
transformed to 345 K.V. The 345 K.V. switchyard is located
about 900 feet due east of the stack for Unit 5.
Coal is supplied from the Muskingum Mine of the Central
Ohio Coal Co. It is transported from the mine to an unloading
terminal located 4 miles away by truck or railroad. The
coal is then sent to the power plant via an overland conveyor
which crosses the river about 1100 feet west of Units 1-4.
Coal used in 1972 averaged 5.10% sulfur. The design coal
feed rate is 564.3 T/H.
40
-------
2. Description of Limestone Scrubbing System
The Muskingum Plant has 5 boilers and would require 11
scrubbing trains. Boilers 1-4 would each require 2 scrubbing
trains (size IV) and Boiler 5 would require 3 trains (size I).
Units 1-4 present a difficult arrangement problem. The area
is being almost totally utilized. Apparently the most
feasible location for 6 of the 8 scrubbing trains (for Units
1-3) is over the river bank northeast of the new stack about
150 feet from its centerline. These trains would occupy a
space about 55 feet wide and 355 feet long. The scrubbers
would be placed on a deck at grade (Elev. 643'-0") which would
be supported by piles driven down to bed rock (approximate
Elev. 603'-0" to 613'-0"). The 2 scrubbing trains for
Unit 4 could be located at grade in the open space just
south of Unit 4. Fans for all 8 scrubbing trains would be
mounted above the venturi scrubbers and all absorber and
venturi scrubbers would be placed above their respective
circulating tanks. A considerable amount of additional
ductwork would be required for all trains.
Unit 5 has a considerable amount of open space near the
stack such that even if new precipitators are added, no
problem would be encountered in fitting in the 3 scrubbing
trains. It is now proposed that the 3 standard trains for
this unit be located at grade on the north side of the stack.
Fans for these units would be located at grade. The dimensions
of each train would be 60 feet in width by 145 feet in length
and the overall space occupied by the 3 trains would be 192
feet wide by 145 feet long. Location of the scrubbers in
this space would necessitate relocating an existing construction
office and would require some additional ductwork.
Design limestone flow rate for the plant is 180 T/H
with the normal flow being 109 T/H. The dead limestone storage
pile (130,000 tons) can be located east of the 345 K.V.
switchyard utilizing a portion of the bottom ash storage area.
41
-------
The grinding building (which is 75 feet wide and 240 feet
long) and the limestone slurry surge tank can be located
north of the limestone pile. This will require relocating
the dikes for the bottom ash pond. Limestone can be received
by truck or rail and unloaded into an underground hopper.
Additional facilities would be required if barge shipments
of limestone were to be received.
A settling pond for the sludge produced at the Muskingum
Plant would need to be 685 acres by 50 feet deep for 20
years storage. A more feasible alternate appeared to be
installation of a thickener and a small pond placed north
of the limestone pile. The pond will be lined and sized
for holding about two weeks of sludge production. Sludge
is produced at the rate of 522 T/H and. will have to be removed
from the plant site by barge, rail, or truck.
42
-------
E. Eastlake Plant
1. Description of Power Plant
Eastlake Is the larger of two plants owned by Cleveland
Electric and Illuminating Company that are included in this
study. It is rated at 1257 MW although, according to infor-
mation from the utility, it can run as high as 1350 MW
(peak capacity). The plant is located in Cleveland on the
Lake Erie shore in an otherwise exclusively residential area.
The site is triangular in shape and occupies approximately
100 acres. Much of the site is occupied by present plant
facilities, with little unoccupied space.
Eastlake has five boilers, three of which can operate
at 140 MW (peak capacity), one at 250 MW, and one which is
rated at 680 MW. Boilers 1-4 were placed in service between
1953 and 1956 and have a remaining life of 30-33 years, based
on a life of 50 years (per Cleveland Electric). The average capa-
city factor in 1972 for these four units was quite high, viz., 73,
Boiler 5 was fired in mid-1972. Because of this, its
capacity factor for the year is quite low, only 18.9%.
For this study, it has been assumed that the capacity factor
would normally be on the order of 80%. Since the plant is
new, it has a remaining life of about 50 years.
At present, boilers 1-4 are fitted with mechanical-
electrical precipitators for fly ash removal. The precipitators
have a design efficiency of 98.2%. Boiler 5 has an electrostatic
precipitator which has a design efficiency of 99.5%. Since
the plant site does not have sufficient room for a long-term
ash pond, all ash collected at the plant is ultimately hauled
off-site by a contractor. A small pond is used as a temporary
storage area for most of the ash prior to disposal.
43
-------
Boilers 1-3 are oriented in a west-to-east row in fully
enclosed buildings. The precipitators and I.D. fans for these
units are in-line extending to the south, with the fans being
fully enclosed, and the precipitators partially so. Each
unit has its own stack which is adjacent to the fans and
extends through a one-story service building. This building
continues southward from the stacks approximately 125 feet.
Boiler 4 is essentially in-line with the first three and
is also fully enclosed. The precipitator and I.D. fans
are virtually enclosed and at grade. The adjacent stack
is also at grade, in a small, open area. Almost immediately
south of the stack is a three-story building used to provide
various facilities for plant personnel and to house some
equipment.
Boiler 5, the largest on the plant, lies to the east
of the other units. This unit is also fully enclosed.
The stack, which has a symmetrical breeching arrangement,
is south of the unit at grade in a small, open area.
The coal pile covers a large portion of the area to the
south and southeast of the boilers. Delivery to the plant
is by rail. The maximum coal feed rate to the plant
(all units operating at peak capacity) is about 522 tons
per hours. Sulfur content of the coal in 1972 was quite
uniform, averaging 3.35% over the year while the maximum
monthly average was only 3.58%.
The turbine rooms are located directly north of the
boilers, with the transformers and electrical switchgear
beyond that to the north and east. South of the boilers
there is a variety of structures and equipment, including
the buildings previously mentioned, coal conveyors, track,
44
-------
roadway, a coal hopper house, coal silo, etc. To the east
of the boilers is the temporary ash disposal area, just
north of the coal pile.
2. Description of Limestone Scrubbing System
The Eastlake plant would require a total of 9 scrubbing
trains. Boilers 1-3 would need one maximum size (I) train
each. Boiler 4 would require 2 trains (size IV) , while four
size II trains would be used for boiler 5.
The arrangement for boilers 1-3 would be identical. The
scrubbing modules would be built over the service building,
using piles through the building. This would necessitate
temporary relocation of service equipment, demolition of the
building to provide access for cranes, etc., during construction,
reconstruction of the building, re-installation of equipment,
etc.
The scrubbing modules for boiler 4 would be adjacent
to the stack, but elevated about 50 feet above grade.
Construction of the modules would be similar to that described
above, in that the nearby building would be demolished during
construction and rebuilt afterwards. Equipment and facilities
in this building would be temporarily moved and later rein-
stalled.
The scrubbers for boiler 5 would be located immediately
south of the stack, two on each side, and elevated about
40 feet over the railroad track. This arrangement would
require moving a silo (1200 tons), relocating 300 feet
of conveyor and 400 feet of a pipe bridge. Because of the
number of scrubbers required, additional ductwork would be
needed to get to and from the furthest scrubbers.
All tanks and pumps for the scrubber modules would be
adjacent to the scrubbers and with the exception of those
for boiler 5 would be elevated about 20 feet above the road
45
-------
located south of the scrubbers. This maintains an unobstructed
access way to equipment in this portion of the plant.
The limestone system has been designed for a maximum
flow rate of 87.4 TPH, with a normal consumption of 68.2 TPH.
The receiving hopper and storage pile would be located at
the eastern tip of the plant. Grinding and slurry storage
facilities would be built in an area near the temporary ash
pond.
Since there is inadequate room for long-term storage of
the sludge, it would be concentrated in a thickener prior
to temporary storage in a small (1 week) holding pond.
From the latter, it would be hauled away by local contractor.
The thickener and pond would both be located north of the
plant in two areas near the electrical switchyard.
46
-------
F. Lake Shore Plant
1. Description of Power Plant
The Lake Shore Plant is owned by the Cleveland Electric
and Illuminating Company and has a rated capacity of 514 MW.
According to company personnel, however, some of the units
operate above their design rating, giving an actual plant
capacity of about 550 MW. The plant is located in Cleveland
and occupies a relatively small site of approximately 50
acres on the Lake Erie shore line. The lake supplies water
to the plant. A major highway separates the site from the
lake on its northwest edge, and parallel to this on the
opposite side of the plant lies a railroad right of way.
To the northeast, the plant is bounded by a park, and to the
east by a city street across which is located the main
parking lot for the plant. The plant site itself is
cramped, with little unused space. In general, the locality
surrounding the plant is a mixed residential and industrial
area.
Lake Shore has five boilers. The first four (boilers
91-94) constitute "Plant-A". Two of these boilers operate
at 70 MW each (peak operating capacity) while the other
two can run at 80 MW each. The former units were installed
in 1941 and have a remaining life of about 18 years, based
on a 50 year life (per Cleveland Electric) . The latter two boilers
were put in service ten years later and have a remaining life of
about 28 years. Capacity factors for these four units averaged
43% in 1972.
The remaining unit, boiler 18, constitutes "Plant-B"
and has a rated capacity of 250 MW. It was installed in
1962 and has a remaining life of 39 years. In 1972, the
average capacity factor was 68%.
47
-------
Each boiler is equipped with an electrostatic precipitator
for fly ash control, but the efficiencies of the precipitators
serving Plant-A are relatively low (90-95%) . The collected
fly ash, plus all bottom ash, is stored temporarily in a
small disposal area. From there, it must be hauled away
by a local contractor.
The four boilers in Plant-A are in a row roughly parallel
to the shore line, and are fully enclosed in a boiler house
which is separated from the highway by the turbine room.
On the opposite side of the boilers, the building contains
transformers, electrical gear, and miscellaneous equipment.
Precipitators and I.D. fans are elevated but enclosed with
the stacks, one for each unit, being roof-mounted.
Plant-B lies to the northeast of Plant-A, with the boiler,
fans, and precipitator fully enclosed. The stack for this
boiler is at grade to the southeast of the unit.
The open area to the southeast of both plants, i.e., the
area nearest the stacks, is relatively unobstructed, but
there is a large hill which parallels the five boilers.
Between the base of the hill and the boiler houses are an
ash trench and railroad track. Two oil tanks are imbedded
in the hill with an oil pump house at the bottom of the hill.
Coal is received by rail and stored in a large area to
the south of Plant-A. The total coal feed rate for the plant,
when operating at peak capacity, is 260 tons per hour. The
coal averaged 2.93% sulfur in 1972, with a high monthly
average of 3.53%.
The temporary ash disposal area is located to the south-
west of Plant-A. Electrical switchgear are located to the
southeast of the boilers, at the top of the hill.
48
-------
2. Description of Limestone Scrubbing System
Plant-A would require 4 scrubbing trains (two size III
and two size IV), one for each boiler, while Plant-B would
require 2 size III trains. This gives a total of 6 trains
for the entire plant. All scrubbers would be built over
the railroad and ash trench near the units, with some of the
foundations imbedded in the hill. The modules would begin
at the edge of the boiler houses, necessitating additional
ductwork for all scrubbers serving Plant-A. The underground
oil tanks and the oil pump house would have to be relocated,
and virtually all tanks and pumps serving the scrubber
modules would be set in the hill. Since gravity flow
from the scrubbers to the tanks could not be used with this
arrangement, an additional set of slurry pumps would be
required for each module.
The design flow rate for limestone is 42.9 TPH, with a
normal rate of 22.3 TPH. The receiving hopper and storage
pile would be located in the main parking lot. From there
it would be conveyed to the grinding and slurry storage
facilities immediately adjacent to Plant-B.
Since there is inadequate area available for long-term
storage of the sludge, it would be thickened and held temporarily
in a small (1 week) holding pond prior to disposal by local
contractor. These facilities would be located in the extreme
southwest part of the present temporary ash disposal area.
49
-------
G. Conesville Plant
1. Description of Power Plant
The Conesville station, owned by the Columbus and Southern
Ohio Electric Company, is a mine-mouth plant, having a total
installed generating capacity of 1276 MW. It is located
about 65 miles east of Columbus in the foothills of east
central Ohio in Coshocton County in a rural, sparsely populated
area. The plant is adjacent to the Muskingum River, from
which it draws its water supply, and occupies a small portion
of the several hundred acre site.
Presently there are four boilers and generators ranging
in size from 147 to 842 M W. The newest and largest unit
was fired this year. Construction has begun on the first
of two other boilers. The utility company plans to install
a flue gas scrubbing system on this unit.
The three older boilers were placed in service between
1957 and 1962 and have a remaining life of about 15-20 years.
Boiler 4, as mentioned, was brought on stream this year and
has a useful life of 30 years. Capacity factors for the
first three boilers were 65-72% in 1972.
Boilers 1 and 2 have no dust collectors. Boiler 3 has
a mechanical dust collector, while boiler 4 has two electrostatic
precipitators, one for each half of the split-flow boiler.
All ash collected at the plant is sent to a large settling
pond. The pond is about 180 acres and has a 15 year storage
capability. The company plans to equip boilers 1 and 2, and
to upgrade boiler 3, with precipitators. The units now
under construction will also have precipitators for fly ash
control.
The four boilers are housed in structures oriented along
a west-to-east line with the stacks adjacent and north of the
50
-------
boilers. All stacks are at grade and easily accessible.
Stack 1 is common to both of the first two boilers, while
each of the other boilers has its own stack. Unit 4 has
a separate breeching for each half of the boiler.
The area surrounding the stacks is relatively unobstructed.
Some of it is needed to provide access to the various boilers.
To the north of stack 1 there is a large, one story service
building and to the north of it a smaller frame building.
West of stack 3 there are three large storage tanks, one
of which is diked.
Coal is brought to the plant by conveyor and stored
in a large pile north of the stacks. The design coal feed-
rate for the entire plant is about 550 tons per hours. In
1972, the coal averaged 5.2% sulfur, with a high monthly
average of 6.5% sulfur. These are the highest figures for
any of the eight plants included in the study.
The ash settling pond is located east of the boilers and
east of the construction area for the future units. Directly
south of the latter are the water treatment facilities and
cooling towers. To the west of the water treatment facilities
are the electrical switchyards, just south of the boiler
and generator structures.
2. Description of Limestone Scrubbing System
The Conesville plant would require a total of 9 scrubbing
trains for the present boilers. Boilers 1 and 2 would require
one train each (size III). Boiler 3 would require one train
(size II). Six trains (size III) would be needed for boiler
4, three for each half of the unit. The scrubbing trains
for boilers 1, 2, and 3 would be located adjacent to and
north of the stacks. In order to leave access room to the
boilers, the scrubbers would be elevated about 25 feet above
the roadway. All tanks and pumps would be at grade, north
of the scrubbers. This would require removal of the small
51
-------
frame building north of the service building to install the
tanks for Unit 1.
The six scrubbers required for boiler 4 would be located
adjacent to the stack, with three trains on each side. In
order to get to and from the furthest scrubbers, some additional
ductwork is required. The scrubbers woulr* be elevated about
25 feet above grade. To install these scrubbers, a diked,
500,000 gallon oil storage tank would have to be relocated.
All tanks and pumps would be at grade and near the scrubbers.
The design flow rate for limestone is 171 TPH, with a
normal or average consumption of 120 TPH. Receiving facilities,
including the 123,000 ton storage pile would, be located
just south of the cooling towers, necessitating the relocation
of part of a road. Limestone grinding and slurry storage
facilities would be located in an open area between the two
banks of cooling towers.
Limestone sludge would be disposed of in a pond located
southeast of the plant in the strip mine area. The pond would
be about 665 acres in area (and 50 feet deep) and have a
storage capability of 20 years.
52
-------
H. Poston Plant
1. Description of Power Plant
At 254 MW, the Poston Station is the"smallest plant
included in this study. Owned by the Columbus and Southern
Ohio Electric Company, it is located about 65 miles southeast
of Columbus in a rural, hilly, sparsely populated area. The
plant, situated on a several hundred acre tract, is somewhat
unique in that it is not adjacent to a river, but draws its
water supply from ground water.
There are four boilers on the plant, two rated at 50 MW
each, and two rated at 77 MW each. The"boilers are 20-25
years old, having been put in service between 1949 and 1954.
They have a remaining life of about 10-12 years. In 1972,
capacity factors varied between 46% and 60%.
All boilers at Poston are equipped with mechanical,
cyclone-type fly ash collectors which are estimated to remove
about half of the fly ash. All ash collected at the plant
is sluiced to a pond which has a remaining 5 year storage
capacity. The company is proposing to install electrostatic
precipitators on all units.
The four units are in a row oriented along a west-to-east
line, with the boilers themselves in an open steel structure.
Two stacks serve the four boilers and these are at grade
directly south of the units in an open unobstructed area.
Stack 1, serving boilers 1 and 2, is located between the
units with a symmetrical breeching arrangement. Stack 2,
which serves the remaining boilers, is adjacent to.boiler
3, with ductwork extending laterally from boiler 4. The
cyclone ash collectors and I.D. fans are located at grade
between the boilers and stacks.
53
-------
The area south of the stacks is quite open and provides
access to the four boilers. There are two small, one-story
buildings, an ash pumping station south of stack 2 and a
storage building south of stack 1. Below this area is a row
of cooling towers, running parallel to the boilers.
Coal is brought to the plant by truck from nearby mines
and stored in a pile located west of the boilers. The design
coal rate for the plant is 112 tons per hour. The coal
averaged 2.6% sulfur in 1972 with a high monthly average of
only 3.4%.
All collected ash is sluiced to the settling pond which
is north of the plant. The pond has a limited remaining
storage capacity of about 5 years. The switchyard is
located directly north of the boilers and generators. Water
treatment facilities are west of the boiler bank.
2. Description of Limestone Scrubbing System
Each of the four boilers at Poston would require one
scrubbing train, with boilers 1 and 2 needing a size VI train
and boilers 3 and 4 needing a size V train. The scrubbers
would be located adjacent and just south of their corresponding
boilers. They would be elevated about 20-25 feet above grade
to maintain clear access to the boilers, fans, and other
equipment. All tanks and pumps would be at grade and near
the scrubbers. No alterations or relocation of existing
building, structures, etc., would be required to install
the scrubbing trains.
The design limestone flow rate is about 18 TPH, with a
normal consumption of slightly more than 9 TPH. The storage
pile (about 13,000 tons) and the truck unloading hopper would
be located in a clear area east of the plant. From there,
the limestone would be conveyed to the grinding and slurry
storage facilities located just north of the last bank of
cooling towers.
54
-------
Sludge from the process would be stored in a special pond
north of the ash pond. It would have a useful life of 20
years and occupy about 30 acres.
55
-------
VI. CAPITAL INVESTMENT
Results
Tabulated below are total capital investments required
to install SO- scrubbing equipment on the eight power plants
selected for the present study:
PLANT NAME
W.H. Sammis
W.C. Beckjord
Cardinal
Muskingum
Eastlake
Lakeshore
Conesville*
Poston*
Generating
Capacity ,
MW
2303.5
1221.3
1180
1466.8
1350
550
1276
254
Interest Total
Capital During Capital
Cost, $M Cons true t ion, $M Invest, $M
91,780
57,950
39,740
68,020
60,100
40,320
73,250
20,380
9,120
5,750
3,960
6,880
6,000
4,080
7,350
2,020
100,900
63,700
43,700
74,900
66,100
44,400
80,600
22,400
$/KW
43.80
52.20
37.00
51.10
49.00
80.70
63.20
88.20
The totals shown represent "order-of-magnitude" type estimates
developed over a very short period of time and with a minimum
of input data. These are all "revamp" (or "retrofit") type
installations and based on MWK's past experience with many
such jobs, the final cost is almost invariably higher than is
originally estimated. Consequently, it is reasonable to
expect that the costs listed above could be low by as much as
30-35% with very little, if any, probability of underrun.
*The Conesville and Poston plants have 20 and 12 year sludge
disposal ponds respectively. All other plants have small,
temporary holding ponds of nominal capacity.
56
-------
Procedure
In order to complete the evaluation of all eight plants,
comprising some 40 individual boilers of various sizes, it
was necessary to devise a method whereby certain items
common to all systems could be standardized with respect to
design and cost. Based on major process and installation
factors it was determined that developing six different size
standard gas scrubbing modules would be sufficient to
adequately cover the range of boiler sizes involved.
A single type of gas contactor was selected, as previously
discussed, and the vendor supplied information on sizes
available and budget costs for the different sizes. Sizes
of the standard scrubbing modules developed ranged downward,
from the largest size presently manufactured, in decrements
of 12.5%. Thus the largest module developed is capable of
treating the flue gas from a power plant generating about
180 MW and the smallest has a capacity equivalent to about
65-70 MW. All of the equipment needed for gas scrubbing
was included in the standard module assuming there were no
restrictions on space availability or configuration. Devia-
tions from this basis were handled as additions according to
the individual requirements of each boiler. A list of
equipment, sizes and cost required for the largest scrubbing
module was developed and used as a basis for determining
equivalent costs for the other sizes.
Input data from the utilities and FPC Form 67 were used
to determine the size and number of standard scrubbing modules
required for each boiler in each plant. Equipment layouts
were prepared along with a list of necessary additions to
the standard module including a tabulation of revamp work
needed to prepare the site. The MWK Estimating Department
used this information as a basis for estimating the cost
57
-------
of installing the scrubbing equipment on each boiler taking
into account the appropriate labor cost and productivity
for the particular geographical locations involved.
A single limestone preparation system (including receiving,
handling, grinding, slurry preparation, storage and feeding)
was used for each plant with the size adjusted according to
specific needs. Cost of this system was estimated in a manner
similar to that used for the gas scrubbing system.
Disposal ponds were treated as a separate item for each
plant since space required for these ponds is quite large
(hundreds of acres) and the size that can be installed therefore
varies over a wide range. Adequate space is available at
only two plant sites viz., Conesville and Poston, for the
installation of a large disposal pond. At all other sites,
a small, temporary holding pond was employed. In the latter
cases, ultimate disposal of sludge would have to be treated
as an operating expense rather than a capital cost. It was
assumed in all cases that an impervious lining would be
required for the ponds to prevent contamination of ground
water via leaching of soluble salts from the waste sludge.
Since there are a wide variety of linings available,the
cost of these linings can vary appreciably depending on
total surface to be covered, type of material, thickness of
material, etc. For the present estimates, a lining price
about mid-range between high and low was selected.
Costs in terms of dollars per kilowatt ($/KW) have been
shown above but these numbers can be misleading. That is,
owing to differences in heat rates, coal heating value,
excess air, etc., the quantity of flue gas produced per
kilowatt-hour generated can vary widely among different boilers.
58
-------
Other variables that can affect $/KW include differences in
methods of calculating name plate rating values, use of
gross rather than net power produced and whether or not the
power consumed by the scrubbing unit is deducted from the
plant output. If it is desirable to use $/KW as a method of
stating costs, then caution should be exercised when comparing
different installations to insure that a common basis is used.
In this study, $/KW is referenced to the sum of the individual
boiler capacities either as reported by the utility on FPC
Form 67, or as obtained directly from the utility in cases
where they had more current information.
59
-------
VII OPERATING COST DATA
PLANT
W.H. SAMMIS W.C. BECKJORD CARDINAL MUSKINGUM EASTLAKE LAKESHORE CONESVILLE POSTON
CTl
O
HH
% Sulfur in Coal
(1972 Avg.)
Capacity Factor
(1972 Avg,)
Limestone Required
(0 150% Stoic. Quan.)
T/H Peak (@ Max. Sulf.)
T/H Peak (9 Avg. Sulf.)
T/H (Yearly Avg.)
T/MWH (@ Avg. Sulf.)
Sludge Disposal
T/H Peak
T/MWH
Utilities Required
Electrical Power
Fract. of Gen. Cap.
MH (Max.)
Steam
Fract. of Heat Rate
MM Btu/Hr. (Max.)
|/Hr (Max.): 751 Btu/Lb.
MM Btu/MWH
Make-Up Water
GPM (Max.)
GAL/MWH
Operating Labor
Men/Shift
Supervision
2303.5
2.50
1.
0.607
122.6
113.5
68.9
0.0493
401
0.174
.0220
50.8
0.0144
312.9
417,000
0.136
3250
84.7
4
15% Lab.
1221.3
3.04
0.633
87.3
80.2
50.8
0.0657
259
0.212
.0192
23.4
0.0123
146.5
195,000
0.120
1810
88.9
4
15% Lab.
1180
3.20
1466.8
5.10
0.6001' 0.6741'
1350
3-35
550
2.93
0.7802' 0.520
1276
5.20
0.700
3.
254
2.60
0.523
76.6
74.3
44.6
0.0630
264
0.224
.0189
22.4
0.0133
144.5
192,000
0.122
1680
85.4
3
15% Lab.
171.9
162.4
109.4
0.111
522
0.356
.0219
32.1
0.0128
176.2
235,000
0.120
2840
116.2
4
15% Lab.
87.4
81.8
63.8
0.0606
313
0.232
0.0237
32.0
0.0145
178.0
237,000
0.132
2000
88.9
4
15% Lab.
42.9
35.6
18.5
0.0647
154
0.280
0.039C
21.4
0.0152
94.7
126,000
0.172
1020
111.3
3
15% Lab.
171.3
137.0
95.9
0.107
613
0.480
0.0246
31.4
0.0137
160.5
214,000
0.126
2645
124.4
4
15% Lab.
17.8
13.6
7.1
0.0535
64
0.251
0.0287
7.3
0.0146
35.6
47,400
0.140
400
94.5
3
15% Lab
NOTES
1. 1971 Average.
2. Estimated for 1972 assuming Boiler 5, fired in mid-'72, had operated normally for full year.
3. Estimated value based on reported capacity factors for Boilers 1-3 and estimated capacity factor for Boiler 4, fired in
tarly '73.
-------
VIII APPENDICES
61
-------
APPENDIX A
PROCESS FLOW SHEETS
62
-------
/O5-*J
NO.
REVISION DKSCRIPTION
XT.)
/O/-V
FEEDER
DAT* BY CHK
IBSUKD FOR
FABRICATION
IIBBUKO FOR
CONSTRUCTION
CALK
ORAWN;
CHKCKID:
APPMOVKD:
OATKDl
THE M. W. KELLOGG COMPANY
a dlvhten of PULLMAN INCORPORATED
CLASS
ARIA
4//8-0/
JOB NO.
. /
DRAWING NO.
-------
>9 T^
$ S?/\s^/? \A//?r£-/?
£ /&O/VD w/)r£-&
RCVKION DESCRIPTION
DATE BY
CHK
ISSUED rOR
FABRICATION
CONSTRUCTION
CALK: AW/V5T
DRAWN:
CHICK.D,
APPROVED:
DATKO:
THE M. W. KELLOGG COMPANY
a dlvUten of PULLMAN INCORPORATED
CLASS
200
ARKA
JOB NO.
DRAWING NO.
DKPIANCI NO. IOOOH
-------
APPENDIX B
EQUIPMENT LIST
(TABLE 1)
65
-------
, //TAX
lUEUDCO)
\W/
EQUIPMENT LIST
ENG PROJ « 9-70
CLIEMT: EPA-Ohio Utilities Study
LOCATION:
JOB/EST. NO..
4118-01
TYPE UNIT; Limestone System: Section 100
- CLASS
F.J.K.L
PAGE NO.:
OF
ITEM
NO.
101-F
102-F
103-F
104-F
101-J
10 2 -J
103-J
104-J
105-J
106-J
101-K
101-L
102-L
»
DESCRIPTION
EQUIPMENT TYPE: F-Drums and Tanks
Unloading Hopper
Live Storage Silos
Limestone Slurry Storage Tank
Effluent Slurry Surge Tank
J -Pumps and Drivers
Limestone Slurry Feed Pumps
Raw Water Pumps
Pond Water Recycle Pumps
Effluent Slurry Surge Tank Pumps
Entrainment Separator Pumps
tfash Water Pumps
K-Buildings
Grinding Building
L-Special Equipment
Ball Mills (Incl. weigh feeder, mill, classifiers, slurry
sump, slurry pumps)
Thickener (If required)
5W
5^r
*~ V. *
~5~
Uf
Sc
<« z
CHECKS IN FAR RIGHT HAND COLUMN INDICATE ITEMS CHANGED IN LATEST ISSUE.
STANDARD DISTRIBUTION (ENTIRE EQUIPMENT LIST)
DIV. OR SECT.
DESIGN
JSVSTEMS
glfsYiSl
L^Y-O^T
MATERIAL
CONTROL
PI P E
SUPPORTS
BJsTA&MENT
Mfc!V7na
fihWuWWf-
SYSTEMS ENC.
'^NSC1.rUJ
n*
STsW>^DS
CIVIL ENC.
F U FIN A C r
E\CM. ClTV.
igsbrBrv.1-"1-
!iSW£ESNG
iE(^PcuES1NG
t-
V)
§
HOME OFFICE
Fltl_D
COST SERVICES
PROCESS MGR.
ATTENTION OF:
ADDITIONAL DISTRI3.THIS SHEET ONLY
DIV. OR SECT.
pygC^AS.NG
ATTENTION OF:
66
1 ISSUE NO.
DATE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 1 9 1 10 1 11
1 II
12
-------
EQUIPMENT LIST
ENG PROJ ft tt-70
EPA-Ohio Utilities Study
JOB/EST. NO. 4118-01
CLIENT:
LOCATION:
TYPE UNIT: Limestone System: Section 100
CLASS
PAGE NO.:
V
OF
ITEM
NO.
101-V
102-V
10 3 -V
10 4 -V
10 5 -V
t
DESCRIPTION
EQUIPMENT TYPE: V~Transportat ion Equip.
Feeder
Tunnel Belt Conveyor
Stacker
Plant Conveyor
Tripper Belt
t
-
§ls
5
IU
2cJ
<-T 7.
CHECKS IN FAR RIGHT HAND COLUMN INDICATE ITEMS CHANGED IN LATEST ISSUE.
STANDARD DISTRIBUTION (ENTIRE EQUIPMENT LIST)
DIV. OR SECT.
2
0
U
O
ISVSTEVS
DESIGN
CAY-O^T
*£19BktL
p| (->r
SUPT ORTS
RJk'IV-feMEMT
t^T,>-
fiHSSLV/'^ff
5VSTCMO tNC.
.Jj^NUMENT
t OUIF'MLN T
ATTENTION OF:
' .
DIV. OR SECT.
d6
>UJ
r~S
V &'&£**
CIVIL tING.
F'lJKN A C I". -
K X C H . DIV.
^Nb'.'fciv:-"^
^iW$ri:k"G
5E!!*>FcutSING
h-
1/1
§
HOME OFFICE
ULl-D
COST sr.Rvicts
PROCESS MGH.
ATTENTION OF:
»
ADDITIONAL DIST RIB. TH IS SHEET ONLY
DIV. OR SECT.
SGESV"1"10
ATTENTION OF:
67
ISSUL IJO.
DATE
t
2
3
4
S
6 ;
7
e
9
10
1 1
\2
-------
EMC PKOJ « 4-70
CLIEHT:
LOCATION:_
TYPE UNIT:
EQUIPMENT LIST
EPA-Ohio Utilities Study
JOB/EST. NO..
4118-01
Scrubbing Train; Section 200
CLASS
PAGE NO.:
C ,E , F,G /
OF
ITEM
NO.
201-C
201-E
202-E
t
201-F
202-F
201-G
%
DESCRIPTION
EQUIPMENT TYPE: C~Heat Exchanqers
eheater
'.
E-Towers
Venturi Scrubber
TCA Absorber
F -Drums and Tanks
Vent. S.cr.. Circulating Tank
Absorber Circulating Tank
G-Separators
Entrainment Separator
-
§ |s
~5
u*
u
l/l O
r
s y s i r M 3 r. n G .
»:« S 1 FiUMtrJ T
CNG.
£a«!'"M6NT
ATTENTION OF:
DIV. OR SECT.
I
d6
> UJ
n*
TsWA?05
CIVIL ENG.
tkifcr^
6
u
HOM6 OFFICE
^ILLD
COST SKR VICES
PROCESS MGR.
ATTENTION OF:
ADDITIONAL DISTRIS.THIS SHEET ONLY
DIV. OR SECT.
pygC^ASING
ATTENTION OK:
ISSUE NO.
DATE
I
2
fiR
3
1
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
-------
EQUIPMENT LIST
ENC PROJ 6 8-70
CLIENT: EPA_Ohio Utilities Study
LOCATION:
JOB/EST. NO..
4118-01
TYPE UNIT: Scrubbing Train; Section 200
CLASS
' PAGE NO.:
J,L,M
OF
1
ITEM
NO.
201-J
202-J
203-J
201 L-
202-L
203-L
204-L
205-L
201-M
202-M
20 3 -M
204-M
205-M
206-M
207-M
208-M
DESCRIPTION
EQUIPMENT TYPE: J-Pumps, Blowers, Drivers
Vent. Scr. Circulating Pumps
Absorber Circulating Pumps
Forced Draft Fan
L-Special Eauipment
Vent. Scr. Tank Agitator W/Motor
Absorber Tank Agitator W/Motor
Soot Blower (Inlet Duct to Venturi)
Soot Blower (Elbow to Ent. Separator)
Soot Blower (Rene ate r)
M-Piping
Duct To Fan
Duct From Fan To Vent. Scr.
Duct From Ent. Sep. To Reheater
Duct From Reheater To Stack Duct
Inlet Shut-Off Gate
Outlet Shut-Off Gate
Bypass Shut-Off Gate
Duct From Abs. To Ent. Separator
0
5 W
*~ ? ^
~5~
UJ
5?c
i/> z
CHECKS IN FAR RIGHT HAND COLUMN INDICATE ITEMS CHANGED IN LATEST ISSUE.
STANDARD DISTRIBUTION (ENTIRE EQUIPMENT LIST)
OIV. OR SECT.
DESIGN
(SYSTEMS
PIPING
DESIGN
LAYOUT
y&wtff
PI PEL
SUPPORTS
fiirYi!.WNT
pb%v
fihS-RlW^f-
SYSTEMS EMC.
ICJ^IPMENT
ATTENTION OF:
DIV. OR SECT.
1
d6
> iii
f)S
!TsWcS?os
CIVIL ENG.
f- URN A C E
EXCH. DTv.
'gahrDiv.1-"1-
£iSW£E!>NC
igH«-Pcu^mc
K-
m
8
HOME OFFICE
FIELD
COST SERVICES
PROCESS MGR.
ATTENTION OF:
ADDITIONAL DISTRIB.THIS SHEET ONLY
DIV. OR SECT.
PyRg.j.AS.NG
ATTENTION OF:
1 ISSUE NO.
DATE
1
2
3
4
5
6 .
'7
8 1 ,
I
10
1 1
I
1
-------
APPENDIX C
STANDARD SCRUBBER MODULES
70
-------
1
^
i
i
5'
4±
\
0'
r
\
> r-
t- } \
\S
j*
~
^f"
il l|
II 11
1 1
T i
^+---^1
T_±±---A Z
__m --T-y-y
i-'1 ' ' (
~* ~n /
-.-^--^.ip
\ !--- J X^l
S/DE V/EW
NO.
RKVIBION DMCRimON
DATK BY
CHK.
IBBUKO FOM
rABRICATION
Iisauio ron
CONSTRUCTION
CHKCKKDt
APPROVED:
QATBO:
AT
THE M. W. KELLOGG COMPANY
o dMiton of PULLMAN INCORPORATED
CLAS*
ARIA
JOB NO.
. 3
ORAWINO NO.
-------
if
!'
i!
H
i
^
"T
1
1
1
i
l
1
1
1
-J.
.-1
1
~l
2O
1
NO.
8S'
JO'
45'
fO'
f
-35-'-
\\ H
r
4-
rJ-~! " '
O3
5/D£ V/EW
REVISION DECCRIPTION
DATE BV CHK
ISSUED FOR
FABRICATION
(ISSUED FOR
CONSTRUCTION
PRAWN;
CHECKED:
APPROVED^
DATED:
THE M. W. KELLOGG COMPANY
a division of PULLMAN INCORPORATED
CLA«S
AREA
JOB NO.
. 4
DRAWINO NO.
-------
FORM NO. eoe-p
N
X
^--
V
\
\ '
l\
.
,--* r
^
r
i
'
i
i
i
i.
J
T
agy
30'
2.0'
/O'
35'-
60'-
NO.
RtVISION DESCRIPTION
DATE BY CHIC
ISSUED FOR
FABRICATION
ISSUED FOR
CONSTRUCTION
SCALE: /"- 3Q'
DRWN;
THE M. W. KELLOGG COMPANY
A DIVISION 0» FULUfAN INCORPORATED
CHKO:
APRVO:
DATED:
CLASS
AREA
JOB NO.
, S
DRAWINO NO.
-------
APPENDIX D
STANDARD LIMESTONE SYSTEM PLAN AND ELEVATION
74
-------
o ,f SO 100 FEET
/.
of
I DRAWING HO.
Sff"
THE M. W. KELLOGG COMPANY
4//8-0/ FIG,. 6
DMAWWMMX
-------
APPENDIX E
76
-------
APPENDIX E
TABLE 2
ABSORBER-VENTURI STANDARD SIZES
II
III
IV
VI
ACFM Wet @ 125°/175°
ACFM Hot @ 300°
SCFM (Hot)
Hot Duct/Stack Duct
450,000/488,000
545,000
373,000
131xl2'/12'xl21
394,000/428,000
477,000
326,000
338,000/367,000
409,000
280,000
H'xll'/lO'xlO'
281,000/305,000
341,000
233,000
10'xlO'/10'x9'
225,000/244,000
273,000 .
187,000
9'x9'/9'x8'
169,000/183,000
204,000
140,000
8'x8'/8'x7'
Nominal M,W.
Factor
ABSORBER
L/G; GPM/MSCFM
GPM Total
Size
No . Pumps-
BHP @ 65% Eff, (Tot.)
Motors; No. /Hp Ea,
ABS. TANK
Gal.
Dimen.
FAN BHP @ 65% EFF.
VENTURI
L/G: GPM/MSCFM
GPM Total
Size
No. Pumps
BHP @ 65% Eff. (Tot.)
Motors: No. /Hp Ea.
VENTURI TANK
Gal.
Dimen .
REHEATER: q: MMBTU/H
AQ: Ft2/Wt:#
182
1.000
64.5
24,000
15' x 40'
3 (2 + SP.)
844
3/500
141,000
40' 0 x 15'
3300
16.1
6000
2 (1 + SP.)
231
2/250
35,300
20' 0 x 15'
23.9
'14,940/60,000
159
0.875
64.5
21,000
15' x 35'
3 (2+ SP.)
738 t
3/400
123,000
37' 0 x 15'
2890
16.1
5250
2 (1 + SP.)
202.5
2/250
30,900
19' 0 x 15'
20.9
13,070/52,500
136
0.750
64.5
18,000
15' x 30'
.3 (2 + SP.)
633
3/400
106,000
35' 0 x 15'
2475
16.1
4500
2 (1 + SP.)
174
2/200
26,500
17' 0 x 15"
17.9
11,200/45,000
114
0.625
64.5
15,000
15' x 25'
3 (2 + SP.) "
527
3/300
88,100
32 ' 0 x 15 '
2060
16.1
3750
2 (1 + SP.)
145
2/150
22,100
16' 0 x 15'
14.9
9,340/37,500
91
0.500
64.5
12,000
15' x 20'
3 (2 + SP.)
422
3/250
70,500
28' 0 x 15'
1650
16.1
3000
2 (1 + SP.)
116
2/125
17,700
14' 0 x 15'
11.9
7,470/30,000
68
.375
64.5
9,000
15' x 15'
3 (2 + SP.)
316
3/175
52,900
25' 0 x 15'
1240
16.1
2250
2 (1 + SP.)
87
2/100
13,200
12 '-6" 0 x 15'
9.0
5,600/22,500
Dimen: Ht/Width/Depth 15' x 14' x 45'
No. Tubes/Dia./Length 4060/1"/14'
No. Rows High/Deep 116/35
14' x 13' x 45"
3850/1"/13'
110/35
13' x 12' x 45"
3570/1"/12'
102/35
12' x 11' x 45"
3255/lVll1
93/35
11' x 10' x 45"
2870/1"/101
82/35
9' x 10' x 45"
2130/W10'
61/35
-------
APPENDIX F
78
-------
APPENDIX F
TABLE 3
SLURRY POND
150 CY/H FOR A 550 MW PLANT BURNING 4.3% SULFUR COAL
150% STOIC. QUANTITY; SLUDGE IS 40% SOLIDS
70% LOAD FACTOR (6132 HR/YR)
NUMBER YEARS STORAGE
PLANT SIZE: MW
200
400
600
800
1000
5 YRS
1
3
5
6
8
.67
(20.
.34
(41.
.01
(62.
.68
(82.
.35
(103
MMCY
7)
MMCY
4)
MMCY
1)
MMCY
8)
MMCY
.5)
10 YRS
3.3
(41.
6.70
(83.
10.05
(124
13.40
(166
16.75
(207
MMCY
5)
MMCY
1)
MMCY
.6)
MMCY
.1)
MMCY
.6)
15 YRS
5.02
(62.
10.04
(124
15.06
(186
20.08
(248
25.10
(311
MMCY
2)
MMCY
.5)
MMCY
.7)
MMCY
.9)
MMCY
.2)
20 YRS
6.69
(82.
13.38
(165
20.07
(248
26.76
(331
33.45
(414
MMCY
9)
MMCY
.9)
MMCY
.8)
MMCY
.7)
MMCY
.7)
25 YRS
8.36
(103
16.72
(207
25.08
(310
33.44
(414
41.80
(518
MMCY
.6)
MMCY
.3)
MMCY
.9)
MMCY
.5)
MMCY
.2)
Sample Calculation:
Calculate the pond size (50 feet deep) required for a
1180 MW power plant burning 3.2% sulfur coal with a load
factor of 60% to hold 20 yrs. stg.
(Gen. Cap.)(Fraction Sulfur)(Load Factor)
Area = Area
1000
Area = 414.7 x
Ratio
x
Ratio
= 312 Acres
Ratio
No. in parentheses ( ) = No. of acres of pond 50' deep
79
-------
APPENDIX G
POWER PLANT INPUT DATA & DESIGN DATA
(TABLES 4-27)
80
-------
Table 4
Power Plant Inpu't Data
W. H. S ammi s Plant
Ohio Edison Company
General Plant Design Data
Plant Location /
Plant Capacity, MW
No. of Boilers
No. of Generators
Stratton, Ohio
2301.5
Coal Data
(1)
Source
Method of Transportation
Moisture, %
Ash, %
Sulfur, %
Heating Value, Btu/lb.
Ea. Penn., Ohio, Kentucky, W.
Barge, Truck ,
6.5
14.5
2.50
11,474
Max. Monthly Avg. 2.70
81
-------
W.H. Sammis Plant
Table 4
Boiler Data
(2)
Turbo-Generating Capacity, MW
Coal Consumption, TPH
Air Flow
Total Air, SCFM
Excess Air, %
Flue Gas Flow, ACFM(3)
Flue Gas Temperature, °F(Uncorr./Corr.)
oo \
^Boiler Efficiency, %
Total Hours Operation During 1972
Average Capacity Factor, %
Year Boiler Placed in Service
Remaining Life of Unit, Yrs.
(based on 40 year life)
Related to Generator No.
Served by Stack No.
(3)
swer Plant Input
Boiler No. 1
185
72.5
350,000
20
1r\ on
, u ou
279/269
88.88
7539
70.65
1959
26
1
1
Data
Boiler No. 2
185
72.5
350,000
20
fi no
279/269
88.88
7419
67.57
1960
27
2
1
Boiler No. 3
185
72.5 .
350,000
Boiler No. 4
185
72.5
350,000
20
20
-1,080,000-
279/269
88.88
7102
65.R4
1961
28
279/269
88.88
7638
70.66
1962
-------
y«7.H. Sammis Plant
Table 4
Boiler Data
(2)
Turbo-Gqnerating Capacity, MW
Coal Consumption, TPH
Air Flow
Total Air, SCFM "
Excess Air, %
Flue Gas Flow,.ACFM^ '
Flue Gas Temperature, °F(Uncorr./Corr.)
00 V,
00 Boiler Efficiency, %
Total Hours Operation During 1972
Average Capacity Factor, %
Year Boiler. Placed in Service
Remaining Life of Unit, Yrs.
(based on 4o year life)
Related to Generator No.
Served by Stack No.
(3)
jwer Plant
Boiler No.
317.5-
117.95
549,000
18
940 ,000
278/267
89.13
5790
54.75
1967
34
. 5
3
Input Data
5 Boiler No. 6
623
234.5
1,092,000
18
20 ^ A n r\r\
,O-Lfi,JUU
1,874,000
282/272
88.99
6216
58.12
1969
36
6
3
Boiler No. 7
623
234.5
1,092,000.
18
1,884,000
282/272
88.99
5342
56.73
1971
Boiler No.
-------
W.H. Sammis Plant
Boiler Data(Cont'd)
Stack-Height, Ft. above grade
I.D. of Flue at Top, Ft.
Distance to £, of Stack Breeching, Ft.
above grade
Grade = El. 690'-0".
Fly Ash Removal Equipment
Type
Design Efficiency, %
00 Scheduled Maintenance' Shutdown
£i
Interval,. Months
Duration, Weeks
Table 4
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler No. 1
Boiler No.
Boiler No-. 3 Boiler No. 4
-504-
-21-
-20-
63'
63'
63'
(22 ' High x 9' Wide) (22 ' High x 9' Wide)
t.
97
97
12
12
2-3
2-3
Elect. Pp t.
_9_7
12
2-3
63'
Elect. Pp t.
97
12
2-3
(1) Coal quality and heating value are average values for .coal burned in 1972.
(2) Operating data are at 100% load
(3) At stack inlet. (Corrected value includes air heater leakage)
-------
W.H. Sammis Plant
Boiler Data(Cont'd)
Stack -Height, Ft. above grade
I.D. of Flue at Top, Ft.
Distance to £ of Stack Breeching, Ft.
above grade. Grade = El. 690'-0"
Fly Ash Removal Equipment
Type
Design Efficiency, %
Scheduled Maintenance' Shutdown
Interval, Months
Duration, Weeks
Table 4
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler No. 5 Boiler No. 6
850
18
126'
(281 High)
12
2-3
154'
(27' High)
Elect. .Ppt. Elect. .Ppt.
99 99
12
2-3
Boiler No-. 7
1000
26 .75
154
Boiler No,
(27' High x 9' Wide)
2 Flues
Elect. Ppt.
99
12
2-3
(1) Coal quality and heating value are average values for .coal burned in 1972,
(2) Operating data are at 100% load
(3) At stack inlet. (Corrected value includes air heater leakage)
-------
W.H. Sammis Plant
Table 5
Item No.
101-F
101-V
102-V
103-V
104-V
105-V
102-F
101-E
103-F
101-J
Limestone Handling System
Unloading Hopper - Capacity, Tons
, - Dimensions, Ft.
Dead Storage Pile - Type
- Capacity, Tons
Feeder - Capacity, TPH
Tunnel Conveyor - Capacity, TPH
- -Horiz. Run. Ft.
Stacker - Capacity, TPH
Plant Conveyor - Capacity, TPH
- Horiz. Run, Ft.
- Lift, Ft.
Tripper Belt - Capacity, TPH
- Length, Ft.
Live Storage Silos - Number
- Dimensions, Ft.
- Capacity, Tons, ea.
Ball Mill System - Number
- Capacity, TPH, ea.
Limestone Slurry Storage Tank - Capacity, Gal.
- Dimensions, Ft.
100
20x20x15
Kidney
93,600
650
650
850
650
650
1700
100
650
235
30' 0 x 50' qt. Side
1560
45
232 ,000
40' 0 x 30
Limestone Slurry Feed Pumps - Number ^
- Capacity, GPM, ea. 70
86
-------
W.H. Sammis Plant
Table 5
Limestone Handling System
Item No.
102-J
103-J
Raw Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
Pond Water Recycle Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
104-F Effluent Slurry Surge Tank - Capacity, Gal
3250
3110
26,400
- Dimensions, Ft. 15' 0 x 20'
104-J
102-L
105-J
Effluent Slurry Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
Thickener - Capacity, GPM
- Diameter, Ft.
Sludge Pond - Capacity, Tons
- Dimensions, Ft.
4500
4500
265
214,000 .
300 x 350 x 50 Deep
- Storage Capability, weeks 3.2 (@ Max. Gen. Cap)
Entrainment Separator Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
12
1670
106-J
Wash Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
6000
87
-------
W.H. Sammis
Plant
Number of Trains Req'd.
Train Size
Additional Pumps Req'd.
(2)
Additional Duct Req'd.
(3)
NO
NO
Table
Boiler
No. 1
1
Limestone
Boiler
No. 2
1
Scrubbing System
Boiler
No. 3
1
Boiler
No. 4
1
Boiler
No. 5
2
Boiler
No. 6
4
Boiler
No. 7
4
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
I .
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
- Total Weight, Ibs.
150,000
500 ,000 1 ,660,000
00
CO
(1) Refers to standard size modules
(2) If yes, one additional set of venturi and absorber circulation pumps are required
for each scrubber module.
(3) Beyond that required for standard modules.
-------
Table 7
Power Plant Input Data
W.C. Beckjord Plant
Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company
General Plant Design Data
Plant Location
Plant Capacity, MW
No. of Boilers
No. of Generators
New Richmond, Ohio
1221.3
Coal Data
(1)
Source
Method of Transportation
Moisture, %
Ash, %
Sulfur, %
Heating Value, Btu/lb.
Barge
9.91
18.26
3.04
10,555
Max. Monthly Avg. 3.31
89
-------
W.C. Beck-iord Plant
Table 7
Boiler Data
(2)
Turbo-Generating Capacity, MW
Coal Consumption, TPH
Air Flow
Total Air, SCFM
Excess Air, %
Flue Gas Flow, ACFM
Flue Gas Temperature, °F(Uncorr./Corr.)
Boiler Efficiency, %
Total Hours Operation During 1972
Average Capacity Factor, %
Year Boiler Placed in Service
Remaining Life of Unit, Yrs.
(based on ^-^ year life)
Related to Generator No.
Served by Stack No.
(3)
>wer Plant Input
Boiler No. 1
115
38.2
161,000
24
310,000
311/-
89.4
8445
68.4
1952
12
1
1
Data
Boiler No. 2
112.5
37.5
158,300
24
305,000
322/-
89.4
7607
62.9
1953
13
2
2
Boiler No. 3
125
47.6.
!96,<>0'0
25
360,000
288/-
89.33
6794
55.8
1954
14
3
3
Boiler No. 4
163.2
62.0
240,500
20
425 ,000
255/-
90.05
6376 '
62.8
1958
18
-------
W.C. Beckjord piant
Table 7
Boiler Data
(2)
Turbo-Generating Capacity, MW
Coal Consumption, TPH
Air Flow
Total Air, SCFM
Excess Air, %
Flue Gas Flow,,ACFM(3)
Flue Gas Temperature, °F(Uncorr./Corr.)
1-1 Boiler Efficiency, %
Total Hours Operation During 1972
Average Capacity Factor, %
Year Boiler Placed in Service
Remaining Life of Unit, Yrs.
(based on 33 year life)
(3)
Related to Generator No.
Served by Stack No.
jwer Plant Input
Boiler No. 5
2 4 A . 8 . . .
96.8
351,900
20
1QR O
, «DZ ,
277/267
89.99
6723
69.9
1962
22
5
5
Data
Boiler No. 6
460. R
173
6.69 ,200
20
n n r\ _____
UU'J _ _
272/262
89.01
6943
60.9
1969
29
6
5
Boiler No.
Boiler No.
-------
W.C. Beckjord plant
Boiler Data(Cont'd)
Stack Height, Ft. above grade
I.D. of Flue at Top, Ft.
Distance to ?, of Stack Breeching, Ft.
above grade (Grade = El. 515'-0")
Fly Ash Removal Equipment
Type
Design Efficiency, %
«3 Scheduled Maintenance Shutdown
M
Interval, Months
Duration, Weeks
Table 7
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler No. 1
300
12
157
TT1Duct
Elect. Ppt.
18-24
2-3
Boiler No. 2
300
12
157
"TT1Duct
Elect. Ppt.
92
18-24
2-3
Boiler No. 3
375
12
162
Ij1 IJUCT:
18-24
Boiler No.
375
12
162
12 ' Duut
Elect. Ppt. + Cyclones +
New Elect.Ppt.- Elect. Ppt.
93 (Orig.)
94
18-24
2-3
2-3
(1) Coal quality and heating value are average values for ,coal burned in 1972.
(2) Operating data are at 100% load
(3) At stack inlet. (Corrected value includes air heater leakage)
-------
W.C. Beckjord Plant
Boiler Data(Cont'd)
Stack -Height, Ft. above grade
I.D. of Flue at Top, Ft.
Distance to ?, of Stack Breeching, Ft.
above grade (Grade = El. 515 '-0")
Fly Ash Removal Equipment
Type
Design Efficiency, %
Scheduled Maintenance ' Shutdown
Interval, Months
Duration, Weeks
CO
Table 7
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler No. 5 Boiler No. 6
Boiler No.
Boiler No,
183
21' Duct
Elect. -Ppt.
95
18-24
2-3
A £ t __ _ _____
1 Q 1 _ _ _
236
29 '-6" Duct.
Elect. Ppt.
, 97
18-24
2-3
(1) Coal quality and heating value are average values for ,coal burned in 1972,
(2) Operating data are at 100% load
(3) At stack inlet. (Corrected value includes air heater leakage)
-------
W.C. Beckjord Plant
Table 8
Item No.
101-F
101-V
102-V
103-V
104-V
105-V
102-F
101-E
103-F
101-J
Limestone Handling System
Unloading Hopper - Capacity, Tons
x - Dimensions, Ft.
Dead Storage Pile - Type
- Capacity, Tons
Feeder - Capacity, TPtf
Tunnel Conveyor - Capacity, TPH
- Horiz. Run. Ft.
Stacker - Capacity, TPH
Plant Conveyor - Capacity, TPH
- Horiz. Run, Ft.
- Lift, Ft.
Tripper Belt - Capacity, TPH
- Length, Ft.
Live Storage Silos - Number
- Dimensions, Ft.
- Capacity, Tons, ea.
Ball Mill System - Number
- Capacity, TPH, ea.
Limestone Slurry Storage Tank - Capacity, Gal.
- Dimensions, Ft.
Limestone Slurry Feed Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
100
20 x 20 x 15
Kidney
61,900
430
430
250
430
430
550
115
430
100
30' 0 x 65' St. Side
2120
30
197,000
40' 0 x 21'
12
100
94
-------
W.r. Beckjord plant
Table 8
Limestone Handling System
Item No.
102-J Raw Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea. 1810
103-J Pond Water Recycle Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea. 2150
104-F Effluent Slurry Surge Tank - Capacity, Gal. 19'800
- Dimensions, Ft. 15' 0x15'
104-J Effluent Slurry Pumps - Number _2
- Capacity, GPM, ea. 3110
102-L Thickener - Capacity, GPM 3110
- Diameter, Ft.
Sludge Pond - Capacity, Tons 214,000
- Dimensions, Ft. 300 x 350 x 50 Deep
- Storage Capability, weeks 4.9 a Max. Gen Cap,
105-J Entrainment Separator Pumps - Number 13
- Capacity, GPM, ea. 75°
106-J Wash Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea. 5320
95
-------
W.C. Beckiord Plant
Number of Trains Req'd.
Train Size
Additional Pumps Req'd.
(2)
Additional Duct Req'd.
(3)
Boiler
No. 1
IV
NO
NO
Table 9
Limestone Scrubbing System
Boiler Boiler Boiler
No. 2
IV
NO
NO
No. 3
III
NO
NO
No. 4
II
NO
NO
Boiler
No. 5
2
Boiler
No. 6
3
Boiler
No.
IV
NO
NO
III
NO
YES
- Total Weight, Ibs.
476,000
ID
(1) Refers to standard size modules
(2) If yes, one additional set of venturi and absorber circulation pumps are required
for each scrubber module.
(3) Beyond that required for standard modules.
-------
Table 10
Power Plant Input Data
Cardinal Plant
Ohio Power Company
General Plant Design Data
Plant Location /
Plant Capacity, MW
No. of Boilers
No. of Generators
Brilliant/ Ohio
1230.5 (1180 is total of individual
0 units)
Coal Data
(1)
Source
Method of Transportation
Moisture, %
Ash, %
Sulfur, %
Heating Value, Btu/lb.
6.46
16.58
3.20.
11,254
Max. Monthly Avg. 3.30
97
-------
Cardinal Plant
Table 10
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler Data
(2)
Turbo-Generating Capacity, MW
Coal Consumption, TPH
Air Flow
Total Air, SCFM
Excess Air, %
Flue Gas Flow, ACFM^3*
Flue Gas Temperature, °F(Uncorr./Corr.)
Boiler Efficiency, %
Total Hours Operation During 1972
Average Capacity Factor, %
Year Boiler Placed in Service
Remaining Life of Unit, Yrs.
(based on 40 year life)
Related to Generator No.
Served by Stack No.
(3)
Boiler No. 1
. 590
247.5
800,000
20
1,680,000
315/305
87.4
6243
1967
34
Boiler No. 2 Boiler No.
Boiler No.
590
247.5
800,000
20
1,680 ,000
315/305
87.4
7573
1967
34
-------
Cardinal Plant
Table IP
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler Data(Cont'd) Boiler No. 1 Boiler No. 2 Boiler No-. Boiler No.
Stack'Height, Ft. above grade
825 825
I.D. of Flue at Top, Ft. 22' 22
Distance to £ of Stack Breeching, Ft. 90 90
above grade (Grade = El. 670'-0") (16' High x 12' Wide) (16' High x 12' Wide)
Fly Ash Removal Equipment
Type Flftn-h. Pph. El^nf. Pp-h.
Design Efficiency, % 92 92
Scheduled Maintenance'Shutdown
Interval, Months . ;
Duration, Weeks
(1) Coal quality and heating value are average values for ,coal burned in 1972.
(2) Operating data are at 100% load
(3) At stack inlet. (Corrected value includes air heater leakage)
-------
Cardinal
Plant
Item No.
101-F
101-V
102-V
103-V
104-V
105-V
102-F
101-E
103-F
101-J
Table 11
Limestone Handling System
Unloading Hopper - Capacity, Tons
- Dimensions, Ft.
Dead Storage Pile - Type
- Capacity, Tons
Feeder - Capacity, TPH7
Tunnel Conveyor - Capacity, TPH
- Horiz. Run. Ft.
Stacker - Capacity, TPH
Plant Conveyor - Capacity, TPH
- Horiz. Run, Ft.
- Lift, Ft.
Tripper Belt - Capacity, TPH
- Length, Ft.
Live Storage Silos - Number
- Dimensions, Ft.
- Capacity, Tons, ea.
Ball Mill System - Number
- Capacity, TPH, ea.
Limestone Slurry Storage Tank - Capacity, Gal.
- Dimensions, Ft.
100
Limestone Slurry Feed Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea. 100
20x20x15
Kidney
57,600
400
400
220
400
400
400
115
400
100
30' 0 x 60'
1920
26,7
144,000
37' 0 x 18'
8
100
-------
Cardinal
Table 11
Limestone Handling System
Plant
Item No.
102-J
Raw Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
1680
103-J
104-F
Pond Water Recycle Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
Effluent Slurry Surge Tank - Capacity, Gal.
- Dimensions, Ft.
1910
16,300
17' 0 x 10'
104-J
Effluent Slurry Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
2770
102-L
Thickener - Capacity, GPM
- Diameter, Ft.
2770
210
Sludge Pond - Capacity, Tons 214,000
- Dimensions, Ft. 300 x 350 x 50 Deep
- Storage Capability, weeks 4-8 @ Max. Gen. Cap
105-J
Entrainment Separator Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
10
840
106-J
Wash Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
5040
101
-------
Cardinal
Plant
Table 12
Number of Trains Req'd.
(1)
Train Size
Additional Pumps Req'd.
(2)
Additional Duct Req'd.
- Total Weight, Ibs.
(3)
Boiler
No. i
3
Limestone
Boiler
No. 2
3
Scrubbing System
Boiler
No.
Boiler
No.
Boiler
No.
Boiler
No.
Boiler
No.
NO
YES
190,000
NO
YES
190,000
o
to
(1) Refers to standard size modules
(2) If yes, one additional set of venturi and absorber circulation pumps are required
for each scrubber module.
(3) Beyond that required for standard modules.
-------
Table 13
Power Plant Input Data
Muskingum Plant
Ohio Power Company
General Plant Design Data
Plant Location /
Plant Capacity, MW
No. of Boilers
No. of Generators
Beverly, Ohio
1529.6 (1466.8 is total of individual
units)
Coal Data
(1)
Source
Method of Transportation
Moisture, %
Ash, %
Sulfur, %
Heating Value, Btu/lb.
Muskingum Mine-Ohio
Mine to unloading terminal via RR or truck
unloading terminal to plant via conveyor
6.83
19.70
5.10
10,332
Max. Monthly Avg. 5.40
103
-------
Muskingum Plant
Table 13
Boiler Data
(2)
Turbo-Gejierating Capacity, MW
Coal Consumption, TPH
Air Flow
Total Air, SCFM
Excess Air, %
Flue Gas Flow, ACFM^3)
Flue Gas Temperature, °F(Uncorr./Corr.)
H
O »
*-Boiler Efficiency, %
Total Hours Operation During 1972
Average Capacity Factor, %
Year Boiler Placed in Service
Remaining Life of Unit, Yrs.
(based on 40 year life)
Related to Generator No.
Served by Stack No.
(3)
>wer Plant Input
Boiler No. 1
213
77
278,000
15
613,000
315/2 99
88.8
7341
Data
Boiler No. 2
213
77
278,000
15
613,000
315/299
88.8
7821
1953
20
1
1
1954
21
2
1
Boiler No. 3 Boiler No. 4
225
81.4 -
317,000
17
320/307
89.3
7363
1957
24
3
1
225
81.4
317,000
17
1 1 QC f\f\C\ __ _
J. , J- ot> f'J 'J'i -
320/307
89.3
8278
1958
25
4
1
-------
Muskingum Plant
Table 13
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler Data
(2)
Turbo-Generating Capacity/ MW
Coal Consumption, TPH
Air Flow
Total Air, SCFM
Excess Air, %
Flue Gas Flow, ,ACFM*3*
.Flue Gas Temperature, °F(Uncorr./Corr.)
v» .
1 Boiler Efficiency, %
Total Hours Operation During 1972
Average Capacity Factor, %
Year Boiler Placed in Service
Remaining Life of Unit, Yrs.
(based on 40 year life)
Related to Generator No.
Served by Stack No.
(3)
Boiler No. 5
590.8.
247.5
800,000
20
1,680,000
315/305
87.4
6983
1968
35
Boiler No.
Boiler No.
Boiler No.
-------
Muskingum
Plant
Boiler DataCCont'd)
Stack Height, Ft. above grade
I.D. of Flue at Top, Ft.
Distance to f, of Stack Breeching, Ft.
above grade(Grade = E1> 643,_(,..,
Fly Ash Removal Equipment
Type
Design Efficiency, %
ii
o Scheduled Maintenance Shutdown
Interval, Months
Duration, Weeks
Table 13
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler No. 1
Boiler No. 2
Boiler No . 3
Boiler No. 4
59
(20 ' High x
10' Wide)
Cyclones +
Elect. Ppt.
99
12
2
59
(20 ' High x
10' Wide)
Cyclones +
Elect. Ppt
99
(Tested Eff =
12
2
£. £.
59
(20 ' High x
10' Wide)
Elect. Ppt.
" 88
99.6)
12
3
59
(20 ' High x
10' -Wide)
Elect. Ppt.
88
(Tested Eff = 88.9)
12
3
(1) Coal quality and heating value are average values for ,coal burned in 1972.
(2) Operating data are at 100% load
(3) At stack inlet. (Corrected value includes air heater leakage)
-------
Muskinqum Plant
Table 13
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler Data(Contfd)
Stack -Height, Ft. above grade
I.D. of Flue at Top, Ft.
Boiler No. 5
Boiler No.
2?!
(2 Ducts - 20' High x 12' wide)
Distance to ?, of Stack Breeching, Ft. 93
above grade
Fly Ash Removal Equipment
Type
Design Efficiency, %
Scheduled Maintenance'Shutdown
Interval, Months
Duration, Weeks
Cyclones +
Elect.Ppt. _
67.5
(Tested Eff = 67.9)
6-8
Boiler No-.
Boiler No.
(1) Coal quality and heating value are eiyerage "values for,coal burned in 1972.
(2) Operating data are at 100% load
(3) At stack inlet. (Corrected value includes air heater leakage)
-------
Muskingum Plant
Item No.
101-F
101-V
102-V
103-V
104-V
105-V
102-F
101-E
103-F
101-J
Table 14
Limestone Handling System
Unloading Hopper - Capacity, Tons
- Dimensions, Ft.
Dead Storage Pile - Type
- Capacity, Tons
/
Feeder - Capacity, TPH"
Tunnel Conveyor - Capacity, TPH
- Horiz. Run. Ft.
Stacker - Capacity, TPH
Plant Conveyor - Capacity, TPH
- Horiz. Run, Ft.
- Lift, Ft.
Tripper Belt - Capacity, TPH
- Length, Ft.
Live Storage Silos - Number
- Dimensions, Ft.
- Capacity, Tons, ea.
Ball Mill System - Number
- Capacity, TPH, ea.
Limestone Slurry Storage Tank - Capacity, Gal.
- Dimensions, Ft.
Limestone Slurry Feed Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea<
100
20x20x15
Kidney
130,000
900
900
400
900
900
360
115
900
235
30' 0 x 65
2160
60
367,000
50' 0 x 25'
15
125
108
-------
Muskinqum Plant
Table 14
Limestone Handling System
Item No.
102-J Raw Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea. 2R40
103-J Pond Water Recycle Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea. 4300
104-F Effluent Slurry Surge Tank - Capacity, Gal. 37,000
- Dimensions, Ft. 25* 0 x 10'
104-J Effluent Slurry Pumps - Number 2
- Capacity, GPM, ea. 6250
102-L Thickener - Capacity, GPM 6250
- Diameter, Ft. 315
Sludge Pond - Capacity, Tons 214,000
- Dimensions, Ft. 300x350x50 Deep
- Storage Capability, weeks 2.3 @ Max. Gen. Cap.
105-J Entrainment Separator Pumps - Number _15
- Capacity, GPM, ea. 850
106-J Wash Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
109
-------
Muskingum Plant
Number of Trains Req'd.
(1)
Train Size
Additional Pumps Req'd,
Additional Duct Req'd.
(2)
(3)
- Total Weight/ Ibs.
Boiler
No.l
2
IV
NO
YES
Tab
Limestone
Boiler
No. 2
2
IV
NO
YES
11 c o An/1 ___
le 15
Scrubbing Sy;
Boiler
No. 3
2
IV
NO
YES
806 ,000
stem
Boiler
No. 4
2
IV
NO
YES
,008 ,000
Boiler Boiler Boiler
No. 5 No. No.
3
I
NO
YES
908 ,000.
(1) Refers to standard size modules
(2) If yes, one additional set of venturi and absorber circulation pumps are required
for each scrubber module.
(3) Beyond that required for standard modules.
-------
Table 16
Power Plant Input Data
Eastlake Plant
Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co,
General Plant Design Data
Plant Location
Plant Capacity, MW
No. of Boilers
No. of Generators
Cleveland, Ohio
1350
Coal Data
(1)
Source
Method of Transportation
Moisture, %
Ash, %
Sulfur, %
Heating Value, Btu/lb.
Southern Ohio-Deep-Mined
Rail
6.29
13.16
3,35
11,797
Max. Monthly Avg. 3.58
111
-------
Eastlake Plant
Boiler Data
(2)
Turbo-Generating Capacity, MW
Coal Consumption, TPH
Air Flow
Total Air, SCFM
Excess Air, %
Flue Gas Flow, ACFiyP3'
Flue Gas Temperature, °F(Uncorr./Corr.)
H
{^Boiler Efficiency, %
Total Hours Operation During 1972
Average Capacity Factor, %
Year Boiler Placed in Service
Remaining Life of Unit, Yrs.
(based on 50 year life)
Related to Generator No.
Served by Stack No.
(3)
Table 16
>wer Plant Input
Boiler No. 1
140
60 .3
361,000
47
550,000
-/300
88.6
1953
30
1
1
Data
Boiler No. 2
140
60.3
361,000
47
550,000
-/300
88.6
97 e.
^j,C
___________ 77 C
1953
30
2
2
Boiler No. 3
140
60.3
361,000
47
550,000
-/300
88.6
(6)
,(6)
1954
31
3
3
Boiler No. 4
250
110.6
450,000
<5
700,000
-/290
89 .6
1956
33
4
4
-------
Eastlake Plant
Table 16
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler Data
(2)
Turbo-Generating Capacity, MW
Coal Consumption, TPH
Air Flow
Total Air, SCFM
Excess Air, %
Flue Gas Flow,.ACFM^3^
Flue Gas Temperature, °F(Uncorr./Corr.)
X .
Boiler Efficiency, %
Total Hours Operation During 1972
Average Capacity Factor, %
Year Boiler Placed in Service
Remaining Life of Unit, Yrs.
(based on . year life)
Related to Generator No.
Served by Stack No.
(3)
Boiler No. 5
680
230
1,106,700
18
1,950,000
-/285
90.2
2203
18.9
(7)
1972
50
Boiler No.
Boiler No.
Boiler No.
-------
Eastlake Plant
Table 16
Boiler Data(Cont'd)
Stack -Height, Ft. above grade
I.D. of Flue at Top, Ft.
Distance to ?, of Stack Breeching, Ft.
above grade
Fly Ash Removal Equipment
Type
Design Efficiency, %
_»
Scheduled Maintenance Shutdown
&.
Interval, Months
Duration, Weeks
Power Plant
Boiler No.
300
192
50
Mech. -Elect .
98.2
12
2-3
Input Data
1 Boiler No. 2
300
192
50
Mech. -Elect .
98.2
12
2-3
Boiler No. 3
300
192
50
Mech.-Elect,
98.2
12
2-3
Boiler No. 4
300
216
45
Mech.-Elect
98.2
12
2-3
-------
Eastlake
Plant
Boiler Data(Cont'd)
Stack -Height, Ft. above grade
I..D. of Flue at Top, Ft.
Distance to £ of Stack Breeching, Ft.
above grade
Fly Ash Removal Equipment
Type
Design Efficiency, %
__i t"
Scheduled Maintenance Shutdown
Interval,. Months
Duration, Weeks
Ul
Table 16
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler No.
600
288
100
Boiler No.
Boiler No.
Boiler No.
Elect:. Precip,
99 .5
12
2-3
(1) Coal quality and heating value are average values for ..coal burned in 1972.
(2) Operating data are at 100% load
(3) At stack inlet. (Corrected value includes air heater leakage)
(4) Figures shown are the actual peak operating capacities, which are different frbm the rated
capacities. Information was obtained from utility personnel.
(5) Data correspond to actual peak operating capacity, and were estimated from information on FPC Form
67 and from advice given by utility personnel.
(6) Data for boilers 1-4 were reported collectively.
(7) Fired in mid-1972
-------
Eastlak-e Plant
Item No.
101-F
101-V
102-V
103-V
104-V
105-V
102-F
101-E
103-F
101-J
Table 17
Limestone Handling System
Unloading Hopper - Capacity, Tons
- Dimensions, Ft.
Dead Storage Pile - Type
- Capacity, Tons
Feeder - Capacity, TPH
Tunnel Conveyor - Capacity, TPH
- Horiz. Run. Ft.
Stacker - Capacity, TPH
Plant Conveyor - Capacity, TPH
- Horiz. Run, Ft.
- Lift, Ft.
Tripper Belt - Capacity, TPH
- Length, Ft.
Live Storage Silos - Number
- Dimensions, Ft.
- Capacity, Tons, ea.
Ball Mill System - Number
- Capacity, TPH, ea.
Limestone Slurry Storage Tank - Capacity, Gal.
- Dimensions, Ft.
Limestone Slurry Feed Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM ea.
100
20x20x15
Kidney
65,000
450
450
100
450
450
950
115
450
100
300x66
2160
35
168,000
40 0 x 21
12
50-85
116
-------
Plant
Table 17
Limestone Handling System
Item No.
102-J
Raw Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
2000
103-J
104-F
Pond Water Recycle Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea,
Effluent Slurry Surge Tank - Capacity, Gal.
- Dimensions, Ft.
2150
16,800
150x15
104-J
Effluent Slurry Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
3100
102-L
Thickener - Capacity, GPM
- Diameter, Ft.
3100
220
Sludge Pond - Capacity, Tons
- Dimensions, Ft.
- Storage Capability, weeks
40,000 .
275x150(A)
1
105-J
Entrainment Separator Pumps - Number 12
- Capacity, GPM, ea. 500-775
106-J
Wash Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
6210
117
-------
Eastlake
Plant
Number of Trains Req'd.
(1)
Train Size
Additional Pumps Req'd.
(2)
Additional Duct Req'd.
(3)
- Total Weight, Ibs.
Boiler
No. 1
NO
NO
Table 18
Limestone Scrubbing System
Boiler Boiler Boiler
No. 2
NO
NO
No. 3
NO
NO
No. 4
IV
NO
YES
44,000
Boiler
No. 5
Boiler
No.
Boiler
No.
4
II .
NO
YES
650,000
oo
(1) Refers to standard size modules
(2) If yes, one additional set of venturi and absorber circulation pumps are required
for each scrubber module.
(3) Beyond that required for standard modules.
-------
Table 19
Power Plant Input Data
Lake Shore Plant
Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co
General Plant Design Data
Plant Location
Plant Capacity, MW
No. of Boilers
No. of Generators
Cleveland, Ohio
550
Coal Data
(1)
Source
Method of Transportation
Moisture, %
Ash, %
Sulfur, %
Heating Value, Btvi/lb.
Southern Ohio-Deep-Mined
Rail
5.48
13.26
2.93
11,990
Max. Monthly Avg. 3.53
119
-------
Lake Shore
Plant
Boiler Data
(2)
,(4)
Turbo-Generating Capacity, MW
Coal Consumption, TPH
Air Flow(5)
Total Air, SCFM
Excess Air, %
Flue Gas Flow, ACFM ^
Flue Gas Temperature, °F(Uncorr./Corr.)
i'
N> Boiler Efficiency, %
o
Total Hours Operation During 1972
Average Capacity Factor, %
Year Boiler Placed in Service
Remaining Life of Unit, Yrs.
(based on 50 year life)
Related to Generator No.
Served by Stack No.
(3)
Table 19
>wer Plant Input
Boiler No. 91
70
40
214,000
17
350,000
-/350
88.7
Data
Boiler No. 92
70
40
214,000
17
350,000
-/350
88.7 '
Tl 78 A
Boiler No. 93
80
45.7
260 ,000
24
425,000
-/350
88.5
(6)
Boiler No. 94
80
45.7
260,000
24
425,000
-/350
88.5
43.0U;
1941
18
14
1
1941
18
15
2
1951
28
16
3
1951
28
17
4
-------
Lake Shore Plant
Table 19
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler Data
(2)
Turbo-Generating Capacity, MW
Coal Consjumption, TPH
Air Flow
Total Air, SCFM
Excess Air, %
Flue Gas Flow,.ACFM^3^
.Flue Gas Temperature, °F(Uncorr./Corr.)
4 v» .
Boiler Efficiency, %
Total Hours Operation During 1972
Average Capacity Factor, %
Year Boiler Placed in Service.
Remaining Life of Unit, Yrs.
(based on 50 year life)
Related to Generator No.
Served by Stack No.
(3)
Boiler No.18
250.
88.4
483,000
19
790,000
-/300
89.7
7495
68.3
1962
39
18
Boiler No.
Boiler No.
Boiler No.
-------
Lake Shore Plant
Boiler Data(Cont'd)
Stack-Height, Ft. above grade
I.D. of Flue at Top, Ft.
Distance to f, of Stack Breeching, .Ft.
above grade
Fly Ash Removal Equipment
Type
Design Efficiency, %
M Scheduled Maintenance Shutdown
N>
N)
Interval, Months
Duration, Weeks
Table 19
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler No.91 Boiler No. 92
268
12
130
Elect. Precip.
90
12
2-3
268
12
130
Elect. Precip.
90
12
2-3
Boiler No. 93
268
12-
130
Boiler No. 94
268
12
130
Elect. Precip. Elect. Precip,
95 95
12
12
2-3
2-3
NOTE: Notes should appear on last page (next page) only.
-------
Lake Shore Plant
Boiler Data(Cont'd)
Stack -Height, Ft. above grade
I.D. of Flue at Top, Ft.
Distance to £ of Stack Breeching, Ft.
above grade
Fly Ash Removal Equipment
Type
Design Efficiency, %
£ Scheduled Maintenance'Shutdown
U)
Interval, Months
Duration, Weeks
Table 19
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler No.18
320
17
95
Boiler No.
Boiler No
Boiler No,
Elect. Precip.
99 .4
12
2-3
(1) Coal quality and heating value are average values for ,coal burned in 1972.
(2) Operating data are at 100% load
(3) At stack inlet. (Corrected value includes air heater leakage)
(4) Figures shown are the actual peak operating capacities, which are higher than the rated capacities.
Information was obtained from utility personnel.
(5) Data correspond to actual pe.ak operating capacity, and were estimated from information on FPC From
67 and from advice given by utility personnel.
(6) Data for boilers 91-94 were reported collectively.
-------
Lake Shore Plant
Table 20
Item No.
101-F
101-V
102-V
103-V
104-V
105-V
102-F
101-E
103-F
101-J
Limestone Handling System
Unloading Hopper - Capacity, Tons
- Dimensions, Ft.
Dead Storage Pile - Type
- Capacity, Tons
Feeder - Capacity, TPH
Tunnel Conveyor - Capacity,. TPH
- Horiz. Run. Ft.
Stacker - Capacity, TPH
Plant Conveyor - Capacity, TPH
- Horiz. Run, Ft.
- Lift, Ft.
Tripper Belt - Capacity, TPH
- Length, Ft.
Live Storage Silos - Number
- Dimensions, Ft.
- Capacity, Tons, ea.
Ball Mill System - Number
- Capacity, TPH, ea.
Limestone Slurry Storage Tank - Capacity, Gal.
- Dimensions, Ft.
Limestone Slurry Feed Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM ea.
100
20x20x15
Kidney
30,900
215
215
170
215
215
360
95
215
85
25 0 x 48
1030 _
81,000
30 0 x 18
55
124
-------
Item No.
Lake Shore Plant
Table 20
Limestone Handling System
102-J
Raw Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity/ GPM, ea.
1020
103-J
Pond Water Recycle Pumps - Number
- 'Capacity, GPM, ea.
1025
104-F
Effluent Slurry Surge Tank - Capacity, Gal.
- Dimensions, Ft.
6000
100x12
104-J
Effluent Slurry Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
1500
102-L
Thickener - Capacity, GPM
- Diameter, Ft.
1500
155
Sludge Pond - Capacity, Tons
- Dimensions, Ft.
- Storage Capability, weeks
13,400
80x80x50
105-J
Entrainment Separator Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
700
106-J
Wash Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
4070
NOTE: Pumps include spares.
125
-------
Lake Shore
Plant
Number of Trains Req'd.
(1)
Train Size
Additional Pumps Req'd.
(2)
Additional Duct Req'd.
(3)
Boiler
No. 91
IV
YES
YES
Table 21
Limestone Scrubbing System
Boiler Boiler Boiler
No. 92
IV
YES
YES
No .9 3
III
YES
YES
No. 94
III
YES
YES
Boiler
No. 18
Boiler
No.
Boiler
No.
YES
NO
- Total Weight, Ibs.
86,000
86,000
86,000
86,000
(1) Refers to standard size modules
(2) If yes, one additional set of venturi and absorber circulation pumps are required
for each scrubber module.
(3) Beyond that required for standard modules.
-------
Table 22
Power Plant Input Data
Conesville Plant
Columbus & Southern Ohio Eleqiric Co.
General Plant Design Data
Plant Location
Plant Capacity, MW
No. of Boilers
No. of Generators
Conesville, Ohio
1276
Coal Data
(1)
Source
Method of Transportation
Moisture, %
Ash, %
Sulfur, %
Heating Value, Btu/lb.
On-site strip mines
.Conveyor
7.4
17.3
5.2
10,636
Max. Monthly Avg
127
-------
Conesville Plant
Table 22
Boiler Data
(2)
Turbo-Generating Capacity, MW
Coal Consumption, TPH
Air Flow
Total Air, SCFM
Excess Air, %
Flue Gas Flow, ACFM' '
Flue Gas Temperature, °F(Uncorr./Corr.)
i-1
TO Boiler Efficiency, %
Total Hours Operation During 1972
Average Capacity Factor, %
Year Boiler Placed in Service
Remaining Life of Unit, Yrs.
(based on 30 year life)
Related to Generator No.
Served by Stack No.
(3)
>wer Plant Input
Boiler No. 1
147 .- ,
59.5
234,000
11
427,000
-/300
90.3
6455
66.9
1959
16
1
1
Data
Boiler No. 2
147
59.5
234,000
11
427,000
-/300
90.3
8440
86.4
1957
14
2
1
Boiler No. 3
174
62.3
250 ,000
22
490 ,000
-/290
89.7
6892
Boiler No. 4
842
367.5
1,600,000(4)
20 (4)
2 ,460 ,000 (4)
-/300 (4)
Not Reported
None
58.0
1962
19
3
2
1973
30
4
3
-------
Conesville Plant
VD
Boiler Data (Cont'd)
Stack -Height , Ft. above grade
I.D. of Flue at Top, Ft.
Distance to §, of Stack Breeching, .Ft.
above grade
Fly Ash Removal Equipment
Type
Design Efficiency, %
'
Scheduled Maintenance Shutdown
Interval , Months
Duration, Weeks
Table 22
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler No.
450
168
60
NONE
12
~2
Boiler No.
450
168
60
NONE
12
Boiler No
450
150-
CYCLONE
83
12
~2
Boiler No.
NR
(5)
NR
NR
ELECT. PRECIP,
99.3
12
~2
(1) Coal quality and heating value are average values for ,coal burned in 1972.
(2) Operating data are at 100% load
(3) At stack inlet. (Corrected value includes air heater leakage)
(4) Unit was fired this year. Operating data are not available. Input data were developed from
reported coal design rate, coal analysis supplied by utility, and reasonable assumptions
(5) Not Reported
-------
Conesville
Plant
Item No.
101-F
101-V
102-V
103-V
104-V
105-V
102-F
101-L
103-F
101-J
Table 23
Limestone Handling System
Unloading Hopper - Capacity, Tons
- Dimensions, Ft.
Dead Storage Pile - Type
- Capacity, Tons
Feeder - Capacity, TPH
Tunnel Conveyor - Capacity, TPH
- Horiz. Run. Ft.
Stacker - Capacity, TPH
Plant Conveyor - Capacity, TPH
- Horiz. Run, Ft.
- Lift, Ft.
Tripper Belt - Capacity, TPH
- Length, Ft.
Live Storage Silos - Number
- Dimensions, Ft.
- Capacity, Tons, ea.
Ball Mill System - Number
- Capacity, TPH, ea.
Limestone Slurry Storage Tank - Capacity, Gal.
- Dimensions, Ft.
Limestone Slurry Feed Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM ea.
100
20x20x15
Kidney
123,000
860
860
100
860
860
400
115
860
235
30 0 x 63
2060
60
320 ,000
40 0 x 40
12
150
130
-------
Conesville Plant
Table 23
Limestone Handling System
Item No.
102-J
Raw Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
2645
103-J
Pond Water Recycle Pumps - Number
-'Capacity, GPM, ea.
4100
104-F
Effluent Slurry Surge Tank - Capacity, Gal.
- Dimensions, Ft.
24,000
20 0 x 12
104-J
Effluent Slurry Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
6000
102-L
Thickener - Capacity, GPM
- Diameter, Ft.
Not
Required
Sludge Pond - Capacity, Tons
- Dimensions, Ft.
- Storage Capability, years
60.2x10
6300x4600
20
105-J
Entrainment Separator Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
12
630
106-J
Wash Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
5640
131
-------
Conesvilie
Plant
Boiler
No. 1
Table 24
Limestone Scrubbing System
Boiler
No. 2
Boiler
No. 3
Boiler
No. 4
Boiler
NO.
Boiler
No.
Boiler
No.
Number of Trains Req'd.
(1)
Train Size
Additional PNffips Req'd.
(2)
Additional Duct Req'd.
(3)
III
NO
NO
III
NO
NO
II
NO
NO
III
NO
YES
- Total Weight, Ibs.
570,000
OJ
to
(1) Refers to standard size modules
(2) If yes, one additional set of venturi and absorber circulation pumps are required
for each scrubber module.
(3) Beyond that required for standard modules.
-------
Table 25
Power Plant Input Data
Poston Plant
Columbus & Southern Ohio Electric Co,
General Plant Design Data
Plant Location
Plant Capacity, MW
No. of Boilers
No. of Generators
Athens, Ohio
254
Coal Data
(1)
Source
Method of Transportation
Moisture, %
Ash, %
Sulfur, %
Heating Value, Btu/lb.
Southern Ohio
Truck
9.4
13.4
2.6
10,917
Max. Monthly Avg. 34
133
-------
Poston
Plant
Boiler Data
(2^
Turbo-Generating Capacity, MW
Coal Consumption, TPH
Air Flow
Total Air, SCFM
Excess Air, %
Flue Gas Flow, ACFM(3)
Flue Gas Temperature, °F(Uncorr./Corr.)
Boiler Efficiency, %
Total Hours Operation During 1972
Average Capacity Factor, %
Year Boiler Placed in Service
Remaining Life of Unit, Yrs.
(based on ~33 year life)
Related to Generator No.
Served by Stack No.
(3)
Table 25
>wer Plant Input
Boiler No. 1
50
22.9
92,500
20
jb j , U LM
/Z4D
87.7
6003
53.3
1949
1
1
Data
Boiler No. 2
50
22.9
92,500
20
,(4)
87.7
6860
59.5
1950
2
1
Boiler No. 3
77
33.2.
131,500
28
C1 -3
87.7
6690
46.4
1952
3
2
Boiler No. 4
77
33.0
126,000
23
04 _
88 .0
6344
52.3
1954
4
2
-------
Poston
Plant
(M
Boiler Data(Cont'd)
Stack -Height, Ft. above grade
I.D. of- Flue at Top, Ft.
Distance to f, of Stack Breeching, .Ft.
above grade
Fly Ash Removal Equipment
Type
Design Efficiency, %
Scheduled Maintenance Shutdown
Interval, Months
Duration, Weeks
Table 25
Power Plant Input Data
Boiler No. 1 Boiler No. 2
20Q
120
25
Mech. Cycl,
85
12
~2
25
Mech. Cycl,
85
12
~2
Boiler No. 3
Boiler No. 4
25
12
~2
-200-
-132-
Mech. Cycl,
85
35
Mech. Cycl.
85
12
(1) Coal quality and heating value are average values for .coal burned in 1972.
(2) Operating data are at 100% load
(3) At stack inlet. (Corrected value includes air heater leakage)
(4) Total for both units.
-------
Table 26
Limestone Handling System
Poston Plant
Item No.
101-F
101-V
102-V
103-V
104-V
105-V
102-F
L01-E
103-F
101-J
Unloading Hopper - Capacity, Tons
- Dimensions, Ft.
Dead Storage Pile - Type
- Capacity, Tons
Feeder - Capacity, TPH
Tunnel Conveyor - Capacity, TPH
- Horiz. Run. Ft.
Stacker - .Capacity, TPH
Plant Conveyor - Capacity, TPH
- Horiz. Run, Ft.
- Lift, Ft.
Tripper Belt - Capacity, TPH
- Length, Ft.
Live Storage Silos - Number
- Dimensions, Ft.
- Capacity, Tons, ea.
Ball Mill System - Number
- Capacity, TPH, ea.
Limestone Slurry Storage Tank - Capacity, Gal.
- Dimensions, Ft.
Limestone Slurry Feed Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM ea.
100
20x20x15
Circular
12,800
90
90
150
90
90
285
95
90
55
15 0 x 51
430
31,900
20 0 x 16
35
136
-------
Table 26
Limestone Handling System
Poston Plant
Item No.
102-J
Raw Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
400
103-J
Pond Water Recycle Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
425
104-F
Effluent Slurry Surge Tank - Capacity, Gal.
- Dimensions, Ft.
3200
8 0 x 10
104-J
Effluent Slurry Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
616
102-L
Thickener - Capacity, GPM
- Diameter, Ft.
NOT
REQUIRED
Sludge Pond - Capacity, Tons
- Dimensions, Ft.
- Storage Capability, years
2 .66x10° .
1140x1140
12
105-J
Entrainment Separator Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
313 .
106-J
Wash Water Pumps - Number
- Capacity, GPM, ea.
1250
137
-------
Poston
Plant
Number of Trains Req'd.
(1)
Train Size
Additional Pumps Req'd.
(2)
Additional Duct Req'd.
(3)
Boiler
No. 1
VI
NO
NO
Table 27
Limestone Scrubbing System
Boiler Boiler Boiler
No. 2
VI
NO
NO
No. 3
V
NO
NO
No. 4
V
NO
NO
Boiler
NO.
Boiler
No.
Boiler
No.
- Total Weight, Ibs.
00
(1) Refers to standard size modules
(2) If yes, one additional set of venturi and absorber circulation pumps are required
for each scrubber module.
(3) Beyond that required for standard modules.
-------
APPENDIX H
PLOT PLANS FOR EACH
PLANT SHOWING SCRUBBING SYSTEM
139
-------
MOTETS i
i. MOVE PORT\OM OP COAX PILE FOR
2. RELOCATE IQOO1 or RJS TRACK OKI SOUTH
3. USE. TUlCKEMeR .ANO SMALL- PONJO. AREA
FOR. 2O VEAR.5 STORAGE WOULD &6 482. ACfcSS
CSP' oee*0
4. SWADEO AtJGAS W»THINJ HCAW usfE* AK sJSW
L.S. SLUREV
TANK
N0.7 N(X6 N0.5 N0,4 W03 MO.i
itfa
(SEE ^STD,
MODULE
OHIO
TO
PLOT PLAN* (APPE.MOIK
I-H 1 4 FEET
REVISION DESCRIPTION
DATE BY
ISSUED FOR
FABRICATION
ISSUED FOR
CONSTRUCTION
SCALE:
DRAWN:
CHECKED:
APPROVED:
DATE: 10.^.73
W. H. SAMMiS PLANT
THE M .W. KELLOGG COMPANY
PLOT PLAM
CLASS
AREA
JOB NO.
. 7
DRAWING NO.
-------
I. MUST FILL IN PORTION OF POND S.E. OF
PLANT FOR LIMESTONE. STORASE.
(APPRO* SOO1 * 3CO
. ALL SCRUBBING TRAINS LOCATED <3N
STEEL. STRUCTURE. MOUNTED ON
CONCRETE. PILES IN OHIO RIVER.
3, SETTLING POND AREA REQUIRED -
3Z4 ACRES -SO1 DEEP (ID YR). ALTERNATE.
USE. THICKENER. * SMALL FDWD.
4. SHADED AREAS WITHIN HEAVY LINES
ARE. NEW EQ.UIPMENT7
REFERENCE
CINCINNATI 6A& EUEC-TRIC. CO.
DWQ. NO. 4 - ^OOOO- 103
i COLUMBUS, DAYTON
-------
FORM NO. SS6-P
(4300 f=r-
STD.
MODULE:
-_-_-_-^j^
.^. SLU/SAY
THE M. W. KELLOGG COMPANY
A DIVISION OP PULLMAN INCORPORATED
DATED: !0-h73
-------
pa=H
. F£U3C|JE PR PieHANTLe g^STPl^riCH CPf-|Cfe pPp. IMSTAOATtCt*
?. H<>- I.'Z, 4 3 EiPttee- ^fZLJ8B|N<5 TSAIH& LCCAT6D tfri FLtfTRSPH
LCCATED
-rf?ajH9 4j£- STANO&RD
.. - ,
. SHADEO ABe^s VJITHIVI HEAVY tiues AES N
THE M. W. KELLOGG COMPANY
a
01-110 l=blJB(? 69-
MUSWNG-UH v RlVEff PUANT
-------
^HPAHY
PLOT PLAA/ - LIMESTONE
pesipewn/iL-
Si?AfpHIC SCALE-'
^^\0G>^2^^^^^^££>'
Uf*S
NO.
REVISION DiwniirnoN
DAT!
Y
CHK.
IOTUCD rOM 1 IMUED FOB
E | D | M4 1 C | 'B
CAUCt '
rnuiJ.
Apmo
tr^D]
DATK:
THE M. W. KELLOGG COMPANY
A Dtvmow or PULLMAN INCOHPOKATKD
EA^nvAl^e FUAKT
_
l^lgrCl
FJG-, ii
A
-------
1. scGueeec>6*L2L^3 BUILT ^PVBE series &UILPINS - ABOLTT 4c?
ABOVE
BUILT
; PILES THS'U 6UILPINC5-
>,,,
GRAPE; HOVE siLo74^f=T-':f »
4«?FT. OP PIPE
-. ALL. PUMPS, V&NTLU?! TANKS,
2c? pr. ABcA/E
£> UIMes-R?N& HAHPLJNtr AND <3-GlWDlH<5- AT HOF2TH6AST END
coAU'plL&j&roRASE RLE AT EXTREME EASTBF?N SIDE
PLANT;
HOUSE HEAR ELECTF?iCA
STANDARD SCf?ue>6EC
THE M. W. KELLOGG COMPANY
FIAKT UNIT NO.
-------
* /*ioi/e.
MXJS£S
LflKE EZIE
DW6 * SB 70 -3Z (#£* B)
THE M. W. KELLOGG COMPANY
of PUIUUN kKOHPOIAnD
-------
THE M. W. KELLOGG COMPANY
-------
PUMPS
7
O
' 4-05;
'403!
4D
4E
ABSORBER TANKS
URI TANKS
<=. £,
^'
x"4
-4
RUB
3 E
. 1
. n\
4
\
.R.S
4C-
BUILDING
ul
0)
BOILER
BOILER.
UMITS 1,2. | 3
[ 0
DIKED OIL
, STORAGE T*
i (MOTE. 4-'
r\
-< \ 1
3 / [
V^^ V. _
sc
4D
RU& B
4-E.
^ -^.
EfcS
4-F
^vV 1
^
1 H
7Y
7_Z
UhUT 4-
NJOT^S -
I. ALL SCRUBBERS-- E.LEVATIOM Z51 OVER Rc
Z. TANKS AMD PUMPS. AT &(?oUMD LE.VEL
3. REMOVE- FRAME. BUU-DINS fog. *- \ TANK
AvlD PUMPS.
4. MOVE. DIKED OIL sroKAee. TANK. FGK.
SCRuaSERS 4A ^. 4E>
5. F0UMDM1ONS : PILES. TO BEDK)CI^ ISO1
£>. UMESTONe. ^.ToKAiSe. aRJh4DlW6. LIVE.
STORAGE. TO e>e_ sourH-EAsr OF
NEAR. COOUM& TOWERS.; KEJ-OCATEI PART
OF ROAD
T SLUDGE- POND TO ee. SUICT IM STRIP
MIME. AREA- SOLlTHEAi.T Of= PLAMT
ft SHADED AREAS WITHIS HEAVY LIMES
AR.E- N£\
COLUMBUS ^. SOUTHERN <5HIO ELEC-TKIC CO.
CONES.VILLE-
-------
THE M. W. KELLOOO COMPANY
-------
MAIN BUILPIHG UNTO 1,9,3,44
PUMPS (^ csfi^pe
.\ SHADED AREAS WITHIN
NEW EQUIPMEMT
f ( -: W- :
o
PUJfiMT SLUB&'
-------
FORM NO. 996-P
$ SOUTHERN OHIO ELECTRIC CO.
POSTON STATION ' ~ ~-Z
THE M. W. KELLOGG COMPANY
A OIVWION OP PULLMAN INCOMPOMATKO
-------
APPENDIX I
GLOSSARY
152
-------
APPENDIX I
GLOSSARY
ACFM
BtU
Capacity
Factor
CSA
CY
oF
FPC
Ft.
Ft/Sec.
or FPS
Ft2
Gal.
GPM
Grain
Hr.
"H2°
KV
KW
M
MM
MW
Flow rate in actual cubic feet per minute (measured
at flowing conditions)
Energy measured in British Thermal Units
Fraction which multiplied by peak generating capacity
gives the average generating capacity for the year.
Cross-sectional area
Volume measured in cubic yards
Temperature in degrees Farenheit
Federal Power Commission
Linear measure in feet
Velocity in feet per second
Area in square feet
Volume measured in U.S. Gallons (7.481 gallons = one
cubic foot)
Flow rate measured in gallons per minute
Mass equal to 1/7000 of one pound
Time in hours
Pressure in inches of water (27.72 inches of water =
1 pound per square inch)
1,000 volts
Power measured in kilowatts (1 KW = 1,000 watts)
1,000 units (e.g. M$ = thousands of dollars)
1,000,000 units
Power measured in megawatts (1 MW = 1,000,000 watts
or 1,000 kilowatts)
153
-------
PPM : Concentration measured in parts per million (by volume)
PSIA : Pressure in pounds per square inch absolute
PSIG : Pressure in pounds per square inch gage
SCFM : Flow rate in standard cubic feet per minute (measured
at 60°F and 14.7 psia)
Sec. : Time in seconds
Ton : Mass (1 ton = 2,000 pounds)
TPH : Flow rate measured in tons per hour
154
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
i. REPORT NO.
EPA-450/3-74-002
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE ANDSUBTITLE
Evaluation of the Controllability of Power Plants
Having a Significant Impact on Air Quality Standards
5. REPORT DATE
February 8, 1974
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
NA
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING OR'ANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
The M. W. Kellogg Company
Research and Engineering Development
1300 Three Greenway Plaza East
Houston, Texas 77046
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
N. 68-02-1308
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final Report
27711
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
The report presents results of a study to assess costs and feasibility of
applying limestone scrubbers to eight power plants located in the State of Ohio.
The plants, operated by four different electric utility companies, were selected
because of the impact of current sulfur dioxide emissions on air quality and the
resultant need to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions to levels consistent with State
regulations. The report considers a limestone flue gas desulfurization (FGD)
process. No comparisons with other FGD systems or low-sulfur fuels use are
provided. The model limestone system includes a venturi scrubber followed by a
mobile bed scrubber. The systems are designed with multiple scrubber modules.
Module sizes range from 200,000 to 550,000 ACFM. The power plants vary from
254 to 2303 megawatts capacity. All boilers are equipped with electrostatic
precipitators such that the venturi will function primarily to remove residual
particulates escaping the precipitators. The systems are designed to remove
90 percent of the sulfur dioxide in the gas stream--20 to 30 percent in the
venturi and the remainder in the mobile bed scrubber.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COS AT I Field/Group
Air Pollution
Chemical Reaction
Desulfurization
Economic Analysis
Design
Sulfur Dioxide
Limestone
Washing
Coal
Sulfur
Air Pollution Control
Power Plants
Feasibility
13B
13. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
UNLIMITED
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
155
------- |