COPAC—2
ABATEMENT OF SULFUR OXIDE EMISSIONS
FROM
STATIONARY COMBUSTION SOURCES
-------
COPAC—2
ABATEMENT OF SULFUR OXIDE EMISSIONS
FROM
STATIONARY COMBUSTION SOURCES
Prepared by
Ad Hoc Panel on Control of Sulfur Dioxide from Stationary Combustion Sources
Committee on Air Quality Management
Committees on Pollution Abatement an* Control
Division of Engineering
National Research Council
Washington, D. C.
1970
-------
This is the report of a study undertaken
by the Committee on Air Quality Management
Ad HOG Panel on Control of Sulfur Oxide from
Stationary Combustion Sources for the National
Academy of Engineering in execution of work
under Contract No. CPA 22-69-31 with the
National Air Pollution Control Administration,
Environmental Health Service, Public Health
Service, U.S. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare.
As a part of the Division of Engineering of
the National Research Council, the Committees
on Pollution Abatement and Control perform
study, evaluation, or advisory functions
through groups composed of individuals se-
lected from academic, governmental, and in-
dustrial sources for their competence and
interest in the subject under consideration.
Members of these groups serve as individuals
contributing their personal knowledge and
judgements and not as representatives of any
organization in which they are employed or
with which they may be associated.
ii
-------
PREFACE
Because the air, water, and land on earth are
limited, we, as a nation, must plan and work together to
ensure the preservation of an acceptable environment.
In this report of a study on the control of sulfur
oxide emissions into the atmosphere, primarily from
electricity generating stations, an effort has been
made to place the findings of the study in perspective
with the entire problem of environmental quality
management.
On the basis of problem definition, a study
of need, a study of engineering constraints, and an
analysis of technological requirements and alternatives,
this report outlines a government-industry program for
research, development, and demonstration of potential
control processes.
No attempt has been made, however, to deal
with such problems of sulfur oxide emissions as their
effect on health and other biological aspects. Im-
portant though such studies may be, they are outside the
scope of the Ad HOG Panel on Control of Sulfur Oxide
from Stationary Combustion Sources.
The members of the panel, along with the
members of the Committee on Air Quality Management,
share the objectives of the Congress as representing
the determination of the people to restore and main-
tain the quality of our air resources and the objectives
of the National Air Pollution Control Administration of
the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare as the
Federal "lead agency" to assure significant progress
by an early date. The panel hopes that the results of
its study will be useful in the attainment of these
objectives.
The panel's estimation of the present status
of sulfur control technology is based primarily on
presentations by 23 research and industrial organiza-
tions that came to Washington to discuss the results
of their process studies and their proposals for further
111
-------
work. In addition, 23 other organizations provided
information by correspondence.
The panel appreciates the cooperation received
from industrial and research organizations with active
programs in sulfur oxide control. The panel is partic-
ularly grateful to Mr.. Paul ¥. Spaite, Director, Bureau
of Engineering and Physical Sciences, National Air
Pollution Control Administration, and his staff for
their outstanding support.
A summary of the study and a brief statement
of conclusions are presented first in the report for
the benefit of those who may wish to gain an overview
of the panel's efforts. These are followed by an intro-
duction covering the background of the study, the roles
of the National Academy of Sciences and the National
Academy of Engineering, and the nature of the sulfur
oxide emissions problem. The remaining sections of the
report cover the impact of the nation's growing re-
quirements for electricity upon the sulfur oxide
emissions problem and review the possibilities for
abatement of sulfur oxide emissions through the wide-
spread use of nuclear power plants, the use of sulfur-
free or low-sulfur fuels, and the development and
application of technology to control sulfur oxide
emissions. A strategy for the research, development,
and demonstration of this technology is presented.
Appendixes to the report contain lists of
organizations that made presentations and correspondents
who supplied information for the study, lists of re-
search and development activities in sulfur oxide
pollution control in the United States and abroad,
and a selective bibliography.
It is hoped this report will provide a basis
for increased governmental and public understanding of
the problems of sulfur oxide abatement and control,
and will direct attention and adequate assignment of re-
sources to the orderly and expeditious solution of this
portion of the nation's problems of environmental qual-
ity management.
Thomas H. Chilton, Chaiwidn
iv
-------
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES-
NAT IONSL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
Division of Engineering
COMMITTEE ON AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT
AD HOC PANEL ON CONTROL OF SULFUR OXIDE
FROM STATIONARY COMBUSTION SOURCES
Thomas H. Chilton, Retired, E.I. du Pont de Nemours &
Co., Inc., Chairman
Richard E. Chaddock, Hercules Incorporated
Vance R. Cooper, General Electric Company
George T. Cowherd, Jr., Consolidated Edison Co. of New
York, Inc.
H. L. Falkenberry, Tennessee Valley Authority
C. Howard Hardesty, Continental Oil Company
Robert L. Hershey, Retired, E.I. du Pont de Nemours &
Co., Inc.
R. M. Lundberg, Commonwealth Edison Company
Robert L. Pigford, University of California, Berkeley
Elliott J. Roberts, Dorr-Oliver, Incorporated
Thomas K. Sherwood, Retired, Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Ex Officio
Jack A. Simon, Illinois State Geological Survey
Staff
R. W. Crozier, Executive Secretary^ Committees on Pollu-
tion Abatement and Control, National Research Council
J. M. Marchello, Staff Engineer, Committees on Pollution
Abatement and Control, National Research Council
Donnell H. Nicchitta, Administrative Secretary, Commit-
tees on Pollution Abatement and Control, National
Research Council
liaison Representative-NAPCA
Paul W. Spaite, Director, Bureau of Engineering and
Physical Sciences, National Air Pollution Control
Administration, U.S. Department of Health, Education
and Welfare
-------
CONTENTS
I. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 1
II. INTRODUCTION 6
A. Background of the Study 6
B. The Roles of the National Academy
of Sciences and the National
Academy of Engineering 9
C. Nature of the Sulfur Oxide Problem .... 10
III. ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND AIR POLLUTION
CONTROL 12
A. Electricity Generation 12
B. Sulfur Oxide Emissions 14
C. Shifting Generation 19
D. A National Electric Transmission
Grid 20
E. Long-Term Environmental Consider-
ations 21
IV. ENERGY RESEARCH 23
V. FACTORS OF FUELS UTILIZATION 27
VI. TIME PHASES OF TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS 30
VII. SUPPORT OF TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS 33
A. Coal Industry 33
B. Equipment Manufacturers 34
C. Utility Companies 34
D. Federal Government 36
VIII. PRESENT STATUS OF RESEARCH AND TECH-
NOLOGY 38
A. Availability of Technology 38
B. The Need for Commercial Demonstration ... 42
C. Back-Fitting Existing Plants 44
D. Central Recovery Facility 45
E. Research Planning 46
F. Process Development 50
1. General Considerations
of Individual Processes .50
2. Precombustion Processes .52
VI
-------
a. Coal Cleaning 52
b. Coal Gasification 53
3. Combustion Processes 55
a. Fluidized Bed Combustion (FBC) ... 55
b. The Black, Sivalls, and Bryson
Combustion Process 55
4. Limestone Processes 55
a. Limestone-Wet Scrubbing 57
b. Limestone-Dry Removal 53
5. Processes for Sulfur Recovery from
Stack Gases 58
a. The Cat-Ox Process 59
b. The Wellman-Lord Process 59
c. The Esso-Babcock and Wilcox
Adsorbent Process 59
d. Magnesium Oxide Scrubbing 60
e. The Formate Scrubbing Process. ... go
f. Ammonia Scrubbing 60
g. The Westvaco Char Process 60
h. The Molten Carbonate Process .... 60
i. Sodium Bicarbonate Adsorption. ... 61
j. The Modified Glaus Process 61
k. The Catalytic Chamber Process. ... 61
1. The Ionics/Stone & Webster Process . 61
m. The Alkalized Alumina Process. ... 61
6. Scrubber Development 61
TABLES
1. Estimated potential sulfur dioxide
pollution without abatement in
the United States 16
2. Federal research and development
expenditures by primary energy
sources, 25
FIGURES
1. Projected power generating capacity
and fuel sources of electric utilities
in the United States (with breeder).... 13
vii
-------
2. Comparison between projections for
total power plant uncontrolled
SC>2 emissions 18
3. Time scale for process development 51
APPENDIXES
A. List of Presenters 63
B. List of Correspondents 64
C. United States S02 Pollution Control
Research and Development 65
D. Foreign SC>2 Pollution Control
Research and Development 69
E. Bibliography 72
viii
-------
I
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Controlling and improving the quality of our
environmental resources is a growing concern of the
nation. National and regional goals and standards for
air quality management are being defined. Capital in-
vestments of billions of dollars will be required to
install processes to meet these standards. Keeping
these costs within bounds, while still attaining an
acceptable level of control within the shortest practi-
cal period of time, will call for the best efforts and
most careful planning at all levels from individuals,
civic groups, and companies through local, regional,
state, and Federal agencies.
The emission of SC^* from combustion of
sulfur-bearing coal and oil, primarily for the genera-
tion of electrical energy, is second only to the emis-
sion of pollutants from internal combustion engines in
quantity of pollutants discharged to the national air
environment.
During the next 20 years, the national re-
quirement for electrical energy is expected to more
than triple. The supply of natural gas, a low-sulfur
fuel, is expected to decrease in about 10 years, and
petroleum products may reach their maximum availability
in about 30 years. To supply the needed electricity,
the use of coal is expected to triple by the year
2000, when it is expected that the use of nuclear
energy will about equal the use of coal, after which
the requirement for coal will start a downward trend.
The substitution of low-sulfur fuels, the
only presently available method for reducing SC-2
emissions, is restricted by the limited availability
*The symbol S02 is used in this report to designate the
sulfur oxides in stack gases (SC>2 plus 1 percent to
2 percent of 803).
-------
of natural gas, low-sulfur oil, and low-sulfur coal.
More rapid expansion of the application of nuclear
energy is constrained by engineering and economic prob-
lems, in addition to siting problems, that are of grow-
ing concern to all planning of major electricity gen-
erating installations. By the late 1980's, new
fossil-fueled plants may employ magnetohydrodynamic
(MHD) generators followed by conventional steam
boilers, or by an advanced gas-turbine/steam-power
cycle. The combined energy conversion efficiency of
such plants is expected to be in the range of 50 per-
cent to 60 percent compared with about 40 percent for
modern conventional plants, which would result in a
corresponding decrease in S02 emissions. However, the
high operating temperature of MHD units may result in
increased NOX emissions.
In addition to improving the energy conver-
sion efficiency, the fast breeder nuclear reactor pro-
duces a net gain of fissionable material and thereby
reduces the net cost of fuel. The Atomic Energy Com-
mission is planning a 500 MW fast breeder demonstra-
tion plant for 1976 and expects the first commercial
units to start up about 1985 in the United States.
Therefore, the reduction of SO2 emissions
from stationary combustion sources, in the next 5 to
20 years3 will depend very largely on the development,
demonstration, and application of a combination of
technologies designed to prevent the sulfur in coal
and petroleum products from reaching the atmosphere
through the combustion processes.
The technology for removal of sulfur from oil
is being developed .by a number of oil companies, and
the panel does not believe that NAPCA should contribute
significantly to these developments.
Although broader application and refinement
of existing technology could increase the quantity of
low-sulfur coal available, there are no cleaning or
washing processes presently in sight that have the
potential for substantially reducing sulfur content
below levels presently being achieved. This emphasizes
-------
the need for new concepts in engineering and chemical
approaches to the desulfurization of coal.
In addition to joint support by groups of
utilities, a number of industrial organizations have
committed significant funds to research, development,
and demonstration of sulfur emission control processes
and equipment. An increase in these activities, to-
gether with increased support by the Federal Govern-
ment, is needed.
The panel reviewed the status of United States
and foreign sulfur oxide abatement and control processes
and firmly concluded that, contrary to widely held be-
lief, commercially proven technology for control of
sulfur oxides from combustion processes does not exist.
Efforts to force the broad-scale installa-
tion of unproven processes would be unwise; the oper-
ating risks are too great to justify such action, and
there is a real danger that such efforts would, in
the end, delay effective 862 emission control. A high
level of government support is needed for several
years to encourage research, engineering development,
and demonstration of a variety of the more promising
processes, as may be suited to specific local and
regional conditions, to bring these processes to
full-scale operating efficiency at the earliest prac-
tical date. This can be done most expeditiously if
Federal support, in addition to industry commitments,
•is provided at the appropriate time and in the needed
amounts.
Federal .support- for the development of the
following control approaches is suggested:
1. "Throw-away" processes for removal of
S02 from stack gases, such as limestone
injection, which produce a presently
nonmarketable product
2. New combustion concepts, such as fluid-
ized bed combustion (FBC), which fixes
the sulfur as a sulfate during combus-
-------
tion and prevents its release as SC>2
to the stack
3. Chemical recovery processes, which pro-
duce salable SC>2> sulfuric acid, ele-
mental sulfur, or fertilizers
4. Coal gasification processes, which pro-
duce sulfur-free fuels
5. New concepts in engineering and chemical
approaches to the desulfurization of
coal
The limestone injection processes, with
adequate particulate control, should be commercially
demonstrated within the next 1 to 3 years and, if
successful, can be installed in many existing plants.
Several sulfur-recovery processes appear to
be ready for scale-up to commercial demonstration size
(100,000 kW or larger boilers). Full-scale demonstra-
tion of the industrial reliability of these processes
is 3 to 10 years away. Some of them can be installed
in a portion of existing plants or engineered into
future plants.
New combustion technology may be available
for industrial application in 5 to 10 years. Efficient
coal gasification processes, which are 5 to 10 years
away, have the potential for producing pipeline-quality,
low-sulfur gas for supplementing existing supplies of
natural gas or for producing a product of less than
pipeline-quality, but adequate for power generation.
Such fuels seem likely to become increasingly compe-
titive for use in power production as the cost for
controlling all pollutants (S02, NOX, and fine parti-
culates) increases the costs for conventional systems.
These time estimates are realistic only if
there is dedication and a positive commitment on the
part of government agencies3 utilities> fuel supplier s3
and equipment manufacturers to support the orderly
-------
development and timely application of the more promising
processes.
In recommending a 5-year plan for future work,
the panel places special emphasis on the following:
1. Complete development of the limestone
process should be given high priority
because it is applicable to many existing
boilers and is closer than others to
demonstrated industrial application.
2. For new power plants and some existing
plants, it is expected that sulfur-
recovery processes will be necessary to
keep costs for future control within
reasonable limits.
3. NAPCA should continue to support the
development and demonstration of new
concepts in combustion technology, sulfur-
recovery, and coal-desulfurization
processes.
4. Research should be supported on ways to
combine the abatement of nitrogen oxide
and particulates with sulfur oxide
control.
5. Elemental sulfur is a more desirable by-
product than sulfuric acid or sulfur di-
oxide. The conversion of sulfur dioxide
to sulfur is not a well established pro-
cess, and'it is important that the tech-
nology and costs of this conversion be
thoroughly studied.
6. NAPCA should employ a process engineering
and construction firm to project costs
on a common basis for all the promising
processes at various stages in their de-
velopment to aid in making scale-up
decisions.
-------
II
INTRODUCTION
A. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
The concern of Americans for the deteriora-
tion of the nation's air resources is reflected in
Public Law 90-148 as amended, the Air Quality Act of
1967, enacted by the 90th Congress on November 21,
1967. Responsibility for carrying out the provisions
of the law is assigned to the Secretary of the De-
partment of Health, Education, and Welfare.
The purposes of the Act are set forth in
Section 101(b) as:
1. to protect and enhance the quality of
the nation's air resources so as to pro-
mote the public health and welfare and
the productive capacity of its population;
2. to initiate and accelerate a national
research and development program to
achieve the prevention and control of air
pollution;
3. to provide technical and financial
assistance to State and local governments
in connection with the development and
execution of their air pollution pre-
vention and control programs; and
4. to encourage and assist the development
and operation of regional air pollution
control programs.
Special emphasis (Section 104) is given to
research and development into new and improved methods
for th~. prevention and control of air pollution re-
sulting from the combustion of fuels. In addition to
providing for laboratory and pilot plant testing,
Section 104(a)(4) calls upon the Secretary of the De-
partment of Health, Education, and Welfare to "con-
-------
struct, operate, and maintain, or assist in meeting
the cost of the construction, operation and main-
tenance of new or improved demonstration plants or
processes which have promise of accomplishing the
purposes of this Act."
The Clean Air Act recognizes the regional
nature of air pollution problems. One of the functions
of the Federal Government under the 1967 legislation is
the designation of air quality control regions in all
those areas in which air pollution constitutes a serious
threat to health and welfare. Once air quality regions
are designated, and NAPCA has issued criteria documents
describing the harmful effects of specific pollutants,
together with documents describing techniques for con-
trolling the pollutants, it becomes the responsibility
of the states in the regions to develop air quality
standards and plans for enforcing them. In 1969, NAPCA
issued criteria on two of the major pollutants—particu-
late matter and the sulfur oxides—together with the
required supporting documents on techniques available
for preventing and controlling their emission into the
atmosphere. In March 1970, NAPCA issued air quality
criteria and recommended control techniques for carbon
monoxide, photochemical oxidants, and hydrocarbons. 5'
17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26*
The Clean Air Act, as amended, states in
Section 101(a)(3) "that the prevention and control of
air pollution at its source is the primary responsi-
bility of State and local governments," in Section 101
(a)(4) "that Federal financial assistance and leader-
ship is essential for the "development of cooperative
Federal, State, regional, and local programs to pre-
vent and control air pollution," and, in Section 101
(b)(4), that a major purpose of the Act is "to en-
courage and assist the development and operation of
regional air pollution control programs."
Federal assistance is provided in two major
ways—financial and technical. Financial assistance
*Refer to numbered items in the bibliography contained
in Appendix E of this report.
-------
to air pollution control agencies is authorized under
Section 105 of the Act. Under Section 106, financial
assistance for planning for air quality standards and
implementation plans in interstate air quality control
regions is authorized.
The National Air Pollution Control Administra-
tion also provides technical assistance in conducting
emission inventories, air quality monitoring and data
analysis, and diffusion modeling. Diffusion modeling
involves combining meteorological and emission data
to predict air quality. These services are particu-
larly helpful in attempting to test various emission
reduction strategies.
The Air Quality Act of 1967 has created a new
role for the Federal Government in air pollution con-
trol. The Act states that air quality standards that
the states develop for an air quality control region
become effective when the Secretary of the Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare determines that such
standards are "consistent with the air quality crite-
ria," and it states that an implementation plan becomes
effective when the Secretary determines "that the plan
is consistent with the purposes of the Act insofar as
it assures achieving such standards of air quality
within a reasonable time."
What may be considered a "reasonable time"
for attainment of an air quality standard will depend
on a number of factors, including the availability of
applicable control techniques and, particularly, the
nature and seriousness of the adverse effects of the
pollutants involved. Every implementation plan must
include a timetable for reaching compliance with the
projected requirements for the prevention, abatement,
and control of air pollution. This timetable must
provide for meaningful increments of progress over
relatively short intervals, such as 1-year or 2-year
periods, during the total timespan covered by the
implementation plan.
-------
B. THE ROLES OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AND
THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING
The National Academy of Sciences and the
National Academy of Engineering established the Envi-
ronmental Studies Board in 1967 to coordinate activities
of the two Academies in the environmental field. One
of the first acts of this board was to create four com-
mittees within the Division of Engineering of the Na-
tional Research Council on air, water, noise, and solid
waste management, respectively. These committees have
an engineering orientation and are available for advice
and assistance to the Congress and to agencies of the
executive branch having responsibility for pollution
abatement and control. Needed interaction and coordi-
nation of the committees are provided through liaison
activities of the Environmental Studies Board.
On June 20, 1969, the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, through the National Air Pol-
lution Control Administration;, requested the National
Academy of Engineering to make a comprehensive review
of present industry and government research and develop-
ment programs directed toward control of sulfur oxides
effluents from stationary sources of combustion. The
requested study would include technical and economic
potentials, adequacy of scope, proper integration with
other similar efforts, and the responsiveness to
national needs.
The request was accepted after review and
coordination by the Environmental Studies Board with
other environmental activities of the National Academy
of Engineering and the National Academy of Sciences.
The task was assigned to the National Research Council's
Committee on Air Quality Management, which in turn
requested its Ad Hoc Panel on Control of Sulfur Oxide
from Stationary Combustion Sources to carry out the
s tudy.
Because- meeting national energy requirements
is only one of man's activities that may result in un-
acceptable acceleration of environmental degradation,
studies of abatement technology for other sources of
S02 and other air pollutants will be made soon.
-------
C. NATURE OF THE SULFUR OXIDE PROBLEM
At an early meeting of the panel with
Dr. John T. Middleton, Commissioner of NAPCA, and sub-
sequent meetings with Mr. Paul W. Spaite, Director of
the Bureau of Engineering and Physical Sciences of
NAPCA, and other members of the NAPCA staff, the panel
was presented data on projected sulfur oxides emission
with various levels of control. The panel members con-
sidered these data to be realistic, based on authori-
tative sources, and interpreted rationally and conser-
vatively; and the members were impressed with the
magnitude and urgency of the problem of sulfur oxides
emission to the atmosphere. The data and projections
gave rise to the conclusion that positive action will
be required to prevent the emission of sulfur oxides
into the ambient air from more than quadrupling by the
year 2000.
The requirement for electrical power is pro-
jected to increase at an annual rate of 6 percent dur-
ing the next 30 years. It is generally agreed that the
generation and distribution of this quantity of elec-
trical energy, using presently available fuels and
technology, will result in unacceptable levels of en-
vironmental degradation. As previously noted, the use
of sulfur-bearing fuels to generate electrical energy
is only one of man's activities contributing to the
decline in quality of our air resources, but it is a
major source of S021
NAPCA chose S02 emitted to the atmosphere
from electricity generating plants for first attention
because: (1) this is the largest man-made source of
sulfur oxides; (2) it is widely dispersed nationally,
but is largely concentrated in or near urban centers;
(3) it is growing at about 6 percent per year; (4) it
is intimately related to the national and international
flow of energy resources; (5) it is important to re-
gional economic development; and (6) it is critical to
continued national well-being, security, and economic
growth. Moreover, while national and regional goals
and standards are being defined, the processing methods
presently available to attain these goals are inadequate
for the task.
10
-------
Worldwide emission of sulfur into the atmo-
sphere arises from biological, geological, and indus-
trial activity. Of the man-made sources, coal and
oil combustion for electricity generation accounts
for about 50 percent, other combustion of coal 16 per-
cent, other combustion of oil 9 percent, primary and
secondary smelting 12 percent, petroleum refining 7 per-
cent; and miscellaneous sources including coke and
sulfuric acid production, burning coal refuse banks,
and refuse incineration 6 percent.
11
-------
Ill
ENERGY REQUIREMENTS AND AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
A review of sulfur oxide abatement and control
technology gives rise to concern as to the future supply
of electricity and the future availability and use of
fuels. There are important matters of policy and
management regarding future energy conversion and con-
sumption that bear directly and importantly on environ-
mental problems, such as: emission of sulfur oxides,
nitrogen oxides, particulates, carbon dioxide, carbon
monoxide, and other pollutants from fossil fuels com-
bustion; thermal pollution; siting of generating facil-
ities and distribution systems; fuels policy and
availability; radioactive pollution and disposal of
radioactive wastes; and technological, political,
jurisdictional, and economic limitations and constraints.
Electricity generation, sulfur oxide emission
control, and other environmental factors are closely
interrelated and require an integrated systems approach.
The objective of providing for the nation's growing
power needs is subject to the constraints of maintain-
ing environmental quality, fuels availability, and tech-
nical developments. Within this framework lie the
trade-offs of shifting generation, improved transmission,
and the development of control processes. Overriding
all of these is the long-term consequence of each al-
ternative .
A. ELECTRICITY GENERATION
The Federal Power Commission now states that
the 1970 requirement, including reasonable reserves,
for electrical generating capacity is nearly 340 million
kW. This requirement is expected to be nearly double
by 1980 and to exceed 1 billion kW in 1990.
Figure 1 shows the electricity generation and
fuels utilization forecast (assuming early development
of the breeder reactor). At present, about 65 percent
of the energy for electricity generation comes from
coal, with natural gas and oil supplying most of the
12
-------
106
8
6
I
o
UJ 2
O 10*
104
TOTAL POWER
CAPACITY
OIL
*•• HYDROELECTRIC
1960
1970
1980
1990
YEAR
2000
2010
2020
Figure 1. Projected power generating capacity and fuel sources of electric utilities
in the United States (with breeder). NAPCA, February 1970.
13
-------
remainder. It is predicted that the use of nuclear
energy will increase rapidly and will exceed coal as
an energy source around the year 2000. Because of the
need to burn more coal to supply the needed power,
sulfur emissions would be expected to increase more
than fourfold by the year 2000, unless effective control
processes ara developed and applied.
Most of the new generating capacity installed
between now and 1990 will be provided by some 250 large
power plants of greater than 1,000 MW capacity. The
siting problem will generally be .one of assuring that
the relatively small number of large plants are ad-
equately planned and located to meet the goals of pro-
viding low-cost, reliable power and minimizing the ad-
verse effects on our environment. With an onsite in-
vestment of about $200 million to $400 million each,
these new plants will be among the larger industrial
establishments in the nation. Including support and
auxiliary activities, they will represent approximately
$80 billion of capital investment, which will be pro-
foundly affected by the public interest.
B. SULFUR OXIDE EMISSIONS
The demand for electric power is increasing
so rapidly that sulfur oxides emissions may increase
even allowing for: (1) projected construction of
nuclear power plants; (2) substitution of gas or low-
sulfur fuel oil at locations where they are available;
(3) use of coal of reduced sulfur content to the extent
that can be expected; (4) introduction of improved
combustion methods; and (5) application of improved
stack-gas treatment and sulfur recovery processes.
Even with a national commitment to orderly but
urgent plans for application of new technology, the
best that can be hoped for through the year 2000 is a
total sulfur oxides emission rate from all utilities
somewhere near the present level. Near-term improve-
ment in the quality of ambient air at ground level in
urban areas may be brought about by resorting to dis-
persion of facilities, by use of tall stacks, or by
load or fuel shifting under adverse meteorological
14
-------
conditions. Sulfur oxides emission data and projections
for the United States are shown in Table 1 and Figure
2.
Nuclear power plants emit no 862; essentially
the same can be said for plants using natural gas. The
technology for removal of sulfur from fuel oil appears
to be reasonably well in hand. Further development of
hydroelectric power will not be a major factor. The
import of liquefied petroleum gases will most likely
be increased to the limit of economic availability.
Despite these factors, the use of coal will steadily
increase and is projected to more than triple by the
year 2000, before leveling off as large nuclear power
stations replace those burning fossil fuels (Figure 1).
About 75 percent of the sulfur oxides discharged into
the atmosphere from man-made sources comes from the
combustion of coal and oil. Gasoline contains almost
no sulfur, so emissions from automobiles contribute
little SC>2. But the combustion of coal, now averaging
about 2.7 percent sulfur and forecast to increase to
3.5 percent by 2000, accounts-for 65 percent of the-
total SC>2. The combustion of heavy fuel oil contributes
about 12 percent.
15
-------
TABLE 1
ESTIMATED POTENTIAL SULFUR DIOXIDE POLLUTION
WITHOUT ABATEMENT^
UNITED STATES
Annual Emission of Sulfur
Dioxide (Millions of tons)
1967 1970 1980 1990 2000
Power plant operation (coal
and oil)
-------
tion, materials, and human health are first noticed in
areas having 0.03 to 0.04 ppm (annual mean) S0? con-
centration. 5,14,15,20 Thus, a 100,000-fold dilution
or reduction in concentration is required, on the
average, by the time the S02 reaches ground level.
SC>2 concentrations are near and, in some cases, at
times above these levels in several urban areas of the
United States.20
A number of SOo monitoring studies have been
made near power plants, and there are various theoretical
and computer models for predicting dispersion from
stacks and resulting ground-level concentrations for
different meteorological and topographic situations.
These are intended to show the relation between stack
emissions and the permissible concentrations.20 Such
studies have served as the basis for decisions to re-
quire use of fuels having lower sulfur content or the
use of 862 emission control equipment.
The high dilution from stack level to ground
level of 862 concentration will be required even with
development of control devices. The most efficient
removal processes can be expected to reduce stack gas
concentrations of S02 by about 99 percent, which will
result in an effluent that could still be above accept-
able ground level concentrations. In addition to SC>2
dilution, tall stacks will be needed to disperse carbon
dioxide, nitrogen oxide, and water vapor and to provide
mixing with air to raise the oxygen content.
In some cases, the 1 percent sulfur limit in
fuels has been found to be inadequate, and several
regions are considering further reducing the permissible
sulfur content. The New York-New Jersey Metropolitan
region has set standards limiting sulfur to a maximum
of 1.5 percent in fuels that are burned in existing
power plants. Other regions are considering similar
limits. Bituminous coal containing more than 1.0 per-
cent sulfur cannot now be sold in New Jersey, and the
limit will drop to 0.2 percent in October 1971. But
the supply of less than 1.0 percent sulfur coal is
limited; it appears that it would be impossible to
provide the needed fuels if this standard were enforced
across the country.
17
-------
200 -
5 180
UJ
s
Z 160
O
O
140
120
100
5 80
UJ
8
60
Z
Z 40
4
20
WITHOUT
BREEDER
I
1965
70
75
80
85
90 95
YEAR
2000
05
10
15
20
25
Figure 2. Comparison between projections for total power plant uncontrolled
SO2 emissions. NAPCA. February 1970.
-------
One-third of the coal reserves in the United
States are east of the Mississippi and two-thirds west.
Large deposits of lower-rank subbituminous coal and
lignite, which constitute 83 percent of the relatively
low-sulfur reserves, lie in the West and are remote
from the large urban markets. The 1 percent sulfur
coal produced in the East amounts to about 36 percent
of the coal mined. Approximately 26 percent of the
low-sulfur coal produced is exported and 49 percent
sold for metallurgical use, leaving only 25 percent
of present 1.0-percent-sulfur-maximum coal available
for general use. This represents only 9 percent of
the present total coal production.
Elimination of sulfur from the fuel would be
desirable, and considerable progress has been made in
the desulfurization of fuel oil. Although the pros-
pects of coal cleaning appear to be limited, increased
efforts are warranted to reduce sulfur and ash content
in coal to the extent possible. The preferred use of
naturally occurring low-sulfur or cleanable (to low-
sulfur levels) coal is in those fuel uses, other than
power generation, where flue gas treatment processes
to reduce 80% are not economically feasible.
The combustion of fossil fuel, particularly
coal, in stationary sources creates a number of pol-
lutants, of which sulfur oxides are only one. The
panel did not consider the problems of combating all
these pollutants, and addressed such questions only
incidentally, as when the process being studied might
have the potential for removing NOX or particulates.
But, research on processes with the potential for simul-
taneous reduction of all pollutants should ~be encouraged.
C. SHIFTING GENERATION
Shifting of electricity generation to outlying
plants during an incident of serious adverse meteorologi-
cal conditions appears practical under some circumstances,
but only to a limited extent. Chicago, with the Argonne
National Laboratory assisting, is developing a future
power distribution model for the city. This is a
NAPCA-supported activity. It appears possible to shift
19
-------
about 25 percent of the generation within the Chicago
service area, without calling on outside service areas.
For an eastern seaboard situation this may also be
practical, but the panel has no basis for predicting
the extent to which this would alleviate a particular
situation. Most utilities in a metropolitan region
would be able to do a substantial amount of good within
their regions. Shifting generation may aid some peak
pollution crises in other metropolitan areas. However,
there must be idle capacity available beyond the influ-
ence of the poor atmospheric conditions if this is to
be effective.
A long-term plan for such an operating pro-
cedure over the years would require additional invest-
ment to provide stronger transmission ties to permit
shifting substantial amounts of power, as well as very
substantial investment in system reserve generating
capacity. Such a mode of operation would incur in-
creased operating costs, because the system would not
be operating at its economic optimum.
D. A NATIONAL ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION GRID
A survey of energy reserves in the United
States and the status of nuclear reactor development
have led to the suggestion that systematic plans be made
for the development and utilization of western coal
deposits and to a recommendation for a national electric
power transmission grid.^Since the potential power
generation centers based on these fuel sources are
distant from the power demand areas, the cost of fuel
transportation and energy transmission becomes an im-
portant factor in the feasibility of using western coal
and oil shale reserves. The argument becomes even
stronger when viewed in terms of the many siting prob-
lems of large generating stations whether they are coal-,
oil-, gas-, or nuclear-fueled.
A national energy transmission grid might
consist of a number of highly efficient, primary lines
connecting major generating and consuming areas of the
country. Secondary tie lines would then branch out from
the primary lines much like the existing power-pool
20
-------
transmission lines. Preliminary economic analysis12
indicates feasibility and additional potential benefits
in communication and by-products manufacture. Planning,
coordination, and implementation of such a venture must
be accomplished at the national level. It is appropriate
to note here that transmission lines pose significant
environmental problems of their own, which may be solved
eventually by placing them underground.
The design, construction, and utilization of
a very low resistance (super-conductive) national elec-
tric energy transmission system would have many advan-
tages, including: (1) implementation of an effective
national fuels and energy policy; (2) management of
environmental factors related to energy generation,
transmission, and utilization; and, (3) improvement of
security and reliability of energy sources, generation,
transmission, and utilization.
Long-term, broad-scale planning of this
magnitude is important in meeting the problems of
environmental quality3 energy requirements, economic
development, and national security.
E. LONG-TERM ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
The buildup of C02 in the atmosphere has not
been an important consideration in most air quality im-
provement planning, and the ad hoc panel was not charged
with reporting on the long-term global temperature and
ecological effects of increasing concentrations of long-
lived air pollutants. But it is appropriate to remark that
C02 and submicron-size particulates are the only con-
taminants resulting from combustion and reduction pro-
cesses that may be of importance to global ecology. A
portion of the submicron particles are sulfate aerosols
formed by the reaction of,S02 in the atmosphere.
Combustion of fossil fuels, a major source
of S0?, is also the source of perhaps 50 percent of the
atmospheric buildup of C02- Because of this relation-
ship to energy requirements and fuels availability, the
panel believes that a discussion of S02 pollution must
also include recognition of the possible long-term
21
-------
effects of increasing levels of CC^.10 By the year 2000,
it is estimated that there will be a 25 percent increase
in C02 in the atmosphere, compared to the amount present
during the nineteenth century. It is further estimated
that this increase may affect the earth's radiation
balance causing a corresponding increase in the average
temperature near the earth's surface.
However, it has been pointed out5that there
is also a possible worldwide change in the amount of
atmospheric fine particles. In addition to particles
rising from the earth's surface, significant quantities
may be deposited directly in the stratosphere by super-
sonic transports when they come into extensive use. An
increase in fine particulate materials, some of which are
862 decay products, may have the effect of increasing
the reflectivity of the earth's atmosphere and reducing
the amount of radiation received from the sun.11 This
effect would be the opposite of that caused by an in-
crease in COo- It is suggested that the large-scale
cooling trend observed in the Northern Hemisphere since
about 1955 is due to the disturbance of the radiation
balance by fine particles and that this effect has al-
ready reversed any warming trend due to CO^.
Whichever may be the case, it is clear that
considerable uncertainty exists as to the effect of long-
lived pollutants on the environment.
Nuclear power presents several potential air
pollution problems.3 Solid waste from radioactive
materials in spent fuel rods appears to be a relatively
small air pollution problem but is a significant solid
waste disposal problem. There are important questions
regarding the effects of small amounts of tritium (half-
life of 12.26 years) present in the cooling water. The
tritium may enter biological systems and produce radia-
tion effects and damage during its decay. Finally,
krypton-85 (half-life of 10.4 years) released at the
reactor and the fuel reprocessing plant might accumulate
in the atmosphere over an extended period, much like
carbon dioxide. At some time it may become necessary
to collect the tritium and krypton for storage rather
than release to the environment.
22
-------
IV
ENERGY RESEARCH
The National Air Pollution Control Administra-
tion has been designated the Federal "lead agency" to
provide objectivity, coordination, emphasis, and support
to the national efforts to restore and control the qual-
ity of our air environment, including:
1. Accumulation, interpretation, and dissem-
ination of all pertinent information
2. Coordination of short-, medium-, and long-
range planning of research, development, and
demonstration activities of Federal groups
such as the Atomic Energy Commission,
Tennessee Valley Authority, Federal Power
Commission, Bureau of Mines, Office of Coal
Research; and state, regional, and local
agencies as they relate to air quality
factors resulting from extraction, proces-
sing, transportation, and utilization of
energy resources
3. Planning, initiation, coordination, and
funding of research, development, and
demonstration of broadly acceptable systems,
subsystems, and components as required to
reduce air pollution to acceptable levels
Accomplishment of these objectives will require
a high level of planning and coordination between the
several governmental, research, legislative, industrial,
and civic groups involved to: (1) evaluate feasible
and acceptable alternative courses of action, (2) de-
termine present and future consequences of specific
action or inaction, (3) evaluate the impact of changes
on one or another element of the system, (4) determine
priorities and funding levels, and (5) select the most
broadly acceptable courses of action.
The complexities of the national energy-gener-
ation and energy-utilization system will increase with
23
-------
time. However, careful planning and coordination of
national and regional efforts, not only for SC^ control,
but also for control of other air, water, thermal,
visual, and solid waste pollutants, will minimize future
problems related to environmental degradation associated
with plant siting, transmission systems, fuels utili-
zation, engineering feasibility, economics, and public
acceptability. Planning and coordination activities of
this magnitude present a major national challenge to
keep pace with the 6 percent projected annual increase
in electricity requirements and still maintain an
acceptable environment.
Each year the Federal Government supports
research and development to improve methods for pro-
ducing, converting, and transmitting the primary energy
sources—petroleum, gas, coal, oil shale, uranium, and
water power. Table 21 provides an accounting, by
primary energy source, of Federal research and develop-
ment funds currently being devoted to the task of assur-
ing an abundant supply of energy at reasonable costs to
meet the nation's future needs, with minimum impairment
of the quality of the environment.
In addition, industry spends hundreds of
millions of dollars annually for research and develop-
ment, with the petroleum industry accounting for a
substantial portion of the private expenditures in the
energy field. Substantial amounts are spent by utili-
ties and manufacturers on electric power generation and
transmission equipment and nuclear fission as part of
their facilities development. However, industrial re-
search and development expenditures on coal, oil shale,
hydroelectric power, and controlled fusion are but a
fraction of the Federal program in this area.
The important bases for viewing research and
development expenditures in Table 2 are the energy
generation patterns in 1980 and 1990 (Figure 1), and
these, in turn, are influenced by the success of pre-
sent research and development. The relative stage of
development of each form of energy conversion must also
be considered, since the costs of developing a new
technology, such as nuclear fission or fusion, are
.24
-------
TABLE 2
FEDERAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT EXPENDITURES BY
PRIMARY ENERGY SOURCE
(Excludes programs less than $500,000)
In Millions by
1968
1969
Fiscal Year
1970 Est.
Uranium and Thorium
AEC
Coal
Interior
Petroleum
Interior
Oil Shale
Interior
Fast Breeder Re-
actors
Other Breeders
and Converters
General Reactor
Technology and
Safety
Total
Bureau of Mines
Office of Coal
Research
Total
and Natural Gas
Bureau of Mines
Bureau of Mines
82
82
91
255
9
12
21
3
1
102
62
97
261
9
14
23
3
2
122
50
104
276
11
13
24
3
2
Thermonuclear Fusion
AEC
Total
27
31
29
34
34
39
General R&D
AEC
HEW
Interior
NSF
TVA
Plowshare Under-
ground Engineer-
ing
Air Pollution
Explosives Re-
search
Energetics Engi-
neering
Total
3
8
1
3 ,
1 '
16
1
12
1
3
1
18
1
15
1
3
1
21
Over-all Total 323 336 360
25
-------
greater than those for improving existing systems in-
volving other forms of energy.
The energy conversion efficiency of fossil-
fueled power plants appears to have stabilized after
gradually increasing over the years. New fossil-fueled
steam power plants currently have efficiencies of about
40 percent in converting the fuel combustion energy into
electrical energy. Present commercial nuclear power
plants range from about 30 to 35 percent in conversion
efficiency, and breeder reactors are expected to reach
about 40 percent efficiency. Combined cycle systems,
are, in principle, more efficient energy conversion
facilities. For magnetohydrodynamic generation using
fossil fuels, with a steam plant, to utilize the energy
contained in the hot gases leaving the magnetohydro-
dynamic unit, the combined efficiency is projected to
be on the order of 50 to 60 percent.12 The high tem-
perature required will cause increased nitrogen oxides
formation. Improved efficiency reduces the amount of
fuel required and the amount of heat rejected to the
environment to meet a given demand. For sulfur-bear-
ing fuels, the SC^ emission would be correspondingly
reduced.
26
-------
V
FACTORS OF FUELS UTILIZATION
Fuel use patterns are dependent upon supply
(availability) and on certain technical developments in
fuel production, energy conversion, and energy trans-
mission. Projections indicate maximum production of
natural gas in the United States within 10 years and
of petroleum products within 30 years. ®
The Atomic Energy Commission estimates that
in the year 2000 nuclear energy will supply about 44
percent of the national electricity generating capacity,
coal about 41 percent, and gas, oil, and hydroelectric
power about 15 percent. Present fuel sources for
electricity generation are: nuclear, 1 percent; coal,
65 percent; and gas, oil, and hydroelectric, 34 per-
cent. Serious delays in construction schedules of
several nuclear power plants have occurred during the
past year, and the cost estimates per installed kW
have risen from about $130 in 1967 to about $200 in
1970.13 Cost for fossil-fueled plants were about $110
to $130 per kW in 1967, and are $120 to $160 per kW in
1970. These costs include particulate-control devices,
but do not include equipment for S02 or NOX control.
Recently., a number of orders for fossil-fueled plants3
with shorter lead time and tower capital costs3 have
been placed by utilities to meet power requirements
that nuclear plants might have met under earlier con-
struction schedules.
These factors indicate a greatly expanded use
of coal as an energy source during the next 30 to 40
years (Figure 1). The United States has an assured
reserve of coal and oil shale to meet its energy needs
for hundreds of years to come. Some changes in the
schedule are dependent upon .the development of:
1. Early resolutions to siting, environ-
ment, and economic problems related to
present and future power plant develop-
ment
27
-------
2. Processes for more effective coal
desulfurization
3. Processes for conversion of coal to "clean"
gaseous or liquid fuels
4. The fast breeder nuclear reactor, which
will reduce nuclear fission fuels costs
and extend nuclear fuel resources
5. Various combined cycles such as magneto-
hydrodynamic generators, which are poten-
tially more efficient than steam turbine
generators
6. Industrially efficient processes for the
extraction of oil and gas products from
oil shale
7- The controlled nuclear fusion reactor,
which would make large amounts of energy
available
Difficulties with equipment delivery and plant
siting have already seriously delayed the construction
of generating capacity in parts of the United States.
The Federal Power Commission states that 39 of 181
major systems have reserves of less than 10 percent of
peak load. There is a real possibility of power
shortages and "brown-outs" in some power pool areas
during peak-load periods of the next several years.
At many inland sites, river water and ground
water are no longer available in sufficient quantity
to be used for once-through cooling; hence, evaporative
cooling towers have come into fairly common use. At
several locations, in the eastern as well as far west-
ern parts of the country, even the demand for make-up
water for cooling towers (about 2 to 3 percent of the
once-through rate) exceeds the amounts available from
rivers and existing wells without endangering the river
flow or the water table. In England, this situation
has resulted in installation of closed-cycle cooling
systems that exchange heat to the air through finned
28
-------
heat exchangers.2 Costs, of course, increase sub-
stantially with the transition from once-through to
closed-cycle cooling systems.
There is also some thought that man's future
needs may be better served if substantial reserves of
coal, petroleum, natural gas, and oil shale are set
aside for the rapidly growing requirement for chemical
industry feed stocks. Such a reserve will, of course,
depend largely on the beneficial application of develop-
ing nuclear technology. Thus, the critical need for
development and application of technology to control
pollution resulting from fossil fuel (particularly
coal) combustion may well occur between now and 1985
or 1990.
In view of these consideration, it is evident
that S02 problems that are generally restricted to
coal use (and in a smaller way to ore smelting and
petroleum use) will grow until S02 control processes or
other energy sources are developed. Thus, the SO2
abatement problem fits into the larger problems of fuel
policy and management.
29
-------
VI
TIME PHASES OF TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS
Successful development and application of
several control processes and the breeder reactor are
crucial in the abatement of sulfur oxide emission to
the atmosphere. As shown in Figure 2, assuming the
breeder reactor comes into wide application after the
year 2000, coal consumption and sulfur emission would
peak and decrease rapidly even without emission control.
Research on fast breeder nuclear reactors is
proceeding rapidly in several countries. The British
60 MW pilot breeder reactor at Dounreay, Scotland, went
critical in 1959 and has operated continuously except
for a 1-year shutdown during 1968-69 to repair a leak.
The United States 150 MW "Fermi" breeder reactor in Mon-
roe, Michigan, first went critical in 1963. It was shut
down in October 1966 due to a subassembly meltdown and
is scheduled to start up again in 1970. The Atomic
Energy Commission is now selecting a site for a 500
MW demonstration breeder power reactor to start in
1976. Projections call for the first commercial breeder
reactors of the 1,000 MW size to start up about 1985 in
the United States.
Fuel substitution has already begun to be
practiced but is restricted by the limited availability
of low-sulfur oil, coal, and natural gas. More in-
tensive cleaning of coal to remove pyrite may make a
contribution to sulfur-emission control comparable to
fuel substitution as it comes into wider use in the next
few years. Although limestone processes for the re-
moval of S02 from stack gases—which do not produce a
marketable product—should be commercially proven in the
next 1 to 3 years, broad application of these processes
will require several more years. Several product-pro-
ducing processes for S02 removal should be commercially
available in the mid-1970's or early 1980's and should
find wide application in the new coal-fired plants.
With adequate funding and" experimental success, new
combustion technology should be available in 5 to 8
years.
30
-------
As with the breeder reactor, there is no
assurance that the control processes will be developed
as predicted. The time estimates are realistic only
if there is a positive commitment on an urgent basis
by government agencies, utilities, fuel suppliers, and
equipment manufacturers to support the orderly develop-
ment and timely application of these processes.
The sequence of technical developments must
be coordinated with the plans for compliance with air
pollution control regulations and the availability and
use patterns of various fuels. As the national air
quality control regions implement their criteria and
emission control schemes to improve the quality of
the air, there will be a growing need for the different
kinds of technology and a shifting in types of fuel
used.
For example, in the Washington, D.C., area,
plans are being developed for the National Capital
Interstate Air Quality Control Region.7 In addition
to a reduction in suspended particulate matter, it is
proposed that all fuels burned in the region must con-
tain 1 percent or less sulfur. It is also proposed that,
after July 1, 1971, distillate fuel oils (ASTM No. 1
and No. 2) should contain 0.3 percent or less sulfur.
Fuels containing in excess of 1 percent sulfur could be
burned, provided control equipment to desulfurize stack
gases had been installed or other methods were used that
would produce results equivalent to the burning of fuel
containing 1 percent or less sulfur.
All fuel-burning installations constructed and
all fuel-burning installations altered or modified for
use of a different fuel having a maximum heat input of
less than 250 million Ttu's per hour would ^e required
to burn gaseous fuels, provided that distillate fuel
oils could be.used for not more tham 30 days in any
calendar year. However, liquid and solid fuels could
be burned, provided it were demonstrated that sulfur
oxides, partic-ulate matter, and nitrogen oxides emis-
sions would be equal to or less than would result from
burning gaseous fuels to accomplish the same heating
objective
31
-------
At this time, the complete substitution of
gas, or low-sulfur oil, f>or coal in Washington, D.C.,
appears to be the only possible way, short of establish-
ing an all-electric city, to achieve the long-term goals
that are being considered.7 Other proposed actions
include control of open burning and tighter limits on
emissions of particulates and sulfur oxides from
incinerators and industrial operations. These sug-
gestions, of course, are not to be taken as courses of
action recommended by the panel.
To meet such goals in other cities, it would
be necessary for industrial plants to install more
efficient particulate control on all stacks, and SC>2
scrubbers on many processes. Heating systems would
have to convert to gas, low-sulfur oil, or electricity,
depending upon fuel availability. Existing power plants
would need to convert to oil or gas or add stack re-
moval of SC>2, and new plants would use nuclear energy,
gas, or perhaps something like fluidized bed combustion
of coal.
Such shifting would require the expansion of
gas and oil supply systems. Since natural gas reserves
are limited, both coal gasification and importing of
liquefied natural gas would probably be necessary to
meet the increased demand.
There is a possibility that a number of the
newly created air quality control regions will adopt
plans such as those described above in the next few
years. Care must be exercised at the local,regional,
and national levels to assure that realistic criteria
and plans are adopted which can be implemented in con-
cert with the development of technology and the
systematic use of our energy resources.
There is a real danger that the public may be
led to expect environmental improvements at a rate that
cannot be realized. This is not to say that high goals
should not be established, but rather that realistic and
coordinated implementation plans must be adopted.
32
-------
VII
SUPPORT OF TECHNOLOGICAL PROGRESS
The objective of support of technological prog-
ress in SC>2 emissions control is to advance the state
of the art with all deliberate urgency consistent with
prudent engineering and economic judgment and national
needs.
The Federal effort to achieve the necessary
sulfur oxide control should be in partnership with the
electric-power industry, equipment manufacturers, and
the fuels industry. Eventually, sulfur oxide control
may create a market that will offer some industrial in-
centives. Meanwhile, implementation of SC>2 control
plans is a major national problem that will require
large expenditures by the utilities and large costs to
consumers, unless technology is developed that will
minimize these costs.
In seeking suggestions for enlisting the pri-
vate sector in support and augmentation of the Federal
effort, the panel found that in recent years many
companies have spent up to several million dollars
developing their processes to the pilot scale and be-
yond (Chapter VIII). Other companies, some with in-
teresting technological approaches, do not have ade-
quate funds even for bench-scale work. Within industry,
the competition for research and development money is
such that the expenditure of $5 million to $10 million
of a company's funds on commercial demonstration of
one process may be a poor research and development risk
when compared with alternative projects of corporate
interest.
A. COAL INDUSTRY
The coal industry is not process-research
oriented and its air-pollution research and development
has been fragmented. To date, the industry's effort
has been limited to a few modest projects that have
been conducted by several major companies and with
sponsorship by Bituminous Coal Research, Incorporated
33
-------
(BCR). Work within individual companies has been largely
concentrated on methods for removing ash and sulfur
from coal. The work at BCR, which is supported broadly
by the industry, has been devoted to stack gas clean-
ing processes and coal cleaning, with the predominant
emphasis on the latter.
B. EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS
The panel learned that the equipment suppliers
see no immediate profit potential in the research and
development of new S02 control equipment under present
accounting and taxing policies. What the equipment
manufacturers do develop can seldom be protected from
use by competition, because very little of such equip-
ment is proprietary or subject to patents that cannot
be circumvented. A manufacturer may invest his money
and develop a sulfur control process using equipment
that he manufactures, only.to find that similar equip-
ment is available from many manufacturers, and the
utility applying the process may seek competitive bids.
Consequently, patents on equipment of this type are
regarded as relatively worthless. Patents on a process
may be valuable, but the overall situation is such that
little acceleration of the research effort can be ex-
pected to follow automatically in the private sector,
even when sulfur control regulations become more strin-
gent.
Despite these considerations, equipment manu-
facturers are developing new equipment for air pollution
control applications and have participated in a number
of joint pilot, demonstration, and feasibility studies.
C. UTILITY COMPANIES
As regulated monopolies, electrical utility
companies are subject to the control of various gov-
ernmental bodies, Federal, state, and local. Conse-
quently, funds spent by utilities for development and
application of pollution control processes may not be
readily included in their capital structure, which is
the basis for establishing consumer rates.
34
-------
The utility companies, however, are supporting
sulfur oxide emission control studies individually and
jointly. Over 25 utilities are participating in re-
search, development, and demonstration work on several
promising processes (Chapter VIII). The panel agreed
on the following points with respect to support by the
utility companies of research, development, and demon-
stration (R,D,&D).
1. Funds spent for development and applica-
tion of pollution control processes may
not have the potential of self-liquidation
under present rate-making policies.
2. Many utilities located in urban areas are
making determined efforts to secure re-
liable sources of low-sulfur fuels and
installing equipment for multiple fuels
capability.
3. The costs of developing and applying con-
trol processes will be high; the utilities
are neither equipped nor staffed to do the
kind of process development and demonstra-
tion that is needed. Because of the ex-
pense and time involved, it is probably
not realistic to expect individual com-
panies to carry out impressive internal
R,D,&D programs.
4. The technological risk of applying pro-
cesses that are inadequately demonstrated
is too great to force acceptance and in-
stallation of these processes. The most
likely effect of legislative pressure will
be to force the use of the limited supplies
of available low-sulfur fuels. Therefore,
until reliable processes are adequately
demonstrated, the effectiveness""of leg-
islative pressures will be limited.
5. It might be possible for utilities to do
more cooperative R,D,&D. Regulatory and
taxing agencies might consider adjusting
their policies to encourage such activity.
35
-------
D. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
Even if additional cooperative funding by the
coal industry, equipment manufacturers, utility com-
panies, and process developers can be arranged, govern-
ment support will be needed for many years to encourage
development, demonstration, and application of sulfur
oxide control technology. Unless the necessary tech-
nology becomes available; the country may have to choose
between clean air and electricity.
The crux of the problem is its urgency with
respect to lead time and degree of applicability of any
single process. The schedule for abatement of the
emission of sulfur oxides reduces the lead time to a
very short period. In order to demonstrate a variety of
processes which might be applicable to specific con-
ditions , the reduction of lead time and the diversity
of processes required demand an intensive and concerted
effort substantially greater than normal industrial
process development.
Although no control process has yet reached
the stage of demonstrated full-scale application in a
power plant, several methods that may be suited to
particular sets of conditions are under development and
should be brought to a stage of industrial efficiency
with all deliberate speed. This can be accomplished
most expeditiously by adequate funding of NAPCA in its
role as Federal "lead agency" to assure significant
progress in an acceptable period of time.
There are three stages of process development
at which Federal support and encouragement are justified;
The first stage is in unrestricted broad-
ranging investigations. Such pioneering investigations
should normally be restricted to bench-scale work and
are worth supporting on a continuing basis.
The second stage involves pilot-plant trials
of new processes that appear to be promising.
36
-------
The third stage comes after pilot-plant trials
have been concluded, and when the most promising pro-
cesses are considered ready for demonstration on a
scale that would provide engineering and economic data
that could be projected with confidence to large operat-
ing units. Such large-scale demonstrations are neces-
sary and will be quite expensive, running into several
million dollars for each process selected. This is a
critical point in the application of new technology.
National needs will be most effectively accomplished
by a full partnership (financial and technical) be-
tween government agencies, utilities, equipment manu-
facturers, process developers, and fuel suppliers.
In addition to support of research and develop-
ment, governmental assistance may be provided through
changes in tax and patent policies and provisions for
Federal funding of "risk capital." The proposed Tax
Reform Act allows accelerated amortization of pollution
control equipment. The prospect of profitable patents
is an incentive for further research by industry. Sev-
eral government agencies are reviewing patent policy at
this time to determine what changes might be made to
encourage research, development, and application of
processes designed for pollution control. The Patent
Office has recently announced its intention to accel-
erate the handling of applications dealing with pol-
lution control inventions.
In addition, the Subcommittee on Air and
Water Pollution of the Senate Committee on Public Works
has heard testimony "in recent hearings on S.2005—The
Resource Recovery Act of 1969, S.3469—The Wastes Re-
clamation and Recycling Act of 1970, and the Amendment
to S.2005, cited as the National Materials Policy Act
of 1969. Federal provision for "risk capital" was one
of a variety of subjects discussed. Other approaches
of financing of research, development, demonstration,
and application of processes and facilities designed
to control various types of pollution are being con-
sidered at the Federal executive and legislative level.
37
-------
VIII
PRESENT STATUS OF RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY
A. AVAILABILITY OF TECHNOLOGY
Although the panel is optimistic that accept-
able sulfur oxides control technology will be developed,
it concludes that this technology is not yet commercial-
ly proven. Moreover, a rapid pace must be maintained
in pursuit of the technical objectives, if only to
prevent conditions from getting worse. Even when the
expected technology becomes available, it will be too
late to prevent a significant rise in total sulfur
emissions during the next several years.
Five general approaches might be made to
sulfur oxides control problems:
1. Undertake a crash program to build
nuclear power plants
2. Remove sulfur from fuels before they
are burned
3. Remove sulfur from fuels during the
combustion process
4. Remove the S02 from the combustion gases
before emission to the atmosphere
5. Employ very high stacks and remote siting
so that the gases are dispersed and di-
luted to an acceptable level
The first approach is impractical because of
the prohibitive expense and inability to meet even
present construction commitments. Some combination of
the second, third, and fourth approaches offers the
best promise in the United States. However, the pro-
cesses to accomplish sulfur removal from coals before
and during combustion, and from combustion gases, are
not adequately developed, and are not immediately
acceptable for wide application. Tall stacks and
38
-------
remote siting, the fifth approach, are being promoted
in England and to some extent in the United States.
Sulfur is readily removed from distillate
oils, and the technology is well established. Resid-
ual fuel oils are more difficult to treat, because
they contain metals that deposit on the solid cata-
lysts employed. The petroleum industry has invested
heavily in the development of ways to desulfurize
fuel oil, and there is no doubt that some of these
methods will work. The plants required are costly,
and the added refining step of reducing the residual
fuel oil from an average of 2.6 percent to less than
1.0 percent sulfur will probably increase the price
to the power station by 50 to 80 cents per barrel.
This represents an increase in fuel cost of 20 to 35
percent. Fifty cents per barrel of oil is equivalent
to an increase of about 0.7 mills per kWh in power costs,
Sulfur in coal is present principally as
the mineral pyrite and in complex organic compounds;
in these two forms, it exists in widely varying ratios.
With some coals, pyrite can be largely removed by
grinding and washing, but, on the average, only about
half can be removed, using existing coal cleaning
technology. It appears that organic sulfur may be.
removed only by hydrogenation, liquefication and
gasification processes.
Preliminary results of NAPCA's survey of
naturally occurring low-sulfur coals and washability
characterization tests of coals available for uses
other than for metallurgical coke production suggest
that of the steam-coal production: 8 percent has 1
percent or less sulfur as"mined and could be cleaned
further; 11 percent is coal with over 1 percent sulfur
that is easily cleaned; and 6 percent is coal with over
1 percent sulfur that is cleanable at a higher cost.
Thus, perhaps, 25 percent of the steam-coal production
is capable of being cleaned to produce coal with a
maximum of 1 percent sulfur.
NAPCA further estimates that refinement and
broader application of coal cleaning technology might
39
-------
result in an average reduction in sulfur content of the
remaining 75 percent of steam coals by as much as 40
percent.
Coal washing costs may range from 25 to 75
cente.. per ton of cleaned product.
Where fuel desulfurization is practical, it
offers the most obvious and direct method to reduce S02
pollution from combustion. Several processes are under
development for the production of liquid and gaseous
fuels from coal, and liquid fuels from oil shale, and
will perhaps be demonstrated to be industrially feasi-
ble within a decade. Meanwhile, most of the needed
coal cannot be desulfurized to a maximum of 1 percent
sulfur by use of presently available technology.
At least two processes offer hope for removal
of sulfur during combustion: (1) "fluidized bed" com-
bustion, and (2) "molten iron bath" combustion. Opti-
mistically, the perfection of these techniques as
commerical processes is 3 to 8 years away, and there
is some question that either can be retrofitted into
existing plants. If successful processes can be de-
veloped, their major application will be in plants
that are engineered and constructed after the processes
are determined to be applicable on a commercial scaj.e.
Many ways of removing SC>2 from stack gases
are being actively investigated—all involving some
means of contacting the gas with a substance that re-
moves SC>2. At least 25 such processes are under
development in this country by industry and by NAPCA
(Appendix C), and others are under development in
Japan and Europe (Appendix B). Most are bench-scale
laboratory projects, but several have reached the
pilot-plant stage (10- to 25-MW equivalent gas streams).
Only the limestone-wet scrubbing process has been in-
stalled in sizable operating power plants. Several of
these processes will probably be technological successes,
but the efficiencies are not yet well established for
even the most advanced. Projected costs range up to 1
mill per kWh and, in some cases, higher, depending upon
method of financing.
40
-------
Although SC>2 emissions are not decreased by
remote siting and tall stacks, these measures help re-
duce ground-level SC^ concentrations in urban areas.
As previously discussed, even with application of sul-
fur removal processes, tall stacks will continue to be
necessary for large power stations to disperse and
dilute all remaining emissions, including carbon diox-
ide, nitrogen oxide, and water vapor.
It should also be noted that the possiblity
of establishing one national air quality control re-
gion and broader international and even global coop-
eration in environmental quality management may re-
quire national emission standards.
The future of sulfur control is not hard to
predict in general terms. The country is committed to
reducing air pollution, and increasingly stringent
standards regarding sulfur concentrations in the am-
bient air are being established. Users of high-sulfur
fuels will attempt to switch to natural gas, desulfur-
ized fuel oils, or low-sulfur coals, all of which are
in limited supply. These will command a premium price
over present fuels. Where practical, the coal industry
will find more intensive treatment of steam coals prof-
itable. Where possible, new mines in known low-sulfur
coal deposits will also be opened. It normally takes
about 3 years to bring a new mine into full production.
Because these developments will not meet
the total requirements of low-sulfur fuels necessary
to control the continuing increase in sulfur emissions,
many presently operating utilities will have no near-
term alternative except to install facilities to re-
move sulfur from stack gases. Probably, the simpler
methods, which produce "tnrow-away" by-products, will
be the first to be adopted by many existing plants.
The more complicated processes, which produce sulfuric
acid, SC>2, or elemental sulfur, may be demonstrated
in 3 to 10 years.
41
-------
By perhaps 1980 or 1985, sulfur emissions
stemming from smelters and the combustion of fossil
fuels will be under fairly good control, although
total sulfur emissions will have risen substantially
over those at the present time. By 1975 to 1985, there
may be ways to burn coal, such as by fluidized-bed com-
bustion in the presence of lime, to fix the sulfur so
it is not carried by the stack gases.
B. THE NEED FOR COMMERCIAL DEMONSTRATION
It is important to note that industrially
proven technology for the control of sulfur oxides
resulting from fossil fuel combustion does not now
exist. Only one of the several processes under de-
velopment has been installed in 100-MW or larger
boilers, and it has operated only intermittently.
Data on processing variables accumulated
during each stage of process development are evaluated
to determine the feasibility of scale-up to the next
stage. If feasibility at the bench and pilot scale
has been established, prototype industrial scale
operation for a minimum of 1 year is necessary to secure
sufficient knowledge of the process to establish con-
trol parameters, operating reliability and efficiency,
maintenance requirements, adequacy of materials and
engineering, and ability of the process to meet air
quality objectives.
Consequently, fhere is an urgent need for
commercial demonstration of the more promising pro-
cesses 3 to make reliable engineering and economic data
available to engineers who are designing full-scale
facilities to meet specific local and regional con-
ditions. The panel's definition of proven industrial-
scale reliability is satisfactory operation on a
100-MW or larger unit for more than 1 year. Also,
technical and economic data developed must be adequate
for confident projection to full commercial scale.
Pilot scale refers to investigation using flue gas in
the capacity range of 10 to 25 MW. Smaller sizes and
studies using synthetic gas mixtures are considered
to be bench scale.
42
-------
Estimates of industrial-scale feasibility and
adequacy of a process based on paper studies or bench-
scale projections are, by their very nature, too specu-
lative to be reliable in making large-scale economic
or engineering choices between alternative processes.
Such estimates do, however, provide a basis for deci-
sions related to the next level of scale-up. The
estimates of installed cost per kilowatt range from
$4 to $40 for the processes under development. If the
figure were $10, the cost to install control equipment
in existing coal-fired power plants would be about $2.2
billion. Total operating costs may be of the order of
0.5 mill per kWh. These are not reliable estimates of
the ultimate cost to the consumer of electricity, but
they do serve to indicate the magnitude of the problem
of S02 control.
Even though the technical feasibility of a
process were indicated on a pilot-plant scale, industry
would be understandably hesitant to fund a large in-
stallation prior to full-scale evaluation. For a
utility, the risks of failure to meet air quality ob-
jectives—as well as operational objectives—are great.
For the nation, the possibility of delaying effective
862 control by installing equipment that does not do
an adequate job is also great. When national objectives
call for accelerated construction of high-risk, expen-
sive facilities using unproven processes, it is proper
for the government to share in the risks by participation
in those portions of the project that are first-of-a-
kind engineering demonstration units.
The development of several of the processes
for removal of sulfur from stack gases is well advanced.
Pilot plants of up to 25 MW have demonstrated to varying
degrees the technical feasibility of at least three of
these developments. The diversity of the schemes being
developed is gratifying, because quit^e different tech-
nical solutions will be required to meet the wide
variety of situations in which sulfur control is
necessary.
The panel believes that it would be appro-
priate and very much in the national interest for NAPCA±
43
-------
under Section 104 (a) (4) of the Clear Air Act. of 19673
to provide support of several million dollars, in part-
nership with industry, to expedite the first commercial
demonstration installation of each of several promising
processes for SO2 control.
C. BACK-FITTING EXISTING PLANTS
The dry- and wet-limestone processes could
probably be used by many existing plants. These are
by no means the final solution, and other processes
involving by-product recovery should be developed.
Many stations have limited areas in which
they can dispose of the ash, and would have to haul
it away. For some older plants in crowded areas, very
little space is available; forcing them to utilize
large quantities of limestone could result in their
conversion from coal to a low-sulfur oil. Sometimes;
simply upgrading the electrostatic precipitator for
the dry-limestone process would cost more than to con-
vert from coal to an oil-fired unit utilizing low-
sulfur oil. In addition, for a given precipitator
efficiency, a threefold increase in fly ash will nearly
triple the particulate emission.
The existing smaller power plants have the
other alternatives of obtaining low-sulfur coal, oil,
or gas, if supplies of these fuels are available.
These alternatives are also available to large plants,
but the panel believes that, from a national point of
view, the most logical use for the low-sulfur coal is
in commercial and industrial plants,, small power
plants, space heating, and for production of metallur-
gical coke.
The forward-looking utilities are providing
space in new plants, in anticipation of the necessity
of installing corrective measures for flue gas treat-
ment. They are allocating space or buying enough
land to enable them to fit in the technology more
easily when it is available. One restriction of this
policy is that it provides only for the type of process
that would take gases at the usual discharge temperature
44
-------
of 300°F. It would not easily permit installation of
a process that requires use of the high-temperature
part of the boiler. The plan is to minimize the back-
fitting cost on a 300°F process. Those processes that
are designed to operate at 600°F to 900°F will require
about 3 years' lead time, and the back-fitting will cost
much more than if control technology were available and
could be incorporated in the initial design.
D. CENTRAL RECOVERY FACILITY
Utilities may find product-producing pro-
cesses more attractive if a central chemical processing
plant can be employed to collect and regenerate the
absorbents or adsorbents from several installations.
This appears to be an interesting possibility in con-
nection with several of the schemes that produce salable
chemicals.
The suggestion has been made that the chemical
industry be brought into partnership with the electric
power industry. It is feasible to have a separate chem-
ical operation that would serve a number of utilities.
The attractiveness of this scheme depends on the dis-
tance and the transportation involved and the method
of financing. It would probably have to be a facility
financed by the electric power industry and operated by
the chemical industry under a contractual arrangement.
It is possible that the utility could pay enough for
the return of the absorbing medium to make it attractive
for the chemical company.
A central facility is•attractive for several
reasons:
1. The utilities evidently prefer not to get
into the chemical business.
i
2. The recovery operation in many of these
processes requires facilities and space
comparable to the boiler plant.
3. The economy of scale for a central unit
would be better than that of a single
45
-------
utility plant, in which the installation
of a chemical plant of uneconomic size
would not be feasible.
4. The central processing facility could
operate at a higher and more uniform rate
than one located at, and dependent on, a
single power station operating on a vary-
ing load factor.
It has been suggested that the ultimate control
facility might be a combination major power plant, petro-
chemical, and sulfur-chemical complex. Coal chemicals
are presently produced in quantity during coke manufacture
by the steel industry. These organic chemicals are used
as feed stocks for petrochemical processes in competition
with petroleum refinery products. A similar activity
may evolve from the utility companies as they strive
to reduce pollutant emissions from coal and other
fossil fuels used in power generation.
E. RESEARCH PLANNING
From a national point of view, the research
strategy should be to have several processes in com-
mercial operation at the earliest possible date. Pri-
mary emphasis should be placed on achieving industrial
feasibility for the processes that can be readily in-
corporated into existing power plants, even though some
of them may produce only nonsalable or throw-away by-
products. Successful development of these processes
would do most to alleviate air pollution in the short-
est possible time.
Besides development of throw-away processes,
development of product-producing processes must be
continued. For the new installation, improved pro-
cesses, including steps to recover some value from the
sulfur, will be necessary to keep costs for future con-
trol within reasonable limits. Installation of many
of these processes in existing plants would require
major changes. Consequently, they are unlikely to be
found broadly applicable to plants now in existence.
Compliance with the standards that may be promulgated
46
-------
within the next year or two will be extremely difficult
at best, and may be impossible, even with the devel-
opment and installation of the throw-away processes
that appear to be nearly ready for installation.
The limestone injection processes expected
to be available in 1 to 3 years will probably not be
adequate for the long-term requirements, and NAPCA
should continue to support the development of sulfur-
recovery processes.
Coal cleaning should be studied further, at
least on a small scale, until its sulfur reduction
potential is clearly defined. Imaginative new methods
for removal of both pyritic and organic sulfur from
coal should be encouraged.
The panel places special emphasis on the
following:
1. Complete development of the limestone
process should be given high priority
because it seems applicable to existing
boilers. At the same time, NAPCA should
support long-range research on processes
that industry will be slow to develop.
Fluidized bed combustion, which has-
potentially attractive antipollution
features, is such a process.
2. Coal cleaning processes should be refined
to their maximum potential. Promising
new concepts in coal desulfurization
should be supported.
3. Processes for desulfurization of fuel oil
are being developed by several petroleum
companies. It is believed that NAPCA
cannot, nor should it, contribute sig-
nificantly to these developments.
4. Probably, much of the NOX will have to be
removed from stack gases or combustion
temperatures controlled to reduce its
47
-------
generation. Only two of the SC>2 processes
under development appear to be potentially
effective in removing oxides of nitrogen.
Research on ways to combine SO^ NOX and
particulate abatement should be supported.
NAPCA should employ a process engineering
and construction firm to project costs
on a common basis for all of the promising
processes at various stages in their de-
velopment . This not only would provide
more reliable estimates of the ultimate
cost of sulfur control, but also would
provide NAPCA with a valuable guide in
contract allocation and scale-up de-
cisions .
Recovery of sulfur in the elemental form
is desirable for storing and handling.
Though acid-producing processes will find
application in special marketing situa-
tions, acid sales will generally be li-
mited by shipping costs.
Most of the processes using regenerable
absorbents or adsorbents produce S02-
The conversion of SC>2 to elemental sulfur
is not a common industrial process, and
it is important that the technology of
this conversion be thoroughly studied.
The following general considerations
should be kept in mind in choosing
processes for development:
a. Insertion of equipment ahead of the
air preheater is a radical change in
power plant design that may find slow
acceptance in the power industry.
b. Parallel absorber-regenerators,
which require shifting the gas flow
from one vessel to another, will
necessitate large investments in
48
-------
dampers or other flow control
apparatus.
c. Solid absorbents are subject to
attrition and to chemical deteriora-
tion.
d. Finely divided solid adsorbents are
difficult to recover completely
from the gas stream.
e. Processes that involve flow of the
stack gas through all the equipment,
both for absorption and regeneration
(or other type of product recovery),
have relatively high capital cost.
f. High absorbent loading and good mass
transfer and sorption kinetics are
important in keeping equipment size
at a minimum.
g. Gas reheating, while expensive, may
be needed to take care of the loss
of buoyancy of stack gas in some
treatment processes.
h. Impurities will accumulate and cause
trouble in absorbent-recycle pro-
cesses .
i. The disposition of sulfate formed is
a major problem in any absorption
process.
j. Processes that lead to fertilizer
products may be desirable under some
circumstances, because much of the
recovered sulfur can be used by the
fertilizer industry.
49
-------
F. PROCESS DEVELOPMENT
1. General Considerations of Individual Processes
Brief commentaries on each class of the pro-
cesses reviewed by the panel are presented here with
special emphasis on the general process considerations.
In each of the descriptions, the current level of
knowledge about the process is reflected in the state
of process development (bench, pilot, or demonstration
level).
Generally speaking, bench-scale work may pro-
ceed for several years, depending upon what is already
known about each of the individual steps of the process.
Pilot-plant design and construction may take from a
few months to more than a year following completion of
bench-level work. Normally, the pilot plant would be
operated for about 1 year. Scale-up, together with
design and construction of a demonstration plant,
following successful pilot-plant studies, takes from
1 to 2 years. Demonstration work will take 1 to 3 years
to provide adequate information about the process.
Thus, a process for which bench-scale studies have been
completed is generally at least 41/2 years away from
industrial feasibility, assuming success in subsequent
studies. The schematic in Figure 3 summarizes the
time scale for process development.
The panel was impressed by the readiness with
which full information concerning the several propri-
etary processes was disclosed and has no reason to
suspect that there is a major domestic effort on SC>2
control that has not been reported because of propri-
etary reasons.
A wide variety of processes are being con-
sidered in the United States (Appendix C) and in
foreign countries (Appendix D). A number of these
are reviewed here—particularly those that are re-
ceiving the most attention in the United States. In
most cases, the developers are seeking funds from
industry or Federal agencies, or some combination of
the two to supplement corporate funds in expediting
50
-------
CONCEPT
BENCH-LEVEL
EXPERIMENTS
CAPACITY-UNDER 10 MW OR
SYNTHETIC GASES
TIME STUDY-0 to 2 years
PI LOT PLANT
OPERATION
CAPACITY-10 to 25 MW
TIME STUDY-1 to 2 years
DEMONSTRATION
PLANT
OPERATION
CAPACITY-100MW OR LARGER
TIME STUDY-1 to 3 years
PRELIMINARY REVIEW
REVIEW & EVALUATION
PI LOT PLANT
DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION
V4 to 1 year
REVIEW & EVALUATION
SCALE-UP AND DEMONSTRATION
PLANT DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
1 to 2 years
REVIEW & EVALUATION
COMMERCIAL PLANT
DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
1 to 3 years
Figure 3. Time scale for process development.
51
-------
the next level of feasibility investigation and re-
ducing the time required for full-scale demonstration.
2. Precombustion Processes
Coal cleaning and coal gasification are pro-
cesses that attempt to overcome the sulfur oxide em-
ission problem prior to combustion. The processes
have the potential advantage of removing the sulfur
at higher concentrations than are present in the stack
gas. They also provide for the recovery of sulfur or
pyrite and would contribute to the conservation of
this resource.
a. Coal Cleaning
Coal washing or beneficiation by present me-
thods is limited to reduction of pyritic sulfur and
can be expected to yield only a moderate increase in
the supplies of low-sulfur coals. In some cases, sul-
fur emissions may be controlled by combining coal
washing with sulfur removal from stack gases by the
dry-limestone or other relatively inexpensive pro-
cesses .
Coal beneficiation to reduce ash content has
been a regular practice of the industry for years.
Some pyrite is also removed, but only in the past few
years has specific attention been directed toward
sulfur removal by this procedure. The sulfur in many
coals is present in about equal parts as pyrite and
organic substances. Differences in the specific grav-
ity of coal and pyrite are the basis for accomplishing
sulfur removal; however, only part of the pyrite sulfur
can be removed by gravity cleaning methods. The pyrite
is present as nodules on cleat faces, and as dissemi-
nated small veins and crystals. In some coals, the
larger pyrite particles may be partially freed by
crushing and grinding the coal. Some types of coal
are more easily cleaned than others, depending upon
the manner and form in which the pyrite is present.
Experiments with organic solvents, such as hexane, to
remove the organic sulfur indicate that prohibitive
costs would be involved.
52
-------
The coal cleaning process produces a pyrite-
rich reject as well as the cleaned coal. The reject
stream may be further separated into a concentrated
pyrite and a high-sulfur fuel. These may be used,
respectively, for sulfuric acid manufacture and in a
combustion unit with flue gas scrubbing or some other
means of SC>2 control.
The Bureau of Mines and Bituminous Coal
Research have had active programs in air cleaning
and coal preparation for years. Pilot tests on air
and water classification and other means of removing
pyrite from coal have been made. Studies include the
technology of pyrite separation, washability tests,
evaluation of standard coal cleaning equipment, in
addition to flue gas processing.
b. Coal Gasification
Present projections indicate that the cost
of generating electricity from low-sulfur gas produced
from coal will be greater than the cost of obtaining
the same energy directly from coal. Coal gasification's
potential will depend greatly on the availability of nat-
ural gas and on the cost of alternative methods for S02
control. Because gasification is potentially an
alternative method of reducing SC>2 emissions to the
atmosphere, the panel suggests that consideration be
given to less sophisticated and possibly less costly
gasification processes that would produce a relatively
clean lower-heating-value gas, suitable for onsite use,
but not of pipeline quality.
*
The Office of Coal Research has an active
program for the development of pipeline gas and liquids
from coal. While the manufacture of pipeline-quality
gas from coal is not competitive at present, it appears
that it may become so, as gas demand increases, natural
gas reserves decline, and the technology of gasification
processes improves in the next 5 to 10 years.
At present at least four processes are being
considered:
53
-------
1. Hydrogasification—Institute of Gas
Technology
2. C02 Acceptor—Consolidation Coal Company
3. Two-Stage Super-Pressure Gasification—
Bituminous Coal Research
4. Molten Salt Process—Kellogg Company
These processes require preliminary grinding,
and those using lignite require drying. For coal hydro-
gasification, a mild air-oxidation pretreatment is used
to avoid agglomeration in the hydrogasifier. The BCR
process uses high pressure combustion to provide heat
in the gasifier; the Kellogg process circulates hot
molten salt to the gasifier; and the CC^ Acceptor pro-
cess employs the reaction of calcined dolomite with CC^.
Hydrogen is obtained by reacting char and steam. All
processes require purification plus methanation to up-
grade the gasifier effluent to gas of pipeline quality.
During the purification step, sulfur is removed as an
H2S feed for a Glaus plant.
The Institute of Gas Technology Hygas process
is the nearest to commercialization and, assuming success
in the pilot studies, will be commercially available in
the late 1970's. IGT is starting up a 5-ton-per-day
pilot plant, funded by the Department of the Interior
Office of Coal Research, in Chicago for further study
of the Hygas process. Only recently has attention been
given by IGT to production of gas of less than pipeline
quality for power plant fuel.
In addition to the research being supported
by the Office of Coal Research, several companies are
developing coal gasification processes of their own to
produce either pipeline or sub-pipeline quality gas.
It should be 'noted that low-heating value gasification
processes will require sulfur removal from volumetric
flows only slightly smaller than stack gas rates, there-
by reducing the advantage of easier sulfur removal re-
sulting from the higher concentrations.
54
-------
3. Combustion Processes
The new combustion processes remove the sul-
fur during burning by methods that do not require ex-
tensive stack gas cleanup. Some of the more promising
processes that offer the possibility of being brought
to commercial acceptability in the later 1970's are
discussed below. These processes also offer the
possibility of sulfur recovery and the corresponding
conservation of sulfur resources.
The combustion processes proposed for sulfur
oxide contrdl require new concepts of boiler design.
The manufacturers and utilities have standardized boiler
design to the extent that few major changes have been
made in recent years. Additional effort will be re-
quired to obtain acceptance of these processes by in-
dustry since changes in manufacturing procedures and
in operation will be necessary. The processes offer
some of the more logical approaches to sulfur oxide
emission control and deserve the extra level of support
that will ensure their full consideration.
a. Fluidized Bed Combustion (FBC) is a new
concept in boiler design and would be applicable only
to new plants. The burning fuel is contacted with a
fluidized bed of limestone particles which react with
the sulfur. A portion of the bed is continuously re-
moved and replaced with fresh, limestone. Several FBC
systems are being studied in England. The (British)
National Coal Board is conducting research on atmo-
spheric and pressurized systems. Esso Research Ltd.
has been developing a two-stage FBC unit in which high-
sulfur residual fuel oil is burned and sulfur values
recovered. In the United States, the firm of Pope,
Evans, and Robbins (under sponsorship of the Office
of Coal Research and the National Ai,r Pollution Control
Administration) has conducted pilot plant work and
studied the applicability of fluid bed combustion to
industrial boiler systems. The National Coal Board
projects that scale-up, from current laboratory test-
ing, to a 20- to 30-MW single-stage atmospheric pilot
unit can be completed by 1972.
55
-------
b. The Black, Sivalls, and Bryson Combustion
Process is a new concept in boiler design, in which
sulfur oxide formation is prevented by the submerged
partial combustion of coal in a bath of molten iron.
The resulting carbon monoxide is burned above the molten
bath. The sulfur is removed with the ash-slag and is
subsequently recovered as sulfur. Black, Sivalls, and
Bryson are conducting feasibility studies and have begun
pilot plant design.
4. Limestone Processes
The limestone processes for sulfur oxide re-
moval should be given priority in terms of research
money and encouragement, because sufficient work has
been done on these processes to suggest that they may
become commercially acceptable sooner than any of the
processes that produce salable products. Moreover,
it appears that, for some applications, the net cost
of throw-away processes may be less than for a recovery
process. This is particularly true of a station that
has been in operation for some time, since amortization
of the cost of the control equipment would be over the
remaining life of the plant, and the load factor of the
plant would be lower in its later years.
Problems may arise with limestone because of
limitations on the space available for disposal of waste
products. In some locations, this could be expensive
and tip the balance toward a recovery process. On the
other hand, the dry-limestone process can be used in-
termittently for incident control, and thereby reduce
the amount of material handled. This could be done
in certain areas of high pollution levels where local
control at specific times is needed.
The possibility that the limestone-based
processes may solve an air pollution problem but create
a water pollution problem is one reason that the panel
endorsed NAPCA's plan to install plant-scale test
facilities at TVA, where full consideration will be
given to various ways of handling air and water pollu-
tion and solid wastes. The government effort has merit
because the plans are to study the situation not only
for dry-limestone but also for scrubber design
56
-------
alternatives; this would expand the applicability of
the limestone processes. In addition, the technology
developed for S02 removal by limestone-wet scrubbing
will contribute to the general knowledge of wet scrub-
bers, and this will be useful in other wet scrubbing
processes.
The panel does not favor the dry- or wet-
limestone processes exclusively, but merely as a stop-
gap or a first line of defense. There are other pro-
cesses that will have to be developed to provide more
adequate control of emissions. Limestone injection
technology seems nearest to industrial application and
therefore deserves priority in the near term.
The limestone processes appear to be appli-
cable to many existing power plants. Hecause they do
not produce a salable product, the limestone processes
should appeal to utilities not wishing to get into the
chemical business. The lower capital costs make these
processes attractive to the older plants operating*with
low-load factors. There is added cost for the addi-
tional fly ash removal, and there is a probable increase
in particulate emissions resulting from the increased
precipitator load for the dry removal process.
While the limestone processes are generally
thought of as not producing a salable product, there
is the possibility, of recovering sulfur dioxide by
heating the calcium-sulfite portion of the recovered
solids. With control of oxidation to sulfate, this
could provide for recovery of most of the sulfur dioxide
and reuse of the limestone. This area will also be
covered in the TVA study.
a. Limestone-Wet Scrubbing was originally
studied at Battersea in London, England} and at the Tir
John Power Plant in Swansea, Wales, during the 1930's.
In this early work 90 percent removal of 862 was ob-
tained 25 confirming the technical capability of the
process. However, the work also identified specific
problems of low reliability, high maintenance and
operating costs, corrosion, abrasion, scale deposit,
solid waste disposal and loss of plume buoyancy.
57
-------
Current studies in the United States and other countries
are attempting to overcome these problems through im-
proved process and equipment design, closer control of
operating parameters, improved materials, systems
optimization, and reliability.
Limestone-wet scrubbing may be added to
existing plants without significant boiler modification.
Limestone may be injected into the boiler as well as
added to the scrubbing liquor. Solids disposal will
be several times the normal fly ash disposal rate. The
Combustion Engineering Company has recently built two
full-scale units at the Meramec Plant of the Union
Electric Company in St. Louis and at the Lawrence Plant
of the Kansas Power and Light Company. Each unit is
designed to handle all the flue gas from a 125-MW
boiler. Both plants have had start-up troubles but are
expected eventually to meet the design objectives of
83 percent sulfur removal and 98 percent particulate
removal. However, Kansas Power and Light Company is
proceeding with plans for a 430-MW power plant, using
the limestone-wet scrubbing process. Problems of
scrubber optimization and waste disposal may require
several years of additional study and are further
discussed at the end of this chapter.
b. Limestone-Dry Removal uses an electro-
static precipitator. The process may be added to
existing plants. Reaction time and temperature re-
quirements are such that the process may not be ap-
plicable to cyclone-fired boilers. Solids disposal
problems will be several times the normal fly ash
disposal rate. The Tennessee Valley Authority is
installing a 175-MW demonstration unit at its Shawnee
plant near Paducah, Kentucky.
5. Processes for Sulfur Recovery from Stack Gases
Several processes for recovering sulfur from
the stack gas following combustion are at or near the
demonstration level. These processes will recover the
sulfur oxide and convert it into products for the
chemical industry, such as sulfuric acid, hydrogen
sulfide, sulfur oxides, and elemental sulfur.
58
-------
Domestic reserves of sulfur are limited, and
consideration should be given to their conservation.
It would be desirable to conduct a study of the long-
range supply and demand situation with regard to the
several alternative by-products to aid in establishing
priorities for support of control and abatement tech-
nology. Most of the processes reviewed rely on re-
latively straightforward chemical reactions and pro-
cessing equipment. The major technical problems are
related to the low concentration of SC^ in large
volumes of flue gas containing a variety of corrosive
materials.
a. The Cat-Ox Process of Monsanto Company
is a direct translation of the contact sulfuric acid
process. Boiler modifications are needed as the con-
verter uses gas at temperatures of 700° F to 900° F.
The process has been successfully piloted (15-MW equiv-
alent) at the Portland, Pennsylvania, station of
Metropolitan Edison Company. Monsanto has proposed
the pilot unit as a modular alternative to commercial-
scale demonstration. It is especially applicable to
high-sulfur fuels, such as coal-cleaning middlings and
ore smelting. This process could be commercially
demonstrated by 1973.
b. The Wellman-Lord Process is an add-on
process and does not require boiler modifications.
Sulfur dioxide is recovered from the stack gas by
scrubbing and reprocessing the scrubbing solution.
During 1969, a 25-MW pilot study was conducted at the
Crane Station of the Baltimore Gas and Electric Com-
pany. W. R. Grace Company, the Bechtel Corporation,
Potomac Electric Power Company, Delmarva Power and
Light Company, and Potoma'c Edison Company also par-
ticipated in this study. A commercial Wellman-Lord
recovery plant is being installed to recover S02 from
the stack gas of a contact sulfuric acid plant of the
Olin Mathieson Chemical Corporation at Paulsboro, New
Jersey.
c. The Esso-Babcock and Wilcox Dry Adsorbent
Process requires boiler modification to provide 900° F
gas. Regeneration of the adsorbent produces sulfur
59
-------
dioxide for a sulfuric acid plant. A 2,000 CFM bench-
scale unit is in operation, and a 25-MW pilot plant is
planned. If this is successful, a demonstration unit
costing approximately $7.5 million is planned, with
the objective of developing a commercial process by
1973. Sixteen utilities in the midwest and eastern
United States and Canada are cooperatively funding
the project.
d. Magnesium Oxide Scrubbing is an add-on
process in which the scrubber removes both sulfur
oxides and particulates. Chemico proposes a central
recovery plant to remove sulfur dioxide and recycle the
magnesium oxide to the power plants. Chemico and Basic
Chemicals are conducting pilot studies of the process.
e. The Formate Scrubbing Process is an add-
on process in which the reprocessing of the scrubbing
solution yields a feed gas for a Glaus plant for
sulfur recovery. Bench-scale studies have been con-
ducted by Consolidation Coal Company.
f. Ammonia Scrubbing of stack gases can be
done as an add-on process without boiler changes. Sul-
fur dioxide can be stripped from the scrubbing liquid,
using heat, or the solution can be acidified with
nitric, sulfuric, and phosphoric acids to produce
various fertilizers. Bench-scale studies were made
some years ago. The renewed interest in the process
lies mainly in the decrease in the price of ammonia in
recent years.
g. The Westvaco Char Process is an add-on
process. A source of hydrogen is needed for regener-
ation of the adsorbent/catalyst char and to produce
a feed stream for a Glaus sulfur recovery plant. Pilot-
level studies are being conducted by Westvaco.
h. The Molten Carbonate Process is intended
mainly for new plants with modified boilers to provide
the gas at 900° F. Reprocessing of the scrubbing melt
produces a feed gas for a Glaus sulfur recovery plant.
Bench-scale studies have been made by Atomics Inter-
national.
60
-------
i. Sodium Bicarbonate Adsorption is an add-
on process that removes both sulfur oxide and fly ash.
Pilot-level studies have been conducted by Dow Chemical
Company.
j. The Modified Glaus Process is an add-on
process and is an extension of the conventional Glaus
sulfur process. A source of hydrogen (natural gas) is
needed for the process to recover sulfur. Princeton
Chemical Research has conducted bench-scale studies of
the process.
k. The Catalytic Chamber Process is a modi-
fication of the old lead chamber process and removes
both sulfur and nitrogen oxides and produces sulfuric
acid. It is an add-on process that requires some
additional space. Bench-scale studies have been con-
ducted by Tyco Laboratories.
1. The Ionics/Stone & Webster Process uses
a scrubber and an electrolytic cell system to recover
sulfur dioxide for subsequent sulfuric acid production.
It is an add-on process that requires a significant
amount of power. Pilot-level studies have been con-
ducted by Ionics and Stone & Webster.
m. The Alkalized Alumina Process has received
significant attention. Attrition of the alkalized
alumina has been a continuing problem. Recent detailed
engineering and cost analysis (by M. W. Kellogg) suggests
that further work on this process is unjustified.
6. Scrubber Development
There is a wide variety of SC>2 removal pro-
cesses that use scrubbers as the principal chemical
contactor. Some, such as the lime scrubbing process,
employ reactants that may cause scaling and plugging
of equipment because of the precipitation of solids,
while others, such as sodium salt scrubbers, use clear
liquids containing no solids. Nearly all scrubber
applications require corroision studies and materials
evaluation. The problem is not simply a matter of
61
-------
finding a single best scrubber for all applications,
but to develop a scrubber technology for a variety of
applications. Consequently, NAPCA plans to look at
several scrubber types on a small scale in an effort
to characterize process chemistry combinations and
generate the background data necessary to select the
best scrubber for the specific process. In this way
scale-up would not be repeated for every promising
process.
The proposal for work to be done by the TVA
on the wet-limestone process involves a large develop-
ment and testing effort on scrubbers. This same in-
stallation could conceivably be utilized with some
modification to test other wet scrubber sulfur re-
covery processes, when technology reaches the stage
at which testing on this scale is justified.
62
-------
APPENDIX A
LIST OF PRESENTERS
The following organizations made presenta-
tions to the Panel on Control of SOo from Stationary
Combustion Sources:
Babcock & Wilcox
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc.
Black, Sivalls, & Bryson, Inc.
Chemical Construction Corporation
Combustion Engineering, Inc.
Continental Oil Company
(Consolidation Coal Company, Inc.)
The Dow Chemical Company
ESSO Research and Engineering Company
Institute of Gas Technology
Ionics Incorporated/Stone & Webster
The M. W. Kellogg Company
McNally Pittsburg Manufacturing Corporation
Monsanto Company
National Air Pollution Control Administration
North American Rockwell Corporation
(Atomics International Division)
Office of Coal Research
Pope, Evans and Robbins
Princeton Chemical Research Company
Roberts & Schaefer Company
Tennessee Valley Authority
Tyco Laboratories, Inc.
Wellman-Lord, Inc.
Westvaco
63
-------
APPENDIX B
LIST OF CORRESPONDENTS
The following companies sent in material to
the panel describing their activities and experience
on control of S0? from stationary combustion sources:
Abcor, Inc.
The Air Preheater Company, Inc.
Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.
American Petroleum Institute
Basic Chemicals
The Carborundum Company
The Detroit Edison Company
Edison Electric Institute
Institute of Gas Technology
Joy Manufacturing Company
(Western Precipitation Division)
Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corporation
(Kaiser Chemicals Division)
The Kansas Power and Light Company
Nalco Chemical Company
Pennsylvania Electric Company
Precipitair Pollution Control, Inc.
Research-Cottrell, Inc.
Reynolds Metals Company
Reynolds, Smith and Hills
Slick Industrial Company
(Pulverizing Machinery Division)
Union Electric Company
United International Research, Inc.
Universal Oil Products Company
(Air Correction Division)
The Wheelabrator Corporation
64
-------
APPENDIX C
UNITED STATES S02 POLLUTION CONTROL
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT*
Company
Abcor, Inc.
Air Products and Chemi-
cals, Inc.
American Iron and Steel
Institute
Argonne National Labora-
tory
Babcock & Wilcox
Basic Chemicals
Bituminous Coal Research,
Inc.
Bituminous Coal Research,
Inc.
Black, Sivalls, & Bryson,
Inc.
The Carborundum Company
Chemical Construction
Corporation
Combustion Engineering,
Inc.
Type of Work
Aqueous absorption systems
for S02
Dry process for S02 removal
Studies of sulfur pollution
control from various iron
and steel manufacturing
steps
Reduction of atmospheric
pollution by the applica-
.tion of fluidized bed' com-
bustion
Magnesium oxide scrubbing
system and other S02 re-
moval processes
Magnesium slurry scrubbing
(in conjunction with
Chemico)
Use of limestone or dolomite
for S02 removal from coal-
burning boiler flue gases
Removal of pyritic sulfur
from coal
Coal gasification in molten
iron; sulfur removal in slag
Limestone injection with wet
scrubbing or bag filtration
Various projects for S02 con-
trol from sulfuric acid
plants,and power plants
Limestone injection-wet
scrubbing process
*Compiled by NAPCA, March 1970.
65
-------
Company
(Kansas Power and Light
Company)
(Union Electric Company)
Consolidation Coal Com-
pany, Inc.
The Detroit Edison Com-
pany
The Dow Chemical Com-
pany
Edison Electric Institute
Esso Research and Engi-
neering Company
General American Trans-
portation Corporation
Hydrocarbon Research,
Incorporated
Illinois Institute of
Technology Research
Institute
Institute of Gas Tech-
nology
Ionics Incorporated/
Stone & Webster
Kaiser Chemicals
The M. W. Kellogg Com-
pany
Monsanto Company
(Pennsylvania Electric
Company)
(Air Preheater Company)
(Research-Cottrell)
Type of Work
Demonstration of Combustion
Engineering limestone in-
jection-scrubbing process
Demonstration of Combustion
Engineering limestone in-
jection-scrubbing process
Flue gas scrubbing, fluidized
combustion in a lime bed,
and pyrite removal from
coal
Limestone scrubbing, ammonia
injection
Gas-phase removal of SC>2 with
solid alkaline materials
Dispersion characteristics of
Stack effluents, develop-
ment of a formula for stack
design
B&W-Esso proprietary process
for SOp removal
Catalytic reduction of SO* to
sulfur
Catalytic hydrogenation of
fossil fuels
Oxidation and reduction
catalysts
Coal Gasification
Regenerable aqueous scrubbing
system for SC^ removal and
recovery (Stone & Webster-
Ionics process)
Improved dry sorbent for SC>2
removal
Undisclosed process for power
plant SC-2 removal
Catalytic oxidation of SC^
with recovery of sulfuric
acid
Development of Monsanto
catalytic oxidation pro-
cess
66
-------
Company
Nalco Chemical Company
Petroleum Industry
(Source: API)
Pope, Evans & Robbins
Precipitair Pollution Con-
trol, Inc.
Pulp and Paper Industry
(Source: NCASI)
Research-Cottrell, Inc.
Reynolds Metals Company
Reynolds, Smith, and
Hills
Slick Industrial Company
Southern California
Edison Company
Stone & Webster
United International
Research, Incorporated
U.S. Bureau of Mines-
Morgantown
U.S. Stoneware Company
Universal Oil Products
Type of Work
Dry sorbent for SC>2
Industry-wide R&D for sulfur
oxides control
Control of gaseous emissions
from coal-fired fluidized-
bed boilers
Gas-phase removal of SC>2 with
solid alkaline materials,
and collection with fabric
filters (cooperative work
with Southern California
Edison)
Sulfur oxides control from
sulfite and kraft pulping
processes
Scrubbing equipment develop-
ment
Dry sorbents for SC>2 removal
Scrubbing process for flue
gas SC>2 removal
Dry SC>2 sorbent development
Gas-phase removal of SC-2
with solid alkaline mate-
rials, and collection with
fabric filters
Regenerable aqueous scrubbing
system for SC^ removal and
recovery (S&W-Ionics
process)
Regenerable scrubbing process
removal; S02 converted to
H2S04
Study of corrosion/erosion
and of coal type during
fluidized bed combustion
Process for S02 control from
sulfuric acid plants
Dolomite slurry scrubbing;
catalytic hydrogenation of
fuels
67
-------
Company
Wellman-Lords Incorpor-
ated
Tampa Electric Company
(Bechtel Corporation)
(Baltimore Gas and Elec-
tric Company)
(Potomac Electric Power
Company)
(Delmarva Power and Light
Company)
(Potomac Edison Company)
Western Precipitation
Group (Joy Manufactur-
ing Company)
Westi-ighouse R&D Center
Westvaco
The Wheelabrator Company
Wisconsin Electric Power
Type of Work
R&D of regenerable wet scrub-
bing process at Lakeland,
Florida, and Tampa Electric,
plus direct reduction of
S02 to sulfur
Pilot study of Wellman-Lord
process, contributed to
Stone & Webster
Demonstration plant of Wel-
lman-Lord process at
Baltimore Gas and Electric
power station
Demonstration plant of
Wellman-Lord process at
BG&E power station in
Baltimore
Scrubbing equipment devel-
opment
Evaluation of the fluidized
bed combustion process
Adsorption of SC^ by
activated carbon
Scrubbing equipment develop-
ment
Lime scrubbing, other
aqueous scrubbing systems
68
-------
APPENDIX D
FOREIGN S02 POLLUTION CONTROL
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT*
Company
Australia
Commonwealth Science
Industrial Research
Organization
Czechoslovakia
Research Institute of
Inorganic Chemistry
Czech acid plant scrub-
bing
Fuel Research Institute
Institute of Mines
England
Esso Research Center
National Coal Board
Coal Research Establish-
ment
BCURA Industrial Labs
LHF Patented Process
Esso Research
Bankside and Battersea
Process
France
Type of Work
Fluidized bed combustion
Ammonia scrubbing of S02
effluent
Ammonia scrubbing on
plant tail gas
Fluidized bed combustion
Desulfurization of coal
Fluidized bed combustion of
oil
Fluidized bed combustion of
coal
Desulfurization of coal
Alkaline water scrubbing on
Thames River
Catalytic oxidation of flue
gas
Societe Nationale Des
Petroles
D'Aquatane (joint project
with Haider Topsoe. of
Denmark)
Ugine Kuhlmann-Weirtam Ammonia scrubbing of flue
Process gas ,
Societe Anonyme Activit Fluidized bed combustion
Neyric Desulfurization of coal
*Compiled by NAPCA, March 1970.
69
-------
Company
Germany
Bayer Double Contact
Process
Bischoff Process
Lurgi Sulfacid Process
Activated Carbon Ad-
sorption
Bergbau-Forschung
Activated Char Sorption
B ergb au-Fors chung
Grillo Process
Siemens-Schuchert Pro-
cess
Holland
Shell CuO process
NVCP (Nederlandsch
Verkoopkantoor voor
Chemische Producten N.V.
Italy
University of Cagliari
Japan
Kiyoura Ammonium Sulfate
Process
Nippon Kokan Ltd.
Japan Engineering and
Construction Co. (JECCO)
Showa-Denko Process
Hitachi Activated Carbon
Process
Central Research Insti-
tute of the Electric
Power Industry
Resources Research In-
stitute
Mitsubishi DAP-Manganese
Process
Kanagawa
Type of Work
Two-stage catalytic oxida-
tion of ^SO^ tail gas
Lime/Limestone scrubbing of
flue gas
Wet char sorption of SC^
from effluent
Wet char sorption of SC>2
from effluent
Dry char sorption of S02
from gaseous effluent
Sorption by proprietary
mixture of metal oxides
Sorption on iron oxides in
silica gels
Sorption on proprietary mix-
ture of copper based metal
oxides
Hydro desulfurization of oil
Desulfurization of coal
Catalytic oxidation of flue
gas
Lime/Limestone scrubbing of
flue gas
Lime/Limestone scrubbing of
flue gas
Ammonia scrubbing
Wet char sorption of SC>2
from effluent
Dry limestone injection for
S02 control of flue gas
Dry limestone injection for
S02 control of flue gas
Manganese oxide sorption
Aqueous scrubbing
70
-------
Company
Type of Work
Injection of gaseous ammonia
into flue gas
Lime/Limestone scrubbing of
flue gas
Poland
Dry Ammonia Injection
Sweden
BAHCO Lime-scrubbing
Process
U.S.S.R.
Wet Limestone scrubbing Lime/Limestone scrubbing
at Kusnetsk Abagur
Plant
Ammonia and sodium Ammonia scrubbing
carbonate scrubbing-
Voskresenskij Chemical
Industry
I.M. Gubkin Institute of Fluidized bed combustion
Petroleum and Others
Academy of Science
Lensovet Technological
Institute
Yugoslavia
Institute of Mines
Desulfurization of coal
Desulfurization of oil
Desulfurization of coal
71
-------
APPENDIX E
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Executive Office of the President. Office of
Science and Technology. Energy Policy Staff.
Federal Research and Development for Civilian
Energy Product-ion3 Conversion and Transmission.
Washington: Office of Science and Technology,
September 8, 1969. 9 p.
2. . Considerations Affecting Steam Power Plant
Site Selection. Washington: Office of Science
and Technology, December 1968. 133 p.
3. Ho1comb, R. W. Power Generation: The Next 30
Years. Science, 167: 159-160, January 9,
1970.
4. Institute of Gas Technology. LNG: A Sulfur-Free
Fuel for Power Generation. Springfield,
Virginia: Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific
and Technical Information, May 1969. (various
pagings). (PB 184 353)
5. Linzon, S. N. The Influence of Smelter Fumes on th&
Growth of White Pine in the Sudbury Region.
Toronto: Ontario Department of Lands and
Forest, Ontario Department of Mines, 1958.
45 p.
6. McCormick, Robert A. and John H. Ludwig. Climate
Modification by Atmospheric Aerosols. Science,
156(3780): 1358-1359, June 9, 1967-
7. Minutes of the Air Quality Control Advisory Council.
January 28, 1970. Baltimore: State of Mary-
land, Department of Health, Air Quality Con-
trol Division.
8. National Academy of Sciences-National Research
Council. Committee on Resources and Man.
Resources and Man. San Francisco: W. H.
Freeman and Company, 1969. 259 p.
72
-------
9. Operating Characteristics of a High Temperature
Electrostatic Precipitator. Report RI 7276.
Washington: u. S. Bureau of Mines, July 1969.
45 p.
10. President's Science Advisory Committee. Environ-
mental Pollution Panel. Restoring the Quality
of Our Environment. Washington: U. S. Gov-
ernment Printing Office, 1965. 317 p.
11. Robinson, E., and R. C. Robbins. Sources, Abun-
dance, and Fate of Gaseous Atmospheric Pol-
lutants. SRI Project PR-6755. New York:
American Petroleum Institute, February 1968.
123 p.
12. Steinberg, M., J. Powell, and B. Manowitz. The
Western Coal Deposits: A National Source of
Power. Preprint of Report BNL 50187 (T-542).
Upton, New York: Brookhaven National Lab-
oratory, June 1969. 54 p.
13. U. S. Atomic Energy Commission. Division of
Industrial Participation. The Nuclear In-
dustry—1969. Washington: U. S. Government
Printing Office, 1969. 338 p.
14. Upham, J. B. Atmospheric Corrosion Studies in Two
Metropolitan Areas. J. Air Pollution Control
Association, I?: 393-402, June 1967-
15. Wicken, A. J., and S. F. Buck. Report on a Study
of Environmental Factors Associated with Lung
Cancer and Bronchitis Mortality in Areas of
North East England. London: Tobacco Research
Council, 1964. (Research Paper 8)
16. U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
Public Health Service. Consumer Protection
and Environmental Health Service. National
Air Pollution Control Administration. Air
Quality Criteria for Carbon Monoxide. Wash-
ington: National Air Pollution Control Ad-
ministration. (NAPCA Publication AP-62)
73
-------
17. . Air Quality Criteria for Hydrocarbons.
Washington: National Air Pollution Control
Administration. (NAPCA Publication AP-64)
18. , Air Quality Criteria for Particulate Matter.
Washington: National Air Pollution Control
Administration, January 1969. (NAPCA Publica-
tion AP-49) 211 p.
19. . Air Quality Criteria for Photochemical
Oxidants. Washington: National Air Pollution
Control Administration. (NAPCA Publication
AP-63)
20. . Air Quality Criteria for Sulfur Oxides.
Washington: National Air Pollution Control
Administration, January 1969. (NAPCA Publica-
tion AP-50) 178 p.
21. _^ . Control Techniques for Carbon Monoxide
Emissions from Stationary Sources. Washington:
National Air Pollution Control Administration.
(NAPCA Publication AP-65)
22. . Control Techniques for Carbon Monoxide3
Nitrogen Oxides3 and Hydrocarbon Emissions
from Mobile Sources. Washington: National
Air Pollution Control Administration. (NAPCA
Publication AP-66)
23. . Control Techniques for Hydrocarbons and
Organic Solvent Emissions from Stationary
Sources. Washington: National Air Pollution
Control Administration. (NAPCA Publication
AP-68)
24. . Control Techniques for Nitrogen Oxides
Emissions from Stationary Sources. Washington:
National Air Pollution Control Administration.
(NAPCA Publication AP-67)
25. . Control Techniques for Particulate Air
Pollutants. Washington: National Air Pol-
lution Control Administration} January 1969.
(NAPCA Publication AP-51) 215 p.
74
-------
26. . Control Techniques for Sulfur Oxide Air
Pollutants. Washington: National Air Pollution
Control Administration, January 1969. (NAPCA
Publication AP-52) 122 p.
27. . The Climate of Cities: A Survey of Recent
Literature3 by James T. Peterson. Washington:
U. S. Government Printing Office, October 1969.
(NAPCA Publication AP-59) 48 p.
75
------- |