TVA
EPA
Tennessee Valley
Authority
National Fertilizer
Development Center
Muscle Shoals AL 35660
TVA Bu
US Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory
Research Triangle Park IMC 2771 1
EPA-600 7-79-069
February 1979
of Disposal
of Lime/Limestone
Scrubbing Wastes:
Sludge/Flyash Blending
and Gypsum Systems
Interagency
Energy/Environment
R&D Program Report
-------
RESEARCH REPORTING SERIES
Research reports of the Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, have been grouped into nine series. These nine broad cate-
gories were established to facilitate further development and application of en-
vironmental technology. Elimination of traditional grouping was consciously
planned to foster technology transfer and a maximum interface in related fields.
The nine series are:
1. Environmental Health Effects Research
2. Environmental Protection Technology
3. Ecological Research
4. Environmental Monitoring
5. Socioeconomic Environmental Studies
6. Scientific and Technical Assessment Reports (STAR)
7. Interagency Energy-Environment Research and Development
8. "Special" Reports
9. Miscellaneous Reports
This report has been assigned to the INTERAGENCY ENERGY-ENVIRONMENT
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT series. Reports in this series result from the
effort funded under the 17-agency Federal Energy/Environment Research and
Development Program. These studies relate to EPA's mission to protect the public
health and welfare from adverse effects of pollutants associated with energy sys-
tems. The goal of the Program is to assure the rapid development of domestic
energy supplies in an environmentally-compatible manner by providing the nec-
essary environmental data and control technology. Investigations include analy-
ses of the transport of energy-related pollutants and their health and ecological
effects; assessments of, and development of, control technologies for energy
systems; and integrated assessments of a wide range of energy-related environ-
mental issues.
EPA REVIEW NOTICE
This report has been reviewed by the participating Federal Agencies, and approved
for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the Government, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical Informa-
tion Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
TVA Bulletin Y-140
EPA-600/7-79-069
February 1979
Economics of Disposal of
Lime/Limestone Scrubbing Wastes:
Sludge/Flyash Blending and
Gypsum Systems
by
J.W. Barrier, H.L Faucett, and LJ. Henson
Tennessee Valley Authority
National Fertilizer Development Center
Muscle Shoals, Alabama 35660
EPA Interagency Agreement D8-E721-BI
Program Element No. INE624A
EPA Project Officer: Julian W. Jones
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Energy, Minerals, and Industry
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
Prepared for
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Research and Development
Washington, DC 20460
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared by the Tennessee Valley Authority and has
been reviewed by the Office of Energy, Minerals, and Industry, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication. Approval
does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and
policies of the Tennessee Valley Authority or the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
ii
-------
ABSTRACT
Economic evaluations were made of two flue gas desulfurization
waste disposal systems which produce landfill material without purchased
additives. Design and economic premises used in previous Tennessee
Valley Authority studies were used. Capital investment for the basic
sludge - flyash blending process (in which dry flyash is blended with
dewatered sludge) is 17.2 $/kW and annual revenue requirements are 1.08
mills/kWh. Including electrostatic precipitator flyash collection the
capital investment is 36.4 $/kW and revenue requirements are 1.65 mills/
kWh. Capital investment for the gypsum process (in which the scrubber
is modified to produce a sulfate sludge which is dewatered and discarded
without further treatment) is 10.8 $/kW and revenue requirements are
0.89 mill/kWh. Including scrubber modifications the capital investment
is 15.4 $/kW and the annual revenue requirements are 1.18 mills/kWh.
These relative cost differencies remain for variations in power plant
size, coal sulfur and ash contents, power plant age, distance to the
disposal site, and lime instead of limestone scrubbing. In comparison
to processes previously evaluated the gypsum process is lower in cost
than untreated ponding and chemical-treatment processes. The sludge -
flyash blending process is higher in cost than ponding and most chemical-
treatment processes.
iii
-------
CONTENTS
Abstract ill
Figures vii
Tables ix
Abbreviations and General Conversion Factors xi
Executive Summary xiii
Introduction 1
Process Background and Description 5
Sludge - Flyash Blending 6
Gypsum 6
Design and Economic Premises 7
Design Premises 7
Emission Standards 7
Fuel 8
Power Plant Design 8
Power Plant Operation 8
Flue Gas Composition 9
Scrubber Design 9
Sludge Treatment and Disposal 11
Case Variations 12
Economic Premises 13
Capital Costs 14
Annual Revenue Requirements 16
Lifetime Revenue Requirements with Declining Operating Schedule 19
Lifetime Revenue Requirements with Constant Operating Schedule . 20
Systems Estimated 21
Sludge - Flyash Blending 21
Field Equipment 22
Gypsum Process 23
Field Equipment 28
Waste Material and Disposal 28
Results 34
Base Case 34
Case Variations 44
Power Plant Size and Operating Schedule 44
Power Plant Remaining Life 55
Sulfur in Coal 63
Ash in Coal 67
-------
Lime Versus Limestone 67
Distance to Disposal Site 70
Sludge - Flyash Blending Stoichiometry 73
Sludge - Flyash Layering 73
Waste Production Rate 74
Land Requirements 74
Comparison with Other Waste Disposal Processes 74
Conclusions 81
Base Case 82
Case Variations 83
Power Plant Size 83
Remaining Life 86
Sulfur in Coal 86
Ash in Coal 86
Lime Versus Limestone 87
Distance to Disposal Site 87
Sludge - Flyash Layering 87
Sludge - Flyash Blending 1.3 Stoichiometry 88
Recommendations 89
References 90
Appendices
A. Total Capital Investment and Annual Revenue Requirement
Tables - All Processes and Case Variations 93
B. Declining Operating Profile - Lifetime Revenue Requirements . 163
C. Constant On-Stream Time - Lifetime Revenue Requirements . . . 171
vi
-------
FIGURES
Number
1 Sludge - flyash blending. Plow diagram and material
balance 24
2 Sludge - flyash blending. Control diagram 25
3 Sludge - flyash blending. Plant layout 26
4 Gypsum. Flow diagram and material balance 29
5 Gypsum. Control diagram 30
6 Gypsum. Layout drawing 31
7 Effect of power plant size on capital investment.
New plant 49
8 Effect of power plant size on annual revenue requirements.
New plant 50
9 Effect of power plant size on unit capital investment.
New plant 51
10 Effect of power plant size on annual unit revenue
requirements. New plant 52
11 Effect of power plant size on annual unit revenue
requirements. New plant 53
12 Effect of power plant size on annual unit revenue
requirements. New plant 54
13 Effect of power plant size on capital investment. New
plant operating at constant 7000 hr/yr throughout 30-yr
life 56
14 Effect of power plant size on annual revenue requirements.
New plant operating at constant 7000 hr/yr throughout
30-yr life 57
15 Effect of power plant size on levelized unit revenue
requirements. New plant operating with declining annual
operating load over 30-yr life 59
16 Effect of power plant size on levelized unit revenue
requirements. New plant operating at constant
7000 hr/yr throughout 30-yr life 61
17 Effect of remaining plant life on capital investment.
500-MW plant 62
18 Effect of remaining plant life on annual revenue
requirements. 500-MW plant 64
19 Effect of sulfur content of coal on capital investment.
New 500-MW plant 65
20 Effect of sulfur content of coal on annual revenue
requirements. New 500-MW plant 66
21 Effect of ash in coal on capital investment. New
500-MW plant 68
vii
-------
FIGURES (continued)
Page
Effect of ash in coal on annual revenue requirements.
New 500-MW plant 69
Effect of distance to disposal site on capital investment.
New 500-MW plant 71
Effect of distance to disposal site on annual revenue
requirements. New 500-MW plant 72
Effect of sludge rate on annual unit revenue requirements,
wet basis 75
Effect of sludge rate on annual unit revenue requirements,
dry basis 76
viii
-------
TABLES
Number Page
S-l Base-Case Capital Investment Costs xix
S-2 Base-Case Annual Revenue Requirements xx
S-3 Base-Case Modular Economics xxi
S-4 Summary of Total Capital Investment xxii
S-5 Summary of Total Annual Revenue Requirements xxiii
S-6 Lifetime Revenue Requirements for Declining-Load Schedule . . xxiv
S-7 Summary of Lifetime Revenue Requirements for Constant-
Load Schedule xxiv
S-8 Capital Investment for Base-Case Waste Disposal Processes . . xxvii
S-9 Annual Revenue Requirements for Base-Case Waste Disposal
Processes xxvii
1 EPA-Sponsored FGD Sludge-Related Projects 3
2 Assumed Power Plant Operating Schedule 9
3 Coal and Flue Gas Compositions and Amounts for Various
Sulfur Contents in Coal (500-MW Unit) 10
4 Base-Case Conditions and Case Variations 12
5 Cost Indexes and Projections 15
6 Projected 1980 Unit Costs for Raw Materials, Labor, and
Utilities 17
7 Annual Capital Charges for Power Industry Financing 18
8 Sludge - Flyash Blending Base-Case Equipment List 27
9 Gypsum - Base-Case Equipment List 32
10 Quantities of Sludge for Disposal - All Case Variations ... 33
11 Total Capital Investment Summary - Sludge - Flyash Blending . 35
12 Summary of Revenue Requirements - Sludge - Flyash Blending . . 36
13 Total Capital Investment Summary - Gypsum 37
14 Summary of Revenue Requirements - Gypsum 38
15 Modular Capital Investment - Base-Case Sludge - Flyash
Blending 40
16 Modular Annual Revenue Requirements - Base-Case Sludge -
Flyash Blending 41
17 Modular Capital Investment - Base-Case Gypsum 42
18 Modular Annual Revenue Requirements - Base-Case Gypsum .... 43
19 Capital Investment Analysis - Sludge - Flyash Blending .... 45
20 Annual Revenue Requirements - Sludge - Flyash Blending .... 46
21 Capital Investment Analysis - Gypsum 47
22 Annual Revenue Requirements - Gypsum 48
23 Capital Investment and Annual Revenue Requirements for
Declining- and Constant-Load Conditions, k$ 55
24 Summary of Lifetime Revenue Requirements for Systems
Operating on a Declining-Load Schedule over the 30-Year
Life of the Power Plant 58
ix
-------
TABLES (continued)
Number Page
25 Summary of Lifetime Revenue Requirement for Systems
Operating at Constant Load of 7000 hr/yr during 30-Year
Life of the Power Plant 60
26 Land Requirements and Costs 77
27 Base-Case Cost Comparison of Seven Disposal Alternatives . 78
28 Effect of Case Variations on Total Capital Investment
and Annual Revenue Requirements - Sludge - Flyash
Blending 84
29 Effect of Case Variations on Total Capital Investment
and Annual Revenue Requirements - Gypsum 85
-------
ABBREVIATIONS AND GENERAL CONVERSION FACTORS
ABBREVIATIONS
Btu British thermal unit
°C degrees Centigrade
°F degrees Fahrenheit
ESP electrostatic precipitator
FGC flue gas cleaning
FGD flue gas desulfurization
ft feet
ft/sec feet per second
g gram
gal gallon
gpm gallons per minute
hp horsepower
hr hour
in. inch
k thousand
kg kilogram
km kilometer
kW kilowatt
KWh kilowatthour
1 liter
Ib pound
M million
MW megawatt
sec second
xi
-------
CONVERSION FACTORS
To convert from
English units
acre
barrels of oil
British thermal unit
degrees Fahrenheit-32
feet
square feet
cubic feet
feet per minute
cubic feet per minute
gallons
gallons per minute
grains (troy)
grains per cubic foot
horsepower
inches
pounds
pounds per cubic foot
pounds per hour
miles
revolutions per minute
standard cubic feet
per minute (32°F)
tons (short)3
tons (long)3
tons per hour
To metric units
hectare
liters
gram-calories
degrees Centigrade
centimeters
square meters
cubic meters
centimeters per second
cubic meters per second
liters
liters per second
grams
grams per cubic meters
kilowatts
centimeters
kilograms
kilograms per cubic meter
grams per second
meters
radians per second
normal cubic meters
per hour (0°C)
metric tons
metric tons
kilograms per second
Multiply by
0.405
158.97
252
0.5555
30.48
0.0929
0.02832
0.508
0.000472
3.785
0.06308
0.0648
2.288
0.7457
2.54
0.4536
16.02
0.126
1609.
0.1047
1.695
0.90718
1.016
0.252
a. All tons, including tons of sulfur, are expressed in short tons in
this report.
xii
-------
ECONOMICS OF DISPOSAL OF LIME-LIMESTONE SCRUBBING WASTES:
SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING AND GYPSUM SYSTEMS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
Flue gas desulfurization (FGD) processes are coming into increasing
use by the U.S. electrical power industry to meet sulfur oxides (SOX)
emission-control standards established by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA). Most existing and planned FGD processes consist
of wet-scrubbing systems using a lime or limestone slurry which reacts
with SOjj in the flue gas to produce a waste sludge of calcium sulfite
and calcium sulfate. A major problem confronting power plants using
this type of FGD process is disposal of the waste, which is difficult to
dewater to a solid with acceptable landfill properties. The waste
slurry can be ponded, where it eventually settles to a material of
doubtful stability and questionable environmental effect. As an alter-
nate approach, it can be mechanically dewatered and chemically treated
using purchased additives to produce a waste more amenable to landfill
disposal. Flyash can be collected separately and disposed of either
separately or with the scrubber waste, or it can be collected in the
scrubbers and disposed of as part of the scrubber waste. In addition to
the many factors of practicality and cost involved in selection of a
disposal method, existing State and Federal regulations and impending
more-comprehensive regulations make selection of an effective and satis-
factory disposal method a complex and difficult process.
An extensive research and development program supported by EPA is
in progress to develop, evaluate, and demonstrate environmentally and
economically acceptable methods of dealing with FGD wastes. As a part
of these studies, TVA is conducting a series of studies on FGD process
economics, a portion of which is a study of waste disposal economics.
Based on conceptual designs developed from TVA, industry, process vendor,
and EPA studies, capital investment and annual revenue requirement
estimates are made for each disposal process studied. A consistent
structure of design and economic premises is used to permit comparisons
on an equitable basis, and to permit comparisons between systems evalu-
ated in different phases of the studies.
In a previous study the economics of four waste disposal methods
were evaluated. Untreated ponding was compared with three proprietary
processes in which dewatered FGD sludge is mixed with stabilizing
xiii
-------
chemicals to improve its landfill characteristics. The chemical-treatment
processes were developed by the Dravo Corporation, IU Conversion Systems,
Inc., and Chemfix, Inc.
In this study two methods are evaluated which produce a dewatered
waste material without the use of purchased additives. Both of these
methods, the sludge - flyash blending process and the gypsum process,
are under evaluation and development but have not been demonstrated in
full-scale industrial use. The scrubbing and dewatering processes are
generic designs based on extensive industrial experience and experimental
data. The physical properties of the wastes are based on similar informa-
tion and experimental data from a number of sources.
PROCESS BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION
Most scrubbing systems produce a sludge with a high sulfite to
sulfate ratio. The sulfite (calcium sulfite hemihydrate, CaS03-l/2H20)
is more difficult to dewater than the sulfate (calcium sulfate dihydrate,
CaSO^*2H20, which is chemically identical to gypsum) and is less suitable
as a landfill material. High-sulfite sludges can be practically
dewatered to about 60% solids whereas high-sulfate sludges can be practi-
cally dewatered to about 80% solids. At these water contents the sulfite
waste is a poor landfill candidate while the gypsum waste is much more
soillike.
Two potential waste disposal processes are thus to dewater and then
to further stabilize the high-sulfite sludge or to produce a high-
sulfate sludge which can be dewatered and disposed of without further
treatment. The dewatered sulfite sludge can be blended with dry flyash
to further reduce the water content and to provide a stabilizing
ingredient. Alternately, the scrubbing system can be modified to pro-
duce a more highly oxidized sludge consisting primarily of gypsum.
Sludge - Flyash Blending Process
A disposal alternative which involves dewatered sludge and flyash
blending is available to power plants using fuels with suitable ash to
sulfur ratios. The process (unlike the Dravo, IUCS, and Chemfix processes
in which additive quantities are independent of the fuel ash to sulfur
ratio) depends on a relatively high-ash, moderate- to low-sulfur coal.
Within these relatively wide ranges, however, it has the advantage that
no purchased additives and their handling equipment are needed.
In this study high-sulfite effluent from the scrubber system is
dewatered from 15% solids to 60% solids using a thickener followed by a
rotary-drum filter. Flyash is collected separately using electrostatic
precipitators (ESP) and blended with the dewatered sludge using a con-
ventional mixer. The blended waste is assumed to be a soillike solid
which can be handled and transported by conventional earthmoving equip-
ment and trucks.
xiv
-------
Gypsum Process
Limestone and lime scrubbing systems can be modified, by the addition
of forced-air sparging systems, to produce a high-sulfate sludge.
Flyash can be removed in the scrubber with the SOX without affecting the
process. In this study it is assumed that the air-oxidation modification
produces a high-sulfate (gypsum) sludge with improved dewatering charac-
teristics. The scrubber effluent is assumed to be 15% solids, which is
dewatered to 80% solids in a thickener and rotary-drum filter. The
product is assumed to be a soillike material which can be handled in the
same manner as the waste from the sludge - flyash blending process.
Waste Disposal
The waste from both processes is loaded into over-the-road trucks
and disposed of in an area-fill-type landfill where it is piled, contoured,
and covered with soil. Typical landfill equipment and operations are
assumed, including landscaping to control seepage and runoff.
Design and Economic Premises
The premises used in this study were developed by TVA and EPA to
provide an equitable basis for economic comparisons of FGD processes.
Conditions for the base case are representative of typical power-industry
conditions. Case variations are used to determine the sensitivity of
costs to variations in conditions.
The cost analysis, with two exceptions, begins with the scrubber
effluent. In this study costs for separate ESP collection of flyash in
the sludge - flyash blending process and for air-oxidation modifications
are provided separately so that equitable comparisons can be made with
systems using either separate or combined flyash and SOX removal systems.
Design Premises
For the base-case conditions a new, 500-MW net-output midwestern
power plant is used. The design and operation are based on Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission data and TVA experience. An operating
lifetime of 30 years with a declining schedule totaling 127,500 hours is
used. The heat rate is 9000 Btu/kWh.
The fuel used is a typical Eastern U.S. coal with 3.5% sulfur and
16% ash and a heating value of 10,500 Btu/lb as fired. It is assumed
that 80% of the ash and 95% of the sulfur is emitted with the flue gas.
Flyash and SOX control systems are assumed to remove flyash and SOX to
meet new-source performance standards (NSPS) of 0.01 and 1.2 Ib/MBtu
respectively.
Scrubber design is based on TVA experience, power-industry operating
experience, and process vendor information. The design is generic,
representing most-proven technology rather than a particular installation,
xv
-------
and is sized and costed as a fully developed and proven unit. A single
mobile-bed scrubber is used in each of four trains on the 500-MW unit.
Stoichiometry is 1.5 moles of calcium carbonate to each mole of sulfur
removed for the standard limestone scrubber and 1.1 moles of calcium
carbonate per mole of- sulfur removed for the air-oxidation gypsum process.
The sludge-treatment process consists of a conventional thickener
followed by rotary-drum vacuum filtration. The scrubber effluent is
assumed to be 15% solids for both processes. Sulfur species in the
standard scrubber effluent of the sludge - flyash blending process are
assumed to be 85% CaS03'l/2H20 and 15% CaSO^-Z^O. In the gypsum process
the sulfur species are assumed to be 95% CaS04'2H20 and 5% CaS03-l/2H20.
The waste from the vacuum filters is assumed to contain 60% solids
in the sludge - flyash blending process and 80% solids in the gypsum
process. At this stage the gypsum process waste is assumed to have a
bulk density of 121 Ib/ft^ and to have the handling characteristics of a
loose soil. The sludge - flyash blending process waste is mixed with
dry flyash in a blade-type mixer. After mixing it is assumed to have a
bulk density of 97 Ib/ft^, a solids content of 74% (base case), and the
handling characteristics of a loose soil.
The wastes are stockpiled at the process site for transportation to
a disposal site 1 mile away by over-the-road trucks. The disposal site
is assumed to be a typical area-fill operation in which conventional
earthmoving equipment is used to pile the waste to a depth of 30 feet
and cover it with 2 feet of compacted soil contoured to control seepage
and runoff. Provision for site maintenance, but not for monitoring of
offsite environmental effects, is included. Land requirements are based
on the bulk density of the waste and the 30-foot fill depth.
Case Variations
Case variations for both processes consist of 200- and 1500-MW
power plant sizes; power plants with 25, 20, and 15 years of remaining
life; coal with 2% and 5% sulfur and with 12% and 20% ash; lime instead
of limestone as the scrubber absorbent; distances of 5 and 10 miles to
the disposal site; and a constant operating schedule of 7000 hr/yr over
the life of the plant instead of a declining operating schedule. For
the sludge - flyash blending process two additional case variations of
separate transport of flyash and sludge with deposit in alternate layers
at the disposal site, and a 1.3:1.0 calcium carbonate to sulfur-removed
Stoichiometry are also included.
Economic Premises
The economic premises are divided into capital investment costs and
annual revenue requirements. The economic estimates are made using
equipment lists, flow diagrams and material balances, process layouts
and other design and operating conditions. Cost information is based'
on engineering firm and vendor information, TVA data, and published
xvi
-------
sources. Cost projections are based on Chemical Engineering cost indices.
The premises are based on regulated-utility economics with a 60% debt-
40% equity capital structure.
Capital investment costs are divided into direct costs, indirect
costs, land, and working capital. The costs are projected to mid-1979,
representing a mid-1977 to mid-1980 construction period with 50%
expenditure in mid-1979. Direct capital costs cover process equipment,
piping and insulation, transport lines, foundations and structural,
excavation and site preparation, roads and railroads, electrical,
instrumentation, buildings, and trucks and earthmoving equipment.
Material and labor costs for fabrication and Installation of these
items are estimated. These estimates are based on costs obtained from
vendors and on related literature Information.
Indirect capital costs consist of engineering design and super-
vision, architect and engineering contractor expenses, construction
expenses, contractor fees, contingency, allowance for startup and modi-
fications, and interest during construction. Working capital, and land
costs of $3500/acre, are included as separate entries. These estimates
are based on current industry practice and authoritative literature
sources.
Base-case annual revenue requirements are based on a first-year
declining operating schedule of 7,000 hr/yr with 127,500 total operating
hours. The costs are projected to mid-1980. Case variations include a
constant operating schedule of 7,000 hr/yr with 210,000 total operating
hours for the three power plant sizes. In addition, lifetime revenue
requirements are included for the three power plant sizes with both
declining and constant operating schedules. Revenue requirements are
divided into direct costs for raw materials, labor, utilities, equipment
fuel and maintenance, and analyses and indirect costs for capital charges
and overheads. In these studies no raw materials are required and
electricity is the only utility used.
RESULTS
Detailed capital investment summaries for both processes are shown
in Table S-l. Detailed annual revenue requirements for the base case
are shown in Table S-2. These costs do not include costs associated
with separate ESP collection of flyash or air oxidation in the scrubbers,
Capital investment for ESP units is $9,614,000 (19.23 $/kW) and annual
revenue requirements are $1,975,000 (0.56 mill/kWh). Capital investment
for air oxidation is $2,303,000 (4.61 $/kW) and annual revenue require-
ments are $1,005,000 (0.29 mill/kWh). These costs, and 500-MW-size
limestone scrubber capital investment of $36,368,000 (72.74 $/kW) and
annual revenue requirements of $11,842,000 (3.38 mills/kWh), can be
combined with disposal costs to evaluate complete scrubbing - disposal
systems.
xvii
-------
Base Case
Capital investment for the base-case sludge - flyash blending
process, shown in Table S-l, is §8,605,000 (17.2 $/kW). Process equipment
cost, excluding fTyash collection, is 23% of the total, mobile equipment
cost is 7%, and land purchase is 6% of the total. Capital investment
for the base-case gypsum process is $5,411,000 (10.8 $/kW). Process
equipment cost is 22% of the total, mobile equipment cost is 9%, and
land purchase is 7% of the total.
Annual revenue requirements for the base-case sludge - flyash
blending process, shown in Table S-2, are $3,772,600 (1.08 mills/kWh).
The largest direct cost is disposal operating labor and supervision for
solids at 20% of the total revenue requirements, followed by process
operating labor and supervision at 12% of the total. Annual revenue
requirements for the base-case gypsum process are $3,117,500 (0.89
mill/kWh). Solids disposal operating labor and supervision is the
largest direct cost, at 24% of the total, followed by process operating
labor and supervision at 14%. Landfill operations, consisting of land
preparation and mobile equipment fuel and maintenance, are a minor
element of the annual revenue requirements of both processes.
These costs can be further illustrated by a breakdown into modular
units based on processing areas, as shown in Table S-3. Each area
represents a separate entity based on function with all costs assigned
and calculated in the same manner as the total costs were determined.
The effect of the relatively high flyash collection and handling costs,
as compared to air oxidation, is evident in both capital investment and
annual revenue requirements. Capital investment for flyash collection
and handling is 23.7 $/kW and annual revenue requirements are 0.75
mill/kWh. Capital investment for air oxidation is 4.6 $/kW and annual
revenue requirements are 0.29 mill/kWh. Combined sludge and flyash
thickening and filtration increase costs for the gypsum process but
these are offset by the lower costs associated with the superior
settling and filtration characteristics of the gypsum sludge. Mixing
contributes little to overall costs. Disposal capital investment,
consisting primarily of land and mobile equipment, is a minor part of
the total. Disposal annual revenue requirements, primarily labor and
supervision, are, however, a substantial portion of the total.
Case Variations
Capital investments and annual revenue requirements for the case
variations of both processes are shown in Tables S-4 and S-5 respectively.
Power Plant Size and Operating Schedule—
Power plant size has a large effect on both capital investment and
annual revenue requirements for both processes but does not greatly
affect the relative cost relationships of the two processes. Capital
investment for the sludge - flyash blending process increases 198% for
the 200- to 1500-MW power plant size increase of 650%. The gypsum
xviii
-------
TABLE S-l. BASE-CASE CAPITAL INVESTMENT COSTS
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks
and equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Sludge flyash
blending,3
total k$
1,985
139
242
53
345
56
504
3,324
50
3,374
581
3,955
334
83
686
273
5,331
1,066
6,397
582
768
7,747
536
322
8,605
Gypsum.
total k$
1,179
174
25
42
220
52
174
1,866
27
1,893
498
2,391
195
48
425
136
3,245
649
3,894
340
467
4,701
403
307
5,411
Basis: New Midwestern 500-MW plant with 30-year life of 127,500 hours,
7,000 hours first year; coal 3.5% sulfur, 16% ash, removed to NSPS;
landfill disposal 1 mile from site. Costs scaled to mid-1979.
a. Flyash collected by ESP, 1.5 limestone stoichiometry, waste 74%
solids.
b. Flyash collected in scrubber, 1.1 limestone stoichiometry with air
oxidation, waste 80% solids.
xix
-------
TABLE S-2. BASE-CASE ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIRElffiNTS
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance - plant labor and super-
vision, 4Z of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmovlng equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Sludge - flyash blending'
Gyps urn
Total
annual revenue
Z of
total annual
revenue
Total
annual revenue
Z of
total annual
revenue
requirements. $ requirements requirements. $ requirements
438,000
744,600
158,200
8,700
32,900
87,800
76,900
17.000
1.564,100
1,564,100
11.6
19.7
4.2
0.2
0.9
2.3
2.0
0.5
41.A
41.4
438,000
744,600
95,600
6.600
29,800
79,400
49,300
17.000
1,460,300
1.460,300
14.0
23.9
3.1
0.2
1.0
2.5
1.6
0.5
46.8
46.8
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and Insurance at 7.83Z of total
capital Investment less land and
working capital 606,600 16.o
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment 740,000 19.6
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities 743,600 19.7
Administrative, IQZ of oppr.it Inn labor 118.300 3.3
Subtotal Indirect costs 2.208,500 58.6
Total annual revenue requirements 3,772.600 100.0
368.100
465.300
705.500
118.300
1,657,200
3,117,500
11.3
14.9
22.7
3.8
53.2
100.0
Basis: New Midwestern 500-MW plant with 30-year life of 127,500 hours, 7,000 hours first year; coa
sulfur, 16Z ,i»h, removal to NSPS; Inndflll dispos.il 1 mile from site. Cuats projected to mid-1980.
a. Klyash collected by ESI', 1.5 limestone stoich tome try, waste 742 solids.
b. Flyash .elicited in s< rubber, 1.1 I Imcstonc- st.il. hlomeiry with .ilr oxidation, waste 80Z solids.
1 3.52
XX
-------
TABLE S-3. BASE-CASE MODULAR ECONOMICS
Capital investment,
$/kW
Sludge -
flyash
blending Gypsum
Annual revenue requirements,
mills/kWh
Sludge -
flyash
blending
Gypsum
ESP costs
Air-oxidation costs
Flyash handling
Thickening
Filtration
Mixing
Disposal
Total
19.2
-
4.5
6.5
2.5
0.9
2.8
36.4
-
4.6
-
5.4
3.1
-
2.3
15.4
0.56
-
0.22
0.25
0.11
0.05
0.45
1.64
-
0.29
-
0.30
0.16
-
0.43
1.18
process capital investment increases 148% for the same power plant size
increase. Most of the improvement in disposal cost per unit of power
output is a result of lower process equipment and mobile equipment costs
relative to power output at the larger plant sizes. Land costs increased
in proportion to power output.
Annual revenue requirements show the same disproportionately smaller
increase with increasing plant size. Annual revenue requirements for
the sludge - flyash blending process and the gypsum process increase
149% and 113%, respectively, for the power plant size increase of 650%.
In this case the cause is smaller increases in both process and mobile
equipment operating labor and supervision relative to power plant size
increase. Landfill costs increase in proportion to power plant size.
The effect of the constant-load operating schedule on first-year
revenue requirements is to increase land requirements, resulting in
increased capital investment and annual revenue requirement indirect
costs. Capital investment costs for the constant-load operating schedule
increased 5% or less for both processes. Increases in first-year annual
revenue requirements were 3% or less.
Lifetime revenue requirements for the declining-load schedule are
shown in Table S-6 and for the constant-load schedule in Table S-7.
The results are shown both as the cumulative actual total and as the
cumulative present worth total which is discounted at 11.6% to the
initial year. They show the same relative cost relationships between
the two processes and between the three power plant sizes as the first-
year annual revenue requirements. The declining-load operating schedule
average unit revenue requirements, expressed in mills/kWh, are about 35%
higher than the constant-load average unit revenue requirements.
xxi
-------
TABLE S-4. SUMMARY OF TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT
Total capital investment
Sludge - flyash
blending*
Gypsum
Case
Base case0
Variation from base case
200 MW
1500 MW
Existing, 25-year remaining life
Existing, 20-year remaining life
Existing, 15-year remaining life
2% sulfur in coal
5% sulfur in coal
12% ash in coal
20% ash in coal
Lime scrubbing process
5 miles to disposal
10 miles to disposal
7000 hr/yr operating profile
200 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
1500 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
Sludge - flyash layering
1.3 stoichiometry
k$
8,605
6,126
18,282
8,528
8,381
8,276
7,356
10,073
7,917
9,309
8,178
8,969
9,334
8,955
6,268
19,321
8,743
8,160
$/kW
17.21
30.63
12.19
17.06
16.76
16.56
14.71
20.10
15.83
18.62
16.36
17.94
18.67
17.91
31.34
12.88
17.49
16.32
k$
5,411
3,964
9,826
5,174
5,115
5,076
4,782
5,884
5,042
5,707
5,315
5,750
6,005
5,672
4,093
10,603
-
"•
$/kW
10.82
19.94
6.55
10.35
10.23
10.15
9.56
11.77
10.08
11.41
10.63
11.50
12.01
11.34
20.47
7.07
-
~
Basis; Midwestern plant location, mid-1979 costs; sulfur and flyash
removed to meet NSPS.
a. Landfill disposal of 74% solids material; 1 mile to landfill; trucks
used for transport of sludge; flyash removed by ESP.
b. Landfill disposal of 80% solids gypsum; 1 mile to landfill from
scrubber facilities; trucks used for transport of sludge.
c. New 500-MW plant; 30-year life; coal 3.5% sulfur and 16% ash; lime-
stone scrubbing process.
xxii
-------
TABLE S-5. SUMMARY OF TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS
Revenue requirements
Sludge - flyash
blending3
Case
Base case0
Variation from base case
200 MW
1500 MW
Existing, 25-year remaining life
Existing, 20-year remaining life
Existing, 15-year remaining life
2% sulfur in coal
5% sulfur in coal
12% ash in coal
20% ash in coal
Lime scrubbing process
5 miles to disposal
10 miles to disposal
7000 hr/yr operating profile
200 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
1500 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
Sludge - flyash layering
1.3 stoichiometry
Annual, k$
3,773
2,779
6,922
3,852
3,876
3,982
3,224
4,282
3,617
3,965
3,650
4,425
4,891
3,801
2,791
7,012
3,866
3,673
Mills/kWh
1.08
1.99
0.66
1.10
1.10
1.14
0.92
1.22
1.03
1.13
1.04
1.26
1.40
1.09
2.00
0.67
1.10
1.04
Gypsum
Annual , k$
3,118
2,327
4,961
3,143
3,160
3,227
2,707
3,252
3,018
3,206
3,104
3,694
4,286
3,147
2,401
5,028
-
"
Mills/kWh
0.89
1.66
0.47
0.89
0.90
0.92
0.77
0.93
0.86
0.92
0.89
1.05
1.22
0.90
1.71
0.48
—
"
Basis: Midwestern plant location, 30-year plant life, flyash and sulfur removal to meet
NSPS, landfill disposal. Costs scaled to mid-1980.
a. Landfill disposal of 74% solids material; 1 mile to landfill facilities; trucks used
for transport of sludge; flyash removed by ESP.
b. Base case: Landfill disposal of 80% solids gypsum; 1 mile to landfill from scrubber
facilities; trucks used for transport of sludge.
c. New 500-MW plant; coal 3.5% sulfur, 16% ash; limestone scrubbing process; declining
operating profile.
-------
TABLE S-6. LIFETIME REVENUE REQUIREMENTS FOR DECLINING-LOAD SCHEDULE
Case
Sludge - flyash
blending
200 MW
500 MW
1500 MW
Gypsum
200 MW
500 MW
1500 MW
Cumulative actual
lifetime revenue
requirements , $a
70,341,600
96,526,800
181,405,400
62,063,000
78,072,400
126,375,500
Lifetime average
unit revenue
requirements,
mills/kWh
2.76
1.51
0.95
2.43
1.22
0.66
Cumulative
present worth
lifetime revenue
requirements, $
23,903,700
32,801,900
61,730,100
21,047,100
26,513,400
42,998,600
Levelized
unit revenue
requirements,
mills/kWh"
2.40
1.32
0.83
2.12
1.07
0.58
Basis: New Midwestern plant; 3.5Z sulfur, 16Z ash in coal, removed to NSPS; mid-1980
costs; 7,000 hr/yr for 10 years, 5,000 hr/yr for 5 years, 3,500 hr/yr for 5 years,
1,500 hr/yr for 10 years.
a. Discounted at 11.62 to Initial year.
b. Equivalent of discounted process cost over life of power plant.
TABLE S-7. SUMMARY OF LIFETIME REVENUE
REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTANT-LOAD SCHEDULE
Case
Sludge - flyash
blending
200 MW
500 MW
1500 MW
Gypsum
200 MW
500 MW
1500 MW
Cumulative actual
lifetime revenue
requirements, $
85,472,400
118,644,300
222,596,600
77,691,300
97,629,500
161,159,500
Lifetime average
unit revenue
requirements,
mills/kWh
2.04
1.13
0.71
1.85
0.93
0.51
Cumulative
present worth
lifetime revenue
requirements, $a
25,546,100
35,420,300
66,989,700
22,691,000
28,586,200
47,321,000
Levelized
unit revenue
requirements,
mills /kWhb
2.20
1.22
0.77
1.95
0.98
0.54
Basis: New Midwestern plant; 3.5% sulfur, 16Z ash in coal removed to NSPS; mid-1980 costs;
7,000 hr/yr for 30 years.
a. Discounted at 11.6Z to initial year.
b. Equivalent to discounted process cost over life of power plant.
xxiv
-------
Remaining Life—
Capital investment for plants with remaining lifetimes of 25, 20,
and 15 years decreased slightly, with age, as a result of decreasing
land requirements. Land costs decreased from 1.1 $/kW for the new plant
to 0.3 $/kW for the 15-year-old plant in the sludge - flyash blending
process and from 0.8 to 0.1 $/kW for the corresponding plants in the
gypsum process. These decreases were slightly offset by increased
process equipment costs of 0.1 $/kW for the existing plants because of
the higher heat rate used. Annual revenue requirements also increased
slightly because of increased capital charges.
Sulfur Content of Coal—
Sulfur content of the coal was evaluated at 2% and 5%. In capital
investment the largest effects are on process equipment, mobile equipment,
and land costs. Capital investment is 14.7 $/kW at the 2% sulfur content
and 20.1 $/kW at the 5% sulfur content for the sludge - flyash blending
process and 9.6 $/kW and 11.8 $/kW at the same sulfur contents for the
gypsum process.
Annual revenue requirements for the sludge - flyash blending
process are 0.92 mill/kWh at the 2% sulfur content and 1.22 mills/kWh at
the 5% sulfur content. For the gypsum process annual revenue require-
ments are 0.77 and 0.95 mill/kWh at the same sulfur contents. The
increases in direct costs for both processes are largely a result of
increases in conversion costs, particularly those related to transporta-
tion and landfill operations.
Ash Content of Coal—
Coal ash contents of 12% and 20% have effects on cost similar to
the effects of sulfur content. Capital investment for the sludge -
flyash blending process is 15.8 $/kW at the 12% ash content and 18.6
$/kW at the 20% ash content. Capital investment for the gypsum process
is 10.1 and 11.4 $/kW at the same ash contents. In both processes,
process equipment, mobile equipment, and land were the cost elements
most affected. Annual revenue requirements for the sludge - flyash
blending process are 1.03 mills/kWh at the 12% ash content and 1.13
mills/kWh at the 20% ash content. Annual revenue requirements for the
gypsum process are 0.86 and 0.92 mill/kWh at the same ash contents. As
in the case of coal sulfur content, the change in direct cost is primarily
a result of change in transportation and landfill operation costs.
Lime Versus Limestone—
The use of lime as the scrubber absorbent, with process changes to
a 10% solids slurry and a 1.0:1.0 stoichiometry for both processes, has
minor effect on the sludge - flyash blending process and a lesser effect
on the gypsum process. Capital investment is reduced 0.8 $/kW for the
sludge - flyash blending process and 0.2 $/kW for the gypsum process.
Reduction of process equipment and land costs, because of the improved
stoichiometry, are the main cost elements affected. Annual revenue
requirements are reduced .04 mill/kW for the sludge - flyash blending
process, but are not reduced for the gypsum process.
XXV
-------
Distance to Disposal Site—
Distances of 5 and 10 miles to the disposal site increase capital
investment for the sludge - flyash blending process from the base case
17.2 $/kW to 17.9 and 18.7 $/kW. For the gypsum process the capital
investment increases from the base case 10.8 to 11.5 $/kW at 5 miles and
12.0 $/kW at 10 miles. All of the increases are a result of higher
mobile equipment costs. Annual revenue requirements for the sludge -
flyash blending process are 1.08 mills/kWh for the base case, 1.26
mills/kWh at 5 miles, and 1.40 mills/kWh at 10 miles. Annual revenue
requirements for the gypsum process are 0.89 mill/kWh for the base case,
1.05 mills/kWh at 5 miles, and 1.22 mills/kWh at 10 miles. The annual
revenue requirements increase is largely the result of increased mobile
equipment expense and labor.
Sludge - Flyash Blending Stoichiometry—
A 1.3:1.0 calcium carbonate to sulfur-removed Stoichiometry for the
sludge - flyash blending process reduces capital investment from the
base case 17.2 to 16.3 $/kW, primarily because of reduced process equip-
ment and land costs. Annual revenue requirements are reduced from the
base case 1.08 to 1.04 mills/kWh because of slight reductions in land
preparation and mobile equipment costs and indirect costs.
Sludge - Flyash Layering—
Separate transport of dewatered sludge and flyash to the disposal
site and deposition of the two materials in separate layers increase
capital investment from the base case 17.2 to 17.5 $/kW. Annual revenue
requirements increase from the base case 1.08 to 1.10 mills/kWh. The
increases are a result of increased mobile equipment costs related to
the more complex transportaion and landfill operations.
Comparison to Other Processes
The two processes evaluated in this report can be compared to the
untreated-sludge ponding and chemical-treatment processes previously
evaluated. In untreated ponding the sludge is pumped directly to a
waste pond. In the Dravo ponding process the sludge is dewatered to 35%
solids, chemically treated, and ponded. The Dravo landfill process is
similar except the settled sludge in the pond is removed to a landfill.
Both the IUCS and Chemfix processes mix dewatered 60% solids sludge with
chemicals and discard it as landfill.
The capital investment for the seven processes are shown in
Table S-8. Annual revenue requirements are shown in Table S-9. Costs
for ESP units are included in the sludge - flyash blending process and
air-oxidation costs are included in the gypsum process costs.
Major factors affecting the capital investment relationship of the
seven processes are pond construction, process equipment, and the added
costs for ESP units or air oxidation. Land and mobile equipment costs
of the processes differ considerably but have a minor influence on the
total capital investment.
xxvi
-------
TABLE S-8. CAPITAL INVESTMENT FOR BASE-CASE
WASTE DISPOSAL PROCESSES
Disposal only, Scrubbers and disposal,3
Process $/kW $/kW
Gypsum
IUCS
Dravo landfill
Chemfix
Untreated ponding
Sludge - flyash blending
Dravo ponding
15. 4b
21.4
25.3
27.1
34.4
36. 4C
48.2
88.2
94.2
98.1
99.7
107.2
109.2
121.0
Basis: New 500-MW Midwestern plant; 3.5% sulfur, 16% ash in coal
removed to NSPS; 1 mile to disposal site. Costs scaled to mid-1979,
a. Basic limestone scrubber cost is 36,368 k$ (72.7 $/kW).
b. Air-oxidation cost of 2,303 k$ (4.6 $/kW) included.
c. ESP cost of 9,614 k$ (19.2 $/kW) included.
TABLE S-9. ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS FOR BASE-CASE
WASTE DISPOSAL PROCESSES
Disposal only, Scrubbers and disposal,3
Process mills/kWh mills/kWh
Untreated ponding
Gypsum
IUCS
Sludge - flyash blending
Dravo landfill
Dravo ponding
Chemfix
0.94
I.l8b
1.51
1.64C
1.89
1.91
2.00
4.32
4.56
4.90
5.02
5.27
5.30
5.38
Basis: New Midwestern 500-MW plant; 3.5% sulfur, 16% ash in coal
removed to NSPS; 1 mile to disposal site. Costs scaled to mid-1980.
a. Basic limestone scrubber cost is 11,842 k$/yr (3.38 mills/kWh).
b. Air-oxidation cost of 1,005 k$/yr (0.29 mill/kWh) included.
c. ESP cost of 1,975 k$/yr (0.56 mill/kWh) included.
xxvii
-------
The large pond construction cost is a major factor in the low
ranking of the ponding processes. Land costs, distance to the disposal
site, or both, would have to increase considerably to offset this dis-
advantage. The necessity of separate flyash collection is a major dis-
advantage of the sludge - flyash blending process in comparison to other
blending processes.
The gypsum process has several advantages. The absence of flyash
or raw material handling and blending equipment, the superior settling
characteristics, the favorable stoichiometry, and low costs for air-
oxidation modifications combine to reduce process equipment costs.
Capital investment is additionally, if slightly, reduced by the high
bulk density of the waste. The result is a capital investment con-
siderably lower than the other processes.
Major cost factors in annual revenue requirements of the seven
processes are raw material costs; conversion costs, which consist
primarily of process and disposal labor and supervision; and ESP or air-
oxidation operating costs.
Raw material costs for the chemical-treatment processes are an
important element of the annual revenue requirements. Conversion costs
of the blending-landfill processes do not differ greatly. Conversion
costs for the ponding processes are significantly lower.
The ranking of the blending-landfill processes is a result of
combinations of moderate to slight differences in raw material, con-
version, and indirect costs. The cost of separate ESP units for the
sludge - flyash blending process is largely compensated for by absence
of raw material requirements.
The main advantages of the gypsum process are low indirect costs
and low air-oxidation costs which combine to produce the lowest annual
revenue requirements of the processes evaluated except untreated-sludge
ponding.
CONCLUSIONS
The gypsum process has a large advantage over the sludge - flyash
blending process in capital investment and a smaller advantage in revenue
requirements. This relationship is maintained to slightly varying
degrees in all of the case variations studied. The cost differences
between the two processes are increased when ESP unit and air oxidation
are included.
Base Case
Process equipment costs are the major factor in both capital invest-
ment and annual revenue requirements cost differences between the two
processes. The sludge - flyash blending process requires equipment for
storing and metering flyash and for mixing which is not needed for the
xxviii
-------
gypsum process. Much of the process equipment is smaller in size for
the sludge - flyash blending process because flyash does not enter the
dewatering process. The thickener, however, is much larger than the
gypsum process thickener because of the poorer settling characteristics
of the high-sulfite sludge. In contrast, mobile equipment costs for the
two processes do not differ greatly. The higher bulk density of the
gypsum process waste results in a smaller size of equipment in some
cases but not in a reduction in number of units.
Base-case annual revenue requirements are also lower for the gypsum
process than for the sludge - flyash blending process, primarily because
of indirect costs. Direct costs, consisting entirely of conversion
costs, are similar for both processes. Labor and supervision costs are
the major cost for both processes, about one-third for the process and
two-thirds for transportation and disposal. Other direct costs are
relatively minor compared to labor and supervision costs. Landfill
operations other than labor are less than 10% of the annual revenue
requirements of both processes. Utility costs, consisting entirely of
electricity costs, are minor for both processes.
Case Variations
In the range of premise changes used in the case variations the
gypsum process capital investment remains approximately three-fifths as
large as the sludge - flyash blending process capital investment and the
gypsum process annual revenue requirements remain approximately four-
fifths as large as the sludge - flyash blending process annual revenue
requirements. Case variations affecting process equipment and operating
labor and supervision produce large to moderate cost variations. Case
variations producing large changes in land and mobile equipment costs
have less effect.
Power plant size has a large effect on the capital investment and
annual revenue requirements of both processes. Most of the reduction is
a result of proportionately smaller increases in process and mobile
equipment costs and labor and supervision costs, compared to power-
output increases. The use of a constant-load operating schedule of 7000
hr/yr for 30 years has little effect on capital investment and first-
year annual revenue requirements. Lifetime revenue requirements for the
base-case gypsum process are approximately 80% of those for the base-
case sludge - flyash blending process, essentially the same relationship
followed by first-year revenue requirements. Remaining lives of 25, 20,
and 15 years have little effect on either capital investment or annual
revenue requirements. Land requirements is the only capital cost
materially affected. Annual revenue requirements are only marginally
affected.
Sulfur content of the coal has a moderate effect on both capital
investment and annual revenue requirements. Ash content of the coal has
an effect similar to sulfur content but to a lesser extent. The major
effect is due to process equipment costs with lesser effects due to
mobile equipment and land costs. Annual revenue requirements are
xxix
-------
similarly affected due to higher conversion costs, particularly disposal
labor and supervision. The use of lime instead of limestone as the
scrubber absorbent reduces capital investment slightly by reducing
process equipment size and land requirements. Annual revenue require-
ments are only slightly affected.
Distance to the disposal site has a moderate effect on capital
investment and a large effect on annual revenue requirements. The
increases are due to increased mobile equipment costs representing
additional trucks, large increases in labor and supervision costs, and
very large increases in mobile equipment fuel and maintenance costs.
The results indicate that distance to the disposal site is an important
consideration in disposal costs if the distances are more than nominal.
Separate transportation of sludge and flyash to the disposal site
for deposition in layers slightly increases both capital investment and
annual revenue requirements because of the increased complexity of the
landfill operation.
The use of a 1.3:1.0 calcium carbonate to sulfur-removed stoichi-
ometry instead of a 1.5:1.0 stoichiometry slightly reduces capital
investment and annual revenue requirements because of smaller process
equipment sizes and mobile equipment operating costs.
The physical characteristics of the waste also contribute to the
cost advantage of the gypsum process by affecting the quantity and
volume of material handled and the size of the disposal site. The
important factors other than power plant fuel and emission-control
conditions which contribute to waste volume are scrubber stoichiometry,
waste water content, and bulk density. Although none of these factors
alone can, within practical limits, reverse the volume relationship, a
combination of improved stoichiometry, bulk density, and dewatering
could change the waste volume relationships of the two processes.
In comparison to untreated ponding and the Dravo, IUCS, and Chemfix
chemical-treatment processes, the gypsum process has the lowest capital
investment and except for untreated ponding the lowest annual revenue
requirements. Its main cost advantages are low air-oxidation costs and
low process equipment costs. The sludge - flyash blending process is
similar in cost to the chemical-treatment landfill processes.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The results of the two sludge disposal economic studies completed
by TVA provide a basis of comparison for several disposal alternatives.
They also establish major factors which control the cost relationships
of various processes under different conditions. Many of these factors
are continually changing, however. In addition, regulations affecting
disposal requirements could change the procedures and requirements of
ponding and landfill operations.
XXX
-------
These factors create a need for periodic updating of economic
information on waste disposal methods. Updated experimental and oper-
ating data, particularly on air-oxidation and dewatering technology,
should be incorporated into future studies. Vendor modifications
should be included in chemical-treatment processes. The effects of
anticipated solid waste disposal regulations should be incorporated into
disposal costs and related to process-specific waste characteristics.
xxxi
-------
ECONOMICS OF DISPOSAL OF LIME-LIMESTONE SCRUBBING WASTES:
WASTE SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING AND GYPSUM SYSTEMS
INTRODUCTION
The U.S. electrical power industry uses coal-fired steam generator
plants for a large portion of its power generation, a situation expected
to continue for at least the next 20 years. Coal-fired facilities are
particularly affected by regulations limiting emission of particulate
matter and sulfur oxides (SOX) to the atmosphere. Particulate matter
control can be accomplished by several wet or dry processes which
remove flyash from the flue gas. Other than the use of low-sulfur coal,
which is limited in quantity and geographical distribution, SOX control
requires treatment of the coal before combustion or of the flue gas
during or after combustion. An extensive SOX emission control technology
has developed, of which post combustion flue gas desulfurization (FGD)
processes are now the most technically advanced and widely used. Flyash
removal can be combined with the FGD process or separate facilities can
be used. A variety of FGD processes are under development, including
dry absorption and several wet-scrubbing processes. In wet-scrubbing
processes, SOX adsorbed by the scrubbing liquid reacts with an adsorbent
to form sulfur salts which can be removed from the system. The sulfur
salts can be decomposed to form regenerated absorbent and a usable
sulfur compound or they can be discarded as waste. Several regenerable
processes are in various stages of application but almost all existing
and projected FGD systems consist of nonregenerable wet-scrubbing
processes using limestone or lime as the adsorbent and producing a
sulfur-salt waste. In 1977 about 30 existing FGD systems scrubbing
10,000 MW and about 60 units planned or under construction to scrub an
additional 25,000 MW were over 90% nonregenerable limestone or lime
processes (1). The waste produced by these systems presents a major
handling and disposal problem (2).
The quantity of sulfur-salt waste produced is quite large. To meet
existing emission regulations with limestone scrubbing, for example, a
500-MW power unit burning typical Eastern U.S. coal requires, during its
lifetime, removal of over 600,000 tons of sulfur. Disposal of the
sulfur-salt waste as untreated sludge requires a 250-acre pond filled to
a depth of almost 20 feet. If flyash disposal is included the pond size
increases to over 400 acres (3).
-------
The waste sludge withdrawn from the scrubber loop consists of a
slurry of about 15% solids. Both the liquid- and solid-phase compositions
vary widely, depending on fuel type, combustion conditions, and scrubber
design and operating conditions. The solids are characterized by the
presence of calcium sulfate dihydrate (gypsum) and calcium sulfite hemi-
hydrate in differing ratios. The sulfate to sulfite ratio is usually
less than unity although low sulfur to air ratios, long scrubber hold-
times, or an added forced-oxidation stage may produce near-complete
oxidation to sulfate. Unreacted absorbent is often present in appreciable
quantities, especially if limestone is used. Flyash is present in
varying quantities depending on the efficiency of separate particulate
control equipment, or it may be a major component if the scrubber is
also used for particulate control. Trace and minor elements, some of
which are of particular concern in pollution control, are present in
both the liquid and flyash phases (4).
A variety of sludge disposal methods exists, most economically and
practically dependent on a number of highly site-specific conditions.
The simplest disposal method consists of pumping or transporting the
untreated sludge to a ponding area where it eventually settles to a
solid of limiting load-bearing capacity and stability containing about
40% to 60% water. The sludge may be mechanically dewatered before
disposal to facilitate handling or reduce land requirements, but with
much the same resulting waste product.
Alternately the sludge can be chemically or physically treated to
improve such properties as stability, load-bearing capacity, erosion
resistance, and permeability. Several commercial processes involve
addition of materials which produce a series of hydraulic reactions,
forming a claylike material (3). Forced oxidation within or as an
adjunct to the scrubbing system to produce a high sulfate to sulfite
ratio or blending with dry flyash are other possible treatments to
improve stability and load-bearing characteristics.
The particular disposal method is dependent on such factors as the
type, cost, and proximity of the disposal site; the characteristics of
the fuel, combustion, and emission control systems; and a number of
environmental considerations. Environmental concerns are of increasing
importance because of impending regulations likely to impose additional
restrictions on water pollution by runoff and seepage from solid waste
disposal sites.
A broad range of investigations are underway to evaluate FGD waste
characteristics and disposal methods. As part of its "Control of Waste
and Water Pollution from Combustion Sources" program, the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA) is sponsoring a series of studies (Table 1)
to evaluate FGD waste characteristics, disposal methods, and environ-
mental effects. As a part of these studies, the Tennessee Valley
Authority (TVA) is conducting economic evaluations of FGD waste disposal
processes using design and economic premises developed by TVA and EPA
for comparative evaluations of FGD system economics. A previous report
(3) compared the economics of the Dravo Synearth, IUCS Poz-0-Tec, and
-------
TABLE 1. EPA-SPONSORED FGD SLUDGE-RELATED PROJECTS
Project
Contractor
Primary area of interest
FGC waste characterization,
disposal evaluation, and tech-
nology transfer
Shaunee FGD waste disposal
field evaluation
Laboratory and field evaluation
of FGC treatment processes
Attenuation of FGC waste
leachate by soils
Establishment of data base
for FGC disposal standards
Evaluation of FGD waste
disposal options
FGD waste leachate -
liner compatability
Scrubber waste characteri-
zation
Dewaterlng principles and
equipment design
Conceptual design-cost studies
of alternative methods for FGC
waste disposal
Gypsum byproduct marketing
studies
Evaluation of alternative
FGC waste disposal sites
Scrubbing waste conversion
studies
Fertilizer production using
scrubbing wastes
FGD waste and flyash
beneficiation
Arthur D. Little, Inc.
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Tennessee Valley Authority
Division of Chemical Development
Muscle Shoals, Alabama
The Aerospace Corporation
El Segundo, California
U.S. Army Engineer Waterways
Experiment Station
Vicksburg, Mississippi
U.S. Army Material Command
Dugway Proving Ground, Utah
SCS Engineers
Long Beach, California
Louisville Gas and Electric
Company
Louisville, Kentucky
U.S. Army Engineer Waterways
Experiment Station
Vicksburg, Mississippi
Tennessee Valley Authority
Energy Research
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Auburn University
Auburn, Alabama
Tennessee Valley Authority
Office of Agricultural and
Chemical Development
Muscle Shoals, Alabama
Tennessee Valley Authority
Office of Agricultural and
Chemical Development
Muscle Shoals, Alabama
Arthur D. Little, Inc.
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Pullman Kellogg Company
Houston, Texas
Tennessee Valley Authority
Office of Agricultural and
Chemical Development
Muscle Shoals, Alabama
TRW Systems Group
Redondo Beach, California
Environmental and technology
assessment
Environmental assessment
Environmental assessment
Environmental assessment
Environmental assessment
Technology assessment and
development
Technology assessment
and development
Technology assessment
and development
Technology assessment
and development
Economic study
Economic study
Alternative disposal methods
Utilization methods development
Utilization methods development
Utilization methods development
-------
Chemfix sludge-stabilization processes with untreated ponding disposal
of waste from lime and limestone scrubbing systems. These three
processes all use dewatering and addition of proprietary additives to
improve characteristics of the sludge that contribute to disposal problems.
Comparative economics wer,e determined for a number of power plant size
and age conditions, fuel sulfur and ash contents, and sludge treatment
and disposal variations, permitting economic comparison of the four
systems under different conditions.
This study is a continuation of the previous work, using the same
design and economic premises and case variations. The economics of two
sludge-treatment methods—blending of sludge with dry flyash and forced
oxidation to gypsum—are compared. The same cost breakdown is used to
permit direct comparison with the results of the previous evaluation.
-------
PROCESS BACKGROUND AND DESCRIPTION
The disposal of physically or chemically treated FGD sludges as a
landfill material is an attractive alternative to untreated disposal
available to the utility industry. The landfill disposal of sludge can
he evaluated for comparison with other alternatives, such as ponding or
mine disposal, to estimate the effects of land availability, soil charac-
teristics, environmental regulations, and waste material properties on
disposal costs (5, 6). Four waste disposal alternatives evaluated in
the earlier economic evaluation by TVA (untreated ponding, IUCS process,
Dravo process, and Chemfix process) along with the two alternatives
evaluated in this study (sludge - flyash blending and oxidation to
gypsum) represent a wide range of disposal options available to the
power industry.
The physical characteristics of FGD sludges important in disposal
considerations include dewatering characteristics, rewatering potential,
bulk density, unconfined compressive strength, and permeability. Most
untreated FGD sludges produced in lime and limestone scrubbing systems
are not good candidates for landfill materials. Dewatering to the 60%
to 70% solids content necessary for adequate stability and handling
characteristics is difficult, loss of stability through rewatering is a
potential problem, and the compressive strength is marginal for most
landfill applications. In general, high-sulfite sludges are more
difficult to dewater, less stable, and are susceptable to quasithixo-
tropic behavior under conditions of marginal water contents as compared
to sludges with high sulfate to sulfite ratios.
Several commercial chemical-treatment processes are available for
FGD sludge treatment to produce a more suitable landfill material.
These are in use at several power plants using lime or limestone FGD
systems (1) and are under evaluation at the Shawnee EPA Alkali Scrubbing
Test Facility (7). They have the capacity to greatly improve dewatered
sludge stabilities and compressive strengths as well as, at least in
sludges undisturbed after treatment and deposition, to decrease permea-
bilities. By adjusting the type and extent of treatment the properties
of the waste material can also be controlled to meet particular disposal
requirements (3). The two processes evaluated in this study are
alternate methods of improving dewatered sludge landfill characteristics
without the use of purchased additives.
As an alternative to treatment by commercial processes, additional
dewatering by blending the sludge with dry flyash or improving dewatering
by increasing the sulfate to sulfite ratio are potentially useful methods
of improving the landfill characteristics of dewatered FGD sludge. Both
-------
these methods are being evaluated in large-scale pilot operations (4, 5)
but have not been systematically evaluated in fully operational systems.
Both are system-dependent in the sense that they use no independently
available additives. Operating or fuel conditions such as extreme ash
to sulfur ratios could preclude their use or alter the waste material
properties upon which the disposal economics are based.
SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING
The alternative involving physical stabilization of dewatered
sludge using dry flyash is desirable because it requires only dry flyash
as a treatment additive, provides for disposal of both flyash and FGD
sludge, and at the same time permits landfill disposal instead of ponding
(8). The primary function of the dry flyash from the standpoint of this
study is to obtain a final water content lower than that readily obtain-
able by other methods. At the final water content used, sludge of this
type has sufficient compressive strength and stability to be handled as
a landfill material.
GYPSUM
The typical waste from a lime or limestone FGD scrubber system
contains considerable amounts of calcium sulfite sludge; however, the
FGD can be modified to permit oxidation of sulfite to sulfate (gypsum)
within a single- or multiple-stage scrubbing loop. The conversion to
gypsum is accomplished without addition of catalysts by air sparging at
atmospheric pressure (9).
The gypsum slurry produced by this forced-oxidation scrubbing
process has improved settling and dewatering properties as compared to
sulfite sludge. The gypsum can be mechanically dewatered to an 80%
solids material which can be handled with belt conveyors, trucks, and
earthmoving equipment and can be disposed of directly as landfill without
chemical fixation. The scrubber system also removes flyash which is
contained in the sludge and is disposed of with the gypsum. The total
quantity and volume of sludge for disposal is significantly reduced over
that of the standard lime or limestone process. The reduction in quantity
and volume results from improved limestone utilization (1.1 vs 1.5
stoichiometry), dewatering to 80% solids instead of 60%, and higher bulk
density.
-------
DESIGN AND ECONOMIC PREMISES
The premises used in this evaluation are the same as those used in
the previous study (3) of chemically treated waste. They are based on
premises developed by TVA, EPA, and others to provide an equitable basis
for economic comparisons of FGD processes. Conditions for the base-case
premises are designed to be representative of typical power-industry
conditions. Case variations are used to determine the sensitivity of
costs to variations in plant size and operating profile, age, fuel,
scrubbing conditions, and disposal site location.
With two exceptions costing for this evaluation begins with the
scrubber effluent. In the previous study scrubbing costs for the four
processes were identical at the same premise conditions and thus were
excluded from the economic comparisons. In this study additional costs
are included in the sludge - flyash blending process for separate flyash
collection by electrostatic precipitators (ESP). In the gypsum process
extra costs are included for forced-air oxidation in the scrubber.
DESIGN PREMISES
The utility plant design and operation is based on Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) historical data (10) and TVA experience.
The conditions used are representative of a typical modern boiler for
which FGD systems would be most likely to be considered. A midwestern
location typical of Illinois, Indiana, and Kentucky is used because the
concentration of coal supplies and power plants in this area make it
representative of the power industry. The design for both processes is
assumed to be proven. No provisions are made for additional spares or
special sizing to compensate for unknown design and operating factors.
Emission Standards
New-source performance standards (NSPS) established by EPA (11)
specify a maximum emission, based on heat input, of 0.10 Ib/MBtu for
particulate matter and 1.2 Ib/MBtu for S02 in large coal-fired boilers.
The process design premises used for this study are based on compliance
with these standards. Actual SOX removal efficiencies required vary
according to the sulfur content of the coal. The efficiencies required
for the sulfur contents and combustion conditions used in this study
are:
-------
Sulfur content
of coal, %
Partlculate matter
removal, % in
SOX removal,
% in flue gas
2.0
3.5
5.0
99.5
99.5
99.5
63
79
85
Fuel
The coal premises are composites of several hundred samples repre-
senting major U.S. coal production areas. To represent the range of
sulfur contents in coals now being burned, sulfur contents of 2.0%,
3.5%, and 5.0% dry basis and ash contents of 12%, 16%, and 20% wet basis
are used. The coal has a heating value of 10,500 Btu/lb, as fired. The
composition and flow rates for the base-case conditions are:
Component
C
H2
N2
02
S
Cl
Ash
H20
Total
Composition
as fired,
wt %
57.56
4.14
1.29
7.00
3.12
0.15
16.00
10.74
100.00
500-MW unit
requirements,
Ib/hr
246,800
17,700
5,500
30,000
13,400
600
68,600
46,000
428,600
Power Plant Design
Power units up to 1300 MW in size are operated in the United States
today. For new units scheduled for startup through 1980 the sizes range
from 80 to 1300 MW (12). Although much of the future power production
will be from units of 500 MW or larger, many older units as well as some
new units of 200 MW or less will continue in operation for many years.
The choice of unit sizes used in this evaluation is based on this antici-
pated power unit size distribution. A single, balanced-draft, horizontal,
frontal-fired boiler design is used. A boiler size of 500-MW net output
is used for the base case and sizes of 200- and 1500-MW net output
(composed of three 500-MW units) are used for the case variations.
Power Plant Operation
An operating life of 30 years is used based on guidelines suggested
by FERC (10). The operating schedule based on TVA experience (13) is
shown in Table 2. New units are assumed to have a total operating life
of 127,500 hours. Existing units 5, 10, and 15 years old are assumed to
have remaining operating lives of 92,500, 57,500, and 32,500 hours.
8
-------
TABLE 2. ASSUMED POWER PLANT OPERATING SCHEDULE
Operating year
1-10
11-15
16-20
21-30
Average for 30-year life
Capacity factor, %
(nameplate rating)
80
57
40
17
48.5
Annual
operating
time, hours
7,000
5,000
3,500
1,500
4,250
Power plant efficiencies vary with size and status. FERC data (14)
list heat rates for power units approximately 500 MW in size up to 5
years old which range from 8,800 to 12,800 Btu/kWh. The following heat
rates are used in this study:
Unit size, Heat rate,
MW Status Btu/kWh
200 New 9,200
200 Existing 9,500
500 New 9,000
500 Existing 9,200
Flue Gas Composition
Flue gas compositions are the result of power unit design, fuel,
and a variety of operating conditions. The combustion and emission
conditions used to determine flue gas composition are based on balanced-
draft boiler design and average values for the sulfur content of coal.
Flue gas compositions are based on combustion of pulverized coal using a
total air rate to the air preheater equivalent to 133% of the stoichi-
ometric requirement. This includes 20% excess air to the boiler and 13%
air inleakage at the air preheater. These values reflect operating
experience with TVA horizontal, frontal- fired, coal-burning units. It
is assumed that 80% of the ash present in coal is emitted as flyash and
95% of the sulfur in the coal is emitted as SOX. One percent of the SOX
emitted is assumed to be 803 and the remainder
The coal and flue gas compositions and flow rates are shown in
Table 3.
Scrubber Design
Scrubber design criteria are based on TVA operating experience,
general power industry operating experience, and information from process
and equipment vendors. The designs are generic to the extent that they
represent most-proven technology rather than a particular existing
-------
TABLE 3. COAL AND FLUE GAS COMPOSITIONS AND AMOUNTS FOR VARIOUS
SULFUR CONTENTS IN COAL (500-MW UNIT)
S content in coal (dry basis)
22
Coal
composition* »b Wt X Lb/hr
C
H2
N2
02
S
Cl
Ash
H20
Flue gas
58.03 248,700
4.17 17,900
1.30 5,600
7.81 33,500
1.80 7,700
0.15 600
16.00 68,600
10.74 46,000
100.00 428,600
aft3/tnin
composition Vol Z
N2
02
C02
S02
so3
NO
HC1
H20
Flyash
Dry
Wet
73.68
4.83
12.44
0.14
0.0014
0.06
0.01
8.84
100.00
loading, gr/sft3
Lb/hr
3,439,000
257,400
911,600
14,500
183
3,002
661
265,400
4.892,000
6.67
6.08
(300°F)
1,134,000
74,350
191,400
2,092
21
924
168
136,100
1,539,000
3.5Z
Wt % Lb/hr
57.56 246,800
4.14 17,700
1.29 5,500
7.00 30,000
3.12 13,400
0.15 600
16.00 68,600
10.74 46,000
100.00 428,600
aft3/tnln
Vol X
73.76
4.83
12.31
0.24
0.0024
0.06
0.01
8.79
100.00
Lb/hr
3,450,000
258,200
904,200
25,130
317
3,009
661
264.500
4,906,000
6.65
6.06
(300°F)
1,138,000
74,590
189,900
3,626
37
927
168
135,600
1,543,000
5%
Wt X Lb/hr
56.89 244,000
4.09 17,500
1.27 5,400
6.40 27,400
4.46 19,100
0.15 600
16.00 68.600
10.74 46.000
100.00 428,600
aft3/min
Vol X
73.80
4.84
12.20
0.34
0.0034
0.06
0.01
8.75
100.00
Lb/hr
3,443,000
257,800
894,700
35,920
454
3,000
661
262,400
4,898,000
6.66
6.08
(300°F)
1,136,000
74,460
187,700
5,183
52
924
168
134.600
1,539,000
b.
HHV = 10,500 Btu/lb
As-fired basis
-------
installation. The lime and limestone systems are based on TVA experience
at the Shawnee EPA Alkali Scrubbing Test Facility (15), extensive power
industry experience with these systems, and vendor information. Four
parallel scrubber trains are used for the 500-MW power units and two
trains are used for the 200-MW power units.
A single-stage mobile-bed scrubber design with a presaturator and
an exit-gas demister is used. The scrubbing liquid waste effluent is
15% solids in the limestone systems and 10% solids in the lime system.
Base-case scrubber stoichiometry is 1.5 moles of CaCOj per mole of
SOX removed for the sludge - flyash blending process and 1.1 moles of
CaCC>3 per mole of SOX removed for the gypsum process. Case variations
in which different stoichiometries are used consist of a sludge -
flyash blending process with a 1.3 CaC03:SOx mole ratio, a sludge -
flyash blending process using lime with a 1.1 CaO:SOx mole ratio, and a
gypsum process using lime with a 1.0 CaO:SOx mole ratio.
The sulfur species in the waste slurry from the scrubber in the
sludge - flyash blending process are assumed to be 85% calcium sulfite
hemihydrate (CaS03'l/2H20) and 15% gypsum (CaS04«2H20). The sulfur
species in the waste slurry from the scrubber in the gypsum process are
assumed to be 95% gypsum and 5% calcium sulfite hemihydrate.
Sludge Treatment and Disposal
The sludge from the scrubbers is dewatered with conventional
thickeners and vacuum filtration. Recovered water is returned to the
scrubbing system. After dewatering, the sludge for the sludge - flyash
blending process is assumed to have a solids content of 60%. After
blending with flyash the solids content is 74% and the balk density is
1.56 gm/cc (97 Ib/ft3) for the base-case fuel. Solids for fuel and
stoichiometry case variations vary from 71% to 82%. The gypsum is
assumed to have a solids content of 80% and a bulk density of 1.94 (121
Ib/ft^) after dewatering. Both types of waste are assumed to be a
solid, soillike material that can be handled in the same manner as loose
soil.
The waste material is loaded on over-the-road-type trucks by
wheeled front-end loaders for transportation to the disposal site.
Trucking practices are based on information obtained from commercial
trucking firms. A distance of 1 mile to the disposal site is used for
the base-case condition. Distances of 5 and 10 miles are included as
case variations.
The disposal site is assumed to be land suitable for typical sanitary
fill use. The size is based on lifetime production of the power plant
and a fill depth of 30 feet at bulk densities of 1.56 gm/cc for the
sludge - flyash waste blend and 1.94 gm/cc for the gypsum. No allowance
is made for in-place compaction. The disposal site operation is an
area-fill type consisting of progressive clearing of the site as it
fills; leveling, contouring, and compacting the waste as it is dumped;
11
-------
and periodically covering the waste with 2 feet of compacted soil from
an onsite borrow pit. Site maintenance, such as construction of dikes,
diverter ditches, and watering to control dust, is also included. The
equipment consists of standard dozers, graders, and rollers used in
landfill operations. Monitoring for air and water pollution is not
included. These are normally a minor portion of current landfill
costs.
Case Variations
Case variations, consisting of a change in one design premise while
the remainder is kept at base-case conditions, are included to determine
the sensitivity of the process economics to operating condition ranges
normally encountered in industry practice. The case variations used in
this study are shown in Table 4.
TABLE 4. BASE-CASE CONDITIONS AND CASE VARIATIONS
Case variations
Premise condition
Base case
Sludge -
flyash blending Gypsum
Both processes
Power plant size, MW 500 200, 1,500
Remaining life, yr 30 25, 20, 15
Lifetime operating hours 127,500 210,000
Sulfur in coal, % 3.5 2, 5
Ash in coal, % 16 12, 20
Miles to disposal site 1 5, 10
Absorbent Limestone Lime
Sludge - flyash blending
Moles CaCO.iS removed 1.5:1.0 1.3:1.0
Blending Mechanical Layering
Gypsum
Moles CaCO_:S removed 1.1:1.0
200, 1,500
25, 20, 15
210,000
2, 5
12, 20
5, ID
Limeb
a. A 1.3:1.0 CaO:S removed stoichlometry and a 10% solids scrubber
effluent is used for this case variation.
b. A 1.0:1.0 CaO:S removed stoichiometry and a 10% solids scrubber
effluent is used for this case variation.
12
-------
A case variation is included for the sludge - flyash blending
process in which the dewatered scrubber waste and flyash are not mechani-
cally blended but are trucked separately to the disposal site and deposited
in alternate layers. The same trucking and disposal site operations are
used for this case as are used for the mechanical blending cases. For
the purposes of this evaluation the dewatered sludge is assumed to be
sufficiently dewatered to load, truck, and dump as a solid.
ECONOMIC PREMISES
The economic premises are divided into capital investment costs for
installation of the system and annual revenue requirements for its
operation over the life of the power plant. The premises are further
divided into sections to facilitate calculation and to establish cost
areas for comparison and analysis. Criteria are used which define cost
indexes; land, raw material, utilities, and energy costs; capital charges;
and other factors required for comparative results. The estimates are
made using equipment lists, flow diagrams, material balances, various
layouts for electrical equipment, piping, and instrumentation, plot
plans, and other design and operating information. Capital cost informa-
tion for major equipment items is obtained from engineering-contracting,
processing, and equipment companies; TVA purchasing and construction
data; and authoritative publications on costs and estimating (16-22).
Minor equipment costs are based on literature sources or derived as a
function of major equipment costs. Revenue requirements are based on
current labor and supervisory rates, purchased power costs, costs derived
from literature sources, and current industrial practice.
The premises are designed to represent projects in which design
begins in mid-1977 and construction is completed in mid-1980, followed
by a mid-1980 startup. Capital costs are assumed 50% expended in mid-
1979. Capital costs are projected to mid-1979 and revenue requirements
are projected to mid-1980. Scaling to other time periods can use mid-
1979 as the basis for capital costs and mid-1980 as the basis for revenue
requirements.
The premises are based on regulated utility economics which allow the
power company to earn a specified return on investment. Regulation,
based on FERC guidelines for accounting and rates for interstate trans-
actions, is usually the responsibility of state or local agencies (10).
The sludge disposal system cost is combined with the total power plant
investment and, therefore, increases the rate base upon which the utility
return on investment is based. Thus, a return on equity must be included
in any process evaluation under regulated economics. This "cost-of-
investment money" is added to the disposal system revenue requirements
as part of capital charges. The capital structure is assumed to be 60%
debt and 40% equity. Interest on bonds is assumed to be 10% and the
return to stockholders 14%.
13
-------
Capital Costs
Capital costs are categorized as direct investment, indirect invest-
ment, contingency, other capital charges, land costs, and working capital.
Total fixed investment consists of the sum of direct and indirect capital
costs and a contingency based on direct and indirect investment. Total
depreciable investment consists of total fixed investment plus the other
capital charges. Investment costs are projected from historical Chemical
Engineering annual cost indexes (23, 24) as shown in Table 5. The
costs are based on construction of a proven design and an orderly con-
struction program without delays or overruns caused by equipment,
material, or labor shortages.
Mobile equipment is assigned a 6-year life, based on industry
practice. Replacement is covered by an increased interim replacement
allowance in revenue requirements.
Direct Investment—
Direct capital costs include all costs, excluding land, for materials
and labor to install the complete waste disposal system. Included are
site preparation, excavation, buildings, storage facilities, landscaping,
paving, and fencing. Also included is 6600 feet of paved road for all
cases. Process equipment includes all major equipment and all equipment
ancillary to the major equipment, such as piping, instrumentation,
electrical equipment, and vehicles. Services, utilities, and miscella-
neous costs involved in construction are estimated as 1.5% of the direct
investment.
Indirect Investment—
Indirect investment costs consist of various contractor charges and
fees and construction expenses. The following cost divisions and
determinations are used.
Engineering design and supervision—This cost is calculated as a
function of the complexity of the system as determined by the number of
major equipment items, excluding mobile equipment. The formula used is:
Engineering design and supervision = (8900)(1.294)(number of
major equipment pieces)
Architect and engineering contractor expense—This expense is
calculated as 25% of the engineering design and supervision costs for
major equipment items.
Construction expense—This expense includes temporary facilities,
utilities, and equipment used during construction. The expense is
calculated as a function of direct investment:
Construction expense =0.25 (direct investment excluding
landfill equipment in M$)°-83
14
-------
TABLE 5 . COST INDEXES AND PROJECTIONS
Year 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976a 1977a 1978a 1979a 198Qa 1981'
Plant 125.7
Materialb 123.8
Labor c 137.4
132.3 137.2 144.1 165.4 182.4 197.9 214.7 232.9 251.5 271.6 293.3
130.4 135.4 141.9 171.2 194.7 210.3 227.1 245.3 264.9 286.1 309.0
146.2 152.2 157.9 163.3 168.6 183.8 200.3 218.3 237.9 259.3 282.6
a.
b.
c.
Projections.
Same as index
Same as index
in Chemical
in Chemical
Engineering for "equipment, machinery, supports."
Engineering for "construction labor."
-------
Contractor fees-—Direct investment is also used to determine
contractor fees:
Contractor fees = 0.096 (total direct investment in M$)°'76
Contingency—
Contingency is 20% of the sum of direct investment and indirect
investment.
Other Capital Charges—
Other capital charges consist of an allowance for startup and
modifications and interest during construction. The allowance for
startup and modifications is 10% of the total fixed investment excluding
mobile equipment. Interest during construction is 12% of the total
fixed investment. It is based on the simple interest which would be
accumulated at 10%/yr under the premise construction and expenditure
schedule, assuming a 60% debt-40% equity capital structure.
Land—
Total land requirements, including the waste disposal area, are
assumed to be purchased at the beginning of the project. A land cost of
$3500/acre is used.
Working Capital—
Working capital consists of money invested in raw materials and
supplies, products in process, and finished products; cash retained for
operating expenses; accounts receivable; accounts payable; and taxes
payable. For these premises, working capital is assumed to be equivalent
to the sum of 7 weeks of direct costs and 7 weeks of overhead costs.
Annual Revenue Requirements
Annual revenue requirements are based on a 7000 hr/yr operating
schedule using the same operational profile and remaining life assumptions
that were used for the power plant design premises. Costs are projected
to 1980 dollars to represent a mid-1980 startup. The revenue requirements
are divided into direct costs for raw materials and conversion and
indirect costs for capital charges and overheads. No raw materials were
required in this study.
Direct Costs—
Projected direct costs for labor and electricity are shown in
Table 6. Operating labor and supervision is based on the quantity,
size, and complexity of the major process equipment. Labor for analyses
is based on the number of chemical analyses and physical tests needed
for process control. Electrical requirements are determined from the
operating horsepower of electrical equipment. The rates are based on
purchase from an independent source with full capital recovery provided
and are adjusted for the quantity used.
16
-------
TABLE 6. PROJECTED 1980 UNIT COSTS
FOR RAW MATERIALS, LABOR, AND UTILITIES
$/unit
Labor
Operating labor 12.50/man-hr
Analyses 17.00/man-hr
Mobile equipment 17.00/man-hr
200 MW 500 MW 1500 MW
Utilities
Electricity, kWh 0.031 0.029 0.027
Fuel and maintenance costs for mobile equipment are based on informa-
tion from companies operating similar disposal and transportation systems.
A cost of $0.16/ton of waste is used for earthmoving equipment. Truck
rates for the different distances are:
Distance traveled, miles $/ton of waste
1 0.06
5 0.20
10 0.39
Landfill operation costs are assigned a value of $1700/acre of
landfill required. These costs are allocated by acreage actually used—
filled to 30 feet and covered with soil—during the period costed.
Other maintenance costs are based on the direct investment costs.
They are adjusted for the size and complexity of the system (based on
operating experience with the systems or similar operations) and are
assumed to be constant over the life of the plant, the increase in costs
balanced by the decline in operating hours. Maintenance costs of 4% of
the direct investment were used for all conditions.
Indirect Costs—
Indirect costs consist of capital charges and overheads. A summary
of capital charges, based on regulated utility economics, is shown in
Table 7. Straight-line depreciation is used, based on the remaining
life of the power plant when the FGD system is installed. Following
FERC recommendations (10), an allowance for interim replacement is
included. This allowance is increased to 2.1-2.5%, depending on age of
the power plant, from the usual average of about 0.35% because of the
unknown life span of FGD systems and the short life (6-year) of the
mobile equipment. The insurance and property tax allowance, based on
17
-------
TABLE 7. ANNUAL CAPITAL CHARGES FOR POWER INDUSTRY FINANCING
Years remaining life
Depreciation-straight line (based on
years remaining life of power unit)
Interim replacements (equipment having
less than 30-yr life)
Insurance and property taxes
Total rate applied to original
investment
Percentage of total depreciable
capital investment
30 25 20 15
3.3 4.0 5.0 6.7
2.5 2.4 2.3 2.1
2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
7.8 8.8 9.3 10.8
Percentage of unrecovered
capital investment3
Cost of capital (capital structure
assumed to be 60% debt and 40% equity)
Bonds at 10% interest
Equity at 14% return to stockholder
Income taxes (Federal and State)0
Total rate applied to depreciation base
6.0
5.6
5.6
17.
a. Original investment yet to be recovered or "written off."
b. Contains retained earnings and dividends.
c. Since income taxes are approximately 50% of gross return, the
amount of taxes is the same as the return on equity.
d. Applied on an average basis, the total annual percentage of original
fixed investment for new (30-yr) plants would be 7.8% + 1/2 (17.2%) =
16.4%.
18
-------
FERC practice, is 2.0% of the total depreciable capital investment.
Cost of capital is based on the assumed capital structure.
Methods of calculating overheads vary. The method used in these
premises is based on information from several sources (17-20). Plant
overhead is assumed to be 50% of the total conversion cost less the cost
of utilities. Utilities are excluded to avoid overcharging energy-
intensive processes. Administrative overhead is assumed to be 10% of
the total labor and supervision cost.
Lifetime Revenue Requirements with Declining Operating Schedule
Annual revenue requirements are estimated using the assumption that
annual operating time for the disposal system is 7000 hr/yr. These
estimates are suitable for comparing processes and measuring the effect
of process variable changes. Also, they represent operating profiles
similar to those during the early years of a plant's life. However,
most power units have a declining load over their life and rarely operate
in later years at the 7000 hr/yr level assumed for the annual revenue
requirement calculations. Since revenue requirement estimates are
needed which reflect the operating profiles of older plants, lifetime
revenue requirement estimates are calculated using the declining
operating schedule previously described. These estimates consider the
variations in capital charges and operating profile with plant age.
Capital charges—The portion of indirect costs that reflects the
cost of capital and taxes is based on nondepreciated capital investment.
A computer program is used to calculate the revenue requirements for
each year over the plant life. Straight-line depreciation is used and
capital charges decrease uniformly over the life of the disposal system.
Operating profile—The actual quantities affecting direct costs
(electricity, operating labor and supervision, maintenance, and analyses)
are estimated to calculate annual revenue requirements for each disposal
system based on a 7000 hr/yr annual operating time. As the plant's
remaining life decreases, the operating profile of the plant and these
quantities also decrease. The projected costs for these items are
modified to show the effect of decreased operating load on revenue
requirements. The annual quantities of each item are scaled propor-
tionally to the annual operating hours for the plant. Annual quantities
for operating labor and supervision and overhead charges are scaled
proportionally to the annual operating hours raised to the 0.5 power.
The direct charges for maintenance are scaled proportionally to the
annual operating hours raised to the 0.6 power. These adjustments to
annual revenue requirements to yield lifetime revenue requirements
provide information for more accurately estimating revenue requirements
for later years of the disposal system life.
19
-------
In this study estimates are included to show lifetime revenue
requirements for a declining operating schedule over a 30-year life as
discussed in the design premises. Estimates are made for 200-, 500-,
and 1500-MW plants for each sludge disposal process.
Lifetime Revenue Requirements with Constant Operating Schedule
The capacity of a power plant is sometimes held constant or altered
with time by adding new generating units as the capacity of older units
is reduced by age. When this occurs, the capacity of the disposal
system must be sized on the basis of the larger power plant waste dis-
posal requirements as compared to a declining operating schedule.
The annual values with a constant operating schedule are based on
average capital charges over a 30-year plant life and a revised capital
investment using an adjusted landfill area as compared to a declining
profile-type operation. The lifetime values are based on declining
capital charges and the same revised capital investment.
In this study estimates are included to show the annual and life-
time revenue requirements for plants with a constant annual operating
load of 7000 hours over a 30-year life. Estimates are made for 200-,
500-, and 1500-MW plants for each sludge disposal process.
20
-------
SYSTEMS ESTIMATED
The conceptual designs for the processes are developed from material
balances, major equipment lists, and flow and layout diagrams, using the
design premises as specifications. From these, estimates of field
equipment such as piping, electrical equipment, instrumentation, struc-
tures, site preparation, buildings, services, land requirements, and
mobile equipment requirements are made.
With two exceptions the designs are limited to the dewatering and
disposal requirements for the processes. The sludge - flyash blending
process requires dry flyash which must be collected separately rather
than in the scrubber. In this process ESP unit installation and
operation are included in the waste disposal system. In the gypsum
process the air-oxidation equipment installation and operation are in-
cluded in the waste disposal system.
The economic estimates are based on the conceptual design and the
economic premises. For each case a capital cost estimate and a first-
year annual revenue requirement estimate were made. In addition,
lifetime revenue requirements were estimated for the base case and the
two plant-size case variations for each process using both constant and
declining operating schedules.
The lifetime economic results are given for each process as both
cumulative actual and cumulative discounted costs (discounted at 11.6%
cost of money to the initial year). The results are also given as the
lifetime average increase and the levelized increase in unit revenue
requirement expressed as $/ton coal burned, mills/kWh, $/MBtu heat
input, and $/ton sulfur removed. As the name implies, the lifetime
average increase in unit revenue requirement is simply an average unit
revenue requirement obtained by dividing the lifetime revenue requirement
by the lifetime number of units, such as tons of coal burned. Levelized
unit revenue requirements are obtained by dividing the discounted process
costs over the life of the power unit by the discounted number of units.
They are the more significant costs because they include the effect of
time on both money and units of measure.
SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING
The scrubber system 15% solids effluent is pumped to an agitated
thickener feed tank. From this tank the slurry is pumped to a thickener
where the slurry is increased to 35% solids. Thickener underflow is fed
to vacuum filters for additional dewatering to 60% solids. Excess water
21
-------
from the dewatering steps is returned to the scrubber system. Flyash Is
collected by ESP units, whose costs are also given, and pneumatically
conveyed to storage bins near the sludge-treatment facilities. The dry
flyash and dewatered sludge are blended using a blade-type mixer for all
but the layering case variation. Belt conveyors are used to feed the
filter cake to the mixer and to convey the blended product to a small
pile near the dewatering system for transportation to the disposal site.
The transportation and disposal system is basically the same for each
process and is discussed following the description of the gypsum process.
Field Equipment
The equipment items other than process equipment are piping, elec-
trical, instrumentation, excavation and site preparation, buildings,
roads, earthmoving equipment, and services. The method for estimating
the cost of each of these is described below.
Piping-
Carbon steel pipe and gate valves are used for all waterlines.
Slurry lines are stainless steel pipe for lines under 3 inches in diameter
and are rubber-lined carbon steel for larger lines. Strainers are
stainless steel for pipes under 4 inches in diameter and rubber-lined
carbon steel for pipes over 4 inches in diameter.
Foundations and Structural—
Concrete foundations for each equipment item are estimated according
to equipment sizes. Structural costs are estimated based on the size
and weight of the structure.
Electrical—
The electrical cost is divided into four sections: (1) cost of
feeder cables from the power plant transformer yard to the sludge dis-
posal facilities, (2) transformer costs for each area, (3) costs of
power supply from area field modules to individual motors, and (4) motor
control costs between remote control center, field equipment location,
and individual motors. Total connected motor horsepower is used to
establish costs for the feeder cables and transformers. Costs for power
supply and motor controls are based on individual motor sizes and the
number of connected motors. A typical layout is assumed for the disposal
system in reference to the power plant transformer yard, remote control
center, and other areas.
Instrumentation—
Instrumentation costs are based on fixed costs for instruments
which do not change in size and cost with equipment size variations and
variable costs for instruments which increase in size and cost as equip-
ment and pipe sizes increase. Each of these costs may be dependent upon
the number of equipment items, such as pumps, feeders, mixers, conveyors,
filters, and thickeners. Costs are included for control valves, graphic
boards and panelboards, annunciators, air dryers and piping, and instru-
ment cable and wiring systems.
22
-------
Excavation and Site Preparation—
The excavation and site preparation requirements depend upon the
number of items and the type and size of equipment. Estimates are based
on the number of cubic yards of material that is moved in each case.
Buildings—
A control-room building and an equipment building are required for
all cases. The same size control-room building (40 ft wide by 40 ft
long by 12 ft high) is used for all cases. The equipment building is 50
feet wide by 75 feet long by 40 feet high for 200- and 500-MW plants,
and 75 feet wide by 100 feet long by 40 feet high for the 1500-MW plants.
Services—
The cost of services for each case was estimated to be 1-1/2% of
direct investment costs. This cost includes vehicles, maintenance and
instrument shop equipment, laboratories, lockers, offices, restrooms,
storage area, parking area, walkways, landscaping, fencing, and security
allocated to the disposal system area by the power plant.
Roads—
All cases are estimated to require 6600 feet of hard-surface roadway
for access to the disposal area and process equipment. Roads are required
for the truck transport of waste to the landfill located 1 mile from the
scrubber facilities.
A flow diagram and material balance for the base case is shown in
Figure 1. The control diagram and layout drawings for this process are
shown in Figures 2 and 3. All major equipment items for the sludge -
flyash blending base case are included in Table 8.
GYPSUM PROCESS
Additional oxidation in the scrubber system to provide a 95% oxida-
tion to gypsum is included in this system. This consists of addition of
air-sparging tanks and equipment in the scrubber liquid loop. Additional
costs for the installation and operation of the forced-air oxidation are
given for inclusion in the disposal system costs for this process.
The dewatering system for the gypsum process is similar to the
sludge dewatering process. An 8-hour-capacity hold tank receives
scrubber effluent and feeds thickeners and rotary drum vacuum filters
which successively dewater the 15% solids sludge to 35% and 80% solids
waste. The recovered water is returned to the scrubber system. The
size of the thickeners and filters is adjusted for the higher settling
rate and improved filtration characteristics of the sludge relative to
high-sulfite sludges. The filter cake is transported by belt conveyor
to a waste pile for transportation to the disposal site, as described in
the following section.
23
-------
-------
PNQIHATC CONVCYW
LIHtSTONC
WINDING
AND Ml
FVTUH
PCEO
t^J
IrccDtn
inn
r
WATER
Figure 2. Sludge - flyash blending. Control diagram.
-------
w
THICKENER
FEED TANK
16* 01A.
THICKENER
FEED TANK
16'01 A.
FLYASM «
FEED BIN '
FLYASH
STORAGE
SILOS
DISPOSAL PILE
CONTROL BUILDING
W
-------
TABLE 8. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING
BASE-CASE EQUIPMENT LIST
Item
No.
Description
Pneumatic conveying system, 1
flyash
Storage silo, flyash 2
Feeder, discharge 2
Vibrator, flyash storage silo 16
Feed bin, flyash I
Feeder, bin discharge 1
Vibrator, flyash feed bin 8
Weigh feeder, flyash 1
Tank, thickener feed 1
Agitator, thickener feed tank 1
Pump, thickener feed 2
Thickener 1
Tank., thickener overflow I
Pump, thickener overflow recycle 2
Pump, thickener underflow to 2
filter
Sump pump, thickener tunnel 1
Rotary drum filter 2
Pump, filtrate recycle 2
Conveyor, horizontal belt 2
Conveyor, sloping belt 1
Mixer 2
Conveyor, sloping belt 1
Complete system with blower, cyclone
receiver, receiver filter, motor
81,611 ft3, 1.633 tons, field erected.
41 ft diameter, 62 ft high, carbon steel,
with top, 60-degree cone bottom
Rotary air lock type, 4,633 Ib/hr, 8 in.
diameter, 8 in. long, carbon steel
Electromechanical, rotary vibrators, 1-
hp motor
10,881 ft3, 19 ft diameter, 38 ft high,
with top, 60-degree cone hortnra, carbon
steel
Rotary air lock type, 8 in. diameter, 8
in. long, carbon steel
Electromechanical, rotary vibrators,
1-hp motor
5 ft long, 14-in. belt, 3-hp D.C. motor,
carbon steel
33,525 gal, field erected, 18 ft diameter,
18 ft high, open top, carbon steel,
rubber lined with four 1 ft 6 in. x 18
ft baffles offset 3-1/2 in. from wall
25 hp, 72-ln. diameter blade, rubber
coated
745 gpm, 75-ft head, rubber lined, 40-hp
motor
160-ft diameter, stainless steel- or
rubber-lined concrete basin with rake
and motor (1 spare)
8,310 gal, 12 ft diameter, 12 ft high,
carbon steel, rubber lined, with flat
bottom
468 gpm, 75-ft head, rubber lined. 20-
hp motor
277 gpm, 75-ft head, rubber lined, 15-
hp motor
5 gpm, 10-ft head, carbon steel, 1/4-
hp motor
500 ft2 surface area, 12 ft diameter,
14-ft long drum, stainless steel (wetted
parts), vacuum and filtrate pumps
Included
146 gpm, 75-ft head, rubber lined, 15-hp
motor
52 tons/hr, 16 ft long, 18-in. belt,
100 ft/rain, l/2-hp motor
52 tons/hr. 30 ft long, 18-in. belt,
100 ft/min, l/2-hp motor
Carbon steel, 30-hp motor
79 tons/hr, 30 ft long, 24-in. belt,
100 ft/min, l/2-hp motor
27
-------
Field Equipment
With the exception of buildings, the description of field equipment
for the sludge - flyash blending process also pertains to this process.
For this process two builindgs are required. The control-room building
is 30 feet wide by 30 feet long by 12 feet high. The equipment building
is 40 feet wide by 50 feet long by 30 feet high for the 200- and 500-MW
plants. For the 1500-MW plants it is 40 feet wide by 100 feet long by
30 feet high.
A flow diagram and material balance is shown in Figure 4. Figures
5 and 6 show the control diagram and layout. Major process equipment
items are listed in Table 9.
WASTE MATERIAL AND DISPOSAL
Each estimate is directly affected by the quantity of material that
must be handled. Table 10 lists the cases considered in this study and
the quantity of material for disposal. The final solids content of the
sludge - flyash blending process varies with the fuel composition and
stoichiometry used. The base-case waste is 74% solids. The solids for
fuel and stoichiometry case variations range from 71% to 82%. No bulk
density adjustments were made for these relatively minor changes.
The waste in the disposal pile is loaded onto dump trucks with a
wheeled front-end loader, hauled to the disposal site over hard-surfaced
roadways, and dumped on a prepared section of the site cleared, stripped
of topsoil, and suitably contoured. The dumped waste is shaped and
compacted to form a 30-foot waste depth using graders, dozers, and
rollers. The site is filled in successive sections prepared as required.
A 2-foot-thick layer of compacted and contoured soil obtained from the
site is placed over the waste when it is emplaced to the full depth.
In addition to waste emplacement, the equipment and personnel are used
to maintain the site during use of the site for disposal. A watering
truck is provided to control dusting.
The size of the site is based on the volume of waste generated
during the life of the power plant. For the base-case conditions the
following equipment is required:
Sludge -
Mobile equipment
Wheeled front-end loader
Trucks
Grader
Dozer
Compactor
Pickup truck
Water tanker
flyash blending
No. Size
1 + 1 spare 2.75 yd3
2+1 spare 10 yd3
1
1
1
1
1
Gypsum
No.
1+1 spare
2+1 spare
1
1
1
_
1
Size
2.75 yd3
8 yd3
—
_
_
_
6.000 ga
28
-------
LIMESTONE
WINDING
AND SOj «
ABSORPTION
MEM
FHOM SOI
ABSORPTION
MEM
QAOITATOR
VO
ITMMIIC
•>•
10
THICMENCM
riLTMTf
" IU.MI
XX
DISPOSAL
(41, T2I
Figure 4. Gypsum. Flow diagram and material balance,
-------
LIMESTONE
WINDING
ANDSOt
"war
FftOM SOl
"SET
u>
o
VMTER
Figure 5. Gypsum. Control diagram.
-------
D W
THICKENER
FEED TANK
22' DIA.
THICKENER
OVERFLOW TANK
22' DIA.
1 DISPOSAL PILE
I
CONTROL
(BUILDING
W
Figure 6. Gypsum. Layout drawing.
-------
TABLE 9. GYPSUM - BASE-CASE EQUIPMENT LIST
Item
Tank, thickener feed
No. Description
1 62,000 gal, field erected, 22 ft diameter,
Agitator, thickener* feed tank 1
Pump, thickener feed 2
Thickener 1
Tank, thickener overflow 1
Pump, thickener overflow recycle 2
Pump, thickener underflow to 2
filter
Sump pump, thickener tunnel 1
Rotary drum filter 3
Pump, filtrate recycle 1
Conveyor, horizontal belt 3
Conveyor, sloping belt 1
22 ft high, open top, carbon steel, rubber
lined with four 22 in. x 22 ft baffles off-
set 3-1/2 in. from wall
30 hp, 84 in. diameter, rubber coated
1374 gpm, 75-ft head, rubber lined, 60-hp
motor
82 ft diameter, stainless steel- or rubber-
lined concrete basin with rake and motor
(1 spare)
25,920 gal, 21 ft diameter, 10 ft high,
carbon steel, rubber lined with flat bottom
864 gpm, 75-ft head, rubber lined, 30-hp
motor
510 gpm, 75-ft head, rubber lined, 25-hp
motor
5 gpm, 10-ft head, carbon steel, 1/4-hp motor
500 ft2 surface area, 12 ft diameter, 14-ft-
long drum, stainless steel (wetted parts),
vacuum and receiver pumps included
364 gpm, 75-ft head, rubber lined, 15-hp motor
71 tons/hr, 16 ft long, 16-in. belt, 100
ft/min, 1/2-hp motor
71 tons/hr. 30 ft long, 30-in. belt, 100
ft/min, 1/2-hp motor
32
-------
TABLE 10. QUANTITIES OF SLUDGE FOR DISPOSAL - ALL CASE VARIATIONS
Amount of waste
for disposal, Ib/hr
« Sludge -
Case flyash blending3
Base case0
Variation from base case
200 MW
1500 MW
Existing, 25-yr remaining life
Existing, 20-yr remaining life
Existing, 15-yr remaining life
2% S in coal
5% S in coal
12% ash in coal
20% ash in coal
Lime scrubbing process
5 mi to disposal
10 mi to disposal
7000 hr/yr operating profile
200 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
1500 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
Sludge - flyash layering
1.3 limestone stoichiometry
156,777d
64,107
470,328
160,264
160,264
160,264
98,615
214,433
133,832
182,494
131,767
156,777
156,777
156,777
64,107
470,328
156,777
145,632
Gypsum"
141,728e
57,953
425,195
144,879
144,879
144,879
99,296
179,945
116,758
169,715
136,628
141,728
141,728
141,728
57,953
425,195
-
—
a. Landfill disposal of blended 60% solids sludge and dry ESP-
collected flyash at a bulk density of 97 lb/ft3.
b. Landfill disposal of 80% solids gypsum at 121 lb/ft3; flyash
collected in scrubber and disposed of with gypsum.
c. New 500-MW plant; 30-year life; coal analysis (by wt) - 3.5% S
(dry), 16% ash; limestone scrubbing process; declining operating
profile (first year) 7,000 hours.
d. Waste is 27% sulfur salts, 12% limestone solids, 35% flyash,
26% water.
e. Waste is 38% sulfur salts, 3% limestone solids, 39% flyash,
20% water.
33
-------
RESULTS
Capital investment and annual revenue requirement estimates for the
base cases and each case variation are shown in Appendix A. A summary
of the capital investment for each case of the sludge - flyash blending
process is shown in Table 11. Annual revenue requirements for the
process are summarized in Table 12. Capital investment for each case of
the gypsum process is summarized in Table 13. Annual revenue require-
ments for each case of the process are summarized in Table 14.
The estimates shown in Appendix A and tables in the text do not
include costs associated with ESP collection of flyash or scrubber
modifications for air oxidation to gypsum. Additional capital invest-
ment for base-case ESP collection of flyash is $9,614,000 and annual
revenue requirements are $1,975,000. Additional capital investment for
base-case air oxidation is $2,303,000 and annual revenue requirements
are $1,005,000 for the base-case gypsum process. These costs can be
included with the disposal system costs in making comparisons with
systems which do not have separate flyash removal or air-oxidation
equipment. For determination of overall scrubbing and disposal costs a
base-case limestone scrubber capital investment of $36,368,000 and
annual revenue requirements of $11,842,000 (22) can be combined with the
appropriate flyash-collection or air-oxidation and disposal costs.
BASE CASE
Capital investment for the base-case sludge - flyash blending
process is $8,605,000, equivalent to 17.2 $/kW. Including flyash
collection the capital investment is $18,219,000, or 36.4 $/kW. Direct
investment, excluding flyash collection and waste transportation and
disposal,is 39% of the total. Mobile equipment costs, consisting of
trucks, loaders, and earthmoving equipment, is 7% and land purchase is
6% of the total.
Capital investment for the base-case gypsum process is $5,411,000,
or 10.8 $/kW. Including scrubber modifications for air oxidation the
capital investment is $7,714,000, or 15.4 $/kW. Direct investment,
excluding air-oxidation scrubber modifications and waste transportation
and disposal, is 35% of the total capital investment. Mobile equipment
cost is 9% and land is 7% of the total.
Annual revenue requirements for the base-case conditions are
$3,772,600, or 1.08 mills/kW, for the sludge - flyash blending process
34
-------
TABLE 11. TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT SUMMARY - SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING
Total capital
Case investment, k$ $/kW
Base case
Variation from base case
200 MW
1500 MW
Existing, 25-yr remaining life
Existing, 20-yr remaining life
Existing, 15-yr remaining life
2% S in coal
5% S in coal
12% ash in coal
20% ash in coal
Lime scrubbing process
5 mi to disposal
10 mi to disposal
7000 hr/yr operating profile
200 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
1500 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
Sludge - flyash layering
1.3 stoichiometry
8,605
6,126
18,282
8,528
8,381
8,276
7,356
10,073
7,917
9,309
8,178
8,969
9,334
8,955
6,268
19,321
8,743
8,160
17.2
30.6
12.2
17.1
16.8
16.6
14.7
20.1
15.8
18.6
16.4
17.9
18.7
17.9
31.3
12.9
17.5
16.3
Basis: Midwest plant location; average basis for cost scaling, mid-1979.
862 and flyash removed to meet NSPS.
Base case: New 500-MW plant with 30-yr life; landfill disposal of dewatered
sulfite sludge and dry flyash blends 1 mi from the scrubber facilities.
35
-------
TABLE 12. SUMMARY OF REVENUE REQUIREMENTS -
SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING
Case
Unit revenue requirement
Total annual $/ton $/ton
amount. k$ Mills/kWh dry sludge wet sludge
Base case
Variation from base case
200 MW
1500 MW
Existing, 25-yr remaining life
Existing, 20- yr remaining life
Existing, 15-yr remaining life
2% S in coal
5Z S in coal
12% ash in coal
202 ash in coal
Lime scrubbing process
5 mi to disposal
10 mi to disposal
7000 hr/yr operating profile
200 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
1500 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
Sludge - flyash layering
1 . 3 stoichiometry
3.773 1
2,779 1
6,922 C
3,852
3,876
3,982 1
3,224 (
4,282 I
3,617 1
3,965
3,650
4,425
4,891
3,801
2,791
7,012
3,866
3,673
.08
.99
1.66
.10
.10
.14
).92
L.22
.03
.13
.04
.26
.40
.09
.00
.67
.10
.04
9.29
16.73
5.69
9.28
9.34
9.59
11.40
8.03
10.88
8.17
10.28
10.90
12.05
9.76
16.80
5.76
9.54
9.73
6.87
12.39
4.20
6.87
6.91
7.10
9.34
5.71
7.72
6.21
7.91
8.07
8.92
6.93
12.44
4.25
7.05
7.19
Basis: Midwest plant location, mid-1980 costs; 7000 hr/yr on-stream time, S02 and flyash
removed to meet NSPS.
Base case: New 500-MW plant with 30-yr life; landfill disposal of 75% solids, sludge and
flyash blending; 1 mi to disposal site from scrubber facilities; transport by truck to
disposal area.
36
-------
TABLE 13. TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT SUMMARY - GYPSUM
Total capital
Case investment, k$ $/kW
Base case
Variation from base case
200 MW
1500 MW
Existing, 25-yr remaining life
Existing, 20-yr remaining life
Existing, 15-yr remaining life
2% S in coal
5% S in coal
12% ash in coal
20% ash in coal
Lime scrubbing process
5 mi to disposal
10 mi to disposal
7000 hr/yr operating profile
200 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
1500 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
5,411
3,964
9,826
5,174
5,115
5,076
4,782
5,884
5,042
5,707
5,315
5,750
6,005
5,672
4,093
10,603
10.8
19.8
6.6
10.3
10.2
10.2
9.6
11.8
10.1
11.4
10.6
11.5
12.0
11.3
20.5
7.1
Basis: Midwest plant location; average basis for cost
scaling, mid-1979. S02 and flyash removed to meet NSPS.
Base case: New 500-MW plant with 30-yr life; landfill
disposal of dewatered (80% solids) gypsum 1 mi from
scrubber facilities.
37
-------
TABLE 14. SUMMARY OF REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - GYPSUM
CO
Unit revenue requirement
Case
Base case
Variation from base case
200 MW
1500 MW
Existing, 25-yr remaining life
Existing, 20-yr remaining life
Existing, 15-yr remaining life
2% S in coal
5% S in coal
12% ash in coal
202 ash in coal
Lime scrubbing process
5 mi to disposal
10 mi to disposal
7000 hr/yr operating profile
200 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
1500 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
Total annual
amount , k$
3,118
2,327
4,961
3,143
3,160
3,227
2,707
3,252
3,018
3,206
3,104
3,694
4,286
3,146
2,401
5,028
Mills/kWh
0.89
1.66
0.47
0.89
0.90
0.92
0.77
0.93
0.86
0.92
0.89
1.05
1.22
0.90
1.72
0.48
$/ton
dry sludge
7.86
14.31
4.17
7.74
7.79
7.96
9.74
6.45
9.23
6.75
8.11
9.31
10.80
7.93
14.75
4.23
$/ton
wet sludge
6.28
11.44
3.33
6.20
6.24
6.37
7.79
5.16
7.39
5.40
6.49
7.45
8.64
6.34
11.79
3.37
Basis: Midwest plant location; mid-1980 costs; 7000 hr/yr on-stream time, S02 and flyash
removed to meet NSFS.
Base case: New plant with 30-yr life; landfill disposal of 80% solids material; 1 mi to
disposal site from scrubber facilities; transport by truck to the disposal area.
-------
and $3,117,500, or 0.89 mill/kWh, for the gypsum process. Including the
additional annual costs of $1,975,000, for separate flyash removal, the
annual revenue requirements for the sludge - flyash blending process are
$5,747,000, or 1.64 mills/kWh. Including the additional annual costs of
$1,005,000 for air oxidation, the annual revenue requirements for the
gypsum process are $4,122,500, or 1.18 mills/kWh.
In terms of quantity of waste, the sludge - flyash blending process
revenue requirements are 6.9 $/ton of wet waste and 9.3 $/ton of dry
solids. Including ESP operation the costs are 10.5 $/ton of wet waste
and 14.2 $/ton of dry solids. The gypsum process annual revenue require-
ments are 6.3 $/ton of wet waste and 7.9 $/ton of dry solids without air-
oxidation costs and 8.3 $/ton of wet waste and 10.4 $/ton of dry solids
with air-oxidation costs included.
Operating labor and supervision is the major direct cost of both
processes. Plant labor and supervision cost is 12% and landfill labor
and supervision cost is 20% of the annual revenue requirements of the
sludge - flyash blending process and 14% and 24% of the requirements of
the gypsum process. Landfill costs for land preparation, fuel, and
maintenance are $129,000, or 0.04 mill/kWh, for the sludge - flyash
blending process and $116,000, or 0.03 mill/kWh, for the gypsum process,
a minor portion of the annual revenue requirements in both cases.
Energy costs are also a minor part of the annual revenue requirements of
both processes.
Tables 15 through 18 show the capital investments and annual
revenue requirements in modular form. They are calculated by processing
or handling area using the same procedures used for the overall economics.
In each area all costs are assigned on the basis of equipment function,
building and land requirements, electrical use, and labor requirements.
The modularized results further illustrate the effects of process
requirements on costs. The relatively high costs of separate flyash
collection and handling account for almost two-thirds of the sludge -
flyash blending capital investment costs. In comparison air-oxidation
modifications are only one-fourth of the gypsum process capital investment.
Other than flyash collection and handling and air-oxidation modifications,
thickening costs are the major capital investment cost. Filtration and
disposal costs are also significant elements in capital investment
costs. Mixing contributes relatively little to capital investment
costs.
Flyash collection and handling is also the largest element of the
sludge - flyash blending process annual revenue requirements, contributing
about 45% of the total. Air-oxidation costs are about 25% of the gypsum
process annual revenue requirements. In contrast to the relatively low
capital investment, disposal costs are a large part of annual revenue
requirements for both processes. Dewatering and mixing annual revenue
requirements are significant but not major cost elements.
39
-------
TABLE 15. MODULAR CAPITAL INVESTMENT - BASE-CASE SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING
Costa by area, k$
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation and site preparation
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal
Mobile equipment
Subtotal direct Investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed Investment
Allowance for startup
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital Investment
$/kW
Flyash
ESP costs handling
495
S3
92
20
159
21
192
1,032
19
1,051
1,051
104
26
214
85
1.480
283
1,763
182
205
2,150
5
86
9,614 2.241
19.2 4.5
Thickening
1,101
47
82
18
59
19
171
1,497
17
1,514
1,514
150
38
308
122
2,132
408
2,540
261
294
3,095
5
123
3,223
6.5
Filtration
333
24
41
9
79
10
86
582
9
591
591
59
14
120
48
832
159
991
102
114
1,207
2
48
1,257
2.5
Mixing Disposal
56
15
27
6
48
6
55
213
5
218
581
218 581
21
5
44
18
306 581
59 157
365 738
37
42 113
444 851
2 522
18 47
464 1,420
0.9 2.8
Total
1.985
139
242
53
345
56
504
3.324
50
3,374
581
3,955
334
83
686
273
5,331
1,066
6,397
582
768
7,747
536
322
18,219
36.4
-------
TABLE 16. MODULAR ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - BASE-CASE SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING
Costs by area, k$
Direct Costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor
Plant
Solids disposal
Process maintenance
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks
Earthmoving equipment
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal direct costs
Indirect Costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance
Cost of capital and taxes
Plant overhead
Administrative overhead
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
Mills /kWh
Flyash
ESP costs handling
166
60
35
6
267
168
193
116
17
494
1,975 761
0.56 0.22
Thickening
149
54
13
6
222
242
277
104
15
638
860
0.25
Filtration
75
27
18
3
123
95
108
52
7
262
385
0.11
Mixing
48
17
10
2
77
35
40
34
5
114
191
0.05
Disposal
745
9
33
88
875
67
122
437
75
701
1,576
0.45
Total
438
745
158
9
33
88
77
17
1,564
607
740
744
118
2,209
5,748
1.64
-------
TABLE 17. MODULAR CAPITAL INVESTMENT - BASE-CASE GYPSUM
Costs bv area, kS
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation and site preparation
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal
Mobile equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
$/kW
Scrubber
modifications Thickening
686
117
17
28
147
35
117
1,147
18
1,165
1,165
131
32
285
125
1,738
348
2,086
228
250
2,564
8
150
2,303 2,722
4.6 5.4
Filtration
493
57
8
14
73
17
57
719
9
728
728
64
16
140
61
1,009
202
1,211
112
145
1,468
4
93
1,565
3.1
Disposal Total
1,179
174
25
42
220
52
174
1,866
27
1,893
498 498
498 2,391
195
48
425
186
498 3,245
99 649
597 3,894
340
72 467
669 4,701
391 403
64 307
1,124 7,714
2.3 15.4
42
-------
TABLE 18. MODULAR ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - BASE-CASE GYPSUM
U>
Costs by area, k$
Air oxidation
modifications
Direct Costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor
Plant
Solids disposal
Process maintenance
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks
Earthmoving equipment
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal direct costs
Indirect Costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance
Cost of capital and taxes
Plant overhead
Administrative overhead
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements 1,005
Mills/kWh 0.29
Thickening
294
64
20
11
389
201
234
185
29
649
1,038
0.30
Filtration
144
32
28
6
210
1L5
135
91
14
355
56r->
0.16
Disposal
745
7
30
79
861
52
96
430
75
653
1,") .14
0.43
Total
438
745
96
7
30
79
48
17
1,460
368
465
706
118
1,657
4,122
1.18
-------
CASE VARIATIONS
Case variations for both processes were calculated to define cost
sensitivities to power plant size using both the declining-load and
constant-load operating schedules, power plant age, coal sulfur content,
coal ash content, distance to disposal site, and lime instead of lime-
stone scrubbing. The sludge - flyash blending process was also evalu-
ated using two additional case variations of limestone stoichiometry and
disposal of dewatered sludge and flyash in unblended alternate layers.
In addition to first-year annual revenue requirements, lifetime
revenue requirements were determined for both processes using three
power plant sizes and both the declining-load and constant-load
schedules.
Power Plant Size and Operating Schedule
Declining-Load Operating Schedule—
In addition to the 500-MW base-case condition, estimates were made
for 200- and 1500-MW power plants using the same conditions as were used
for the base case. Capital investments and annual revenue requirements
for the sludge - flyash blending processes are shown in Tables 19 and
20, and for the gypsum processes in Tables 21 and 22. The same data are
summarized graphically in Figures 7-12, illustrating the decrease in
disposal costs with increase in plant size. Capital investment for the
sludge - flyash blending process increases only 40% from the 200-MW to
the 500-MW plant sizes and 158% from the 200-MW to the 1500-MW plant
sizes, compared to power output increases of 150% and 650%. For the
gypsum process the capital investment increases only 37% and 148% for
the same power output increases. Most of the differences in capital
cost between the power plant sizes are a result of lower process equip-
ment costs and mobile equipment costs relative to units of power output.
Land costs, which are directly related to the quantity of waste produced,
increase in proportion to power plant size.
Annual revenue requirements show the same disproportionately
smaller increases in relation to power plant size. In this case the
cause is smaller increases in operating labor and supervision for both
plant and disposal equipment, relative to power plant size. Landfill
costs, which are directly related to quantity of waste, increase in
proportion to power plant size.
Constant-Load Operating Schedule—
Estimates were also made for the three power plant sizes using a
constant-load operating schedule of 7000 hr/yr for the 30-year life of
the power plant. The effect of this variation, resulting in a total
operating lifetime of 210,000 hours instead of the 127,500 hours of the
base-case declining-load operating schedule, is to increase land require-
ments for waste disposal, resulting in the increases in capital invest-
ment. Similarly, the only change in first-year annual revenue require-
ments is to increase the costs of capital and taxes which are based on
44
-------
TABLE 19. CAPITAL INVESTMENT ANALYSIS - SLUDGE - FLYASH BLE11DING
Capital investment3
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation,
roads and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks
and earthmoving equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect-engineering contractor
expense
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and
modification
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
200
k$
1,211
117
122
44
284
52
504
2,334
35
2,369
451
2,820
288
72
511
211
3,902
780
4,682
423
562
5,667
221
238
6,126
MW
Percent
of total
19.8
1.9
2.0
0.8
4.6
0.8
8.2
38.1
0.6
38.7
7.3
46.0
4.7
1.2
8.4
3.4
63.7
12.7
76.4
6.9
9.2
92.5
3.6
3.9
100.0
500
k$
1,985
139
242
53
345
56
504
3,324
50
3,374
581
3,955
334
83
686
273
5.331
1,066
6,397
582
768
7,747
536
322
8,605
MW
Percent
of total
23.1
1.6
2.8
0.6
4.0
0.7
5.8
38.6
0.6
39.2
6.8
46.0
3.9
0.9
8.0
3.2
62.0
12.3
74.3
6.8
8.9
90.0
6.3
3.7
100.0
1500
k$
4,152
214
1,264
85
540
80
954
7,289
109
7,398
1,307
8,705
472
118
1,316
497
11,108
2,222
13,330
1,202
1,600
16.132
1.607
543
18.282
MW
Percent
of total
22.7
1.2
6.9
0.5
3.0
0.4
5.2
39.9
0.6
40.5
7.1
47.6
2.6
0.7
7.2
2.7
60.8
12.1
72.9
6.6
8.7
88.2
8.8
3.0
100.0
Basis
New plant (30-year life). Midwest plant location, mid-1979 costs.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5Z sulfur (dry basis), 16Z ash.
Fly ash and SC<2 removed to meet NSPS.
Limestone process with 1.5 stoichioraetry based on S02 removed.
Landfill disposal 1 mile from scrubber facilities, trucks used for transport of treated
material to disposal site.
-------
TABLE 20. ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING
Annual revenue requirements, $a
Direct Costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance — plant labor and supervision,
U7. of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Total direct costs
200 MW
328,500
595,700
112,800
3,600
13,500
35,900
55,400
17,000
1,162,400
1,162,400
500 MW
438,000
744,600
158,200
8,700
32,900
87,800
76,900
17,000
1 , 564 , 1 00
1 ,564,100
1500 MW
547,500
1,191,400
348,200
26,000
98,800
263,400
161,900
25,500
2,662,700
2,662,700
Indirect Costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83% of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6% of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50% of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10% of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirement
443,700
526,800
553,500
92,400
606,600
740,000
743,600
118.300
1,616,400 2,208,500
2,778,800 3,772,600
1,263,100
1,572,300
1,250,400
173.900
4,259,700
6,922,400
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
Mins/Kwn
S/wet ton
S/dry ton
1.99
12.39
16.73
1.08
6.87
9.29
0.66
4.20
5.69
Basis
New plant (30-year life), Midwest plant location, mid-1980 costs.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% sulfur (dry basis), 16% ash.
Fly ash and SC>2 removed to meet NSPS.
Limestone process with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed.
Landfill disposal 1 mile from scrubber facilities, trucks used for transport of treated
material to disposal site.
46
-------
TABLE 21. CAPITAL INVESTMENT ANALYSIS - GYPSUM
200 MW
Process equipment
piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation,
roads and railroads
Electrical
Instrumental ion
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks
and earthmoving equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal -direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect-engineering contractor
expense
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and
modification
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
kS
794
124
17
38
180
44
174
1,371
20
1,391
381
1,772
172
43
329
148
2,464
493
2.957
258
355
3.570
165
229
3,964
Percent
of total
20.1
3.1
0.4
1.0
4.5
1.1
4.4
34.6
0.5
35.1
9.6
44.7
4.3
1.1
8.4
3.7
62.2
12.4
74.6
6.5
9.0
90.1
4.2
5.7
100.0
Capital
500
k$
1,179
174
25
42
220
52
174
1,866
27
1,893
498
2,391
195
48
425
186
3.245
649
3,894
340
467
4,701
403
307
5,411
investment
MW
Percent
of total
21.7
3.2
0.5
0.8
4.1
1.0
3.2
34.5
0.5
35.0
9.2
44.2
3.6
0.9
7.9
3.4
60.0
12.0
72.0
6.3
8.6
86.9
7.5
S.6
100.0
1500 MW
k$
2,215
290
47
59
374
55
294
3,334
50
3,384
942
4,326
264
66
688
292
5,636
1,127
6,763
582
812
8,157
1.201
468
9,326
Percent
of total
22.4
3.0
0.5
0.6
3.8
0.6
3.0
33.9
0.5
34.4
9.5
43.9
2.7
0.7
7.0
3.0
57.3
11.5
68.8
5.9
8.3
83.0
12.2
4.8
100.0
Basis
New plant (30-year life); Midwest plant location, mid-1979 costs.
Coal analysis (by wt); 3.5% sulfur (dry basis). 162 ash.
Fly ash removed with S02 to meet NSPS.
Limestone process with 1.1 stoichioraetry based on S02 removed.
Landfill disposal of SOX solids material 1 mile from scrubber facilities, trucks
used for transport of treated material to disposal site.
47
-------
TABLE 22. ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - GYPSUM
Annual revenue requirements, $a
Direct Costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance — plant labor and supervision,
4Z of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Total direct costs
200-MW
328,500
595,700
70,900
2,700
12,200
32,500
22,500
17.000
1,082,000
1,082,000
500-MW
438,000
744,600
95,600
6,600
29,800
79,400
49,300
17,000
1,460,300
1,460,300
1500-MW
547,500
1,042,400
173,000
19,400
89,300
238,100
116,300
25,500
2,251,500
2,251,500
Indirect Costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83X of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal Indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
279,500
343,000
529,800
92.400
368,100
465,300
705,500
118.300
638,700
845,000
1,067,400
159.000
1,244,700 1,657,200 2,710,100
2,326,700 3,117,500 4,961,600
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
Mills /kWh
$/wet ton
$/dry ton
1.66
11.44
14.31
0.89
6.28
7.86
0.47
3.33
4.17
Basis
New plant (30-year life), Midwest plant location, mid-1980 costs.
Coal analysis (by wt); 3.5Z sulfur (dry basis), 16Z ash.
Fly ash and S02 removed to meet NSPS.
Limestone process with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed.
Landfill disposal 1 mile from scrubber facilities, trucks used for transport
of treated material to disposal site.
48
-------
20
VO
16
v>
32
12
0)
B
(0
-------
10
Cn
O
Ol
>-l
•H
a
o-
ai
01
3
01
I
T
O Sludge - flyash blending
X Gypsum
I
I
_L
_L
250
500
1250
1500
750 1000
Power plant size, MW
Figure 8. Effect of power plant size on annual revenue requirements. New plant.
-------
a.
a)
u
32
§ 24
B
CO
I
16
0
T
O Sludge - flyash blending
X Gypsum
I
I
I
I
0
250
500
1500
750 1000 1250
Power plant size, MW
Figure 9. Effect of power plant size on unit capital investment. New plant,
-------
2.5
in
to
01
cr
0)
01
0)
01
l-l
c
at
I
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
T
T
O Sludge - flyash blending
X Gypsum
I
I
I
I
I
X—
I
250
500
1250
1500
750 1000
Power plant size, MW
Figure 10. Effect of power plant size on annual unit revenue requirements. New plant.
-------
20
wn
W
0>
•O
o
co
B
O
•CO-
CO
4-1
C
a)
cr
a>
i-i
ai
3
0)
-------
CO
4J
B
•H
3
0)
u
C
HI
OJ
u
(0
C
15
00
•o
3
i-H
» 12
4-1
0)
3
§
I
Sludge - flyash
blending
X Gypsum
I
I
1
I
I
1
0
250
500
1250
1500
750 1000
Power plant size, MW
Figure 12. Effect of power plant size on annual unit revenue requirements. New plant.
-------
capital Investment. In both cases the increase in costs is slight, as
shown in Table 23 and graphically in Figures 13 and 14, as compared to
Figures 7 and 8.
TABLE 23. CAPITAL INVESTMENT AND ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS
FOR DECLINING- AND CONSTANT-LOAD CONDITIONS, k$
,200 HW 500 MW 1,500 MW
Load schedule Declining Constant Declining Constant Declining Constant
8,955 18,282 19,321
3,801 6,922 7,012
5,672 9,826 10,603
3.146 4,962 '..,028
Sludge fly ash blending
Capital Investment
Annual revenue requirements
Gypsum
Capital investment
Annual revenue requirements
6. 126
2,779
3,964
2,327
6,268
2,791
4,093
2,401
8,605
3,773
5,411
3,118
Total Lifetime Revenue Requirements—
In addition to first-year annual revenue requirements, lifetime
revenue requirements were calculated for the three power plant sizes for
both 30-year declining-load operating schedule and 30-year constant-load
operating schedule. The declining-load schedule uses the load schedule
described in the premises with a 127,500-hour operating lifetime. The
constant-load schedule consists of a 7,000 hr/yr, 210,000-hour operating
lifetime.
The yearly and cumulative detailed results of the declining-load
schedule are shown in Appendix B and are summarized in Table 24 and
Figure 15. The results are given as both actual cost and as costs
discounted at 11.6% to the initial year as described in the premises.
The same detailed results for the constant-load schedule are shown in
Appendix C and are summarized in Table 25 and Figure 16.
jfower Plant Remaining Life
Power plants with remaining lives of 25, 20, and 15 years, operating
at 7000 hr/yr at the same conditions as the base case, were evaluated.
Compared to the base cases, both processes have small decreases in
capital investment as shown below and in Figure 17.
Remaining life, years 30 (base easel 25 20 15 —
k$ $/kW k$ $/kW k$ $/kW k$ $/kW
Sludge - flyash blending
Process equipment 1,985 4.0 2,026 4.1 2,026 4.1 2,026 4.1
Land 536 1.1 389 0.8 242 0.5 137 0.3
Total capital investment 8,605 17.2 8,528 17.1 8,381 16.8 8,276 16.6
Gypsum
Process equipment 1,179 2.3 1,183 2.4 1,183 2.4 1,183 2.4
Land 403 0.8 154 0.3 95 0.2 56 0.1
Total capital investment 5,411 10.8 5,174 10.3 5,115 10.2 5,076 10.2
55
-------
20
B
-------
10
(U
A
-------
TABLE 24. SUMMARY OF LIFETIME REVENUE REQUIREMENTS FOR SYSTEMS OPERATING ON
A DECLINING-LOAD SCHEDULE OVER THE 30-YEAR LIFE OF THE POWER PLANT3
in
CO
Caseb
Sludge - tlyash blending
200 MU
500 MW
1500 MW
Gypsum
200 MW
500 MW
1500 MW
a. Basis: 30-vr life - 7000 1
Cumulative actual
lifetime revenue
requirements, $
70,341,600
96,526,800
181,405,400
62,063,000
78,072,400
126,375,500
nr for 10 vr. 5000 hr f
Lifetime average
unit revenue requirements
Mills/kWh
2.76
1.51
0.95
2.43
1.22
0.66
or 5 vr. 350
S/ton
dry solids
22.95
12.88
8.07
21.00
10.80
4.66
10 hr for 5 v
S/ton
wet solids
17.21
<).66
6.05
16.80
8.64
5.83
r; 1500 hr ft
Cumu lilt ivy
present worth
lifetime revenue
requirements, S
23,903,700
32,801,900
61,730,100
21,047,100
26,513,400
42,998,600
jr 10 yr; Midwest p
Level! zed unit
revenue requirements
Mills/kWh
2.40
1.32
0.83
2.12
1.07
0.56
lant locatio
$/tun
dry solids
7.80
4.38
2.75
7.12
3.67
1.98
in, mid-1980
S/ton
wet solids
5.85
3.28
2.06
5.70
2.93
1.59
revenue
requirements; constant labor cost assumed over the life of the project.
b. New plants, coal analysis (wt Z): 3.5* S (dry), 16Z ash, flyash and S02 removed to meot NSPS.
c. Discounted at ll.6Z to initial year.
d. Equivalent to discounted process cost over life of power plant.
-------
3.0
v£>
7J 2.4
plant operating with declining annual operating load over 30-yr life.
New
-------
TABLE 25. SUMMARY OF LIFETIME REVENUE REQUIREMENT FOR SYSTEMS OPERATING
AT CONSTANT LOAD OF 7000 HR/YR DURING 30-YEAR LIFE OF THE POWER PLANT3
Lifetime average
Caseb
Sludge blending
200 MW
500 MW
1500 MW
Gypsum
200 MW
500 MW
1500 MW
Cumulative actual
lifetime
revenue requirements, $
85,472,400
118,395,300
222,596,600
77,691,300
98,403,500
161.159,500
unit
Mills/kUh
2.04
1.13
0.71
1.B5
0.94
0.51
revenue requirements
$/ton
dry solids
17.16
9.72
6.09
15.96
8.26
4.51
$/ton
wet solids
12.70
7.19
4.51
12.77
6.61
3.61
Cumulative present
worth lifetime
revenue requirements, $c
25,546,100
35.351,400
66,989,700
22,691,000
28,800,400
47,321,000
Levelized unit
revenue requirements
Mills/lcWh
2.20
1.22
0.77
1.95
0.99
0.54
$/ton
dry solids
5.14
2.91
1.84
4.66
2.43
1.33
$/ton
wet solids
3.80
2.15
1.36
3.73
1.94
1.06
a. Basis: Midwest plant location; 1980 revenue requirements; 30-yr life; 7,000 hr/yr operation; 210,000 hr total operating time.
b. New plant; coal analysis (wt X): 3.5Z S (dry), 16% ash; flyash and S02 removed to meet NSFS.
c. Discounted at U.6Z to initial year.
d. Equivalent to discounted process cost over life of power plant.
-------
3.0
T
M
(0
w
-------
NS
I
4J
CO
01
10
-O-
15
Sludge - flyash
blending
Gypsum
20
Remaining plant life, yr
25
Figure 17. Effect of remaining plant life on capital investment,
500-MW plant.
-------
30 (base case)
k$
3,773
3,116
Mills/kWh
1.08
0.89
25
k$
3,852
3,143
Mills/kWh k$
1.10
0.89
3,876
3,160
20
Mills/kWh
1.10
0.90
15
k$
3,982
3,227
Mills/kWh
1.14
0.92
Process equipment and land costs produce the differences in capital
investment shown. The difference in process equipment costs is a
result of using a 9000 Btu/kWh heat rate for new plants and 9200 Btu/kWh
for existing plants. Land costs are based on the area needed to dispose
of the waste produced during the remaining life of the plant.
Annual revenue requirements, shown below and in Figure 18, increase
primarily as a result of increased capital charges. The increase in
capital charges is due to accelerated depreciation charges, partially
offset by a lower interim replacement allowance, as discussed in the
premises.
Remaining life, years
Sludge flyash blending
Gypsum
Sulfur in Coal
The sulfur content of coal was evaluated at 2% and 5% in addition
to the base case 3.5%. The primary effects on capital investment are on
process equipment size, mobile equipment required, and land requirements
as shown below and in Figure 19.
Sulfur in coal, wt % dry 2.0 3.5 (base case) 5.0
k$ $/kW k$ $/kW _ k$ $/kW
Sludge - flyash blending
Process equipment 1,532 3.1 1,985 4.0 2,465 4.9
Mobile equipment 517 1.0 581 1.2 698 1.4
Land 340 0.7 536 1.1 735 1.5
Total capital investment 7,356 14.7 8,605 17.2 10,073 20.1
Gypsum
Process equipment 1,031 2.1 1,179 2.3 1,290 2.6
Mobile equipment 435 0.9 498 1.0 575 1.2
Land 284 0.6 403 0.8 511 1.0
Total capital investment 4,782 9.6 5,411 10.8 5,884 11.8
Annual revenue requirements are shown below and in Figure 20. The
differences are largely a result of differences in conversion costs,
particularly those related to transportation and landfill operations,
resulting from the different quantities of waste handled.
Sulfur in coal, wt % dry _ 2.0 _ 3.5 (base case)
_ _ _
k$ Mills/kWh k$ Mills/kWh k$ Mills/kWh
Sludge - flyash blending 3,224 0.92 3,773 1.08 4,282 1.22
Gypsum 2,707 0.77 3,118 0.89 3,252 0.95
63
-------
ON
s
g
3
er
-------
ON
in
10
c
0)
I! 6
(0
I
ra
4J
X Sludge - flyash blending
0 Gypsum
I
012 345
Sulfur in coal, % by wt (dry basis)
Figure 19. Effect of sulfur content of coal on capital investment,
New 500-MW plant.
-------
Ov
co
jj
e
(1)
I
Sludge - flyash
° blending
X Gypsum
I
I
01 234 5
Sulfur in coal, % by wt (dry basis)
Figure 20. Effect of sulfur content of coal on annual revenue require-
ments. New 500-MW plant.
-------
Ash in Coal
The ash content of the coal was evaluated at 12% and 20% in addition
to the base case 16%. As in the case of sulfur in coal, ash content
affects capital investment primarily in the size of process equipment,
mobile equipment, and land requirements, as shown below and in
Figure 21.
Ash in coa.1, wt % 12 16 (base case) 20
k$ $/kW k$ $/kW k$ $/kW
Sludge - flyash blending
Process equipment 1,788 3.6 1,985 4.0 2,173 4.3
Mobile equipment 581 1.2 581 1.2 665 1.3
Land 459 0.9 536 1.1 627 1.3
Total capital investment 7,917 15.8 8,605 17.2 9,309 18.6
Gypsum
Process equipment 1,109 2.2 1,179 2.4 1,271 2.5
Mobile equipment 435 0.9 498 1.0 498 1.0
Land 329 0.7 403 0.8 480 1.0
Total capital investment 5,042 10.] 5,411 10.8 5.707 11-4
Annual revenue requirements, as shown below and in Figure 22, were
affected by conversion costs, particularly transportation and landfill
operations.
Ash in coal, wt % 12 16 (base case) 20
k$ Mills/kWh k$ Mills/kWh _k$ Mills/kWh
Sludge - flyash blending 3,617 1.03 3,773 1.08 3,965 1.13
Gypsum 3,018 0.86 3,118 0.89 3,206 0.92
Lime Versus Limestone
The use of lime instead of limestone as the scrubber absorbent was
evaluated for both the sludge - flyash blending process and the gypsum
process. From a disposal standpoint the main process differences were
a 10% solids slurry from the scrubbers instead of 15% and a 1.0:1.0
absorbent to sulfur-removed stoichiometry for both cases instead of
1.5:1.0 for the sludge - flyash blending process and 1.1:1.0 for the
gypsum process when using limestone.
The main effects on capital investment are a reduction in process
equipment costs and land requirements because of the absence of unreacted
absorbent in the waste slurry. For the gypsum process the differences
are small because of the small differences in stoichiometry between the
lime and limestone processes.
67
-------
oo
B
I
4-1
co
0)
(X
OJ
10
10
I
I
I
12
Sludge - flyash
blending
X Gypsum
I
14 16 18
Ash in coal, % by wt (wet basis)
Figure 21. Effect of ash in coal on capital investment.
20
22
New 500-MW plant.
-------
VO
-------
Gypsum
Base case
k$
1.985
581
536
8,605
$/kW
4.0
1.2
1.1
17.2
Lime
k$
1,838
581
452
8,178
?/kW
3.7
1.2
0.9
16.4
Base case
k?
1,179
498
403
5,411
$/kW
2.4
1.0
0.8
10.8
Lime
k$
1,167
455
389
5,315
$/kW
2.3
0.9
0.8
10.6
Process equipment
Mobile equipment
Land
Total capital investment
Annual revenue requirements, as shown below, are affected by lower
transportaion and landfill operation costs. The effects are slight in
the gypsum process because of the small stoichiometry differences.
Sludge - flyash blending Gypsum
Base case Lime Base case Lime
k$ Mills/kWh k$ Mills/kWh k$ Mills/kWh k$ Mills/kV:
3,773 1.08 3,650 1.04 3,118 0.89 3,104 0.89
Distance to Disposal Site
Distances of 5 and 10 miles to the disposal site were compared to
the base-case distance of 1 mile for both processes. In these case
variations the only capital-investment direct cost significantly
affected is mobile equipment as shown below and in Figure 23.
Distance to disposal site 1 mile (base case) 5 miles 10 miles
k$ $/kW k$ $/kW k$ $/kH
Sludge - flyash blending
Mobile equipment 581 1.2 777 1.6 992 2.0
Total capital investment 8,605 17.2 8,969 17.9 9,334 18.7
Gypsum
Mobile equipment 498 1.0 712 1.4 849 1.7
Total capital investment 5,411 10.8 5,750 11.5 6,005 12.0
Annual revenue requirements were increased by costs related to
transportation—particularly disposal labor and supervision and truck
fuel and maintenance—as shown below and in Figure 24.
70
-------
10
B 6
-------
to
C
-------
Distance to disposal site 1 mile (base case) 5 miles 10 miles
k$ Mills/kWh jc$ Mills/kWh k$ Mills/kWh
Sludge - flyash blending
Disposal labor 745 0.21 1,042 0.30 1,191 0.34
Trucks 33 0.01 110 0.03 214 0.06
Total annual revenue
requirements 3,773 1.08 4,425 1.26 4,891 1-40
Gypsum
Disposal labor 745 0.21 1,042 0.30 1,192 0.34
Trucks 30 0.01 99 0.03 194 0.06
Total annual revenue
requirements 3,118 0.89 3,694 1.05 4,286 1.22
Sludge - Flyash Blending Stoichiometry
A case variation for the sludge - flyash blending process was made
using a 1.3:1.0 calcium carbonate to sulfur-removed Stoichiometry instead
of the base-case 1.5:1.0 stoichioaetry. The main effects are a reduc-
tion in process equipment costs and land requirements. Process equip-
ment cost is 1,771 k$, or 3.5 $/kW, and land cost is 497 k$, or 1.0
$/kW, compared to the base-case process equipment cost of 1,985 k$, or
4.0 $/kW, and land cost of 536 k$, or 1.1 $/kW. Total capital invest-
ment is 8,160 k$, or 16.3 $/kW, for the 1.3:1.0 Stoichiometry process as
compared to 8,605 k$, or 17.2 $/kW, for the base case.
Annual revenue requirements are affected by slight reductions in
land preparation and transportation costs, and by costs related to
capital investment. Annual revenue requirements for the 1.3:1.0
Stoichiometry process are 3,673 k$, or 1.04 mills/kWh, as compared to
3,773 k$, or 1.08 mills/kWh, for the base case.
Sludge - Flyash Layering
For the sludge - flyash blending process a case variation was
determined for separate transportation of dewatered sludge and flyash to
the disposal site where they were dumped in alternate layers. The major
differences between the layering disposal method and the base case are
mobile equipment costs resulting from the more complex landfill operations
in which two materials are deposited simultaneously. Mobile equipment
cost is 751 k$, or 1.5 $/kW, for the layering method, compared to 581
k$, or 1.2 $/kW, for the base case. Total capital investment for the
layering method is 8,743 k$, or 17.5 $/kW, compared to 8,605 k$, or 17.2
$/kW, for the base case.
Annual revenue requirements increase slightly in the layering case
by additional equipment operating and maintenance costs, offset by
slightly lower electrical costs. Annual revenue requirements for the
layering case are 3,866 k$, or 1.10 mills/kWh, compared to 3,773 k$, or
1.08 mills/kWh, for the base case.
73
-------
Waste Production Rate
The rate of waste production differs for most cases. In several
cases the waste rate is the most significant variable for the case. The
annual revenue requirements were calculated as unit revenue requirements
based on dollars per ton on the basis of wet waste and of dry solids
produced. These unit revenue requirements for a range of waste produc-
tion rates are shown in Figures 25 and 26.
Land Requirements
Land requirements are almost completely a function of disposal
requirements, based on the premise conditions for percent solids, bulk
density, and landfill depth. The land requirements in acres and as a
percentage of total capital investment are shown in Table 26. The land
requirements range from 756 acres for the 1500-MW plant, sludge - flyash
blending process with a constant 7000 hr/yr operating schedule to 16
acres in the 15-year-old 500-MW plant with the gypsum process. For the
base cases, the sludge - flyash blending process requires 153 acres and
the gypsum process requires 115 acres. In contrast to the large acreage
requirements, land costs range from 1% to 20% of the total capital
investment and for most cases are less than 10%.
Comparison with Other Waste Disposal Processes
The sludge - flyash blending process and the gypsum process can
also be compared with untreated-sludge ponding and the chemical-
treatment processes previously evaluated (3). Table 27 shows summarized
capital investments and annual revenue requirements for untreated ponding,
the three chemical-treatment processes previously evaluated, and the
sludge - flyash blending and gypsum processes. Areas in which the major
cost differences occur are shown separately. In the untreated-sludge
ponding process the 15% solids sludge is pumped directly to an earthen-
diked pond. In the Dravo ponding process it is dewatered to 35% solids,
treated with additives, and pumped to a pond where it settles and hardens.
The similar Dravo landfill process uses the same process but the hardened
waste is removed and discarded as landfill, thus reducing land require-
ments. Both the IUCS and Chemfix processes treat 60% solids dewatered
sludge with chemical additives and discard it as landfill.
The capital investments of the seven processes are ranked below.
Disposal only Scrubbers + disposal
k$ $/kW k$ $/kW
Gypsum + air oxidation 7,714 15.4 44,082 88.2
IUCS 10,717 21.4 47,085 94.2
Dravo landfill 12,670 25.3 49,038 98.1
Chemfix 13,531 27.1 49,849 99.7
Untreated ponding 17,211 34.4 53,579 107.2
Sludge - flyash
blending + ESP units 18,219 36.4 54,587 109.2
Dravo ponding 24,114 48.2 60,482 121.0
74
-------
15
(0
•o
o
en 12
u
-------
20
-------
TABLE 26. LAND REQUIREMENTS AND COSTS
Sludge - flyash blending Gypsum
Z capital
Case Acres investment
Base case
Variation from base case
200 MW
1500 MW
Existing, 25-year remaining life
Existing, 20-year remaining life
Existing, 15-year remaining life
2Z sulfur in coal
52 sulfur in coal
12% ash in coal
20% ash in coal
Lime scrubbing process
5 miles to disposal
10 miles to disposal
7000 hr/yr operating profile
200 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
1500 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
Sludge fly ash layering
1.3 stoichiometry
153
63
459
111
69
39
97
210
131
179
129
153
153
252
104
756
153
142
6
4
9
5
3
2
5
7
6
7
6
6
6
10
6
14
6
6
% capital
Acres investment
115
47
343
44
27
16
81
146
94
137
111
115
115
188
77
565
-
8
4
12
3
2
1
6
9
7
3
7
7
7
12
7
19
a. The unit cost of land for all cases is $3500/acre.
77
-------
TABLE 27. BASE-CASE COST COMPARISON OF SEVEK DISPOSAL ALTERNATIVES
Untreated sludge
oonding
Capital investment
Fond construction
Mobile equipment
Other direct investment
Total direct investment
Land
Other capital investment
Total
Total with ESP or oxidation
Total with scrubbers8
Annual revenue requirements
Raw materials
Conversion
<;a Total direct costs
Indrect costs
Total
Total with ESP or oxidation
Total with scrubbers
Lifetime revenue requirements
Total
Discounted totalf
k$
7,251
1.914
9,165
1,423
6,623
17,211
53,579
577
577
2,703
3,280
15,122
97,758
33,612
Z
42
11
53
8
39
100
18
18
82
100
Sludge-fly ash
blending
k$
581
3.374
3,955
536
4,114
8,605u
18,219b
54,587b
1,564
1,564
2,209
J.773
5,748d
17,590d
96,527
32,802
*
7
3j
46
6
48
100
41
41
59
100
Gypsum
k$
498
1,893
2,391
403
2,617
5,411
7,714c
44,082=
1.460
1,460
1,657
3,117
4,122e
15,964s
78,072
26,513
X
9
35
44
8
48
100
47
47
53
100
Dravo
ponding
k$
7,410
4.943
12,353
1,450
10,311
24,114
60,482
1,840
979
2,819
3,882
6,701
18,543
175,765
62,053
7,
31
JO
51
6
43
100
27
15
42
58
100
Dravo
landfill
k?
739
4,834
5,573
1,007
6,090
12,670
49,038
1,840
1.835
3,676
2,944
6,620
18,462
X
6
38
46
8
48
too
28
28
56
44
100
IUCS
k$
581
4.301
4,882
676
5,159
10,717
47,085
859
1,791
2,650
2,641
5,291
17,133
131,224
45,382
*
6
40
46
6
48
100
16
34
50
50
100
Chemfix
k$
442
5.775
6,217
693
6,621
13,531
49,849
2,177
1,758
3,935
3,053
6,988
18,830
167,942
59,099
Z
3
Ji3
46
5
49
100
31
25
56
44
100
a. Basic limestone scrubber capital investment is 36,368 k$; annual revenue requirements are 11,842 1;$ (22).
b. Includes 9,614 k$ for ESP units.
c. Includes 2,303 k$ for air-oxidation scrubber modifications.
d. Includes 1,975 k$ for ESP units.
e. Includes 1,005 k$ for air-oxidation scrubber operation.
f. Discounted at 11.6Z to initial year.
-------
Important elements in the relative capital cost ranking are pond
construction and the amount of equipment required to dewater and blend
the wastes and additives. In the sludge - flyash blending and gypsum
processes additional equipment is also required to produce dry flyash or
highly oxidized sludge. Land costs, at the $3500/acre used, and mobile
equipment costs are important but not major capital cost elements and
are also partially counteracting.
Pond construction cost is considerably greater than the offsetting
equipment simplification and is largely responsible for the low ranking
of the untreated-sludge ponding alternative. The Dravo ponding option
combines both additional equipment requirements and ponding. Use of a
small pond and landfill disposal considerably improves the Dravo land-
fill alternative ranking, making it similar in capital cost to the other
chemical-fixation processes.
The low ranking of the sludge - flyash blending process, which
combines low equipment costs with low land requirements, is largely a
result of the ESP units, which account for over half of the total capital
costs, excluding scrubbing.
The gypsum process combines several favorable elements. Excluding
air-oxidation costs it has the lowest direct investment, primarily
because of improved dewatering and waste density characteristics and
lack of blending requirements. In addition, the additional capital
costs for air oxidation are only $2,303,000, much less than pond con-
struction.
Annual revenue requirements, based on first-year, 7000-hour
operation, are shown below.
Disposal only Scrubbers + disposal
k$ Mills/kWh k$ Mills/kWh
Untreated ponding 3,280 0.94 15,122 4.32
Gypsum + air oxidation 4,122 1.18 15,964 4.56
IUCS 5,291 1.51 17,133 4.90
Sludge - flyash
blending + ESP units 5,748 1.64 17,590 5.03
Dravo landfill 6,620 1.89 18,462 5.27
Dravo ponding 6,701 1.91 18,543 5.30
Chemfix 6,988 2.00 18,830 5.38
The ranking based on annual revenue requirements illustrates the
effects of conversion and raw material costs. Untreated-sludge ponding,
with low conversion costs and no raw material costs, becomes the least-
expensive process to operate. Raw material costs composing over half of
the direct costs, combined with relatively high conversion costs, result
in low ranking for the Dravo and Chemfix processes. The IUCS process,
with lower raw material costs, is less affected.
79
-------
The sludge - flyash blending process compares more favorably with
the chemical-treatment processes. ESP costs are approximately a third
of the annual revenue requirements for this process but conversion costs
are similar to the chemical-treatment processes and it requires no raw
materials.
The economic advantages of the gypsum process compared to the other
sludge-treatment processes are again evident. Conversion costs are the
lowest of the nonponding processes and the additional costs for air
oxidation are 0.29 mill/kWh compared to 0.56 mill/kWh for ESP operation
and 0.53 and 0.62 mill/kWh for raw materials in the Dravo and Chemfix
processes. Combined with low indirect costs resulting from its
relatively low capital investment, the gypsum process has the smallest
annual revenue requirements of all the alternatives evaluated except
ponding.
80
-------
CONCLUSIONS
The gypsum process has a large advantage over the sludge - flyash
blending process in capital investment and a smaller advantage in annual
revenue requirements. This is true for the base-case conditions and, to
only slightly greater or lesser degree, for all of the case variations
studied. The advantage is, in general, a result of the process chemistry,
the additional processing steps required for the sludge - flyash blending
process, and the superior dewatering and bulk density characteristics of
the gypsum waste. The advantage of the gypsum process is enhanced when
costs for ESP units and air oxidation are included in the waste disposal
process costs.
The sludge - flyash blending process requires equipment for storing
and metering the flyash and for mixing it with the dewatered sludge
which is not required for the gypsum process. Equipment size is smaller
for the sludge - flyash blending process in some respects because flyash
does not enter the dewatering process, but this is counteracted by its
poorer dewatering characteristics. In addition, the stoichiometry of
the basic limestone scrubbing system results in larger amounts of
unreacted limestone in the waste compared to the air-oxidation process.
The overall result is a 50 to 90% larger major-equipment cost (depending
on the case variation) for the sludge - flyash blending process. These
higher equipment costs are a major element in the capital investment and
annual revenue requirement cost differences between the two processes.
The gypsum process has a further advantage in the smaller weight
and volume of waste generated. Although 25 weight percent more sulfur-
salt waste is generated in the gypsum process, because of the additional
oxidation and hydrated water, this is more than compensated for at base-
case stoichiometry conditions by lower quantities of unreacted limestone
and water in the waste. Consequently the total weight of waste produced
is slightly reduced and the total volume substantially reduced. This
has a direct effect on land requirements. It has a less proportional
effect on disposal costs; mobile equipment and labor requirements cannot
vary continuously with waste quantities because of the incremental
nature of the costing units. In general, the gypsum process is also
more economical in elements related to the volume of waste generated but
the effects of these costs are less important in the cost relationship
between the two processes than the effects of major-equipment costs.
81
-------
BASE CASE
Capital investment for the sludge - flyash blending process is 17.2
$/kW for the disposal system and 36.4 $/kW for the system with ESP
capital investment included. Capital investment for the gypsum process
is 10.8 $/kW for the disposal system and 15.4 $/kW for the system including
air-oxidation capital investment. Most of the difference, other than
the large difference between ESP and air-oxidation costs, is a result of
major-equipment costs of 4.0 $/kW for the sludge - flyash blending
process and 2.4 $/kW for the gypsum process. Thickener costs, which are
about half of the equipment costs in dewatering, are much greater for
the poorly settling sulfite-rich sludge of the sludge - flyash blending
process, more than counteracting the larger costs for combined flyash -
sulfate sludge dewatering in the gypsum process.
In addition, about a third of the sludge - flyash blending equip-
ment costs are for flyash handling and blending which are not used in the
gypsum process. Overall major process equipment costs are nearly 70%
larger for the sludge - flyash blending process than for the gypsum
process because of larger thickener requirements and flyash handling and
blending requirements.
In comparison, the capital investment cost advantages of the gypsum
process related to its higher bulk density are relatively minor. Equip-
ment costs for mobile equipment are much less than process equipment
costs and the same number of loaders, trucks, and landfill earthmoving
machines is required for both processes. The smaller sizes of the
equipment in the gypsum process result in a relatively minor cost
reduction.
In general, for the base-case conditions, capital investment is
higher for the sludge - flyash blending process because of higher
thickener costs and because flyash handling and mixing equipment, not
required for the gypsum process, is needed. Relatively minor mobile
equipment and land costs contribute to the cost differences. In com-
paring total capital costs, the sludge - flyash blending process is
further handicapped by high ESP costs compared to air-oxidation capital
investment costs.
Annual revenue requirements for the two base cases are 1.08 mills/kWh
for the sludge - flyash blending process and 0.89 mill/kWh for the
gypsum process. Direct costs, consisting entirely of conversion costs,
are primarily for plant and mobile equipment operating labor and super-
vision for both processes. The labor and supervision costs are 32% of
the sludge - flyash blending process annual revenue requirements and 38%
of the gypsum process annual revenue requirements. The actual labor and
supervision costs are $1,183,000 for both processes, the smaller volume
of gypsum process waste providing no advantage at the base-case conditions
because of the incremental nature of operator requirements. Mobile
equipment operation involved in transportation and placement of the
waste constitutes 63% of the total labor and supervision costs for both
processes.
82
-------
Other direct costs are relatively minor compared to the labor and
supervision costs. Landfill operation costs, consisting of land prepa-
ration and mobile equipment fuel and maintenance, are 9% of the sludge -
flyash blending direct costs and 8% of the gypsum process direct costs.
Utility costs, consisting entirely of electricity, are minor for both
processes.
Total direct costs are 0.45 mill/kWh for the sludge - flyash
blending process and 0.42 mill/kWh for the gypsum process. The remaining
difference in annual revenue requirements is indirect costs based on
capital investment.
When annual revenue requirements of 0.56 mill/kWb. for ESP operation
and 0.29 mill/kWh for air oxidation are included, the difference between
the annual revenue requirements of the processes is more pronounced,
becoming 1.64 mills/kWh for the sludge - flyash blending process and
1.18 mills/kWh for the gypsum process.
CASE VARIATIONS
In the range of premise changes used in the case variations the
gypsum process remains less costly than the sludge - flyash blending
process in both capital investment and annual revenue requirements.
The gypsum process capital costs are approximately three-fifths as large
as the sludge - flyash blending process capital costs and revenue require-
ments are approximately four-fifths as large for all case variations.
Some case variations produce large to moderate changes in disposal costs
for both processes, as shown in Tables 28 and 29. These are those in
which the cost areas affected involve process equipment and operating
labor and supervision, such as plant size, fuel composition, and distance
to the disposal site. Case variations producing large changes in land
and mobile equipment costs have less effect on overall costs because of
the relatively small portion of the overall costs that these elements
represent.
Power Plant Size
Power plant size in the 200-MW to 1500-MW range evaluated has the
largest effect on both capital investment and annual revenue require-
ments. The differences, particularly large in capital investment, are
the result of economics of scale, both in equipment and manpower require-
ments. The differences in capital investment are primarily a result of
lower increases in both process and mobile equipment costs relative to
power output increases. Similarly, annual revenue requirement differences
are primarily a result of lower increases in both process and solids
disposal labor and supervision, relative to power output increases.
Most significantly, the cost relationships between the two processes
are not affected by the disposal-cost variations with size. The gypsum
process remains a considerably less costly process at all three power
Plant sizes. Capital investment for the gypsum process increases about
83
-------
TABLE 28. EFFECT OF CASE VARIATIONS ON TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT
AND ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING
Percent change from base case
Capital Revenue
Variation from base case3 investment requirements
200 MW
1500 MW
Existing, 25-yr remaining life
Existing, 20-yr remaining life
Existing, 15-yr remaining life
2% S in coal
5% S in coal
12% ash in coal
20% ash in coal
Lime scrubbing process
5 mi to disposal
10 mi to disposal
7000 hr/yr operating profile
200 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
1500 MW, 7000 hr/vr operating profile
Sludge - flyash layering
1.3 stoichiometry
-29
112
-1
-3
-4
-15
17
-8
8
-5
4
8
4
-27
125
2
-5
-27
84
2
3
6
-15
12
-4
4
-3
18
30
1
-26
86
2
-3
a. Base case: 500-MW new plant with 30-yr life.
84
-------
TABLE 29. EFFECT OF CASE VARIATIONS ON TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT
AND ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - GYPSUM
Percent change from base case
Capital Revenue
Variation from base casea investment requirements
200 MW
1500 MW
Existing, 25-yr remaining life
Existing, 20-yr remaining life
Existing, 15-yr remaining life
2% S in coal
5% S in coal
12% ash in coal
20% ash in coal
Lime scrubbing process
5 mi to disposal
10 mi to disposal
7000 hr/yr operating profile
200 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
1500 MW, 7000 hr/yr operating profile
-26
82
-4
-5
-6
-12
9
-7
5
-2
6
11
5
-24
96
-20
59
1
1
4
-13
4
-3
3
0
19
37
1
-23
61
a. Base case: 500-MW new plant with 30-yr life.
85
-------
two and one-half times with power plant size increase from 200-MW to
1500-MW, while the sludge - flyash blending process increase is about
three times. Revenue requirements increase about two times for the
gypsum process and about two and one-half times for the sludge - flyash
blending process. Overall, however, the gypsum process retains its cost
advantage at all power plant sizes evaluated.
The same three power plant sizes were also evaluated using a constant-
load operating schedule of 7,000 hr/yr over the power plant life, result-
ing in a 210,000-hour lifetime operating schedule instead of 127,500
hours. The result is to proportionally increase land requirements,
based on the additional amount of waste produced, with minor increases
in capital costs, insignificant increases in first-year annual revenue
requirements, and no change in the relative cost relationships of the
two processes.
Lifetime revenue requirements also show the gypsum process to the
same advantage over the sludge - flyash blending process. The first-
year annual revenue requirements of the gypsum process are 83% of the
first-year annual revenue requirements of the sludge - flyash blending
process. For the lifetime revenue requirements they are 80% of the
sludge - flyash blending process lifetime revenue requirements.
Remaining Life
Remaining power plant lives of 25, 20, and 15 years were compared
to the base-case 30-year remaining life. Land requirements are the only
large capital investment changes and these have little effect on the
total capital investment, which decreases 4% and 6%, respectively, for
the sludge - flyash blending and gypsum processes as the plant remaining
life decreases from 30 to 15 years. First-year annual revenue require-
ments are marginally increased by indirect costs related to the acceler-
ated depreciation rate.
Sulfur in Coal
Coal sulfur contents of 2% and 5%, compared to the base-case 3.5%,
have a considerable effect on both capital investment and annual revenue
requirements of both processes. Coal sulfur increase from 2% to 5%
increases capital investment for the sludge - flyash blending process by
37% and increases capital investment for the gypsum process by 23%. The
capital investment cost differences are a result of changes in process
equipment size, with lesser effects from changes in mobile equipment and
land costs. Annual revenue requirements increase 33% in the sludge -
flyash blending process and 20% in the gypsum process for the same coal
sulfur increases, primarily because of conversion cost increases, particu-
larly disposal labor and supervision costs.
Ash in Coal
Ash content of coal has an effect on both capital investment and
revenue requirements similar to the effect of sulfur, and for the same
86
-------
reasons. The sludge - flyash blending process, with a larger proportion
of the process equipment involved in flyash processing, has a propor-
tionally larger increase in capital costs with increasing ash content
than the gypsum process. Revenue requirements for the two processes
increase moderately, by about 9% for the sludge - flyash blending process
and 6% for the gypsum process as coal ash content increases from 12% to
20%.
Lime Versus Limestone
The use of lime instead of limestone as the absorbent has a much
larger effect on the sludge - flyash blending process than it had on the
gypsum process because of the larger improvement in stoichiometry for
the sludge - flyash blending process. Both process equipment and land
costs were reduced for this process while there was no significant
corresponding decrease for the gypsum process. The result is a 5%
decrease in capital investment for the sludge - flyash blending process
and only a 2% decrease for the gypsum process. The magnitude of these
improvements, however, does not greatly effect the cost relationships of
the two processes. Changes in annual revenue requirements were also
larger for the sludge - flyash blending process and insignificant for
the gypsum process, again with marginal effect on the cost relationships
of the two processes.
Distance to Disposal Site
Distance to disposal site was evaluated at distances of 5 and 10
miles compared to 1 mile for the base case. This case variation
essentially evaluates trucking costs, the only cost affected, in relation
to total disposal costs. The increase in capital investment, consisting
of additional trucks, is slight, 4% at 5 miles and 8% at 10 miles for
the sludge - flyash blending process, and 6% at 5 miles and 11% at 10
miles for the gypsum process with a larger proportion of its equipment
in mobile equipment.
Annual revenue requirements, conversely, have the largest increases
of all case variations studied except power plant size. The sludge -
flyash blending process has increases of 17% and 30% at 5 and 10 miles,
respectively, and the gypsum process has increases of 19% and 37%. The
differences are a result of greatly increased landfill labor and super-
vision costs, which increase 40% and 60% at 5 and 10 miles for each
process, and mobile equipment fuel and maintenance costs which increase
230% and 550% at 5 and 10 miles for both processes.
The results indicate that transportation costs, if conducted by
trucking, are a major consideration in waste disposal if the distances
are more than nominal.
.Sludge - Flyash Layering
Separate transportation of flyash and dewatered sludge to the
disposal site is 2% higher in both capital investment and annual revenue
87
-------
requirements. Process equipment costs are reduced only 2% by elimination
of the blending process while mobile equipment costs are increased 30%,
producing the 2% increase in capital investment. Landfill operations,
primarily mobile equipment fuel and maintenance, account for most of the
annual revenue requirement,increase.
lludge - Flyash Blending 1.3 Stoichiometry
This case variation, which has the effect of reducing the quantity
of sludge by eliminating about 6700 Ib/hr of unreacted limestone from
the waste stream, reduces capital investment by 5% because of smaller
process equipment size. Annual revenue requirements are reduced 3%
because of reduced mobile equipment operating costs. Neither mobile
equipment capital investment nor process and landfill labor and super-
vision costs are reduced.
88
-------
RECOMMENDATIONS
The results of the two waste disposal economic studies completed by
TVA provide a basis of comparison for several disposal alternatives and
establish factors having major influences on cost relationships of the
processes. Many of these factors are continually changing, however.
The two processes evaluated in this report are still in a development
stage; chemical-treatment processes are still evolving. Refinements in
process technology and changes in raw material requirements could
significantly alter the cost relationship of the processes. In addition,
regulations affecting disposal procedures could change the overall costs
of landfill and ponding operations as well as promote process-specific
waste characteristics such as permeability to greater cost significance.
These factors create a need for periodic updating of economic
information on waste disposal methods. Current experimental and operating
data, particularly on air-oxidation and dewatering technology, should be
incorporated into future studies. Vendor modifications to chemical-
treatment processes should also be included. The effects of anticipated
solid waste disposal regulations should be included in disposal costs
and related to process-specific waste characteristics.
89
-------
REFERENCES
1. Laseke, B. A., Jr. EPA Utility FGD Survey; December 1977-January 1978.
EPA-600/7-78-051a, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1978. (NTIS PB 279 Oil)
2. Jones, J. W. Research and Development for Control of Waste Water
Pollution from Flue Gas Cleaning Systems. In: Proceedings of the
Symposium on Flue Gas Desulfurization, New Orleans, Louisiana.
March 1976, Volume II. EPA-600/2-76-136b, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1976.
pp. 579-604. (NTIS PB 262 722)
3. Barrier, J. W., H. L. Faucett, and L. J. Benson. Economics of Dis-
posal of Lime/Limestone Scrubbing Wastes: Untreated and Chemically
Treated Wastes. Bull. Y-123, TVA Office of Agricultural and Chemical
Development, Muscle Shoals, Alabama; EPA-600/7-78-023a, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North
Carolina, 1978. (NTIS PB 281 391)
4. Leo, P. P., and J. Rossoff. Control of Waste and Water Pollution from
Power Plant Flue Gas Cleaning Systems: First Annual R&D Report.
EPA-600/7-76-018, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1976. (NTIS PB 259 211)
5. Fling, R. B., W. M. Graven, F. D. Hess, P. P. Leo, R. C. Rossi, and
J. Rossoff. Disposal of Flue Gas Cleaning Wastes; EPA Shawnee Field
Evaluation - Initial Report. EPA-600/2-76-070, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1976.
(NTIS PB 251 876)
6. Rossoff, J., and R. C. Rossi. Disposal of Byproducts from Non-
regenerable Flue Gas Desulfurization Systems; Inital Report.
EPA-650/2-74-037a, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1974. (NTIS PB 237 114)
7. Leo, P. P., R. B. Fling, and J. Rossoff. Flue Gas Desulfurization
Waste Disposal Study at the Shawnee Power Station. In: Proceedings
of the Symposium on Flue Gas Desulfurization, Hollywood, Florida,
November 1977 (Volume II), F. A. Ayer, ed., EPA-600/7-78-058b,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina, 1978. pp. 496-536. (NTIS PB 282 091)
90
-------
8. Kelso, T. M. Progress Reports of Plant Operations Section of
Emission Control Development Projects, Administrative Files.
Tennessee Valley Authority, Muscle Shoals, Alabama, November-
December 1976 and January-February 1977.
9. Borgwardt, R. H. Sludge Oxidation in Limestone FGD Scrubbers.
EPA-600/7-77-061, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1977. (NTIS PB 268 525)
10. Hydroelectric Power Evaluation, FPC P-35 (1968) and Supplement
No. 1, FPC P-38. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1969.
11. Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Federal Register, 36(247),
Part II, December 23, 1971.
12. Generation - 1977 Fossil Boiler Survey. Electr. World, 187(5):
35-38, March 1, 1977.
13. Slack, A. V., G. G. McGlamery, and H. L. Falkenberry. Economic
Factors in Recovery of Sulfur Dioxide from Power Plant Stack Gas.
J. Air Pollut. Control Assoc., 21(1):9-15, January 1971.
14. Steam-Electric Construction Cost and Annual Production Expenses;
Twenty-Fourth Annual Supplement - 1971. Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, B.C., 1973.
15. Monthly progress report of Bechtel Corporation for EPA Alkali
Scrubbing Test Facility - TVA Shawnee Power Plant. Report period
March 1-31, 1977, Paducah, Kentucky, May 2, 1977.
16. Peters, M. S., and K. D. Timmerhaus. Plant Design and Economics
for Chemical Engineers. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968.
17. Guthrie, K. M. Capital Cost Estimating. Chem. Eng., 76(6) : 114-142,
March 24, 1969.
18. Popper, Herbert. Modern Cost Engineering Technique. McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1970.
19. McGlamery, G. G., R. L. Torstrick, W. J. Broadfoot, J. P.
Simpson, L. J. Henson, S. V. Tomlinson, and J. F. Young. Detailed
Cost Estimates for Advanced Effluent Desulfurization Processes.
Bull. Y-90, TVA Office of Agricultural and Chemical Development,
Muscle Shoals, Alabama; EPA-600/2-75-006, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1975.
(NTIS PB 242 541)
20. Chemical Engineers Handbook. 4th Ed., R. H. Perry and C. H.
Chilton, eds., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1963.
91
-------
21. The Richardson Rapid System. Vol. 1, 3, 4, Richardson Engineering
Services, Inc., Solano Beach, California, 1976.
22. Torstrick, R. L., L. J. Benson, and S. V. Tomlinson. Economic
Evaluation Techniques. Results, and Computer Modeling for Flue Gas
Desulfurization. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on Flue Gas
Desulfurization, Hollywood, Florida, November 1977 (Volume I),
F. A. Ayer, ed., EPA-600/7-78-058a, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 1978. pp. 118-168.
(NTIS PB 282 090)
23. Economic Indicators. Chem. Eng., Vol. 81-83, 1974-1976.
24. Selected Ratios for Privately Owned Electric Utilities - Classes
A and B. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, FPC News, 7(40),
October 4, 1974.
92
-------
APPENDIX A
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT AND ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENT TABLES
ALL PROCESSES AND CASE VARIATIONS
93
-------
TABLE A-l. SLUDGE BLENDING
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Base case)
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Ins trumentat ion
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total, k$
1,985
139
242
53
345
56
504
3,324
50
3,374
581
3,955
334
83
686
273
5,331
1,066
6,397
582
768
7,747
536
322
Percent of
direct
investment
50.2
3.5
6.1
1.3
8.7
1.5
12.7
84.0
1.3
85.3
14.7
100.0
8.8
2.1
17.2
6.9
135.0
27.0
162.0
14.6
19.4
196.0
13.9
8.1
Percent of
total capita;
investment
23.1
1.6
2.8
0.6
4.0
0.7
5.8
38.6
0.6
39.2
6.8
46.0
3.9
0.9
8.0
3.2
62.0
12.3
74.3
6.8
8.9
90.0
6.3
3.1
8,605
218.0
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 409 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge, 54
dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 153
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 74% solids.
94
-------
TABLE A-2. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
Direct coses
Conversion coses
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 42 of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
(Base case)
Annual
quantity
Unit
cost, S
Total
annual revenue
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements. S requirements
35,040 man-hr
43,800 man-hr
548,720 tons
548,720 tons
2,652,800 kWh
1,000 hr
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
n.029/kl>h
!7.00/hr
438,000
744,600
158,200
8,700
32.900
87,800
76,900
17,000
l","564", LOO
1,564,100
11.6
19.7
4.2
0.2
0.9
2.3
2.0
0.5
41 .4
41.4
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83% of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.631 of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50? of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
S/dry ton $/wet ton
aills/fcWh
606,600
740.000
743,600
118,300
2,208,500
3,772,600
16.0
19.6
19.7
YsTe
100.0
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
9.29
6.87
1.08
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 429 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, 58.605,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
95
-------
TABLE A-3. SLUDGE BLENDING
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 200 MW)
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total, k$
1,211
117
122
44
284
52
504
2,334
35
2,369
451
2,820
288
72
511
211
3,902
780
4,682
423
562
5,667
221
238
Percent of
direct
investment
42.9
4.1
4.3
1.6
10.1
1.9
17.9
82.8
1.2
84.0
16.0
100.0
10.2
2.6
18.1
7.5
138.4
27.6
166.0
15.1
19.9
201.0
7.8
8.4
Percent of
total capital
investment
19.8
1.9
2.0
0.8
4.6
0.8
8.2
38.1
0.6
38.7
7.3
46.0
4.7
1.2
8.4
3.4
63.7
12.7
76.4
6.9
9.2
92.5
3.6
3.9
6,126
217.2
100.0
a. Basis
New 200-MW plant (30-yr life); 167 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge, 22 klb/hr
dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 63 acres,
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 74% solids.
96
-------
TABLE A-4. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 200 MU)
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4Z of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmovlng equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
Unit
cost. S
Total
annual revenue
requirements, $
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
26.280 man-hr
35,040 raan-hr
224,375 tons
224,375 tons
1,788,500 kWh
1,000 hr
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.031/kWh
17.00/hr
328,500
595,700
112,800
3,600
13,500
35,900
55,400
17.000
1,162,400
1,162,41/0
11.8
21.4
0.1
0.5
1.3
2.0
0.6
41.8
41.8
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.831 of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.62 of total capital investment
Overhead
Plane, SOX of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10% of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
S/dry ton S/uet ton mllls/kWh
44J. 700
526,800
553,500
92.400
1,616,400
2,778,800
16.0
19.0
19.9
3.3
58.2
100.0
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
16.73
12.39
1.99
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 175 klb/hr, 9,200 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream tine. 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $6,126,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
97
-------
TABLE A-5. SLUDGE BLENDING
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 1500 MW)
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total, k$
4,152
214
1,264
85
540
80
954
7,289
109
7,398
1,307
8,705
472
118
1,316
497
11,108
2,222
13,330
1,202
1,600
16,132
1,607
543
18,282
Percent of
direct
investment
47.7
2.4
14.5
1.0
6.2
0.9
11.0
83.7
1.3
85.0
15.0
100.0
5.4
1.4
15.1
5.7
127.6
25.5
153.1
13.8
18.4
185.3
18.5
6.2
210.0
Percent of
total capital
investment
22.7
1.2
6.9
0.5
3.0
0.4
5.2
39.9
0.6
40.5
7.1
47.6
2.6
0.7
7.2
2.7
60.8
12.1
72.9
6.6
8.7
88.2
8.8
3.0
100.0
Basis
New 1500-MW plant (30-yr life); 1,228 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge, 163 klb/"1
dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 459 acres,
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 74% solids.
98
-------
TABLE A-6. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 1500 MW)
Direct coats
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4% of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
Unit
cost. $
Percent of
Total total annual
annual revenue revenue
requirements, S requirements
43,800 man-hr 12.50/man-hr
70,080 man-hr 17.00/man-hr
1,646,148 tons 0.06/Con
1,646,148 tons 0.16/ton
5,994,900 kWh 0.027/kWh
1,500 hr 17.00/hr
547,500
1,191,400
348,200
26,000
98,800
263,400
161,900
25,500
2.662.700
2.662,700
8.0
17.2
5.0
0.4
1.4
3.8
2.3
0.4
38.5
38.5
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6* of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50% of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
S/dry ton $/wet ton mills/kWh
Equivalent unit revenue requirements 5.69 4.20 0.66
1,263,100
1,572.300
1,250.400
173,900
4,259.700
6,922,400
18. Z
22.7
18.1
2.5
61.5
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 1,286 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment. $18,282.000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
99
-------
TABLE A-7. SLUDGE BLENDING
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 500 MW, 25-yr remaining life)
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentat ion
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total, k$
2,026
140
239
53
345
56
504
3,363
50
3,413
581
3,994
Percent of
direct
investment
Percent of
total capital
investment
8,528
50.7
3.5
6.0
1.3
8.7
1.4
12.6
84.2
1.2
85.4
14.6
100.0
8.4
2.1
17.3
6.9
134.7
26.9
161.6
14.7
19.4
195.7
9.7
8.1
213.5
23.8
1.6
2.8
0.6
4.0
0.7
5.9
39.4
0.6
40.0
12.6
75.7
100.0
a. Basis
Existing 500-MW plant (25-yr life); 419 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge,
56 klb/hr dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 111 acres,
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 74% solids.
100
-------
TABLE A-8. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDINGa
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from
lirect costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance — plant labor and super-
vision, 4% of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
base case: 500 MW,
Annual
quantity
35,040 man-hr
43,800 man-hr
560,924 tons
560,924 tons
2,652,800 kWh
1,000 hr
25-yr remaining life)
Unit
cost, S
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0. 16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
Total
annual revenue
requirements, $
4JS.OOO
744,600
159,800
7.7CO
33,700
89.700
76,900
17.000
1,567,400
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
11.4
19.3
4.2
0.2
0.9
2.3
2.0
0.4
40.7
Subtotal direct costs
1,567,400
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 8.87. of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
ac 8.62 of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 102 of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
$/dry ton
9.28
$/wet ton
6.87
jniUs/kWh
1.10
687,900
733,400
745.JOO
118.300
3,852,300
Basis
Remaining plant life, 25 yr.
Coal burned, 438 klb/hr, 9,200 Btu/kWh. 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $8,528.000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operattnR costs.
17.9
19.0
19. j
_3.J_
" 59". 3
100.0
101
-------
TABLE A-9. SLUDGE BLENDING8
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 500 MW, 20-yr remaining life)
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total, k$
2,026
140
239
53
345
56
504
3,363
50
3,413
581
3,994
334
33
693
275
5,379
1.076
6,455
587
775
7,817
242
322
Percent of
direct
investment
50.7
3.5
6.0
1.3
8.7
1.4
12.6
84.2
1.2
85.4
14.6
100.0
8.4
2.1
17.3
6.9
134.7
26.9
161.6
14.7
19.4
195.7
6.1
8.0
Percent of
total capital
investment
24.2
1.7
2.8
0.6
4.1
0.7
6.0
40.1
0.6
40.7
7.0
47.7
4.0
1.0
8.2
3.3
64.2
12.8
77.0
7.0
9.3
93.3
2.9
3.8
8,.381
209.8
100.0
Basis
Existing 500-MW plant (20-yr life); 419 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge,
56 klb/hr dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 69 acres,
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 74% solids.
102
-------
TABLE A-10. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 500 MW, 20-yr remaining life)
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4Z of direct Investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earchmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
Unit
cost, $
Total
annual revenue
requirements. $
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
35,040 man-hr
43,800 man-hr
560,924 tons
560,924 tons
2,652,800 kWh
1,000 hr
12.50/raan-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
438,000
744,600
159,800
6,000
33,700
89.700
76,900
17,000
1,565,700
1,565,700
11.3
19.2
4.1
0.2
0.9
2.3
2.0
0.4
40.4
40.4
Indirect coats
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 9.3Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
$/dry ton S/wet ton mllls/kUh
727,000
720;800
744,400
118,300
2,310,500
3,876,200
18.7
18.6
19.2
3.1
59.6
100.0
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
9.34
6.91
1.10
Basis
Remaining plant life, 20 yr.
Coal burned, 436 klb/hr, 9,200 Btu/kHh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant cm-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital Investment, $8,381,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
103
-------
TABLE A-ll. SLUDGE BLENDING*
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 500 MW, 15-yr remaining life)
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentalion
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total, k$
2,026
140
239
3,413
581
3,994
7,817
8,276
Percent of
direct
investment
Percent of
total capital
investment
1.2
85.4
14.6
100.0
14.7
19.4
195.7
3.5
8.0
207.2
24.4
1.7
2.9
0.6
4.2
0.7
6.1
40.6
0.6
^M^M_^MM
41.2
100.0
a. Basis
Existing 500-MW plant (15-yr life); 419 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge,
56 klb/hr dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 39 acres,
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 74% solids.
104
-------
TABLE A-12. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING9
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 500 MW, 15-yr remaining life)
Direct costs
Conversion coses
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and -super-
vision, 4% of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
Unit
cost, $
Total
annual revenue
requirements, S
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
35,040 man-hr 12.50/man-hr
43,800 man-hr 17.00/man-hr
560,924 tons 0.06/ton
560,924 tons 0.16/ton
2,652,800 kWh 0.029/kWh
1,000 hr 17.00/hr
438,000
744,600
159,800
4,400
33,700
89,700
76,900
17.000
1,564,100
1,564,100
11.0
18.7
4.0
0.1
0.8
2.3
1.9
0.4
39.2
39.2
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and Insurance at 10.8% of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6% of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10% of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
S/dry ton
9.59
$/wet ton
7.10
mills/kWh
1.14
844,200
711,700
743.600
118,300
2,*17,80~0
3,981,900
21.2
17.9
18.7
3.0
" 60.8
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 15 yr.
Coal burned, 438 klb/hr, 9,200 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $8,276,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
105
-------
TABLE A-13. SLUDGE BLENDING
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 2% S)
Total. k$
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
1,532
140
236
43
2,878
Percent of
direct
investment
Percent of
total capital
investment
45.1
4.1
7.0
1.3
9.6
1.6
14.8
83.5
1.3
84.8
7,356
14.9
20.0
199.0
10.0
8.0
217.0
20.8
1.9
3.2
0.6
4.4
0.7
6.9
38.5
0.6
39.1
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 181 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge; 53 klb/hr
dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 2% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 97 acres,
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 82% solids.
106
-------
TABLE A-14. .SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base
Annual
quantity
case: 2Z S)
Unit
cost, $
Total
annual revenue
requirements, $
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
Direct costa
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4Z of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
35,040 man-hr
35,040 man-hr
345,153 tons
345,153 tons
2,015,700 kWh
1,000 hr
.50/man-hr
.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
438.000
595,700
135,800
5,400
20,700
55,200
58,500
17.000
I,3i6,300
1,326,300
13.6
18.5
4.2
0.2
0.6
1.7
1.8
0.5
41.1
41.1
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.832 of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
$/dry ton
11.40
$/wet ton
9.34
mills/kwh
0.92
528,000
632,600
633,900
103.400
1,897,900
3,224,200
16.4
19.6
19.7
3.2
58.9
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 421 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,700 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $7,356,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
107
-------
TABLE A-15. SLUDGE BLENDING
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
base case :
Total, k$
2,465
151
248
62
380
63
504
3,873
58
3,931
698
4,629
369
92
779
308
6,177
1,235
7,412
671
889
8,972
735
366
10,073
5% S)
Percent of
direct
investment
53.3
3.3
5.4
1.3
8.2
1.3
10.9
83.7
1.3
85.0
15.0
100.0
8.0
2.0
16.7
6.7
133.4
26.7
160.1
14.5
19.2
193.8
15.9
7.9
217.6
-
Percent of
total capital
investment
24.5
1.5
2.4
0.6
3.8
0.6
5.0
38.4
0.6
39.0
6.9
45.9
3.7
0.9
7.7
3.1
61.3
12.3
73.6
6.7
8.8
89.1
7.3
3.6
100.0
—
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 638 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge, 55 klb/hr
dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 210 acres
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 71% solids.
108
-------
TABLE A-16. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: coal with 52 S)
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant '
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4% of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel- and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
Unit
cost, S
Total
annual revenue
requirements. S
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
35,040 man-hr
52,560 man-hr
750,516 tons
750,516 tons
,519,600 kWh
1,000 hr
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kU'li
17.00/hr
438,000
893,500
185,200
11,900
45,000
120,100
102,100
_ 17,000
1,812", 800
1,812,800
10.2
20.9
4.3
0.3
1.0
2.8
2.i
0.4.
42.3
42.3
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83% of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10% of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
$/dry ton S/wet ton mills/kWh
8.03 5.71 1-22
660.300
819,900
855.400
_ 133.200
2,468,800
4,281,600
15.4
19.2
20.0
3.1
57.7
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 433 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,400 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment. $10,073.000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
109
-------
TABLE A-17. SLUDGE BLENDING
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
case: 12%
Total, k$
1,788
139
184
52
306
54
504
3,027
45
3,072
581
3,653
299
75
635
257
4,919
984
5,903
532
708
7,143
459
315
7,917
ash)
Percent of
direct
investment
49.0
3.8
5.0
1.4
8.4
1.5
13.8
82.9
1.2
84.1
15.9
100.0
8.2
2.1
17.4
7.0
134.7
26.9
161.6
14.5
19.4
195.5
12.6
8.6
216.7
.
Percent of
total capita]
investment
22.6
1.8
2.3
0.5
3.9
0.7
6.4
38.2
0.6
38.8
7.3
46.1
3.8
0.9
8.0
3.3
62.1
12.5
74.6
6.7
8.9
90.2
5.8
4.0
100.0
— —
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 381 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge, 38 klb/ht
dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 12% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 131 acres
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 71% solids.
110
-------
TABLE A-18. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 12Z ash)
Direct coats
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4Z of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
Unit
cost, $
Percent of
Total total annual
annual revenue revenue
requirements, S requirements
35,040 man-hr
43,800 man-hr
468,412 tons
468,412 tons
2,558,800 kWh
1,000 hr
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
438,000
744,600
146,100
7,500
28,100
74,900
74,200
17.000
1,530,400
1,530,400
12.1
20.6
4.0
0.2
0.8
2.1
2.0
0.5
42.3
42.3
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
S/dry ton
10.88
$/wet ton
7.72
mills/kWh
1.03
559,300
680,900
728,100
118.300
2,086,600
3,617,000
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 405 Vclb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 11.100 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $7,917,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
15.5
18.8
20.1
3.3
57.7
100.0
111
-------
TABLE A-19. SLUDGE BLENDINGa
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 20% ash)
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total, k$
4,298
624
828
8,353
627
329
9,309
Percent of
direct
investment
Percent of
total capital
investment
23.4
1.5
3.3
0.6
3.6
0.6
5.4
38.4
0.7
39.1
216.6
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 441 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge, 72 klb/hr
dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 20% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 179 acres,
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 76% solids.
112
-------
TABLE A-20. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case:
Annual
quantity
202 ash)
Unit
cost, $
Total
annual revenue
requirements, $
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
Direct' costs
Conversion coses
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4/5 of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
35,040 man-hr
43,800 man-hr
638,729 tons
638.729 tons
3,754,600 kWh
1,000 hr
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
438,000
744,600
171,900
10,200
38,300
102,200
108,900
17,000
1,631,100
1,631,100
11.0
18.8
4.J
2.6
2.7
0 ._4
4~l . 1
41.1
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.B3Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
$/dry ton
8.17
$/wet ton
6.21
mills/kWh
1.13
654,000
800,600
761,100
118,300
2,334,000
3,965,100
Ifi.5
20.2
19.2
_J.O
5tT.~9"
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 455 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 9,900 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $9,309.000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
113
-------
TABLE A-21. SLUDGE BLENDING
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: lime process)
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
In s t rument at ion
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total, k$
1,838
127
232
49
334
56
504
3,140
47
3,187
581
3,768
334
83
654
263
5,102
1.020
6,122
554
735
7,411
452
315
Percent of
direct
investment
48.8
3.4
6.1
1.3
8.9
1.5
13.4
83.3
1.2
84.6
15.4
100.0
8.9
2.2
17.4
7.0
135.4
27.1
162.5
14.7
19.5
196.7
12.0
8.3
Percent of
total capital
investment
22.5
1.6
2.8
0.6
4.1
0.7
6.2
38.4
0.6
39.0
7.1
46.1
4.1
1.0
8.0
3.2
62.4
12.5
74.9
6.8
9.0
90.6
5.5
3.9
8,178
217.0
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 309 klb/hr (10% solids) sludge, 54 klb/hr
dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Lime process
with 1.1 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 129 acres.
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 77% solids.
114
-------
TABLE A-22. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation
Ditecc costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance — plant labor and super-
vision, 4Z of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthntoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity 1,
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
from base case:
Annual
quantity
35,040 man-hr
43,800 man-hr
461,185 tons
461,185 tons
055,200 kWli
1,000 hr
lime process)
Unit
cost, $
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0. 16/ton
0.(J29/kl%'h
17.00/hr
Total
annual revenue
requirements, S
438.000
744,600
150,700
7,300
27,700
73,800
59,600
17,000
1,518,700
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
12.0
20.4
4.1
0. J
0.8
2.0
1.6
0.5
41.6
Subtotal direct costs
Indirect costs
1,518,700
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 429 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $8.178,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
41 .6
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.62 of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50% of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10* of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
S/dry ton S/wet ton mills/kWh
Equivalent unit revenue requirements 10.28 7.9
580,300
703,300
729,600
118,300
2,131,500
3,650,200
15. y
19. J
20.0
J.2
"58 .4
100.0
-------
TABLE A-23. SLUDGE BLENDING
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 5 mi to disposal)
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Inst rumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total, k$
1,985
140
242
53
345
56
504
Percent of
direct
investment
81.3
8,969
216.0
Percent of
total capita]
investment
0.5
37.6
8.7
46.3
3.7
0.9
0.2
3.2
61.7
89.5
6.0
4.5
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 409 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge, 54 klb/hr
dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 153 acres
5 mi from scrubber facilities, 74% solids.
116
-------
TABLE A-24. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 5 mi to disposal)
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 42 of direct investment t
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
Unit
cost, $
Total
annual revenue
requirements. S
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
35,040 raan-hr
61,320 man-hr
548,720 tons
548,720 tons
2,584,900 kWh
1,000 hr
.50/man-hr
,00/man-hr
0.20/ton
0.16/Con
D.029/kWh
17.00/hr
438,000
1,042,400
166,100
8,700
109,700
87,800
75,000
17.000
1,944,700
1,944,700
9.9
23.5
3.8
0.2
2.5
2.0
1.7
__0_._4
4~4~. 0
44.0
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 502 of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
S/dry ton $/wet ton roills/kWh
628,800
771,300
934,900
145,000
2,480,000
4,424,700
14.2
17.4
21.1
3.3
56.0
100.0
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
10.90
8.07
1.26
Basis
Remaining plant life. 30 yr.
Coal burned, 429 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $8,969,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
137
-------
TABLE A-25. SLUDGE BLENDING
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
case: 10 mi
Total, k$
1,985
140
242
53
345
56
504
3,325
50
3,375
992
4,367
334
83
686
294
5,764
1,153
6,917
593
830
8,340
536
458
9,334
to disposal)
Percent of
direct
investment
45.5
3.2
5.5
1.2
7.9
1.3
11.5
76.1
1.2
77.3
22.7
100.0
7.6
1.9
15.7
6.7
131,9
26.4
158.3
13.6
19.0
190.9
12.3
10.5
213.7
- —
Percent of
total capital
investment
21.3
1.5
2.6
0.6
3.7
0.6
5.3
35.6
0.5
36.2
10.6
46.8
3.6
0.9
7.3
3.1
61.8
12.4
74.1
6.4
8.9
89.4
5.8
4.9
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 409 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge; 54 klb/hr
dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 153 acres,
10 mi from scrubber facilities, 74% solids.
118
-------
TABLE A-26. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation
Direct coats
Conversion costs ,
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance — plant labor and super-
vision, 4% of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
from base case:
Annual
quantity
35,040 man-hr
70,080 man-hr
548,720 tons
548,720 tons
2,584.900 kWh
1,000 hr
10 mi to disposal)
Unit
cost, S
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.39/ton
0. 16/ton
0.029/kKh
17.00/hr
Total
annual revenue
requirements, $
438,000
1,191,400
174,700
8,700
214,000
87.800
75,000
17,000
2,206,600
2,206,600
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
9.0
24.3
3.6
0.2
4.4
1.8
1.5
0. i
45.1
45.1
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83% of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6% of total capital investment
Overhead
Plane, 50% of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10% of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
653,000
802,700
1,065,800
162.900
2,684,400
4,891,000
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
$/dry ton
12.05
S/wet ton
8.92
mills/kWh
1.40
13.4
16.4
21.H
3.3
54.9
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 429 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $9,334,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
119
-------
TABLE A-27. SLUDGE BLENDING3
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 500 MW, 7,000 hr/yr)
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total, k$
1,985
139
242
3,955
334
83
686
273
5,331
7,747
886
322
8,955.
Percent of
direct
investment
Percent of
total capital
investment
1.3
85.3
226.2
0.6
37.7
6.5
44.2
3.7
0.9
7.7
3.0
59.5
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 409 klb/hr (15% solids), 54 klb/hr dry
flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed by ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process with
1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 252 acres,
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 74% solids.
120
-------
TABLE A-28. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 500 MW, 7,000-hr/yr operating profile)
Direct coats
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids *isposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4Z of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
Unit
cost. $
Total
annual revenue
requirements. $
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
35,040 man-hr 12.50/roan-hr
43,800 man-hr 17.00/man-hr
548,720 tons 0.06/ton
548,720 tons 0.16/ton
2,584,900 kWh 0.029/kUh
1,000 hr 17.00/hr
438,000
744,600
158,200
8,700
32,900
87,800
75,000
17,000
1,562,200
1,562,200
11.5
19.6
4.2
0.2
0.9
2.3
2.0
O./.
41.1
41.1
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50% of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 102 of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
$/dry ton
9.76
S/wet ton
6.93
mills/kWh
1.09
606,600
770,100
743,600
118.300
2,238,600
3,800,800
is.y
20.3
19.f,
~5~8.~9
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 429 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $8,955,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
121
-------
TABLE A-29. SLUDGE BLENDING
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Cont ingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
case:
Total,
1,947
HO
238
53
345
56
504
3,283
49
3,332
751
4,083
311
78
679
280
5,431
1,086
6,517
578
782
7,877
536
330
8,743
layering)
Percent of
direct
k$ investment
47.7
3.4
5.8
1.3
8.5
1.4
12.3
80.4
1.2
81.6
18.4
100.0
7.6
1.9
16.6
6.9
133.0
26.6
159.6
14.2
19.2
193.0
13.1
8.1
214.2
-^
Percent of
total capita]
investment
22.3
1.6
2.7
0.6
3.9
0.6
5.8
37.5
0.6
38.1
8.6
46.7
3.6
0.9
7.8
3.2
62.2
12.4
74.6
6.6
8.9
90.1
6.1
3.8
100.0
I
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 409 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge, 54 klb/hr
dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 153
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 74% solids.
122
-------
TABLE A-30. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: layering)
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 42 of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
35,040 man-hr
43,800 man-hr
548,720 tons
548,720 tons
2,584,900 kWli
I,000 hr
Unit
cost, S
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.24/ton
0.(IJ9/kk1i
17.00/hr
Percent of
Total total annual
annual revenue revenue
jre^uirement_s_,_S _ requiremen ts
438,000
744,600
163,300
8,700
32,900
131,700
7 5, (100
17.000
1 ,hl I , J0l>
i ,hi i ,.'nn
11. j
19. )
O.J
0.4
1. .
I .9
0. ,
A'I .7
41.7
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.62 of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 502 of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
S/dry ton $/wet ton mills/kWh
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
9.54
7.05
1.10
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 429 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh. 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $8,743,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
616,800
751,900
768,100
118.300
2,255,100
3,8M>, 300
li..0
19.i
19.9
~5fiV"3
100.0
123
-------
TABLE A-31. SLUDGE BLENDING
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 1.3 limestone stoichiometry)
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total. k$
47
3,150
581
3,731
334
83
648
261
5,057
1,011
6,068
Percent of
direct
investment
Percent of
total capital
investment
47.5
3.7
6.4
1.4
9.2
1.5
13.5
83.2
1.2
84.4
135.6
27.1
162.6
14.7
19.5
196.9
0.6
38.6
7.1
45.7
8,160
218.7
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 365 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge, 54 klb/hr
dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.3 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 142 acres,
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 74% solids.
124
-------
TABLE A-32. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 1.3
Annual
quantity
limestone stoichiometry)
Total
Unit annual revenue
cost, $ requirements, $
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 43! of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
35,040 man-hr
43,800 man-hr
509,712 tons
509,712 tons
2,572,500 kWh
1,000 hr
12.50/man-hr
17.00/raan-hr
0.067 ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kUti
17.00/hr
438,000
744,600
149,200
8,000
30,600
81,600
74,600
17.000
1,543.600
1,543,600
11.9
20.1
4.1
0.2
0.8
2.1
2.0
_0^5
" 42.0
42.0
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83% of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
$/dry ton
9.73
$/wet ton
7.19
mills/kWh
1.04
575,100
701,800
734,500
118.300
2,129,700
3,673,300
15.7
19.1
2U.O
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 429 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $8,160,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
125
-------
TABLE A-33. SLUDGE BLENDING
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 200 MW, 7,000-hr/yr constant load)
Total, k$
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
1,211
117
122
44
284
52
504
2,334
35
2,369
451
2,820
288
72
511
211
3,902
5,667
6,268
Percent of
direct
investment
Percent of
total capital
investment
42.9
4.2
4.3
1.6
10.1
1.8
17.9
82.8
1.2
84.0
16.0
100.0
10.2
2.6
18.1
7.5
138.4
15.0
20.0
201.0
12.9
8.4
222.3
0.6
37.8
62.3
12.4
74.7
6.7
9.0
90.4
5.8
3.8
100.0
a. Basis
New 200-MW plant (30-yr life); 167 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge, 64 klb/hr
dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S0£ removed. Landfill disposal, 104
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 74% solids.
1-26
-------
TABLE A-34. SLUDGE - FLYASH BLENDING3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 200 MW, 7,000-hr/yr constant load)
Direct coses
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4% of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthnoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
26,280 man-hr
35,040 man-hr
224,375 tons
224,375 tons
,788,500 kWh
1,000 hr
Unit
cost, $
Total
annual revenue
requirements, $
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/con
0.031/kWh
17.00/hr
328,500
595,700
112,800
3,600
13,500
35,900
55,400
17.000
1,162,400
1,162,400
11.8
21.4
4.0
0.1
0.5
1.3
2.0
_0.b
41.7
41.7
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83% of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6% of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50% of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10% of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
443,700
539,000
553,500
92.400
1,628,600
2,791,000
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 175 klb/hr, 9,200 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant: on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $6,268,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating coses.
15.9
19.3
19.8
3.3
58. .1
100.0
Equivalent unit
$/dry ton S/wet ton
revenue requirements 16.80 12.44
mills/kWh
2.00
127
-------
TABLE A-35. SLUDGE BLENDING*1
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
— . . _
(Variation from base case: 1,500 MW, 7,000-hr/yr constant load)
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total. k$
4,152
214
1,264
85
540
80
954
7,289
109
7,398
1,307
8,705
472
118
1,316
497
11,108
2,222
13,330
1,202
1.600
16,132
2,646
543
19,321
Percent of
direct
investment
47.7
2.5
14.5
1.0
6.2
0.9
11.0
83.7
1.3
85.0
15.0
100.0
5.4
1.4
15.1
5.7
127.6
25.5
153.1
13.8
18.4
185.3
30.4
6.2
221.9
Percent of
total capital
investment
21.5
1.1
6.5
0.4
2.8
0.4
4.9
37.7
0.6
38.3
6.8
45.1
2.4
0.6
6.8
2.6
57.5
11.5
69.0
6.2
8.3
83.5
13.7
2.8
100.0
a. Basis
New 1500-MW plant (30-yr life); 1,228 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge, 470
dry flyash.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with ESP. Both removed to meet NSPS. Limestone process
with 1.5 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill disposal, 756
1 mi from scrubber facilities, 74% solids.
128
-------
TABLE A-36. SLUDGE -
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS -
FLYASH BLENDING
• REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance — plant labor and super-
vision, 42 of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
case: 1,500 MW,
Annual
quantity
43,800 man-hr
70,080 man-hr
1,646,148 tons
1,646,148 tons
5,944,900 kWh
1,500 hr
7,000-hr/yr constant load)
Unit
cost, $
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.027/kWI>
17.00/hr
Total
annual revenue
requirements. $
547,500
1,191,400
348,200
26,000
98,800
263,400
161,900
25,500
2,662,700
2,662,700
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
7.8
17.0
5.0
0.4
1.4
3.7
2.3
0.4
40.0
40.0
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83? of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, IOZ of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
1,263,100
1,661,600
1,250,400
173.900
4,349,000
7,011,700
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
S/dry ton
5.76
S/wet ton_
4.25
mills/kWh
0.67
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 1,286 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital Investment, $19.321,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
13.0
23.7
17.8
~62~VO
100.0
129
-------
TABLE A-37. GYPSUM3
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
— ______ _^ ^— .^— ^— _ — ^— — — -^^—^^ - — _
(Base
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
case)
Total, k$
1,179
174
25
42
220
52
174
1,866
27
1,893
498
2,391
195
48
425
186
3,245
649
3,894
340
467
4,701
403
307
5,411
Percent of
direct
investment
49.3
7.3
1.0
1.8
9.2
2.2
7.3
78.1
1.1
79.2
20.8
100.0
8.2
2.0
17.8
7.8
135.8
27.1
162.9
14.2
19.5
196.6
16.9
12.8
226.3
Percent of
total capital
investment
21.7
3.2
0.5
0.8
4.1
1.0
3.2
34.5
0.5
35.0
9.2
44.2
3.6
0.9
7.9
3.4
60.0
12.0
72.0
6.3
8.6
86.9
7.5
5.6
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 756 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with S02- Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
limestone process with 1.1 stoichioraetry based on S02 removed. Landfill
disposal, 115 acres, 1 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
130
-------
TABLE A-33. GYPSUIia
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4% of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
(Base case)
Annual
quantity
Total
Unit annual revenue
cost. $ requirements, $
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
35,040 man-hr
43,800 man-hr
496,048 tons
496,048 tons
1,699,761 kWh
1,000 hr
12.50/nan-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
438,000
744,600
95,600
6,600
29,800
79,400
49,300
17,000
1,460,300
1,460,300
14.0
23.9
3.1
0.2
1.0
2.5
1.6
0.5
46.8
46.8
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83% of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8. 62 of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50% of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10% of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
S/dry ton S/wet ton mills/kWh
Equivalent unit revenue requirements 7.86 6.28 0.89
368,100
465,300
705,500
118,300
1,657,200
3,117,500
11.8
14.9
22.7
3.8
53.2
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 429 klb/hr. 9,000 Btu/kHh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $5,411,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
131
-------
TABLE A-39. GYPSUM3
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
base case:
Total, k$
794
124
17
38
180
44
174
1,371
20
1,391
381
1,772
172
43
329
148
2,464
493
2,957
258
355
3,570
165
229
3,964
200 MW)
Percent of
direct
investment
44.8
7.0
1.0
2.1
10.2
2.5
9.8
77.4
1.1
78.5
21.5
100.0
9.7
2.4
18.6
8.4
139.1
27.8
166.9
14.6
20.0
201.5
9.3
12.9
223.7
-^
Percent of
total capital
investment
20.1
3.1
0.4
1.0
4.5
1.1
4.4
~34~76~
0.5
35.1
9.6
44.7
4.3
1.1
8.4
3.7
62-2
12.4
74.6
6.5
9.0
90.1
4.2
_iZ
100.0
—
a. Basis
New 200-MW plant (30-yr life); 309 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with S02-
limestone process with 1.
Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
1 stoichiometry based on SC»2 removed. Landfill-
disposal, 47 acres, 1 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
132
-------
TABLE A-40. GYPSUM3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 200 MW)
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4Z of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
Unit
cost. $
Percent of
Total total annual
annual revenue revenue
requirements, S requirements
26,280 nan-hr
35,040 man-hr
202,836 tons
202,836 tons
725,858 kWh
1,000 hr
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.031/kWh
17.00/hr
328,500
595,700
70,900
2,700
12,200
32,500
22,500
17,000
1,082,000
1,082,000
14.1
25.7
3.0
0.1
0.5
1.4
1.0
0.7
46.5
46.5
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6% of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
279,500
343,000
529,800
92.400
1,244,700
2,326,700
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 175 klb/hr, 9,200 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $3,988,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
12.0
14.7
100.0
Equivalent unit
$/dry ton
revenue requirements 14.31
S/wet ton mills/kWh
11.44 1.66
133
-------
TABLE A-41. GYPSUM3
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
case:
Total,
2,215
290
47
59
374
55
294
3,334
50
3,384
942
4,326
264
66
683
292
5,636
1,127
6,763
582
812
8,157
1,201
468
9,826
1500 MW)
Percent of
direct
k$ investment
51.1
6.7
l.l
1.4
8.7
1.3
6.8
77.1
1.1
78.2
21.8
100.0
6.1
1.5
15.9
6.8
130.3
26.0
156.3
13.5
18.8
188.6
27.7
10.8
227.1
Percent of
total capital
investment
22.4
3.0
0.5
0.6
3.8
0.6
3.0
33.9
0.5
34.4
9.5
43.9
2.7
0.7
7.0
3.0
57.3
11.5
68.8
5.9
8.3
83.0
12.2
4.8
100.0
—
a. Basis
New 1500-MW plant (30-yr life); 2,268 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with S02. Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
limestone process with 1.1 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill
disposal, 343 acres, 1 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
134
-------
TABLE A-42. GYPSUlia
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 1500 HW)
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance — plant labor and super-
vision, 42 of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
A3, 800 man-hr
61,320 man-hr
1,488,183 tons
1,488,183 tons
4,308,150 kWh
1,500 hr
Unit
cost, $
12. 50 /man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0. 167 ton
0.027/kWh
17.00/hr
Total
annual revenue
requirements, S
547,500
1,042,400
173,000
19,400
89,300
238,100
116,300
25,500
2,251,500
2,251,500
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
11.1
21.0
3.5
0.4
1.8
4.8
2.3
0.5
45.4
45.4
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83% of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.62 of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50% of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
$/dry ton S/wet ton mills/kWh
Equivalent unit revenue requirements 4.17 3-33 0.47
638,700
845,000
1,067,400
159,000
2,710.100
4,961,600
12.9
17.0
21.5
3.2
54.6
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 1,286 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $9,826,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
135
-------
TABLE A-43. GYPSUM3
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 500 MW, 25-yr remaining life)
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total. k$
Percent of
direct
investment
Percent of
total capital
investment
1.1
79.2
20.8
100.0
27.2
162.9
14
19
.2
,5
196.6
0.5
36.7
5,174
215.8
12.6
75.5
6.6
9.0
91.1
3.0
5.9
100.0
a. Basis
Existing 500-MW plant (25-yr life); 773 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with S02. Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
limestone process with 1.1 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill
disposal, 44 acres, 1 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
136
-------
TABLE A-44. GYPSUM3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 500 MW, 25-yr remaining life)
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant.
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4Z of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
Unit
cost. $
Total
annual revenue
requirements. $
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
35,040 man-hr
43,800 man-hr
507,077 tons
507,077 tons
,712,816 Wh
1,000 hr
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
438,000
744,600
95,900
3,100
30,400
81.100
49,700
17.000
1,459,800
1,459,800
13.9
23.7
3.0
46.4
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 8.87. of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6% of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
$/dry ton $/wet ton mills/kWh
7.74 6.20 0.89
Basis
Remaining plant life, 25 yr.
Coal burned^ 438 klb/hr, 9,200 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $5,174,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
414,700
445,000
705,100
1 IB.300
1.6T3.100
3,142,900
13.2
14.2
22.4
3.8
53.6
100.0
137
-------
TABLE A-45. GYPSUM3
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 500 MW, 20-yr remaining life)
Total, k$
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
28
1,899
498
2,397
195
48
426
187
3,253
651
3,904
341
468
4,713
95
307
5,115
Percent of
direct
investment
Percent of
total capital
investment
49.
7,
1.1
1.2
79.2
20.8
100.0
8.1
2.0
17.8
7.8
135.7
14,
19,
196.6
23.2
3.4
0.5
0.8
4.3
1.0
3.4
36.6
9.8
46.9
213.4
100.0
a. Basis
Existing 500-MW plant (20-yr life); 773 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with S02- Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
limestone process with 1.1 stoichiometry, based on S02 removed. LandfH1
disposal, 27 acres, 1 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
138
-------
TABLE A-46. GYPSUM3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance — plant labor and super-
vision, 45! of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthraoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
base case: 500 MW,
Annual
quantity
35,040 man-hr
43,800 man-hr
507,077 tons
507,077 tons
1,712,816 kWh
1,000 hr
20-yr remaining life)
Unit
cost, S
12.50/man-hr
1 7 . 00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
Total
annual revenue
requirements, $
438,000
744,600
95,900
2,400
30,400
81,100
49.700
17,000
1,459,100
1,459,100
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
13.9
23.5
3.0
0.1
1.0
2.6
1.6
0.5
46.2
46.2
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 9.3% of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6% of total capital investment
Ove rhead
Plant, 502 of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
$/dry ton $/wet ton mills/kWh
Equivalent unit revenue requirements 7.79 6.24 0.90
438,300
439. 900
704,700
118,300
1(701,200
3,160,300
13.9
13.9
22.3
~53T§
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 20 yr.
Coal burned. 438 klb/hr, 9,200 Btu/kWh, 10.500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $5,115,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
139
-------
TABLE A-47. GYPSUM3
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 500 MW, 15-yr remaining life)
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total, k$
Percent of
direct
investment
Percent of
total capital
investment
28
1,899
5,076
49.
7.
1.1
1.7
9.2
2.2
7.2
78.0
1.2
79.2
20.8
100.0
14,
19,
196.6
23.5
3.4
0.5
0.5
37.4
9.8
47.2
3.9
0.9
8.4
3.7
64.1
12.8
76.9
1.
6.
211.8
100.0
a. Basis
Existing 500-MW plant (15-yr life); 773 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with S02. Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
limestone process with 1.1 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill
disposal, 16 acres, 1 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
140
-------
TABLE A-48. GYPSUM3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 500 MW, 15-yr remaining life)
Direct: coats
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 42 of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
Unit
cost. $
Total
annual revenue
requirements. S
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
35,040 raan-hr
43,800 nan-hr
507,077 tons
507,077 tons
1,712,816 kWh
1,000 hr
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
438,000
744,600
95,900
1,900
30,400
81,100
49.700
17,000
1,458,600
1,458.600
13.6
23.1
3.0
0.1
0.9
2.5
1.5
_0.5_
45.2
45.2
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 10. 8% of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10% of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
$/dry ton S/wet ton mills/kWh
Equivalent unit revenue requirements 7.96 6.37 0.92
509,000
436,500
704,500
118,300
1,768,300
3.226,900
15.8
13.5
21.8
3.7
54.8
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 15 yr.
Coal burned, 438 klb/hr, 9,200 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant en-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $5,076,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
141
-------
TABLE A-49. GYPSUM
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
base case:
Total, k$
1,031
140
21
42
205
51
174
1,664
24
1,688
435
2,123
195
48
386
170
2,922
584
3,506
307
421
4,234
284
264
4,782
2% S)
Percent of
direct
investment
48.5
6.6
1.0
2.0
9.7
2.4
8.2
78.4
1.1
79.5
20.5
100.0
9.1
2.3
18.2
8.0
137.6
27.5
165.1
14.5
19.8
199.4
13.4
12.4
225.2
Percent of
total capital
investment
21.6
2.9
0.4
0.9
4.3
1.1
3.6
34.8
0.5
35.3
9.1
44.4
4.1
1.0
8.1
3.5
61.1
12.2
73.3
6.5
8.8
88.5
5.9
5.6
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 530 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 2% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with S02. Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
limestone process with 1.1 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill
disposal, 81 acres, 1 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
142
-------
TABLE A-50. GYPSUM*
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 2% S)
Direct coats
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4% of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
Unit
cost, S
Total
annual revenue
requirements, $
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
35,040 man-hr
35,040 man-hr
347,536 tons
347,536 tons
1,221,948 kWh
1,000 hr
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
438,000
595,700
84,900
4,600
20,900
55,600
35,400
17,000
1,252,100
1,252,100
16.2
22.0
3.1
0.2
0.8
2.1
1.3
0.6
46.3
46.3
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83% of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6% of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10% of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
S/dry ton
9.74
$/wet ton
7.79
mills/kWh
0.77
331,500
411,300
608,400
103.400
1,454,600
2,706,700
12.2
15.2
22.5
3.8
53.7
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 421 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,700 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $4,782,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
143
-------
TABLE A-51. GYPSUM3
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
— — ^ ——
(Variation from
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
base case:
Total, k$
1,290
181
27
47
227
52
174
1,998
29
2,027
575
2,602
195
48
449
199
3,493
699
4,192
362
503
5,057
511
316
5,884
5% S)
Percent of
direct
investment
49.6
7.0
1.0
1.8
8.7
2.0
6.7
76.8
1.1
77.9
22.1
100.0
7.5
1.8
17.3
7.6
134.2
26.9
161.1
13.9
19.3
194.3
19.7
12.1
226.1
Percent of
total capital
investment
21.9
3.0
0.5
0.8
3.9
0.9
3.0
34.0
0.5
34.5
9.7
44.2
3.3
0.8
7.6
3.5
59.4
11.8
71.2
6.2
8.5
85.9
8.7
5.4
100.0
—
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 960 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with S0£. Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
limestone process with 1.1 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill
disposal, 146 acres, 1 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
144
-------
TABLE A-52. GYPSUM3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 52 S)
Direct coats
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 41 of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Indirect costs
Total
Annual Unit annual revenue
quantity cost, $ requirements. $
35,040 raan-hr 12.50/man-hr
43,800 man-hr 17.00/man-hr
629,808 tons 0.06/ton
629,808 tons 0.16/ton
1,906,030 kWh 0.029/kWh
1,000 hr 17.00/hr
438,000
744,600
104,100
8,300
37,800
100,800
55,300
17,000
1,505,900
1,505,900
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
13.5
22.9
3.2
0.3
1.1
3.1
1.7
0.5
46.3
46.3
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
S/dry ton $/wet ton mills/kWh
Equivalent unit revenue requirements 6.45 5.16 0.93
396,000
506,000
725,300
118,300
1,745,600
3,251,500
12.2
15.6
22.3
3.6
53.7
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 433 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,400 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $5,884,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
145
-------
TABLE A-53. GYPSUM
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
^ _ - .-. ^__
(Variation from base case: 12%
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmovlng equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total, k$
1,109
148
21
41
212
52
174
1,757
26
1,783
435
2,218
196
49
404
176
3,043
609
3,652
322
438
4,412
329
301
5,042
ash)
Percent of
direct
investment
50.0
6.7
0.9
1.9
9.6
2.3
7.8
79.2
1.2
80.4
19.6
100.0
8.9
2.2
18.2
7.9
137.2
27.5
164.7
14.5
19.7
198.9
14.8
13.6
227.3
Percent of
total capital
investment
22.0
3.0
0.4
0.8
4.2
1.0
3.5
34.9
0.5
35.4
8.6
44.0
3.9
1.0
8.0
3.5
60.4
12.0
72.4
6.4
8.7
87.5
6.5
6.0
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 623 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 12% ash.
Flyash removed with S(>2. Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
limestone process with 1.1 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill
disposal, 94 acres, 1 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
146
-------
TABLE A-54. GYPSUll3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ZCON01IICS
(Variation from base case: 12% ash)
Total
Annual Unit annual revenue
quantity cost. $ requirements. $
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant J , 35,040 raan-hr 12.50/man-hr
Solids disposal equipment 43,800 man-hr 1 7 . 00/man-hr
Maintenance — plant labor and super-
vision, 4Z of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance) 408,653 tons 0.06/ton
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance) 408,653 tons 0.16/ton
Electricity 1,566,600 kWh 0.029/kWh
Analyses 1>000 hr 17.00/hr
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.832 of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50% of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
S/dry ton $/wet ton mills/kHh
Equivalent unit revenue requirements 9.23 7.39 0.86
438,000
744,600
88,700
5,400
24,500
65,400
45,400
17,000
1,429,000
1,429,000
345,500
433,600
691,800
118,300
1,589,200
3,018,200
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
14.5
24.7
2.9
0.2
0.8
2.2
1.5
0.5
47.3
47.3
11.5
14.4
22.9
3.9
52.7
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 405 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 11,100 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream tine, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $5,042,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
-------
TABLE A-55. GYPSUM8
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 20%
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total, k$
1,271
182
26
46
227
52
174
1,978
30
2,008
498
2,506
196
49
446
193
3,390
678
4,068
357
488
4,913
480
314
5,707
ash)
Percent of
direct
investment
50.7
7.3
1.0
1.8
9.1
2.1
6.9
78.9
1.2
80.1
19.9
100.0
7.8
2.0
17.8
7.7
135.3
27.0
162.3
14.3
19.5
196.1
19.1
12.5
227.7
Percent of
total capital
investment
22.3
3.2
0.4
0.8
4.0
0.9
3.1
34.7
0.5
35.2
8.7
43.9
3.4
0.9
7.8
3.4
59.4
11.9
71.3
6.3
8.5
86.1
8.4
5.5
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 905 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 20% ash.
Flyash removed with S02- Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
limestone process with 1.1 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill
disposal, 137 acres, 1 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
148
-------
TABLE A-56. GYPSUlf1
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case:
Annual
quantity
20% ash)
Unit
cost, $
Total
annual revenue
requirements, $
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
Direct costs
Conversion coses
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4% of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
35,040 man-hr
43,800 man-hr
594,003 tons
594,003 tons
1,906,030 kVfli
1,000 hr
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
438,000
744,600
100,200
7,800
35,600
95,000
55,300
17.000
1,493,500
1,493,500
13.7
23.2
3.1
0.2
1.1
3.0
1.7
0.6
46.6
46.6
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10Z of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
$/dry ton
6.75
S/wet ton
5.40
mills/kWh
0.92
384,700
490,800
719,100
118.300
1,712,900
3,206,400
12.0
15.3
22.4
3.7
~53T4
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 455 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 9,900 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $5,707,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
149
-------
TABLE A-57. GYPSUM3
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case:
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
a.nd railroads
Electrical
Ins t rumen t at ion
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
1.0 lime
Total, k$
1,167
173
24
42
220
52
174
1,852
28
1,880
455
2,335
196
49
422
183
3,185
637
3,822
337
459
4,618
389
308
5,315
stoichiometry)
Percent of
direct
investment
50.0
7.4
1.0
1.8
9.4
2.2
7.5
79.3
1.2
80.5
19.5
100.0
8.4
2.1
18.1
7.8
136.4
27.3
163.7
14.4
19.7
197.8
16.7
13.1
227.6
Percent of
total capital
investment
22.0
3.2
0.4
0.8
4.1
1.0
3.3
34.8
0.6
35.4
8.5
43.9
3.7
0.9
7.9
3.4
59.9
12.0
71.9
6.3
8.7
86.9
7.3
5.8
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 729 klb/hr (10% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with S02« Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
limestone process with 1.0 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill
disposal, 111 acres, 1 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
150
-------
TABLE A-S8. GYPSUII3
TOTAL ANNUAL ZZVZifJE 2.EQUIREI1ENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOL1ICS
(Variation
from base case:
Annual
quantity
1.0 lime stolchiometry)
Total
Unit annual revenue
cost, $ requirements, $
Percent of
tocal annual
revenue
requirements
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4% of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
35,040 man-hr
43,800 man-hr
478,198 tons
478,198 tons
1,712,816 kWh
1,000 hr
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
438,000
744,600
100,200
6,300
28,700
76,500
49,700
17.000
1,461,000
1,461,000
14.1
24.0
3.2
0.2
0.9
2.5
1.6
0.6
47.1
47.1
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.62 of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50% of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10% of operating labor
Subtotal Indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
Equivalent unit revenue requirements
S/dry ton $/wet ton mills/kWh
8.11 6.49 0.89
361,600
457,100
705,700
118.300
1,642,700
3,103,700
11.7
14.7
22.7
3.8
52.9
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 429 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $5,315,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
151
-------
TABLE A-59. GYPSUM3
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
case: 5 mi to
Total, k$
1,179
174
25
42
191
52
174
1,837
27
1,864
712
2,576
196
49
419
197
3,437
687
4,124
341
495
4,960
403
387
5,750
disposal)
Percent of
direct
investment
45.8
6.7
1.0
1.6
7.4
2.0
6.8
71.3
1.1
72.4
27.6
100.0
7.6
1.9
16.3
7.6
133.4
26.7
160.1
13.3
19.2
192.6
15.6
15.0
223.2
Percent of
total capital
investment
20.6
3.0
0.4
0.7
3.3
0.9
3.0
31.9
0.5
32.4
12.4
44.8
3.4
0.9
7.3
3.4
59.8
11.9
71.7
5.9
8.7
86.3
7.0
6.7
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 756 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with S0£. Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
limestone process with 1.1 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill
disposal, 115 acres, 5 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
152
-------
TABLE A-60. GYPSUM3
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance — plant labor and super-
vision, 45! of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
from base case :
Annual
quantity
35,040 man-hr
61,320 man-hr
496,048 tons
496,043 tons
1,699,761 kWh
1,000 hr
5 mi to disposal)
Unit
cost, $
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.20/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
Total
annual revenue
requirements, $
438,000
1,042,400
103,000
6,600
99,200
79,400
49,300
17,000
1,834,900
1,834,900
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
11.9
28.2
2.8
0.2
2.7
2.1
1.3
0.5
49.7
49.7
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7. 83Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50% of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10X of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
$/dry ton S/wet ton mills/fcWh
Equivalent unit revenue requirements 9-31 7.45 1.05
361,600
457,100
892,800
148,000
1,859,500
3,694.400
9.7
12.4
24.2
4.0
50.3
100.0
Baals
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 429 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $5.750,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
153
-------
TABLE A-61. GYPSUM*
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
: 10 mi to
Total, k$
1,179
174
25
42
191
52
174
1,837
28
1,865
849
2,714
196
49
419
205
3,583
716
4,299
345
516
5,160
403
442
6,005
disposal)
Percent of
direct
investment
43.4
6.4
0.9
1.6
7.0
1.9
6.4
67.7
1.0
68.7
31.3
100.0
7.2
1.8
15.4
7.6
132.0
26.4
158.4
12.7
19.0
190.1
14.9
16.3
221.3
Percent of
total capital
investment
19.6
2.9
0.4
0.7
3.2
0.9
2.9
30.6
0.5
31.1
14.1
45.2
3.3
0.8
7.0
3.4
59.7
11.9
71.6
5.7
8.6
85.9
6.7
7.4
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 756 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with S02- Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
limestone process with l.l stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill
disposal, 115 acres, 10 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
154
-------
TABLE A-62. GYPSUlia
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIRHiELITS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance — plant labor and super-
vision, 4% of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earehmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
from base case:
Annual
quantity
35,040 man-hr
70,080 man-hr
496,048 tons
496,048 tons
1,699,761 kWh
1,000 hr
10 mi to dispos.
Unit
cost, $
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.39/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
al)
Total
annual revenue
requirements, $
438,000
1,192,400
119,700
6,600
193,500
79,400
49,300
17,000
2,095,900
2,095,900
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
10.2
27.8
2.8
0.2
4.5
1.8
1.2
0.4
48.9
48.9
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6% of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 502 of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10% of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
S/dry ton S/wet ton mills/kWh
Equivalent unit revenue requirements 10.80 8.64 1.22
443,900
560,200
1,023,300
163,000
2,190,400
4,286,300
10.3
13.1
23.9
3.8
51.1
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 429 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital Investment, $6,005,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
155
-------
TABLE A-63. GYPSUM*1
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 500 MW, 7,000-hr/yr operation)
Total. k$
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
28
1,894
498
2,392
658
308
5,672
Percent of
direct
investment
Percent of
total capital
Investment
49.
7.
0.9
1.2
79.2
20.8
100.0
8.2
2.0
17.8
7.8
135.8
196.7
27.5
12.9
237.1
11.5
68.7
100.0
a. Basis
New 500-MW plant (30-yr life); 756 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with S02. Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
limestone process with 1.1 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill
disposal, 188 acres, 1 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
156
-------
TABjJE A-64. GYPSUIl
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS ~ REGULATED UTILITY ECOHOIIICS
(Variation from base case: 500 MH, 7,000-hr/yr operating profile)
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance — plant labor and super-
vision, 4Z of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
35,040 man-hr
43,800 man-hr
496,048 tons
496,048 tons
1,699,761 kWh
1,000 hr
Unit
cost, S
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
Total
annual revenue
requirements , S
438,000
744,600
95,700
10,700
29,800
79,400
49,300
17,000
1,464,500
1,464,500
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
13.9
23.7
3.0
0.3
1.0
2.5
1.6
0.5
46.5
46.5
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.832 of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8. 62 of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50% of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 10X of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
S/dry ton S/wet ton mills/kWh
Equivalent unit revenue requirements 7.93 6.34 0.90
368,500
487,400
707,600
118,300
1,681,800
3,146,300
11.7
15.5
22.5
3.8
53.5
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 429 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $5,672,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
157
-------
TABLE A-65. GYPSUM3
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 200 MW, 7,000-hr/yr constant onstream)
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
Total. k$
20
1,391
381
1,772
172
43
329
148
2,464
3,570
270
253
4,093
Percent of
direct
investment
Percent of
total capital
investment
1.1
78.5
21.5
100.0
231.0
0.5
34.0
9.3
43.3
4.2
1.1
8.0
3.6
60.2
12.0
72.2
6.3
100.0
a. Basis
New 200-MW plant (30-yr life); 309 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with S02- Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
limestone process with 1.1 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill
disposal, 77 acres, 1 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
158
-------
TABLE A-66. GYPSUMa
TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOMICS
(Variation from base case: 200 MW, 7,000-hr/yr constant onstream)
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance—plant labor and super-
vision, 4Z of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
Annual
quantity
Unit
cost. $
Total
annual revenue
requirements. $
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
26,280 man-hr
35,040 man-hr
202,836 tons
202,836 tons
725,858 kWh
1,000 br
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.031/kWh
17.00/hr
328,500
595,700
70,900
2,700
12,200
32,500
22,500
17,000
1,082,000
1,082,000
13.7
24.8
3.0
0.1
0.5
1.4
0.9
0.7
45.1
45.1
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6% of total capital investment
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities
Administrative, 102 of operating labor
Subtotal indirect costs
Total annual revenue requirements
$/dry ton $/wet ton mills/kWh
Equivalent unit revenue requirements 14.75 11.79 1.72
279,500
352,000
584,500
103,400
1,319,400
2,401,400
11.6
14.7
24.3
4.3
54.9
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 175 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $4,093,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
159
-------
TABLE A-67. GYPSUM3
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT - PROCESS EQUIPMENT AND INSTALLATION ANALYSIS
(Variation from base case: 1,500 MW, 7,000-hr/yr constant onstream)
Total, k$
Process equipment
Piping and insulation
Foundation and structural
Excavation, site preparation, roads
and railroads
Electrical
Instrumentation
Buildings
Subtotal
Services and miscellaneous
Subtotal excluding trucks and
equipment
Trucks and earthmoving equipment
Subtotal direct investment
Engineering design and supervision
Architect and engineering contractor
Construction expense
Contractor fees
Subtotal
Contingency
Subtotal fixed investment
Allowance for startup and modifications
Interest during construction
Subtotal capital investment
Land
Working capital
Total capital investment
2,215
290
47
59
374
55
294
3,334
50
3,384
942
4,326
264
66
688
292
5,636
1,127
6,763
582
812
8,157
1,978
468
10,603
Percent of
direct
investment
Percent of
total capital
investment
77.1
1.1
78.2
21.8
100.0
26.0
156.3
20.9
2.7
0.4
0.6
3.5
0.5
2.8
31.4
0.5
31.9
53.2
77.0
245.1
100.0
a. Basis
New 1500-MW plant (30-yr life); 2,268 klb/hr (15% solids) sludge.
Midwest plant location; average basis for scaling, mid-1979.
Coal analysis (by wt): 3.5% S (dry basis), 16% ash.
Flyash removed with S02- Both removed to meet NSPS. Forced-oxidation
limestone process with 1.1 stoichiometry based on S02 removed. Landfill
disposal, 565 acres, 1 mi from scrubber facilities, 80% solids gypsum.
160
-------
TABLE A-63. GYPSU113
TOTAL AIINUAL REVENUE REQUIREMENTS - REGULATED UTILITY ECONOIIICS
(Variation from base
Direct costs
Conversion costs
Operating labor and supervision
Plant
Solids disposal equipment
Maintenance — plant labor and super-
vision, 4Z of direct investment
Landfill operation
Land preparation
Trucks (fuel and maintenance)
Earthmoving equipment (fuel and
maintenance)
Electricity
Analyses
Subtotal conversion costs
Subtotal direct costs
case: 1,500 MW, 7
Annual
quantity
A3, 800 man-hr
61,320 man-hr
1,488,183 tons
1,488,183 tons
A, 308, 150 kWh
1,500 hr
,000-hr/yr constant ons cream)
Unit
cost, $
12.50/man-hr
17.00/man-hr
0.06/ton
0.16/ton
0.029/kWh
17.00/hr
Total
annual revenue
requirements, $
547,500
1,042,400
173,000
19,400
89,300
238,100
116,300
25,000
2,251,000
2,251,000
Percent of
total annual
revenue
requirements
10.9
20.7
3.4
0.4
1.8
4.7
2.3
0.5
44.8
44.8
Indirect costs
Capital charges
Depreciation, interim replacement,
and insurance at 7.83Z of total
capital investment less land and
working capital 638,700
Average cost of capital and taxes
at 8.6Z of total capital investment 911,900
Overhead
Plant, 50Z of conversion costs less
utilities Il0"'*°°
Administrative 102 of operating Tabor "JrjPP.P
Subtotal indirect costs " 2,777,000
Total annual revenue requirements 5,028,000
S/dry ton $/wet ton mills/kWh
Equivalent unit revenue requirements 4.23 3.37 0.48
12.7
18.1
21.2
3.2
55.2
100.0
Basis
Remaining plant life, 30 yr.
Coal burned, 1,286 klb/hr, 9,000 Btu/kWh, 10,500 Btu/lb.
Power plant on-stream time, 7,000 hr/yr.
Total capital investment, $10,603,000.
Midwest plant location, mid-1980 operating costs.
151
-------
APPENDIX B
DECLINING OPERATING PROFILE - LIFETIME REVENUE REQUIREMENTS
163
-------
TABLE B-l
LIME/LIMESTONE SLUDGE DISPOSAL - SLUDGE BLENDING PROCESS 200 MM NEW UNITt 3.5% S IN FUELt 16% ASH IN COAL. REGULATED CO. ECONOMICS
FIXED INVESTMENT:
6126000
SULFUR
REMOVED
YEARS ANNUAL POWER UNIT POWER UNIT BY
AFTER OPERA- HEAT FUEL POLLUTION
POWER TION. REQUIREMENT. CONSUMPTION. CONTROL
UNIT KW-HR/ MILLION ATU TONS COAL PROCESS.
START KW /YEAR /.YEAR TONS/YEAH
1
2
3
4
~~6
7
8
9
"ll
12
13
14
~16
17
IB
"21
22
23
24
~26
27
28
29
7000
7000
7000
7000
7000
7000
7000
..JOPj
12880000
12880000
12880000
12880000
613300 14600
613300 •- 14600
613300 14600
613300 14600
12880000. 613300 14600.
12880000 613300 14600
12880000 613300 14600
12880000 613300 14600
12880000 613300 14600
" 128HOOOO 613300 14600
5000 9200000 438100
5000 9200000 438100
5000 9200000 438100
SppO 9200000 438100
..115000-1111.2200000 438100
3500 6440000 306700
3500 6440000 306700
3500 6440000 306700
3500 644000P 306700
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
1500
6.44.QOOO
2760000
2760000
2760000
2760000
2Z&0000
2760000
2760000
2760000
2760000.
2Z60000— -
306ZOO-
RY-PRODUCT
RATE,
EQUIVALENT NET
TONS/YEAR
WASTE
SOLIDS
TOTAL
OP. COST
INCLUDING
REVENUE, REGULATED
S/TON ROI FOR
POWER
WASTE COMPANY,
SOLIDS S/VEAR
NET ANNUAL CUMULATIVE
TOTAL INCREASE NET INCREASE
NET (DECREASE) (DECREASE)
SALES IN COST OF IN COST OF
REVENUE, POWER, POwER,
(/YEAR % %
224400 0.0 3289200 0
224400 0.0 3256700 0
224400 0.0 3224200 0
224400 0.0 3191700 0
224400 0*0 1.13152200 l_lfl
224400 0.0 3126700 0
224400 0.0 3094200 0
224400 0.0 3061700 0
224400 0.0 3029200 0
224400 0.0 ' '2996800 0
10400 160300 0.0
10400 160300 0.0
10400 160300 0.0
10400 160300 0.0
1040Q 1&0300 0*0
7300 112200 0.0
7300 112200 0.0
7300 112200 0.0
7300 112200 0.0
7320 1122QO 0.0
131400 3100 48100
131400 3100 48100
131400 3100 48100
131400 3100 48100
__1314flfl 3100 4810Q
131400 3100 48100
131400 3100 48100
131400 3100 48100
131400 3100 48100
-.131400 3100 __4ftlOtt
2668100 0
2635600 0
2603100 0
2570600 0
1— 2533100 l_fl
2248000 0
2215500 0
2183000 0
2150500 0
'2118000 '0
0.0 1644400
0.0 1611900
0.0 1579400
0.0 1546900
—0*0 1-11514400—
0.0 1481900
0.0 1449400
0.0 1416900
0.0 1384400
OaP 135.19QP,
0
0
0
0
' Q \
0
0
0
0
3289200
3256700
3224200
3191700
— 315.2200—
3126700
3094200
3061700
3029200
— 2226800—
2668100
2635600
2603100
2570600
— 2538100—
2248000
2215500
2183000
2150500
2118000
1644400
1611900
1579400
1546900
1514400—
1481900
1449400
1416900
1384400
3289200
6545900
9770100
. J2961800
19247700
22341900
25403600
28432800
34097700
36733300
39336400
.41907000
46693100
48908600
51091600
53242100
-.-56360100
57004500
58616400
60195800
61742700
-—61251100
64739000
66188400
67605300
68989700
__lZtt341600
TOT 127500 234600000 11171000 265500 4087500
LIFETIME AVERAGE INCREASE (DECREASE) IN UNIT OPERATING COST
DOLLARS PER TON OF COAL BURNED
MILLS PEW KILO-KATT-MOUH
CENTS PER MILLION BTU HFAT INPUT
DOLLARS Ptx TON OF SULFUR REMOVED
PROCESS COST niSCOUNTEO AT 11.6% TO INITIAL YEAR* DOLLARS
70341600
6.30
2.76
29.98
264.94
23903700
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
LEVELIZED INCREASE (DECREASE) IN UNIT OPERATING COST EQUIVALENT TO DISCOUNTED PROCESS COST OVER LIFE OF
DOLLARS PER TOM OF COAL BURNED 5.49 0.0
MILLS PER KILOWATT-hOUR 2.40 0.0
CFNTS PER MILLION BTU HFAT INPUT 26.1* 0.0
H TON OF SULFUR REMOVED 230.73 0.0
70341600
6.30
2.76
29.98
264.94
23903700
POWER UNIT
5.49
2.40
26.14
230.73
-------
TABLE B-2
LINE/LIMESTONE SLUDGE DISPOSAL - SLUDGE BLENDING PROCESS 500 MM NEW UNITt 3.5% S IN FUEL* 16« ASH IN COALt REGULATED CO. ECONOMICS
FIXED INVESTMENT I S
YEARS ANNUAL
AFTER OPERA-
POWER TION.
UNIT KW-HR/
START KH
POWER UNIT
HEAT
REQUIREMENT i
MILLION BTU
/YEAR
POWER UNIT
FUEL
CONSUMPTION.
TONS COAL
/YEAR
1 7000
2 7000
3 7000
* 7PPP
__5 1044_
6 7000
7 7000
8 7000
9 7000
14 Z404-
11 5000
12 5000
13 5000
14 5000
.it IMO.
16 3500
17 3500
18 3500
19 3500
.24 3500.
21 1500
22 1500
23 1500
2* »500
_ea 1540.
26 1500
27 1500
28 1500
29 JSOO
-34.-__1504.
31500000
31500000
31500000
31500000
31544444—
31500000
31500000
31500000
31500000
31540404.-
22500000
22500000
22500000
22500000
. 22544444.-
15750000
15750000
15750000
15750000
1SZS4444_
6750000
6750000
6750000
6750000
6Z54444-.
6750000
6750000
6750000
6750000
6154040-
1500000
1500000
1500000
1500000
1544444
1500000
1500000
1500000
1500000
1544444
1071400
1071400
1071400
1071400
14Z1440
750000
750000
750000
750000
154440
321400
321400
321400
321400
321444-.
321400
321400
321400
321400
321444-.
SULFUR
REMOVED
BY
POLLUTION
CONTROL
PROCESSi
TONS/YEAR
•••••••
35600
35600
35600
35600
35640
35600
35600
35600
35600
35640
25400
25400
25400
25400
25444
17600
17800
17800
17800
!Zft4fl
7600
7600
7600
7600
_164Q
7600
7600
7600
7600
1644
BY-PRODUCT
RATEi
EQUIVALENT
TONS/YEAR
WASTE
SOLIDS
546700
546700
548700
548700
.54&I4Q
548700
548700
548700
548700
8605000
NET REVENUEt
S/TON
WASTE
SOLIDS
"o7o
0.0
0.0
0.0
.4*4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
392000
392000
392000
392000
.322444
274400
274400
274400
274400
.2Z4444
117600
117600
117600
117600
.111644
117600
117600
117600
117600
.111644
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
.4*4.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
.4*4.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
.4*4.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
TOTAL
OP. COST
INCLUDING
REGULATED
ROI FOR
POWER
COMPANY.
S/YEAR
45f4000~
4469500
4425100
V380700
4336344.
4291900
4247500
4203100
4158700
4114344.
3657400
3612900
3568500
3524100
34.ZJ7J14
NET ANNUAL CUMULATIVE
TOTAL INCREASE NET INCREASE
NET (DECREASE) (DECREASE)
SALES IN COST OF IN COST OF
REVENUE. POWER* POWER.
S/YEAR t *
3080000
3035600
2991200
2946ROO
224244fl_.
2258600
2214100
2169700
2125300
2404244..
2036500
1992100
1947700
1903300
0 4514000
0 4469500
0 4425100
0 4380700
0 4336344
~0 4291900
0 4247500
0 4203100
0 4158700
.4.. . ,4114344—
0 3657400
0 3612900
0 3568500
0 3524100
.0 34Z2Z44
0 3080000
0 3035600
0 2991200
0 2946800
0 2902400
"O 2258600
0 2214100
0 2169700
0 2125300
0 2464244
4514000
8983500
13408600
J7789300
21125640
26417500
30665000
34868100
39026800
itlillftO
46798500
50411400
53979900
57504000
TOT 127500 573750000 27321000 648000 9995000
LIFETIME AVERAGE INCREASE (DECREASE) IN UNIT OPERATING COST
DOLLARS PER TON OF COAL 8URNED
MILLS PER KILOWATT-HOUR
CENTS PER MILLION STU NEAT INPUT
DOLLARS PER TON OF SULFUR REMOVED
PROCESS COST DISCOUNTED AT 11.6% TO INITIAL YEAH. DOLLARS
96526800
3.53
1.51
16.82
148.96
32801900
LEVELIZED INCREASE (DECREASE) IN UNIT OPERATING COST EQUIVALENT TO DISCOUNTED PROCESS COST OVER LIFE OF
DOLLARS PER TON OF COAL BURNED 3.08 0.0
MILLS PER KILOWATT-HOUR 1.32 0.0
CENTS PER MILLION BTU HFAT INPUT 14.67 o.o
DOLLARS PER TON OF SULFUR REMOVED 129,HI 0.0
0 2036500
0 1992100
0 1947700
0 1903300
4 1&5&244
0 96526600
0.0 3.53
0.0 1.51
0.0 16.82
0.0 148.96
0 32801900
POWER UNIT
3.06
1.32
14.67
129.81
64063700
67099300
70090500
?3p37300
.-11232140
78198300
80412400
82582100
84707400
_afciafl34o
88624800
90816900
92764600
94667900
—2t526aftO
-------
TABLE B-3
LIME/LIHESTONE SLUDGF DISPOSAL - SLUDGE HLENDING PROCESS 1500 MW NEW UNIT. 3t5% S IN FUEL. 16* ASH. REGULATED CO. ECONOMICS
FIXED INVESTMENT:
18282000
SULFUK BY-PRODUCT
REMOVED RATE.
YEARS ANNUAL POWER UNIT POWER UNIT BY EQUIVALENT
AFTER OPERA- HEAT FUEL POLLUTION TONS/YEAR
POWER TION. REQUIREMENT. CONSUMPTION. CONTROL
UNIT KM-HR/ MILLION SITU TONS COAL PROCESS. WASTE
START KW /YEAR /YEAR TONS/YEAR SOLIDS
1 7000 945000QO 4500000 106800 1646100
2 7000 94500000 4500000 106400 1646100
3 7000 94500000 4500000 106800 1646100
4 7000 94500000 4500000 106000 1646100
£ ,.,7000 94500000 ^..4.500000 ,_ -Ifl&eOO,, ,.JT- 164.6.AQQ
6 7000 94500000 4500000 106800 1646100
7 7000 94500000 4500000 106800 1646100
8 7000 94500000 4500000 106000 1646100
9 7000 94500000 4500000 106000 1646100
ill 10.0.0. S4.5QQQ.OJ2 _ 45222QO- _ .IQ-fettttSL. 164&10.2
11 5000 67500000 3214300 76300 1175800
12 5000 67500000 3214300 76JOO 1175800
13 5000 67500000 3214300 76300 1175800
14 5000 67500000 3214300 76JOO 1175800
15 SQQJL 6i5SQ2QC__ —2214322 IfciflD. 1115&QQ.
16 3500 47250000 2250000 53400 823100
17 3500 47250000 2250000 53400 823100
18 3500 47250000 2250000 53400 823100
19 3500 47250000 2250000 53400 823100
20 ^._3^00 T 4725000C 2250000 53400 823100
Zl 1500 20250000 964300 22900 352700
22 1500 20250000 964300 2PVOO 352700
23 1500 20250000 964300 22VOO 352700
24 1500 202SOOOO 964300 22*00 352700
NET REVENUE.
S/TON
WASTE
SOLIDS
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
on
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Qj.fi.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
p_»p
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
(U.Q
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
TOTAL
OP. COST
INCLUDING
REGULATED
ROI FOR
POWER
COMPANY.
I/YEAR
8534900
8442400
8349900
8257500
8 1650 00
8072500
7980000
7887500
7795000
11025JIQ_
6870900
6778400
6685900
6593400
6,50_Q90.Q_
5793400
5691400
559R900
5506400
54L3^flQ
4295600
4203100
4110600
4018200
25 iSflfi -2025000Q-- _S643flfi 222Q1L __ -352IQ.Q 0-^0- 39257_flil
26 1500 20250000 964300 22400 352700
27 1500 20250000 964300 22*00 352700
28 1500 20250000 964300 22*00 352700
29 J500 20250000 964300 22*00 352700
30 iSilJL __2025QQOQ-. -''64320 2229.0 _ .35.2100-
TOT 127500 1721250000 R1964500 1945500 29982500
LIFETIME AVERAGE INCREASE (DECHFASfc) IN UNIT OPERATING COST
DOLLARS PER TON OF COAL BURNED
MILLS PER KILOWATT-HOUR
CENTS PER MILLION BTU HEAT INPUT
DOLLARS PER TON OF SULFUR REMOVED
PROCESS COST DISCOUNTED AT n.6« TO INITIAL YEAR. DOLLARS
LEVELIZED INCREASE (DECREASE) IN UNIT OPERATING COST EQUIVALENT
HOLLARS PER TON OF COAL 9URNED
MILLS PER KILOHATT-HOUH
CENTS PER MILLION RTU HEAT INPUT
HOLLARS PER TON OF bULFUR REMOVED
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
p.o
3833200
3740700
364H200
3555700
3143300-
181405400
2.21
0.95
10.54
93.24
61730100
NET ANNUAL
TOTAL
NET
SALES
REVENUE.
S/YEAR
0
0
0
0
0_
0
0
0
0
g
0
0
0
0
0_
0
0
0
0
Q_
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
Q
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
TO DISCOUNTED PROCESS COST OVER LIFE OF
1.93
0.03
9.20
81.41
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
INCREASE
(DECREASE)
IN COST OF
POWER.
t
8534900
8442400
8349900
8257500
A 1 6SQQO
8072500
7980000
7887500
7795000
Z1Q2500
6870900
6778400
6685900
6593400
5783800
5691400
5598900
5506400
-54132 00-
4295600
4203100
4110600
4018200
CUMULATIVE
NET INCREASE
(DECREASE)
IN COST OF
POWER.
t
8534900
16977300
25327200
33584700
41749700
49822200
57802200
65689700
73484700
Qftl87200
88058100
94836500
101522400
108115800
11*616100
120400500
126091900
131690800
J37J97200
1 4261 11 00
146906700
151109800
155220400
159238600
.3225100. 161164300
3833200
3740700
3648200
3555700
3163300
181405400
2.21
0.95
10.54
93.24
61730100
POWER UNIT
1.93
0.83
9.20
81.41
166997500
170738200
174386400
J77942100
-------
-------
TABLE B-5
LIME/LIMESTONE SLUDGE DISPOSAL - GYPSUM PHOCESS. 500 MX NEM UNIT. 3.5* S IN FUEL. 16* ASH IN COAL* REGULATED CO. ECONOMICS
FIXED INVESTMENT! »
5411000
SULFUi* BY-PRODUCT
REMOVED RATE.
YEARS ANNUAL POWER UNIT POWER UNIT HV EQUIVALENT NET
AFTER OPERA- HEAT FUEL POLLUTION TONS/YEAR
POWER TION. REQUIREMENT. CONSUMPTION. CONTROL
UNIT KW-HR/ MILLION BTU TONS COAL PROCESS. WASTE
START KW /YEAR /YEAH TONS/YEAri SOLIDS
1 7000 31500000 1500000 35700 496300
2 7000 31500000 1500000 35700 496300
3 7000 31500000 1500000 35700 496300
4 7000 31500000 1500000 35700 496300
5 7000 31500000 15000UO , 3S7oq . ..4963QO
6 7000 31500000 1500000 3*700 496300
7 7000 31500000 1500000 35700 496300
8 7000 31500000 1500000 35700 496300
9 7000 31500000 1500000 35700 496300
IQ, jflflh . 21500000 150000.0 - 35.740. __ -42630.0
11 5000 22500000 1071400 25bOO 354500
12 5000 22500000 1071400 25500 354500
13 5000 22500000 1071400 25500 354500
14 5000 22500000 1071400 25500 354500
ife Sflflfl 22500000— —10114110 _ 25&00- 251500
16 3500 15750000 750000 17vOO 246200
17 3500 15750000 750000 17900 246200
18 3500 15750000 750000 17*00 248200
19 3500 15750000 750000 17*00 248200
2ft 3500 " " 15755000 750000 11 200. _. 2*6200
21 1500 6750000 321400 7700 106400
22 1500 6750000 321400 7700 106400
23 1500 6750000 3214QO 7700 106400
24 1500 6750000 321*00 7700 106400
25 1500 6750000 .921*00 ^.^.JMa 1064.00
26 1SOO 6750000 321400 7700 106400
27 1500 6750000 321400 7700 106400
28 1500 6750000 321400 7700 106400
29 1500 6750000 321400 7700 106400
3D 1500- — 6Z5QOQO— 321*00 Z10Q 106100
TOTAL
OP. COST
INCLUDING NET ANNUAL
REVENUE* REGULATED TOTAL INCREASE
S/TON ROI FOR NET (DECREASE)
POWER SALES IN COST OF
WASTE COMPANY. REVENUE* POWER*
SOLIDS S/YEAR S/YEAR *
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
_- 0*0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
—0*0—
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
—0*0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0*0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
— 0*0_
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
D_*4
TOT 1P7500 573750000 27321000 651000 9040500
LIFETIME AVERAGE INCREASE (DECREASE) IN UNIT OPERATING COST
DOLLARS PER TON OF COAL BURNEO
MILLS PER KILOWATT-HOUR
CENTS PER MILLION BTU HEAT INPUT
DOLLARS PER TON OF bULFUR REMOVED
PROCESS COST DISCOUNTED AT 11. 6* TO INITIAL YEAR. DOLLARS
LEVELIZED INCREASE (DECREASE) IN UNIT OPERATING COST EQUIVALENT TO DISCOUNTED
DOLLARS PER TON OF COAL BURNED
MILLS PEB KILOWATT-HOUW
CENTS PE» MILLION BTU HFAT INPUT
COLLARS PE» TON OF bULFUf* REMOVED
3615300
3598300
3561400
3534400
2501500
34H0500
3453600
3426600
3399700
3312.100
2952700
2925700
2898800
2871800
2fll*.2flO
2479100
2452200
2425200
2398200
2311300
0
0
0
0
o_
0
0
0
0
o_
0
0
0
0
fl_
0
0
0
0
0
1772500 0
1745600 0
1718600 0
1691700 0
1664700 0
1637800
1610800
1583900
1556900
1520000
78072400
2.86
1.22
13.61
119.93
26513400
PROCESS COST OVER
2.49
1.07
11.86
104.59
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
LIFE OF
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3615300
3568300
3561400
3534400
3501500
3480500
3453600
3426600
3399700
3212100
2952700
2925700
2898800
2871800
?B4.490Q
2479100
2452200
2425200
2398200
2211200-
1772500
1745600
1718600
1691700
1664700
1637800
1610800
1583900
1556900
1530000
78072400
2.86
1.22
13.61
119.93
26513400
POWER UNIT
2.49
1.07
11.86
104.59
CUMULATIVE
NET INCREASE
(DECREASE)
IN COST. OF
POWER*
%
3615300
7203600
10765000
14299400
1IAQ6900
21287400
24741000
28167600
31567300
2*210000
37892700
40818400
43717200
46589000
41433200
51913000
54365200
56790400
59188600
6*5 5.29 QO
63332400
65078000
66796600
68488300
-ItLSJOOO
71790800
73401600
74985500
76542400
UOZ2100
-------
TABLE B-6
LIME/LIMESTONE SLUDGE DISPOSAL - GYPSUM PKOCESS, 1500 MM NEW UNITi 3.5% S IN FUELi 16* ASH IN COAL* REGULATED CO. ECONOMICS
FIXED INVESTMENT! I
YEARS ANNUAL
AFTER OPERA-
POWER TION.
POWER UNIT
HEAT
POWER UNIT
FUEL
REQUIREMENT, CONSUMPTION.
UNIT KW-HR/ MILLION BTU TONS COAL
START KW
/YEAR
/YEAH
SULFUR
REMOVED
BY
POLLUTION
CONTROL
PROCESS.
TONS/YEAR
BY-PRODUCT
RATE,
EQUIVALENT
TONS/YEAR
WASTE
SOLIDS
9826000
NET REVENUE,
S/TON
HASTE
SOLIDS
TOTAL
OP. COST
INCLUDING
REGULATED
ROI FOR
POWER
COMPANY.
S/YEAR
TOTAL
NET
SALES
NET ANNUAL
INCREASE
(DECREASE)
IN COST OF
REVENUE, POWER,
S/YEAR %
CUMULATIVE
NET INCREASE
(DECREASE)
IN COST OF
POWER,
1 7000
2 7000
3 7000
* 7PPP.
__5 ___ 7.0.0.0.
6 7000
7 7000
6 7000
7pOO
44500000
9*500000
94500000
94500000
11 5000
12 5000
13 5000
1* 5000.
.15 5flOft_
16 3500
17 3500
18 3500
I? 3?pp
.20 35HO-
21 1500
22 1500
23 1500
1500
26
27
2fl
2?
_3Q
1500
1500
1500
J500
__15flOl
94500000
94500000
94500000
94500000
.124500000-
67500000
67500000
67500000
67500000
116Z50QQOJ1-
47250000
47250000
47250000
47250000
114125OOOfl.
20250000
20250000
20250000
20250000
1.20250000.
20250000
20250000
20250000
20250000
11202500.00.
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000—
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
_
3214300
3214300
32143UO
3214300
32143.00_.
2250000
2250000
2250000
22SOOOO
2250000__
964300
964300
464300
964300
2643UO-.
964300
96*100
964300
964300
106800
106800
106dOO
106800
106000-
106800
106600
106HOO
106800
76300
76300
76JUO
76300
53400
53400
53400
53400
. 53400-
2?MOO
22900
22VOO
22*00
22900
22*00
2?VOO
1488200
1488200
1488200
1488200
1488200
1488200
1488200
ItflftiOQ
1063000
1063000
1063000
1063000
744100
744100
744100
744100
144100
318900
318900
318900
318900
318900
318900
318900
318900
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0*0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Oa.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5881800
5835000
5788200
5741500
5647900
5601200
5554400
5507600
4774400
4727600
4680900
4634100
4000600
3953800
3907000
3860300
2882700
2836000
2789200
2742400
2648900
2602100
2555400
2508600
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Q
0
0
0
0
o_
0
0
0
0
0-
5881800
5835000
5788200
5741500
5647900
5601200
5554400
5507600
-51602 00-
4774400
4727600
4680900
4634100
4000600
3953800
3907000
3860300
0 2882700
0 2836000
0 2789200
0 2742400
_fl 26.9.5200
0
0
0
0
0-
5881800
11716800
17505000
23246500
34589100
40190300
45744700
51252300
5tZU2AO
61487600
66215200
70896100
75530200
___ aiiiz&ao
84118100
88071900
91978900
95839200
102535400
105371400
108160600
110903000
2648900 116247600
2602100 118849700
2555400 121405100
2S08600 123913700
246.lflfl.fi. . 1.243Z5500
TOT 127500 1721250000 81964500 1945bOO 27106500
LIFETIME AVERAGE INCHE4SF (OFCKFASt) IN UNIT OPERATING COST
OOLLABS PE" TON OF COAL BURNtD
"ILLS Off KlLOwATT-nOUM
CENTS PER MILLION flTU HEAT INPUT
OOLLAWS PER TON OF iULFUH REMOVED
PROCESS COST niSCOUNTFO AT ll.h* TO INITIAL rEAK(. DOLLARS
126375500
1.54
0.66
7.34
64.96
4299B600
126375500
LEVELIZFD INCREASF (HFCHFASF) IN UNIT OPERATING COST EQUIVALENT TO DISCOUNTED PROCESS COST OVER LIFE OF
HOLLARS PER TON Of COAL BUHNEO 1.35
"ILLS PFft KILO-ATT-nOUR 0.58
CFNTS PFP MILLION HTU HFAT INPUT 6.41
PEW TCIN OF SULFUR REMOVED 56.70
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
FE OF
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.54
0.66
7.34
64.96
42998600
POWER UNIT
1.35
0.56
6.41
56.70
-------
APPENDIX C
CONSTANT ON-STREAM TIME - LIFETIME REVENUE REQUIREMENTS
171
-------
TABLE C-l
LIME/LIMESTONE SLUDGE DISPOSAL - SLUDGE BLENDING PROCESS. 200 MW NEW UNIT. 3.5% S< TOOO HRS CONSTANT ONSTREAM. REGULATED CO. ECONO
FIXED INVESTMENT! $
5
YEARS ANNUAL
AFTER OPERA-
POWER TIONt
UNIT KW-HR/
START KW
_______
2 7000
3 7000
4 7000
—5 ZOOO
6 7000
7 7000
8 7000
9 7000
10 ZOOO
11 7000
12 7000
13 7000
14 7000
.15 ZOOO
16 7000
17 7000
18 7000
19 7000
.20 ZflflO.-.
21 7000
2? 7000
23 7000
24 7000
.25 ZOOO
26 7000
27 7000
28 7000
29 7000
.30 7.000
POWER UNIT
HEAT
REQUIREMENT.
MILLION BTU
/YEAR
POWER UNIT
FUEL
CONSUMPTION.
TONS COAL
/YEAR
SULFUR
REMOVED
BY
POLLUTION
CONTROL
PROCESS*
TONS/YEAR
BY-PRODUCT
RATE,
EQUIVALENT
TONS/YEAR
WASTE
SOLIDS
6268000
NET REVENUE.
S/TON
WASTE
SOLIDS
TOTAL
OP. COST
INCLUDING
REGULATED
ROI FOR
POWER
COMPANY.
S/YEAR
TOTAL
NET
SALES
REVENUE.
S/YEAR
12880000
12680000
12880000
12880000
.12860000.
12880000
12880000
12880000
12880000
.12880000.
12880000
12880000
12880000
12880000
12680000
12880000
12880000
12880000
.12880000.
12880000
12680000
12B80000
12880000
-12880000.
12840000
12880000
12880000
128AOOOO
.12860000.
613300
613300
613300
613300
613300—
613300
613300
613300
613300
613300--
613300
613300
613300
613300
613300-.
613300
613300
613300
613300
613300—
613300
613300
613300
613300
613300-.
613300
613300
613300
613300
613300-
M600
14600
14600
14600
IAMB
14600
14600
14600
14600
14600
14600
14600
14600
14600
14600
14600
14600
14600..
14600
14600
14600
14600
14600
14600
14600
14600
liftflfi
224400
224400
224400
224400
.224400
224400
224400
224400
224400
.224400
224400
224400
224400
224400
.224400
224400
224400
224400
224400
.224400
224400
224400
224400
224400
.224400
224400
224400
224400
224400
.224400
3320200
3287700
3255200
3222700
3ia0200__
3157700
3125300
3092800
3060300
3021800—
2995300
2962800
2930300
2897800
2865300—
2832800
2800300
2767900
2735400
2Z0220fl_.
2670400
2637900
2605400
2572900
2540400-.
2507900
2475400
2442900
2410500
2318000-
NET ANNUAL
INCREASE
(DECREASE)
IN COST OF
POWERi
%
3320200
3287700
3255200
3222700
3120200
3157700
3125300
3092800
3060300
—3021800
2995300
2962800
2930300
2897800
0
0
0
0
p_
0
0
0
0
2832800 4<
2800300 Si
2767900 5'
2735400 5
27P2900 6.1
2670400 6i
2637900 6!
2605400 61
2572900 71
TOT 210000 3R6400000
LIFETIME AVERAGE INCREASE
85472400
18399000 436000 6732000
(DECREASE) IN UNIT OPERATING COST
DOLLARS PER TON OF COAL BURNED
MILLS PER KILOWATT-HOUR
CENTS PEP MILLION BTU MEAT INPUT
DOLLARS PER TON OF SULFUR REMOVED
PROCESS COST DISCOUNTED AT 11.6% TO INITIAL YEAH, DOLLARS
LEVELIZEO INCREASE (DECREASE) IN UNIT OPERATING COST EQUIVALENT TO DISCOUNTED PROCESS COST OVER
DOLLARS PER TON OF COAL BURNED
MILLS PEP KILOWATT-HOUR
CENTS PER MILLION BTU HEAT INPUT
DOLLARS PER TON OF SULFUR REMOVED
.0 2540400
0 2507900
0 2475400
0 2442900
0 2410500
.0 2318000
0 85472400
CUMULATIVE
NET INCREASE
(DECREASE)
IN COST OF
POWER.
3320200
6607900
9863100
13085800
—1*216000
19433700
22559000
25651800
28712100
—3*132200
34735200
37696000
40628300
43526100
.4*321400
49224200
S2024500
54792400
57527800
-6.t23fliaO
62901100
65539000
68144400
70717300
-11251100
75765600
78241000
80683900
83094400
4.65
2.04
22.12
195.14
25546100
SS COST OVER
5.02
2.20
23.90
310.78
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
LIFE OF
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
4.65
2.04
22.12
195.14
25546100
POWER UNIT
5.02
2.20
23.90
210.78
-------
TABLE C-2
LIME/LIMESTONE SLUDGE DISPOSAL - SLUDGE BLENDING PROCESS. 500 HW NEM UNIT. 3.5C Si 7000 HRS CONSTANT ONSTREAMt REGULATED CO. ECONO
FIXED INVESTMENT: *
8955000
YEARS ANNUAL
AFTER OPERA-
POHER TION.
UNIT KH-HR/
START KH
1 7000
2 7000
3 7000
4 7000
..5 ZOOO-.
6 7000
7 7000
8 7000
9 7000
11 7000
12 7000
H 13 7000
77) 14 7000
.15 ZOOO-.
16 7000
17 7000
18 7000
19 7000
_zo zooo..
21 7000
22 7000
23 7000
24 7000
_Z5 ZOQO.
26 7000
27 7000
28 7000
29 7000
.30 ZOQO.
TOT 210000
LIFETIME
PROCESS COST
LEVEL I ZED
SULFUR
REMOVED
POHER UNIT POHER UNIT BY
HEAT FUEL POLLUTION
REQUIREMENT* CONSUMPTION* CONTROL
MILLION RTU TONS COAL PROCESS*
/YEAR /YEAR TONS/YEAR
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 ,1500000 „ ..35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000.. -.1500000 3564.0.
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
. _ 31500000 1500020- 35640.
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35bOO
315flQD_DJI 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35000
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
31500000 1500000 35600
3150Q002-. 1500000. 35600.
TOTAL
BY-PRODUCT OP. COST
RATE* INCLUDING
EQUIVALENT NET REVENUE* REGULATED
TONS/YEAR S/TON ROI FOR
POHER
HASTE HASTE COMPANY.
SOLIDS SOLIDS S/YEAR
496300
496300
496300
496300
496300
496300
496300
496300
426.300
496300
496300
496300
496300
426300
496300
496300
496300
496300
426300
496300
496300
496300
496300
-426300
496300
496300
496300
496300
496300
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0*0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Ot.fi.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0x0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
__0*0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
945000000 45000000 106HOOO 148B9000
AVERAGE INCREASE (DECREASE) IN UNIT OPERATING COST
DOLLARS PtK TON OF COAL BURNED
"ILLS PER KILOWATT-MOUH
CFNTS PEW MILLION *TU MEAT INPUT
DOLLARS PER TON OF bULFUR REMOVED
DISCOUNTED «T 11. 6% TO INITIAL YEAH. DOLLARS
INCREASE IOECRFASEI IN UNIT OPERATING COST EQUIVALENT TO DISCOUNTED i
DOLLARS PER TON OF COAL bUHNEO
MILLS PER KILO*ATT-MOU«
CENTS PER MILLION BTU MEAT INPUT
DOLLARS PER TON OF iULFUR REMOVED
4590500
4546000
4501600
4457200
4412820
4368*00
4324000
4279600
4235200
4120000
TOTAL
NET
SALES
REVENUE.
S/YEAR
0
0
0
0
_ 0_
0
0
0
0
a
4146400 0
4101900 0
4057500 0
4013100 0
3968700 .^ o
3924300
3879900
3835500
3791100
3146122
3702300
3657800
3613400
3569000
3524^00
3480200
3435800
3391400
3347000
330260Q
118395300
2.63
1.13
12.53
110.86
35351400
PROCESS COST OVER
2.8*
13^52
119.63
0
0
0
0
- 0_
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
LIFE OF
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
NET ANNUAL
INCREASE
(DECREASE)
IN COST OF
POHER*
*
4590500
4546000
4501600
4457200
4412800
4368400
4324000
4279600
4235200
4190800
4146400
4101900
4057500
4013100
3924300
3879900
3835500
3791100
-3Z46IOO
3702300
3657800
3613400
3569000
. -3524600
3480200
3435800
3391400
3347000
118395300
2.63
1.13
12.53
110.86
35351400
POHER UNIT
2.8*
1.22
13.52
119.63
CUMULATIVE
NET INCREASE
IDECREASE)
IN COST OF
POHER*
4590500
9136500
13638100
18095300
21503100
26876500
3-1200500
35480100
39715300
4B9.tt6.iaO
48052500
52154400
56211900
60225000
6.4143100
68118000
71997900
75833400
79624500
a»3ueoo
87073500
90731300
94344700
97913700
-.-101434300
104918500
108354300
111745700
115092700
...116325300
-------
TABLE C-3
LIMF/LIMESTONE SLUDGE DISPOSAL - SLUOfaE RLENDlNf, PROCESS. 1500 MW NEW UNIT. 3.5S S. 7000 HUS CONSTANT ONSTREAM. REGULATED CO. ECON
FIXED INVESTMENT: t 19321000
TOTAL
SULFUK HY-PRODUCT OP. COST
PEMOVtO HATE. INCLUDING
YEARS ANNUAL POWEri UNIT POME* UNIT flY EQUIVALENT NET REVENUE. REGULATED
AFTFR OPERA- HEAT FUEL POLLUTION TONS/YEAH S/TON HOI FOR
POWFR TION. REQUIREMENT. CONSUMPTION. CONTROL POWFP
UNIT KW-HR/ MILLION MTU TONS COAL PROCESS. WASTE. WASTE COMPANY,
START KW. /YEAR /Y£A» TONS/YEAH SOLIDS SOLIDS S/YEAR
1 7000
2 7000
3 7000
4 7000
5 _zaaa
6 7000
7 7000
8 7000
9 7000
ia zaaa
11 7000
12 7000
13 7000
14 7000
ife zaao
16 7000
17 7000
16 7000
19 7000
2.B zaaa
"21 7000
22 7000
23 7000
24 7000
.& zaaa
26 7000
27 7000
28 7000
29 7000
.3ft. . zaaa-1"'
94500000
94500000
94500000
94500000
2*5caQac _
94500000
94500000
94500000
94500000
94500000
94500000
94500000
94SUOOOO
94500000
945nnnoo
94SDOOOO
94bOOOOO
94500000
9*500000
94500000
94500000
04500000
94500000
94500000
94500000
94500000
"-Siseseaa
4500000
4SOOOOO
4500000
4500000
—tseaaaa
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
106000
106000
106000
1 06BU 0
_ia&.daa_ ____
lOftOOO
106000
106000
106000
106000
106000
106BOO
106HOO
106000
106000
106000
106000
106000
106000
106000
106*00
106000
106aOO
106000
1646100
1646100
1646100
1646100
1646100
1646100
1646100
1646100
1646100
1646100
1646100
1646100
1646100
1646100
1646100
1646100
16.4.6104
1646100
1646100
1646100
1646100
__ife4.6iaa __ __
1646100
1646100
1646100
1646100
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0*g.
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
8760900
8668400
8575900
84H3500
8298500
8206000
8113500
8021000
7836100
7743600
7651100
7558600
7373600
71HH7QO
7096200
z&oazaa
6911200
6818700
6726100
6633*00
644HHOO
6356300
6263800
6171300
NET ANNUAL CUMULATIVE
TOTAL INCREASE NET INCREASE
NET (DECREASE) (DECREASE)
SALES IN COST OF IN COST OF
REVENUE. POWER. POWER.
S/YEAR % s
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a _
8760900
8668400
8575900
8483500
8298500~
8206000
8113500
8021000
is.2a6.aa
7836100
7743600
7651100
7558600
7373600
7281200
7188700
7096200
-Zaaazaa
6911200
6018700
6726300
6633800
_ 6541300
0 6448BOO
0 6356300
0 6263800
0 6171300
a &azaaaa
8760900
17429300
26005200
34488700
51178200
59384200
67497700
75518700
aaiizaao
91283400
99027000
106678100
114236700
"129076400
136357600
1*3546300
150642500
-151646210
164557400
171376100
178102400
184736200
__i.iUii5ao
197726300
204082600
210346400
2165)7700
TOT 210000 28350000000 135000000 3204000 44383000
LIFETIME AVFRAGE INCREASE (OECHEASt) IN UNIT OPEHATING COST
nOLL*RS PER TOM OF COAL ttUWhtD
MILLS PF.<*
-------
TABLE C-4
LIME/LIMESTONE SLUDGE DISPOSAL - GYPSUM PROCESS. 300 MW NEW UNIT, 3.5* S. 7000 MRS CONSTANT ONSTREAM, REGULATED CO. ECONOMICS
INVESTMENT:
4043000
YEARS ANNUAL
AFTFR OPERA-
POWER TION.
UNIT KW-HR/
START KW
1 7000
2 7000
3 7000
4 7000
5 2DOO-_.
6 7000
7 7000
8 7000
9 7000
-Ift ZQfiJL.
11 7000
12 7000
13 7000
14 7000
.15 IQQC..
16 7000
17 7000
18 7000
19 7000
2ft ZOaQ
"21 70on~"
22 7000
23 7000
24 7000
~26 7000~"
27 7000
28 7000
29 7000
-3ft.___zaaa._
TOT 210000
LIFFTIME A
PROCESS COST
LEVEL I ZED
SULFUH BY-PRODUCT
UEMOVbl) MATE.
POWEH UNIT POWFR UNIT HY EQUIVALENT
HEAT FUEL POLLUTION TONS/YEAH
REQUIREMENT. CONSUMPTION. CONTHOL
MILLION BTU TONS COAL PROCESS. WASTE
/YEAO /YEAH TONS/YEAW SOLIDS
12HROOOO
12880000
12H80000
12180000
.__i2afiap.oo.
12880000
12880000
12H80POO
12880000
12d9QO.a0.
1?8ROOOO
12U80000
I2«hoooo
12*80000
-123S.aDQfl
l?4Hoono
12HMOOOO
12480000
12H«onoo
613300
613300
613300
613300
6133UO
613300
613300
611300
6133aO_
6133UO
6133UO
6111UO
613300
61335.2
&13300
613300
611300
613100
„ _i2flBaaao. ti3Jua_
12HHOOOO M3100
1?880000 613100
12HROOOO 61330U
1?8HOOOO 613300
12tiBP.oao.
1 P8HOOOO
12H80000
12H«nor)0
12>1HOOOO
12960.0QO.
__ &133fl[L_
613300
h 1 3 3 0 0
613100
61 111)11
felllUO
1*100
14100
14100
1*100
14100
14100
1 41110
14100
i4iaa_
14100
14100
14100
14100
14100
14100
14100
14100
1*100
1*100
1*1(10
1*100
1*100
1*100
1*100
1*100
141HO
203000
203000
203000
203000
203000
203000
203000
203000
203000
203000
203000
203000
203000
203000
203000
203000
2a3aao.
203000
203000
203000
203000
2&3aaa
203000
203000
203000
203000
203000
3R64000QQ l«3<»i.OOO 421000 6090000
VF>ABE INCt'EASF (DEC^FASFJ IN UNIT u^EPATINfi COST
PHILIPS P£H TON OF COOL HUHNEO
''ILLS PFW n lLU-V1300
0 4.22
0 1.85
0 ^0.11
0 18J.67
0 22691000
OF POHEH UNIT
0 *.46
0 l.vo
0 21.22
0 193,94
CUMULATIVE
NET INCREASE
(DECREASE)
IN COST OF
POWER.
S
2886500
5752500
8598100
11423200
17012000
19775700
22518900
25241700
30625800
33207100
35928000
38548400
43727800
46286800
48825300
51343400
538410.0.0
56318100
58774*800
61211000
63626700
68396800
70751100
73085000
75398400
„ .11 621310
-------
TABLE C-5
LIME/LIMESTONE SLUDGE DISPOSAL - GYPSUM PROCESS, ^00 MW MEW UNIT. 3.5% S. 7000 MRS CONSTANT ONSTREAM. REGULATED CO. ECONOMICS
FIXfD INVESTMENT! *
S667000
SULFUH
REMOVED
YEARS ANNUAL POWEH UNIT POWER UNIT BY
AFTER OPERA- HEAT FUEL POLLUTION
POWER TION. REQUIREMENT. CONSUMPTION* CONTROL
UNIT KW-HR/ MILLION *TU TONS COAL PROCFSS.
START KW /YEAR /YEA" TONS/YFAM
1 7000 31500000 1500000 35700
2 7000 31500000 1500000 35700
3 7000 31500000 1500000 3S700
4 7000 31500000 IbOOOOO 35700
-_5._ zbba 3i5flQona__ __isaaaao _ aaiao
6 7000 31500000 1500000 35700
7 7000 31500000 1500000 35700
8 7000 31500000 IbOOOOO 35700
9 7000 31500000 1500000 35700
ia _ibbb ^isonaaa ISBOQQQ...... ,^35700,
11 7000 31500000 ISOOnoO 35700
12 7000 31500000 1500000 35700
13 7000 T1SOOOOO 1500000 35700
14 7000 31500000 1500000 35700
L§ zbba 3i5itnoao isaoaaa 3&zaa
16 7000 31500000 1500000 35700
17 7000 31500000 IbOOOOO 35700
18 7000 31500000 1500000 35700
19 79PP ....31500000 1500000 3*700
'20. zaoa 3is.ao.aaa isaaaaa 3c*zaa
21 7000 31500000 1500000 35700
22 7000 31500POO 1500000 35700
23 7000 31500000 1500000 35700
84 ???? ...31500000 1500000 35700
2*2 ZQQQ 31!*ifiQQQfi XSQQ Ofl ft 35Z&&
26 7000 31500000 ISOOOOO 35700
27 7000 31500000 1500000 35700
28 7000 31500000 1500000 35700
29 7000 31500000 ISOOnoo 35700
3B Zbba 31S&QQQQ l^QQQQQ 35ZQQ
BY-PRODUCT
RATE.
EQUIVALENT
TONS/YEAR
WASTE
SOLIDS
496300
496300
496300
496300
42&3P.O.
496300
496300
496300
496300
496300
496300
496300
496300
4,2&aaa
496300
496300
4V6300
496300
496300
496300
496300
496300
__ _42&3ae __
496300
496300
496300
496300
496300
TOT 210000 945000000 45000non 1071000 1*889000
LIFETIME AVERAGE INCREASE
-------
TABLE C-6
LIMf/LIMESTONE SLUDGE DISPOSAL - GYPSUM PROCESS. 1500 MM NEW UNITi 3.5* S. 7000 MRS CONSTANT ONSTREAM, REGULATED CO. ECONOMICS
FIXED INVESTMENT: s
10603000
YEARS
AFTFR
POWFR
UNIT
START
1
2
3
4
g
ANNUAL
OPERA-
TION.
KW-HR/
7000
7000
7000
7000
. 7000
6 7000
7 7000
8 7000
9 7000
LQ ZQQQ
"ll 7000™
12 7000
13 7000
14 7000
-15 IOQft._
16 7000
17 7000
18 7000
19 7000
.Zft 7.00.0.-.
21 7000
22 7000
23 7000
24 7000
.25 20QB-.
26 7000
27 7000
28 7000
29 7000
3Q ZflQQ
POWER UNIT
HEAT
REQUIREMENT.
MILLION *TU
/YEAR
94500000
94500000
94500000
94500000
245DQQQQ
94500000
94500000
94500000
94500000
— 345flaaan__.
94500000
94500000
94500000
94500000
94500000
94500000
94500000
94500000
...945UQQafl_.
94500000
04500000
94SOOOOO
94500000
945D.QaaO.__
945nonon
94500000
SULFUH
REMOVED
POWER UNIT BY
FUEL POLLUTION
CONSUMPTION. CONTROL
TONS COAL PROCESS,
XYEAW TONS/YEAR
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
45aaaao_
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
__4.saaaao _
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
4SOOOQO
4500000
4500000
4500000
4500000
106HOO
106000
106600
106000
_lft6.ttfta_
106AOO
106000
106dOO
106UOO
106f>00
106000
106UOO
106000
106HOO
106000
106000
lOhOOO
lOhrlOO
106800
106000
106000
106000
flY-PRODUCT
RATE.
EQUIVALENT
TONS/YEAR
WASTE
SOLIDS
1488200
1488200
1488200
1488200
1488200
1488200
1488200
1488200
1488200
1488200
1488200
1488200
1488200
14H8200
1484200
1488200
1488200
148H200
148B200
1488200
1488200
14H8200
TOTAL
OP. COST
INCLUDING
NET REVENUE. REGULATED
S/TON ROI FOR
POWER
HASTE COMPANY.
SOLIDS S/YEAR
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
flitt
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
6050100
6003300
5956600
5909000
5816300
5769500
5722700
5676000
55B2400
5535700
54HH9QO
5442100
534H600
5301800
5255100
S20H300
5114AOO
5068000
5021200
4974500
4RH0900
4834?00
4707400
4740600
4643.90.Q
TOTAL
NET
SALES
REVENUE.
t/YEAR
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0-
0
0
0
0
o_
0
0
0
0
._ _ a.
0
0
0
0
a_
0
0
0
0
a_.
NET ANNUAL
INCREASE
(DECREASE)
IN COST OF
POWER.
6050100
6003300
5956600
5909800
CUMULATIVE
NET INCREASE
(DECREASE!
IN COST OF
POWERf
t
6050100
12053400
18010000
23919800
5816300 35599100
5769500 41368600
5722700 47091300
5676000 52767300
56222 O.fl 5ft32&5dO
5582400 63978900
5535700 69514600
5488900 75003500
5442100 80445600
53254.aH B.ftt4ia(LO
5348600
5301800
5255100
5208300
516.15 aa
5114800
5068000
5021200
4974500
91189600
96491400
101746500
106954ROO
"117231100
122299100
127320300
132294800
4880900 142103400
4834200 146937600
4787400 151725000
4740600 156465600
4&.232P.a .L6.lia25.ao
TOT 210000 28350000000 135000000 3204000 44646000
LIFETIME AVERAGE INCREASE (DEC^EASF. I IN UNIT OPFR4TIMG COST
HOLLARS PEw TON OF COAL rlURNEO
MILLS PER KILoWATT-MOUw
CFNTS PER «ILLIuN HTII HFAT INPUT
DOLLARS PER TON Of VJLFllw UI-HOYMI
PROCESS COST DISCOUNTED AT 11.6* TO INITIAL YEAH, DOLLARS
LEVELI2ED INC^FASF (DECREASE) IN UNIT uPFWATiiiii COST FUUIVALENT
DOLLARS PER TON OF COAL HLMNEli
MILLS pFK KILOJATT-HOUH
CFNTS PER "ILLION HTU HFAT INHUT
OMLL*RS PEW TON of MJLfu« m
161154500
161159500
TO
1.19
5*68
50.10
47321000
DISCOUNTED PROCESS COST OVER
O.S4
6.03
53.1R
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0
LIFE OF
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.19
0.51
S.68
bU.30
47321000
POMEH UNIT
1.27
0.54
h.03
53.30
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Imtructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/7-79-069
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Economics of Disposal of Lime/Lime-
stone Scrubbing Wastes: Sludge/Flyash Blending and
Gypsum Systems
6. REPORT DATE
February 1979
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
B. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
J.W. Barrier, H. L. Faucett, and L.J.Henson
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
TVA, Office of Agricultural and Chemical Develop-
ment
National Fertilizer Development Center
Muscle Shoals, Alabama 35660
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
INE624A
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
EPA-JAG-D8-E721-BI
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
EPA, Office of Research and Development
Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final; 6/77 - 5/78
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/13
5. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES IERL-RTP project officer is Julian W. Jones, MD-61, 919-541-
2489. EPA-600/7-78-023a is an earlier related report.
. ABSTRACT
report , the second in a series of economic evaluations of flue gas
desulfurization (FGD) waste disposal systems , gives results of a study of two pro-
cesses that produce a soil-like landfill material without using purchased additives:
(1) separately collected flyash is blended with dewatered FGD sludge from a lime-
stone scrubbing system; and (2) air-oxidation modifications to a limestone scrubber,
which also collects the flyash, produce a high-sulfate sludge (gypsum) which is de-
watered and discarded without further treatment. Both processes are being develo-
ped: neither has been fully demonstrated. The sludge /flyash blending process had a
higher capital investment (#36. 40 AW) than the other (as well as untreated ponding
and three of four chemical processes evaluated in an ealier study) primarily because
of high electrostatic precipitator and process equipment costs; however, the process
had lower annual revenue requirements (1. 64 mills AWh) than three of the four chem-
ical processes. The gypsum process had the lowest capital investment (#15.40AW)
of all processes studied to date because of lower process equipment cost and higher
waste bulk density; its annual revenue requirements (1.18 mills AWh) were lower
than all processes studied except untreated ponding. Capital investment costs are for
mid-1979; annual revenue requirements are for mid-1980.
7.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
COSATI Field/Group
Pollution
Flue Gases
Desulfurization
Economics
Scrubbers
Calcium Oxides
Waste Disposal
Sludge
Fly Ash
Gypsum
Earth Fills
Ponds
Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Limestone Electrostatic Precioitators
13B
21B
07A,07D
05C
131
07B
08G
13C
08H
8. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
209
20. SECURITY CLASS (ThispageJ
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (»-73)
178
------- |