PB95-144358
NT1&
bifomurtlon b our business.
NOX CONTROL  TECHNOLOGIES APPLICABLE  TO
MUNICIPAL WASTE  COMBUSTION
RADIAN CORP., RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC
OH- 94
 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
 National Technical Information Service

-------
                                TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
  i: P. A- 600 /K- 94- 208
 NCx Control Technologies .Applicable to Municipal
 Waste Conibustion
                                               .> RE POH1 OAT I
                                                I >eccmber
                                               6 "tKFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
                                                      3 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
 D.M. White, K.I...\ebel.  M. Cundappa. and K. R. Ferry
9. Pi Rf OHMIi;G OSOA.M2AT.O.N NAX1E AND ADDRESS
 Radian Corporation
 3200 E. Chapel Hill Road/Nelson  Highway
 Research Triangle  Park.  North Carolina  27709
                                                                 1994
                                                NRKI./T I'-430-6742
                                                1)1:194011834
                                                      1O PROGRAM 6 uEMENT NO.
                                               II CONTRACT/GRANT NO
                                                EPA I.AC, DW89935714 and
                                                NRK1. YAR-3-13184-1
12. SPOMSORi.MG AGENCV NAXtt AND ADDRESS
 EPA. Office of Research and Development
 Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory
 Research Triangle Park. NC 27711
                                                      13. TYPE Of REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                                                       Final; 9/93 -  5/94
                                                14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                                                 EPA/600/13*
is.SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES AEERL pt-oject officer is James D.  Ktlgroe.  Mail Drop 65. 919/
 541-2854.  (*) Cosponsored by the U.S. Department of  Energy,  National  Renewable
 l^nerg
 6. ABSTR
v Laboratory. Golden.  CC  80401.
16. ABST  cT-rhe rc^ort documents the key design and operating parameters, commer-
 cial status,  demonstrated performance, and cost of three technologies available for
 reducing nitrogen oxide (NCx) emissions from municipal waste combustors (MVVCs),
 and identifies technology research and development needs associated with natural
 gas injection (NG1),  selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR),  and selective catalytic
 reduction (SCR).  Two iNGl  processes have been developed:  (1)  Methane de-NOK uses
 gas injection to inhibit NCx formation and appears capable of reducing NCx emis-
 sions  from AlVVCs by approximately 60%; and (2)  reburning uses gas injection to
 create reducing conditions  that convert NCx formed in the primary combustion zone
 to  molecular nitrogen.  Because of the relatively  high temperatures required for
 these  NCx-reduction reactions,  it may be difficult to  successfully apply reburning to
 modern mass-burn waterwall MXVCs.  Long-term emission reductions are 45-65%
 for SNCR and 80-90% for SCR. Operating  SNCR  processes near the upper end  of
 their  performance range can result in unwanted emissions of ammonia or other by-
 product gases.  Comparing  costs, SCR is the most capital intensive,  followed by
 advanced SNCR and advanced NG1. Capital costs  of NG1 and conventional SNCR are
 comparable.
                             KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                DESCRIPTORS
                                          b.lDENTIFlERS/OPEM ENDED TERMS
                                                                   c. COSATI Field/Croup
 Pollution
 Wastes
 Combustion
 Nitrogen Oxides
 Natural Gas
 Catalysis
                                    Pollution Control
                                    Stationary Sources
                                    Municipal Waste Com-
                                     bustion (MWC)
13B
14G
2 IB
07B
21D
07 D
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

 Release to Public
                                    19. SECURITY CLASS fJTlil Report)
                                    Unclassified
21. NO. Of PAGES
    118
                                    20. SECURITY CLASS (TTiispagtl
                                    Unclassified

-------
                      NOTICE

This document has been reviewed in accordance with
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency policy and
approved for publication.  Mention of trade names
or commercial products does not constitute endorse-
ment or recommendation for use.

-------
                                   ABSTRACT

       Several technologies are available for reducing NOX emissions from municipal
waste combustors (MWCs). These include combustion controls, natural gas injection
(NGI), selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR), and sdective catalytic reduction (SCR).
The objectives of this report are to document the key design and operating parameters,
commercial status, demonstrated performance, and cost of NGI, SNCR, and SCR, and to
identify technology research and development needs associated with these technologies.

       Two distinct NGI processes have been developed. One of these, Methane
de-NOXSM, uses gas injection to inhibit NOX formation and appears capable of reducing
NOX emissions from MWCs by approximately 60%.  The second approach, reburning,
uses gas injection to create reducing conditions that convert NOX formed in the primary
combustion zone to N2.  Long-term emission reductions for SNCR are 45-65% and are
80-90% for SCR.  Operation of SNCR near  the upper end of the performance range can
result in unwanted emissions of ammonia or other byproduct gases.  An advanced
version of SNCR using furnace pyrometry and advanced process controls appears
capable of achieving high NOX reductions with less reagent than is needed for
conventional SNCR.  The combination of NGI and SNCR (advanced NGI) may be able
to achieve overall NOX reductions of 80 to 85%.

       Comparing costs. SCR is the most capital intensive, followed by advanced SNCR
and advanced NGI. Capital costs of NGI and conventional SNCR are comparable. In
terms of tipping fee impact and cost effectiveness, conventional SNCR generally has the
lowest costs of the evaluated technologies  For NGI, these costs are dependent on
whether waste is diverted and  tipping  fee revenues are lost when applying this
technology, along with the price of natural gas.  Depending on the selected NGI
scenario,  the resulting tipping fee impacts and cost effectiveness values can be the
highest of the evaluated technologies.  After specific NGI scenarios, the next highest
tipping fee impacts and cost effectiveness values are for SCR.  These high costs result
from high capital costs, as well as the  cost of catalyst replacement and disposal.

sdg/nrcl
toc                                     iii

-------
                             TABLE OF CONTENTS

                                                                            Page

       Abstract	..ill
       List of Figures  	v i i
       List of Tables	   i x
       Acronyms	,	    x
       Conversion Factors	x i i

1.0    INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY  	   1-1

       1.1    Report Background, Objectives, and Organization	   1-1

       1.2    Background Information of NOX Formation and Control
             Technologies	   1-2
             1.2.1  NOX Formation 	   1-2
             1.2.2  NOX Control Technologies	   1-5

       1.3    Technical Approach 	   1-7

       1.4    Conclusions  	   1-8
             1.4.1  Technical Status of Evaluated Control Technologies  	   1-8
             1.4.2  Comparative Costs of Evaluated Control Technologies  	1-12

       1.5    References	1-17


2.0    NATURAL GAS INJECTION	   2-1

       2.1    Process Description	   2-1
             2.1.1  Reburning	,	2-1
             2.1.2  Methane de-NOX5"	   2-5

       2.2    Development Status 	   2-5

       2.3    Key Design and Process Variables Affecting Performance	2-10

       2.4    Recent Advances and i Jrther Research Needs	2-13

       2.5    Cost Analysis		2-15
             2.5.1  Design Basis	2-15
             2.5.2  Cost Results	2-17
             2.5.3  Sensitivity Analysis  	2-23

       2.6    References	2-26

sdg/arel
toe                                      V

-------
                            TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                  (Continued)
                                                                          Page
3.0     SELECTIVE NON-CATALYTIC REDUCTION 	  3-i

       3.1    Process Description	  3-1
             3.1.1  Thermal DeNOx™	  3-1
             3.1.2  NOXOUT™ .	  3-4

       3.2    Development Status  	  3-6

       3.3    Key Design and Process Variables	  3-6

       3.4    Recent Advances and Further Research Needs	3-14
             3.4.1  Temperature Monitoring	3-14
             3.4.2  Ammonia Continuous Emissions Monitors	3-18

       3.5    Cost Analysis  	3-19
             3.5.1  Design Basis	3-19
             3.5.2  Cost Results	3-21
             3.5.3  Sensitivity Analysis 	3-30

       3.6    References	3-33
4.0    SELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTION	  4-1

       4.1    Process Description	  4-1

       4.2    Development Status  	  4-3

       4.3    Key Design and Process Variables	  4-6

       4.4    Recent Advances and Further Research Needs	  4-9

       4.5    Cost Analysis  	4-10
             4.5.1  Design Basis	4-10
             4.5.2  Cost Results	4-10
             4.5.3  Sensitivity Analysis	4-16

       4.6    References	4-19

APPENDIX A      Description of Costing Framework   	A-l


sdg/nrel
loc                                    VI

-------
                               LIST OF FIGURES


                                                                           Page

1-1     Effect of Unit Size, Reagent Cost, and Annualized
       Capital on Tipping Fee Impact and Cost Effectiveness
       for Conventional SNCR  	1-10

1-2     Comparison of Capital Cost 	1-14

1-3     Comparison of Tipping Fee Impact	1-15

1-4     Comparison of Cost Effectiveness	 1-16

2-1     Schematic of Rebnrn Process 	  2-3

2-2     Effect of Temperature on Reburn NOX Reduction Efficiency  	  2-4

2-3     Schematic of Methane de-NOXSM Process	  2-6

2-4     Effect of Primary Zone Stoichiometry on CO and NOX
       Emissions  During Malmd Reburn Testing	  2-7

2-5     Effect of Methane de-NOXSM on CO and NOX Emissions
       During Olmsted County Methane de-NOXSM Testing  	  2-9

2-6     Effect of O2 Concentration on NOX Emissions During
       Olmsted County  Methane de-NOX5" Testing	2-11

2-7     Effect of Natural Gas Injection Rate on NOX Emissions
       During Olmsted County Methane de-NOXS!kf Testing	2-12

2-8     Effect of Natural Gas Injection Residence Time on NOX
       Emissions  During Pilot-Scale Testing of Methane
       de-NOXSM Process	2-14

2-9     Effect of Unit Size, Fuel Cost, Annualized Capital and
       Plant Tip Fee on Tipping Fee Impact and Cost Effectiveness
       for NGI-100 (for MWCs without additional heat input
       capacity)	2-24

2-10   Effect of NOX  Reduction on Tipping Fee Impact and Cost
       Effectiveness for NGI-100 (for MWCs without additional heat
       input capacity)  	2-25
sdg/orcl
toe

-------
                              LIST OF FIGURES
                                  (Continued)
                                                                          Page
3-1     Schematic Diagram of SNCR Applied to an MWC	  3-2

3-2     Ammonia Reaction Pathways	  3-3

3-3     Urea Reaction Pathways	  3-5

3-4     Effect of Reagent Feedrate on SNCR Performance	  3-9

3-5     Effect of Temperature and Flue Gas Composition on
       SNCR Performance  	3-11

3-6     Schematic Diagram of Advanced SNCR Applied to the
       Lancaster County MWC	3-16

3-7     Effect of Unit Size, Reagent Cost, and Annualized
       Capital on Tipping Fee Impact and Cost Effectiveness for
       Conventional SNCR	3-31

3-8     Effect of NOX Reduction on Tipping Fee Impact and Cost
       Effectiveness for Conventional SNCR	3-32

4-1     Schematic of SCR Configurations	  4-2

4-2     Effect of Temperature on SCR Performance	  4-8

4-3     Effect of Unit Size, Catalyst Replacement Cost, and
       Annualized Capital on Tipping Fee Impact and Cost
       Effectiveness for SCR	4-17

4-4     Effect of NOX Reduction on Tipping Fee Impact and Cost
       Effectiveness foi SCR	4-18
tdg/nret
toe

-------
                              LIST OF TABLES

                                                                         Page

1-1     Model Plant Cost Estimates for Conventional SNCR	  1-9

1-2     Technical Overview of Evaluated NOX Control Technologies 	1-11

2-1     Model Combustor Inputs for NGI	2-18

2-2     Cost Outputs for NGI Applied to the 400 TFD Model Combustor	2-19

2-3     Model Plant Cost Estimates for NGI for MWCs without
       Additional Heat Input Capacity (NGI-100)	2-20

2-4     Model Plant Cost Estimates for NG! for MWCs with
       15% Available Heat Input Capacity (NGI-85)	2-22

3-1     Summary of U.S. SNCR Applications on Municipal Waste
       Combustors   	  3-7

3-2     Model Combustor Inputs for Conventional SNCR	3-22

3-3     Cost Outputs for Conventional SNCR Applied to the 400 TPD
       Model Combustor	3-23

3-4     Model Plant Cost Estimates for Conventional SNCR	3-24

3-5     Model Plant Cost Estimates for Advanced SNCR	3-26

3-6     Comparison of Conventional and Advanced SNCR Systems	3-28

3-7     Model Plant Cost Estimates for Advanced NGI  	3-29

4-1     Summary of SCR Applications on European MWCs 	  4-4

4-2     Summary of SCR Applications on Japanese MWCs	  4-5

4-3     Model Combustor Inputs for SCR	4-11

4-4     Cost Outputs for SCR  Applied to the 400 TPD
       Model Combustor	4-12

4-5     Model Plant Cost Estimates for SCR 	4-13

4-6     Comparison of Cold- and Hot-side SCR Systems	M5

sdg/orel
ux                                    IX

-------
                                  ACRONYMS
APCD
As
Ca
CEM
CEMS
CO
CO2
CO(NH2)i
DOAS
dscf
dscm
EER
EPA
ESP
FF
FGDN
FOR
H
HC1
HCN
HNCO
IGT
IMS
IR
K
Ib/hr
MB/WW
mg
MMBtu
MSW
MWC
Na
NDIR
N2
N2O
NCI
NH2
NH3
(NH4)2S04
NH4C1
NH4HS04
NO
air pollution control device
arsenic
calcium
continuous emission monitor
continuous emissions monitoring system
carbon monoxide
carbon dioxide
urea
differential optical adsorption spectroscopy
dry standard cubic foot
dry standard cubic meter
Energy & Environmental Research Corporation
Environmental Protection Agency
electrostatic precipitator
fabric filter
flue gas denitrification
flue gas recirculation
hydrogen ion
hydrogen chloride
hydrogen cyanide
cyanic acid
Institute of Gas Technology
ion mobility spectroscopy
infrared
potassium
pounds per hour
mass burn waterwall
milligram
million British thermal units
municipal solid waste
municipal waste combustor
sodium
non-dispersive infrared
nitrogen
nitrous oxide
natural gas injection
amide radical
ammonia
ammonium sulfate
ammonium chloride
ammonium bisulfate
nitrogen oxide
sdg/nrcl
toe

-------
NO
NSPS
NSR
O
02
OFA
OH
O&M
QMS
Pb
ppm
SCR
SNCR
SO,
so,
SYSAV

tpd
U.S.
UV
V205/Ti02
WOj
WSCFM
         ACRONYMS
          (Continued)

nitrogen dioxide
nitrogen oxides
New Source Performance Standards
normalized stoichiometric ratio
oxygen radical
molecular oxygen
overfire air
hydroxyl radical
operating and maintenance
Ogden Martin Systems
lead
parts per million
selective catalytic reduction
selective non-catalytic reduction
sulfur dioxide
sulfur trioxide
Sydvastra Skdnes-Avfallsaktiebolag -
Southwest Scania Waste Company
tons per day
United States
ultraviolet
vanadium pentoxide/titanium oxide
tungsten oxide
wet standard cubic foot per minute
                                       XI

-------
                       CONVERSION FACTORS

Area
Density
Energy
Force
Length
Mass
Mass Concentration
Power
Pressure
Temperature
Volume
Volumetric Flow
Weight
To Convert From
ft2
lbm/ft3
Btu
Ibf
Tt
in.
in.
Ibm
Ibm
• gr
gr/ft3
ft - Ibf/s
lbf/in.2
op
ft3
ft3/s
ton
To
m'
kg/m1
j
N
m
m
nom
kg
g
g
g/m3
W
Pa
°C
m3
m3/s
Mg
Multiply By
9.2903E-2
1.6019E+1
1.0551E + 3
4.4482
3.048E-1
2.5400E-2
2.540E + 1
4.535E-1
4.535E + 2
6.486E-2
2.29
1.3558
6.895E-t-3
S/9(TF - 32°)
2.8317E-2
2.8317E-2
1.10
sdg/nrcl
toe
Xll

-------
1.0          INTRODUCTION AMD SUMMARY

1.1          Report Background. Objectives, and Organization

             Nitrogen oxides (NOX) are of environmental significance because of their
role as a criteria pollutant, acid gas, and ozone precursor. The current New Source
Performance  Standards (NSPS) for municipal waste combustors (MWCs) (40 CFR Part
60, Subpart Ea) limit NOX emissions to a daily average of 180 parts per million (ppm) at
7% oxygen (O2), dry basis.' By comparison, typical NOX emissions from modern mass
burn waterwall (MB/WW) MWCs range from 220 to 320 ppm. To comply with the
NSPS, most recently built MWCs have used a combination of combustion controls to
limit NOX formation and selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) to convert NOX to
molecular nitrogen (N2). Because of pressure to achieve even lower emission levels,
questions have been raised regarding the potential for advancement in NOX control
technologies.  To respond to these questions, the Air and Energy  Engineering Research
Laboratory and the  National Renewable Energy Laboratory initiated this assessment of
three  alternative NOX control technologies:  natural gas injection  (NGI), SNCR, and
selective catalytic reduction (SCR).  The objectives of this assessment were to
(1) document the key design and operating parameters, commercial status, demonstrated
performance, and cost of each technology, and (2) identify technology research and
development  needs.

             The assessment of achievable NOX emissions presented throughout the
report is based on the average NOX reduction potential of these technologies applied to
"typical" MWCs. The assessment does not examine the potential severity or length of
short-duration excursions in performance that can affect continuously achievable NOX
emission rates associated with short averaging periods.  The assessment also does not
    ' Unless otherwise noted, all NOX concentrations used in this report are corrected to
7% O2 and are on a dry basis.
sdg/nrcl
sect-l.rpl                                  1-1

-------
consider potential limitations on technology performance that may result from
combustor-specific design or operating restrictions.

             This report is divided into four chapters.  The first chapter provides an
overview of NOX emissions from MWCs and available control methods, the study's
technical approach, and key findings related to NO1, SNCR, and SCR.  Chapters 2, 3,
and 4 provide a more in-depth review of these three technologies.

1-2          Background Information of NOX Formation and Control Technologies

12.1         NO* Formation

             The chemistry of NOX formation is directly tied to reactions between
nitrogen and  oxygen.  To understand NOX formation in an MWC, a basic understanding
of combustor design and operation is useful.  Combustion air systems in MB/WW
MWCs include both undergraie (also called, primary) air and overgrate (also called,
secondary or  overfire) air.  Undergrate air, supplied through plenums located under the
firing grate, is forced through the grate to sequentially dry (evolve water), devolatilize
(evolve volatile hydrocarbons), and burn out (oxidize nonvolatile hydrocarbons)  the
waste bed. The quantity of undergrate air is adjusted to minimize excess air during
initial combustion of the waste while maximizing burn out of carbonaceous materials in
the waste bed.  Overgrate air, injected through air ports located above the grate, is used
to provide turbulent mixing and destruction of hydrocarbons evolved from the waste bed.
Overall excess air levels for a typical MB/WW MWC are approximately 80% (180% of
stoichiometric [ i.e., theoretical] air requirements), with undergrate air accounting for 60
to 70% of the total  air.  In  addition to destruction of organks, one of the objectives of
this "staged* combustion approach is to minimize NOX formation,
             NOX is formed during combustion through two primary mechanisms:  fuel
     formation and thermal NOX formation. Fuel NOX results from oxidation of
•CC1-1.IJM                                  \~L

-------
organically-bound nitrogen present in the municipal solid waste (MSW) stream.  Thermal
NOX results from oxidation of atmospheric nitrogen (N,).

             Fuel NOX is formed within the flame zone through reaction of organically-
bound nitrogen in MSW materials and  oxygen.  Key variables determining the rate of
fuel NOX formation are the availability of O: within the flame ?.one. the amount of
fuel-bound nitrogen, and the chemical structure of the nitrogen-containing material.
Fuel NOX reactions can occur at relatively low temperatures [< 1,100°C (<2,000°F)j.
Depending on the availability of O2 in the flame, the nitrogen compounds will react to
form either N: or NOX.  When the availability  of O: is low, N, is the predominant
reaction  product. If substantial O, is available, an  increased fraction of the  fuel-bound
nitrogen  is converted to NOX.  Testing  conducted  in the 1970's and  1980's using coal
showed that in oxygen-rich, highly mixed systems approximately 50% of the  fuel-bound
nitrogen  can convert to NOX; in oxygen-starved staged-combustion systems,  however, the
rate of conversion decreases to near 5%.'  Other testing has shown that nitrogen
associated with volatile compounds is more readily converted to fuel NOX than nitrogen
associated with nonvolatile materials.2  Still other  research involving coal and oil
combustion indicates that the extent of conversion  is related to the amount  of nitrogen
available, with the degree of conversion decreasing as  the amount of fuel-bound nitrogen
increases.1
             Thermal  NOX is formed in high-temperature flame zones through reactions
between N, and oxygen radicals. The key variables determining the rate of thermal NOX
formation are temperature, the availability of O, and N2, and residence time.  The key
reactions resulting in thermal NOX formation are:

                                N, + O ^ NO + N                           (l-l)
followed by:
                                N  + O, ^ NO + O                           (1-2)
                                N  + OH ^ NO +  H                          (1-3)
.
.-ccM-l rpt                                   1-3

-------
Because of the high activation energy required for reaction 1-1. thermal  NOX formation
does not  become significant until flame temperatures reach 1.1()()°C (2.(H)0!iF).  Kinetic
calculations (assuming 3(>fr excess air. average MSW properties, and a residence time of
0.5 seconds), predict thermal NOX concentrations of less than 10 ppm in MWCs.J
However, local flame temperatures may exceed 1,100°C (2,0()0°F) and thermal NOX
concentrations may he greater than these calculated models results.

             Examination of MWC operating conditions suggests that most of the  NOX
emitted from MWCs (>iSO%) is attributable to fuel-bound nitrogen.  Based on typical
MSW nitrogen contents  of 0.3 to 0.7^. the expected NOX  emissions-assuming all of the
fuel-bound nitrogen is converted to NOx--would  be 1,000 to 2,500 ppm at 7% O,.  As
noted earlier, however, actual emissions are generally between 220-320 ppm at 7% O-,,
indicating that perhaps 10 to 3()9c of the fuel nitrogen is converted to NOX. with most of
the remainder foiming N:.

             A number of evaluations of MWC  NOX emissions data have attempted to
define  the role of nitrogen-containing materials in MSW (e.g., grass, leaves, wood, and
food wastes) on NOX emissions.  The first of these evaluations was presented in 1987
and suggested that fluctuations in measured NOX levels were attributable to seasonal
fluctuations in MSW composition.5  This evaluation was based  on NOX compliance test
data obtained from a number of MWCs in the U.S. and overseas at different times of the
year, and concluded that the seasonal variations  in measured NOX concentrations might
be the  result of variations in the amount of yardwaste in the MSW at different times of
the year.   Because of the large number of facilities included in the evaluation and the
limited number of measurements taken from a single  MWC at different  times of the
year, however, this conclusion may  have been attributable  to coincidental differences in
the NOx-forming characteristics of the various MWCs, rather than variations in the
nitrogen content of MSW. A similar comparison of NOX emission concentrations versus
time of year for a number of U.S. MWCs compiled by the U.S. EPA in  1989 to support
the MWC NSPS did not show any significant relationship between NOX  concentration
and time of vear.ft
sdg/nrc|
scct-\.rf»                                   1-4

-------
             A more recent evaluation of NOX continuous emission monitor (CEM)
data from 11 MWCs located in the northeast U.S. found no seasonal variations in NOX
concentrations.7  This evaluation compared monthly average NOX data from the
individual MWCs (covering 12 to 36 consecutive months of operation for each unit) with
the estimated fraction of yardwaste found in northeastern MSW during each of the four
seasons.  Monthly average NOX concentrations from these units varied from 140 to
310 ppm, but did not show any consistent relationship between NOX concentrations and
the estimated percentage  of yardwaste.

             Yet another evaluation compared NOX concentrations measured during
nine test runs conducted at the MB/WW MWC in Burnaby, British Columbia to the
amount of high-nitrogen organics (grass, leaves, brush, stumps, wood, food waste, textiles,
rubber, and  footwear) in the MSW firod during each run.8 The testing was conducted in
June 1991 and included sampling of the MSW fired during each run, sorting the
collected sample to evaluate waste stream composition, and elemental analysis of each of
the sorted subsamples.  During these tests,  high-nitrogen organics accounted for 25 to
47% and yardwastes accounted for 4 to 30% of the total waste stream. The estimated
average nitrogen content  of the entire stream during each run ranged  from 0.34 to
0.66%.  NOX concentrations in the flue gas during the runs varied from 261 to 304 ppm.
Statistical analysis of the  MSW and flue gas data from each run showed no relationship
(at a screening 80% confidence level) between NOX concentrations and MSW
characteristics.  These data suggest that because of the staged-combustion design of the
Burnaby MWC and other modern MB/WW MWCs, variations in NOX emissions appear
to be attributable to differences in combustor design and operation, rather than waste
composition.

\22         NOX Control Technologies

             NOX control technologies can be divided into two subgroups: combustion
controls and post-combustion controls. Combustion controls are designed to limit the
formation of NOX during the combustion process  by reducing the availability of O2

«dg/nr«l
xn-l.rpi                                   1-J

-------
within the flame and lowering combustion zone temperatures.  These technologies
include staged combustion, low excess air, flue gas recirculation (FGR), and NGI.
Staged combustion and low excess air are used to reduce the flow of undergrate air in
order to reduce O2 availability in the combustion zone.  Another option is FGR in which
a portion of the combustor exhaust is returned to the combustion air supply to both
lower combustion zone O2 and suppress flame temperatures by reducing the ratio of O2
to inerts (N2 and CO2) in the combustion air system. One or more of these approaches
are used by most modern MWCs.  Test data for these techniques indicate that they can
reduce NOX concentrations by 10-30% compared to baseline levels from the same units.6
NGI selectively uses natural gas either to inhibit NOX formation or convert NOX that is
formed to N2.  NGI is discussed in more detail in Chapter 2 of this report.

            The most used post-combustion NOX controls for MWCs include SNCR
and SCR.  SNCR  reduces NOX to N2 without the use of catalysts. With SNCR,  one or
more reducing agents (e.g., ammonia [NH3], urea) is injected into the upper furnace of
the MWC to react with NOX and form N2.  SNCR is discussed in Chapter 3.  SCR is an
add-on control technology that catalytically  promotes the reaction between NH3  and
NOX. SCR is discussed in Chapter 4.

            In addition to SNCR and SCR, commercial post-combustion NOX  controls
also  include flue gas denitrification (FGDN). FGDN  can be used by MWCs that use a
multiple-stage wet scrubber for hydrogen chloride (HC1) and sulfur dioxide (SO2)
control. In these systems, the first scrubbing stage typically operates at a very low pH
(<3) to remove HC1, followed by a second  stage operating at a higher pH (>5)  to
remove sulfur dioxide (SO2).  In these systems, an oxidizing agent can be added  to the
first  scrubber stage to convert nitrogen oxide (NO) to nitrogen dioxide (NO2). NO
generally accounts for over 90% of the total NOX from combustion systems and  is
relatively insoluble in liquids.  NO2, however, is soluble  and can be collected in the
second scrubber stage along with SO2.  Test data from an FGDN system installed on an
MWC in Europe has shown NOX reductions of up to 85%.9  Because of the
sdg/nrel
scci-l.rpi                                  l-O

-------
predominant use of spray dryer absorber technology is the U.S. for SO2 and HC1 control,
however, significant use of FGDN in the U.S. appears unJikely.

1.3          Technical Approach

             This assessment was conducted using information obtained from published
literature and contacts with technology vendor and MWC industry personnel.  For each
technology, information was collected on the key process variables; commercial
applications in Europe, Japan, and the U.S.; recent research and development activities;
and costs. In addition to the current versions of NGI and SNCR, advanced concepts for
these two technologies were examined.  These include advanced NGI, which combines
conventional NGI and SNCR;  and advanced SNCR, which employs additional process
control equipment to enhance  conventional SNCR performance. This information was
then used to develop a series of computer-based spreadsheets designed to maintain basic
material and energy balances for the technology and to calculate technology costs.  The
costing approach is  further  described in Appendix A.

             The output from these spreadsheets is p.esented in two formats.  The first
format is as a table  presenting capital costs, tipping fee impacts, and cost effectiveness
levels" for each NOX control technology as a function of MWC size and a second key
technology variable.  An example of this output, based on conventional SNCR, is shown
    " Capital costs include purchased equipment costs, installation, engineering and
home office expenses, and process and project contingencies. Tipping fee impact is
calculated by dividing the technology's total annualized cost by the annual tonnage of
MSW processed.  Tipping fee impact is an incremental cost that indicates the potential
cost of the technology on the MSW generator.  However, it does not necessarily reflect
the amount by which the plant's tip fee will increase as a result of applying the control
technology.  Cost effectiveness is calculated by dividing the technology's total annualized
cost by the tonnage of reduced  NOX emissions and indicates the cost of the control
relative to its environmental benefit.
sdg/nrel
sect-l.rpt                                  1-7

-------
in Table 1-1. For example, the estimated capital cost for SNCR operating at 60% NOX
reduction on a 400 ton per day (tpd)"" MWC is $l,980/tpd of capacity. For the same
NOX reduction level and MWC size, the tipping fee impact is estimated at approximately
$1.50 per ton of MSW processed, and the cost effectiveness value is approximately $1,270
per ton of NOX removed from the flue gas.

             The second output format is a graph showing the sensitivity  of tipping fee
impact and cost effectiveness to key process variables.  An example of this output, also
based on conventional SNCR, is presented in Figure 1-1. For example, the  process
variable having the greatest effect on cost is MWC size. Compared to the 400 tpd
"reference" MWC, reducing plant size to 100 tpd increases the tipping fee impact from
roughly $1.50 per ton  of MSW to almost $4.00 per ton  (shown on the left  Y-axis), and
increases the cost effectiveness value from $1,270 per ton of NOX removed to $3,380 per
ton (shown on the right Y-axis).

1.4           Conclusions

1.4.1         Technical Status of Evaluated Control Technologies

             The technical status of each of the evaluated control  technologies is
summarized in Table  1-2.  As shown, two distinct NGI  processes have been  developed.
One of these, Methane de-NOxSM, uses gas  injection to inhibit NOX formation and
appears capable of reducing NOX emissions from MWCs by approximately 60%.  The
second approach, reburning, uses gas injection to create reducing conditions that  convert
NOX formed in the primary combustion zone to N2.  Because of the relatively high
temperatures required for these NOx-reduction reactions, it may be difficult to
successfully apply reburning to modern MB/WW MWCs.  Short-duration  tests of v>?«e
    ""Readers who are more familiar with metric units may use the factors listed at the
end of the front matter to convert to that system.
sdg/iue!
sect-t.rpt                                  1 -8

-------
•it
                   Table 1-1
Model Plant Cost Estimates For Conventional SNCR (a)

NOx Reduction (%)
100 TPD Mass Burn MWC
400 TPD Mass Burn MWC
750 TPD Mass Burn MWC
Tula! Capital Cost
($lflOO/TPD capacity)
45
5.05
1,97
i.49
60
5.06
1.98
1.50
65
5,07
2.00
1.52
Tipping Fee Impact
($/ton MSW)
45
3.74
1.30
0.92
60
3.91
1.47
1.09
65
4.06
1.62
1.24
Cost Effectiveness
($/l«n NOx)
45
4,308
1,496
1,058
60
3,378
1,268
940
65
3,235
1,289
986
      (a) $/ion can be convened to $/Mg by multiplying by I.I.

-------
   s s.
   95.
   •al
                O
                c
                O.
                £
                oo
                C
                'a.
                o.
                H   1.5-
                      l

           Unil Si/.c (ipd)  100
       RcagcniCosl ($/lon)  210
Annualixvd Capital (SlOOO/yr)  52
                                                                                                         3,455
                                                                      Reference MWC Parameters
                                                                      Uncontrolled NOx «« 250 ppm
                                                                      NCx Reduction «• 60%
                                       Unit Size
Reagent Cost
Annualizcd Capilul
                        Figure 1-1.  Effect of Unit Size, Reagent Cost, and Annualizcd Capital
                        on Tipping Fee Impact and Cost Effectiveness for Conventional SNCR

-------
  .
— 9
•a 1
Table 1-2
                          Technical Overview of Evaluated NO  Control Technologies
Technology
NGI:
Methane
deNOXSM
NGI:
Reburning
SNCR:
Thermal
DeNOx™
SNCR:
NOXOUT™
Advanced
SNCR
(improved
process
control)
Advanced NGI
(conventional
NGI plus
SNCR)
SCR
Commercial Status
Tested on MWC in Olmsted
County, Minnesota
Applied to fossil fuel boilers;
use on MWCs limited to test
program in Malmo, Sweden
Applied to six MWCs in U.S.
plus others overseas
Applied to two MWCs in U.S.
plus others overseas
Tested at MWCs in Lancaster,
Pennsylvania and Munich,
Germany
Concept only.
Installed at 20 MWC plants in
Europe and Japan
NOX Control Performance
Testing achieved up to 60%
NOX reduction without
increasing CO emissions.
MWC testing encountered high
CO levels when NOX
reductions exceeded 30 to 40%.
Achieved short-term reductions
of 45 to 75%, depending on
NH3 injection rate. Plume
visible at higher reduction
levels.
Comparable to NH3 injection.
Achieved 60 to 75% NOX
reduction with less reagent than
is needed with conventional
SNCR. Plume visible at higher
reduction levels.
Potential for 80% reduction.
80 to 90% NOX reduction.
Technical Issues
Scaleup of technology to larger
furnace sizes (> 100 tpd).
Reburn zone temperatures in
MWCs may be too low for NOX
reduction reactions.
Impact of furnace temperature
swings on NOX and NH3
emissions. Control of NH3 sli,»
and visible plume.
Similar to NH3 injection. N2O
emissions also of concern.
Demonstration of long-term
performance capability.
Additional process controls may
benefit other combustor
operations.
Interaction of temperature and
residence time needs for each
technology.
Catalyst life in hot-side systems

-------
processes have been conducted at MWCs in the U.S. and Europe, However, neither
process has been adequately developed and demonstrated to be considered ready for
commercial application.

            The SNCR processes used predominantly to date include Thermal
DeNOx™, which is based on NH3 injection and NOXOUT™, which uses urea injection.
Both of these SNCR processes and SCR are considered to be commercially available.
Long-terra NOX reductions are 45-65% for SNCR and 80-90% for SCR.  Operation of
SNCR near the upper end of the performance range can result in unwanted emissions of
unreacted NH3 or other byproduct gases. An advanced version of SNCR using furnace
pyrometry and additional process controls has been tested on at least two MWCs and
appears capable of achieving high NOX reductions with less reagent than is needed for
conventional SNCR.  Combination of NGI and SNCR to achieve  an overall NOX
reduction of 80 to 85% may be feasible, but will require testing to evaluate the
interactions between the temperature and residence time requirements of each
technology.

1.4,2        Comparative Costs of Evaluated Control Technologies

            As part of this study, cost evaluations were conducted for several variations
of NGI, SNCR, and  SCR. For the evaluation of NO!, two scenarios were examined.
The first scenario, referred to as NGI-100, assumes the MWC is firing MSW at 100% of
its desig*> heat input capacity.  Therefore, under this scenario, the rate of waste fired
must be reduced by an amount comparable to the heat input from natural gas. This
results in a reduction of tipping fee revenues.  The second scenario, referred to as
NGI-85, assumes the MWC is firing MSW at 85% of its design heat input capacity
because of insufficient MSW flow or because the  unit was designed with excess heat
input capacity. In this case, natural gas can be used to reduce NOX emissions without
displacing any  waste, and  therefore, without a loss of tipping fee revenues.  The average
NOX reduction assumed in both scenarios is 60%.
sdg/nnl
Krt-l.rpt                                 1-12

-------
             Four variations of SNCR technology were-examined: (1) conventional
SNCR, with an average NOX reduction of 60%, (2) advanced SNCR, with an average
NOX reduction of 60% based on lower reagent use compared to conventional SNCR, (3)
a second advanced SNCR option with a NOX reduction of 70% at a higher reagent feed
rate, and (4) advanced NGI, which combines conventional NGI with conventional SNCR
to achieve a NOX reduction of 80%, The SCR evaluation focused on a cold-side system
with a NOX reduction level of 80%.  A limited evaluation of a hot-side FCR system was
also conducted.

             A comparison of the costs for the different control technologies is
presented in Figures  1-2, 1-3, and 1-4.  Figure 1-2 presents the capital costs for each of
the technologies.  The advanced SNCR system with the 70% NOX reduction and tf 2 hot-
side SCR system are  not represented, since only limited analyses of these scenarios were
conducted.  As shown by the figure, the capital costs for each of the technologies
increase with increasing unit size.  SCR is the most capital intensive of the technologies,
costing 4 to 5 times more than the next  highest  technology.  Advanced SNCR and
advanced NGI have the next highest capital costs, with both technologies estimated to
cost approximately Si to 2 million per combustor.  The capital costs associated with NGI
and conventional SNCR are comparable, at approximately $ I million per combustor and
less.

             The tipping fee impacts and cost effectiveness  values presented in
Figures  1-3 and 1-4 include both annualized capital costs and operating and maintenance
costs. Conventional SNCR generally has the lowest costs of the technologies.  NGI-100
has the highest tipping fee impacts for all but the 100 tpd MWC, for which SCR has
slightly higher costs.  Cost effectiveness  values for NGI-100 are the highest for all
combustor  sizes. Both of the NGI-100 and NGI-85 scenarios result in an incremental
cost increase, however, the revenue loss associated with diverting MSW when firing
natural gas under NGI-100 results in much higher costs for this control technique.  These
revenues are not lost with the NGI-85 scenario, plus revenues are received under this
scenario  from sale of additional electrical production.  The other key variable affecting

idg/orcl
iect-l.rpt                                  1-13

-------
s ri
= «!
— 3
•a I
       "e9  2
       'a  ^
        w
       U
                                                             400
                                                       Unit Size (tpd)
                                  750
|   | NGMOO 60%
    Advsocwl SNCR 60%
NGI-85 60%
Advauccd NCI 80%
                                                                         CouvrutiouRl SNCR 60%
                                                                         SCR 80%
                                            Figure 1-2. Comparison of Capital Cost

-------
         25-
i
         20-
      00
      I  15-
      o
      rt
      I   10'
      oo
      B

      '5.
      a.
                       (~~|NCI.I0060%


                       GH Advanced SNCR 60%
                                                                i
                                                         400

                                                    Unit Size (tpd)
                                         rf
                                                                                il
                                  750
NCI-85 60%



Advanced NCI 80%
H! Conventional SNCR 60%


TZ%\ SCR 80%
                                      Figure 1-3.  Comparison of Tipping Fee Impact

-------
S 8.
?«t
«— !3
      X
      o
      2
      c
      *^r  "O
      vi   C
      oj   rt
      a   3
      4>   O
      >   J3

      «   H
       ^
      U
      •«*
      i/i
      O
      U
                                   100
         400

   Unit Size (tpd)
                              NGM0060%

                              Advanced SNCR 60%
| NGI-85 60%

I Advanced NCI 80%
| Conventional SNCR 60%

I SCR 80%
                                        Figure 1-4. Comparison of Cost Effectiveness

-------
both NGI scenarios is the price of natural gas.  The average gas price used in these

figures is $3.50/MMBtu; the affect of lower and higher natural gas prices is examined in
Section 2.5.2.


            The high tipping fee impacts and cost effectiveness values with SCR result

from the h'gh capital costs for this technology, as well as from the cost of catalyst
replacement and disposal.  Advanced SNCR and advanced NGI have higher costs than
NGI-85 applied to the small combustor size, but are fairly similar when applied to the
medium and large combustor sizes.  More details on the costs of NGI, SNCR, and SCR

technologies are presented in Sections 2.5, 3.5 and 4.5, respectively.


1.5         References
1.            Chen, S. L., M. P. Heap, D. W. Pershing, and G. B. Martin.  Influence of
             Coal Composition on the Fate of Volatile and Char Nitrogen During
             Combustion. Presented at the 19th International Symposium on
             Combustion, The Combustion Institute, Pittsburgh, PA.  1982.

2.            DeSoete, G. G.  Overall Reaction Rates on NO and N2 Formation from
             Fuel Nitrogen.  Presented at the 15th International Symposium on
             Combustion, The Combustion Institute, Pittsburgh, PA.  1975.

3.            Habelt, W. W. and B. M. Howell.  The Influence of Coal Oxygen to Coal
             Nitrogen Ratio on NOX Formation.  Presented at the 70th Annual AIChE
             Meeting, New York, 1977. Referenced in Singer, J. G. Combustion, Fossil
             Power Systems.  Combustion Engineering, Inc. Windsor,  CT. 1981.

4.            Seeker, W. R., W. S. Lanier, and M. P. Heap.  Municipal Waste
             Combustion Study:  Combustion Control of Organic Emissions.
             EPA/530-SW87-021c (NTIS PB87-206090), U.S. Environmental Protection
             Agency,  1987.

5.            Hahn, J. L. and  D. S. Sofaer.  Variability of NOX Emissions from Modern
             Mass-fired Resource Recovery Facilities.  Presented at the 81st Annual
             Meeting of the Air Pollution Control Association  (now Air & Waste
             Management Association), Dallas, TX. 1988.

6.            U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Waste Combustors-
             Background Information for Proposed Standards:  Control of NOX
sdg/nrcl
secl-l.rpi                                  1-17

-------
            Emissions.  EPA-450/3-89-27d (NTIS PB90-154873).  Office of Air Quality
            Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, NC.  1989.

7.           Stultz, J, R., M. L. Wilson, and F. A. Ferraro,  A Critical Review of Source
            Separation on High-Nitrogen Municipal Wastes Fuel Components on
            Nitrogen Oxide (NOX) Emissions from Waste-to-Energy Facilities.
            Presented at the 86th  Annual  Meeting of the Air & Waste Management
            Association, Denver, CO.  1993.

8.           Rigp & Rigo Associates, Inc.  Supplemental Analysis of the WASTE
            Program's Burnaby Test Results for Relationships Between Oxides of
            Nitrogen and Solid Waste Components. Prepared for Wheelabrator
            Technologies Inc.,  Hampton, NH.  1993.

9.           Jones, G., Belco Technologies Corporation.  European Air Quality Control
            Progress.  Presented at the 1993 International Conference on Municipal
            Waste Combustion, Williamsburg, VA.  March 1993.
sdg/nrcl
ccci-l.rpt                                 1-18

-------
2.0          NATURAL GAS INJECTION

2.1          Process Description

             Natural gas injection into the overgrate region of the furnace can be used
to control NOX emissions from the combustor. For MWCs, two different natural
gas-based processes have been developed:  reburning and Methane de-NOXSM.
Reburning is a three-stage combustion process designed to convert NOX to N2 by
injecting natural gas into a distinct "reburn" zone located above the primary combustion
zone. In contrast, Methane de-NOX injects natural gas directly into the primary
combustion zone to inhibit the formation of NOX.

2.1.1         Reburning

             The reburning process was originally developed to reduce NOX emissions
from fossil fuel-fired boilers.1-2 The chemistry of reburning as applied to these boilers
is a three-stage process.  In the first stage, 80 to 85% of the normal fuel input to the
boiler is introduced into the primary combustion zone at slightly fuel-lean conditions.  In
the second stage, the remaining  15 to 20% of the heat input (in the form of natural gas,
oil, or pulverized coal) is injected into the combustion products from the primary zone to
produce a fuel-rich mixture.  Under these conditions, hydrocarbon radicals produced
from the reburn fuel react with NOX formed in the primary combustion zone to form N2:

                              CH  -i- NO-HCN  -i- O                         (2-1)
                            CH2 -i- NO - HNCO -i-  H                       (2-2)
             followed by
                              HCN -i-  O - NH +  CO                         (2-3)
                            HCN  + OH -» HNCO + H                       (2-4)
                            HNCO +  H - NH2  + CO                       (2-5)
sdg/nrel
sett-lrpt

-------
             followed by
                               NH + NO - N2  + OH                          (2-6)
                              NH2 +  NO -* N2H + OH                         (2-7)
                              N2H 4- OH - N2  + H2O      '                   (2-8)

In the third stage, additional air is introduced into this fuel-rich mixture to complete
combustion.  The temperature in this final burnout zone is lower than in the primary
zone, such that there is limited reoxidation of N2 to NOX.

             The application of reburning to MWCs has been developed primarily by
Energy and Environmental Research Corporation  (HER).  A schematic of this process is
shown in Figure 2-1.  As with a conventional MWC, primary zone combustion air is
introduced as underfire air through the grate and as overfire air (OFA) through air
injection ports located above the grate in the lower furnace. With reburning, however,
excess air levels in the primary combustion zone are significantly lower (-10 to 20%)
than normal (-60 to 80%). By reducing the excess air level, gas temperatures at this
location are estimated to be 100 to 300°C (200 to SOOT) higher than in a conventional
MWC. This temperature rise, however, is sensitive to the rate of heat absorption by the
furnace walls and is  difficult to predict without detailed furnace modeling.

             A  mixture of natural gas and recirculated flue gas (used to enhance mixing)
is introduced through nozzles located on the front and rear walls of the furnace to create
reducing conditions.  The rate limiting reactions associated with reburning are those
associated with production  of the hydrocarbon radials (e.g., CH, CH2) and the conversion
of NO to HCN and HNCO. As shown in Figure 2-2, for these reactions to occur rapidly,
temperatures of 1,300°C (2,400°F) or greater are needed.3'4  At lower temperatures,  the
NOX reduction reactions are significantly slower.  Note also from Figure 2-2 that
substoichiometric (fuel-rich) conditions are required in the reburn zone to achieve
significant NOX  reduction.  Finally, additional combustion air is introduced through
sdg/nrcl
cect-2.rpi                                  2-2

-------
                                                Top of Furnace
           Overfire Air i—ufi
           Ports (naw)    1
       MSW
            Rebuming Fuel
            Injectors
             Wingwalls

            .3.5m —

             Burnout
             Zone
           Rebuming
           Zone
                           Primary
                           Combustion
                           Zone
          Undengrata Air Plenums
                                             Furnace Width- 4,6 m
                                            Residence Time - 500 msec
                                              tower OFA
                                                 Ash
$dg/nrel
scct-2.rpt
Figure 2-1. Schematic of Rebura Process2


                2-3

-------
s s.
•a a
 N>
 .U
                       100


                        90


                        80


                   £   70
                   a
                   o
                   '8
•a
u
a:
                        60
                        5°
                        40
                        30
                        20
          Reburn Time = 0.5 sec
                                                                       SR2 - 0.85
                                                                      SR2 = 0.90
                                                                                         SR2 = 0.94
                                                           SR2 = Reburn Zone Stoichiometry
                                                                                        iSR2= 1.0
                             2100    2200    2300    2400     2500    2600

                                                    Temperature (°F)
                                                           2700    2800    2900
                              Figure 2-2.  Effect of Temperature on Reburn NOX Reduction Efficiency

-------
overfire air ports located at the top of the reburn zone to burn out the combustibles.
The overall excess air of the process is approximately 40%.

2.12         Methane de-NOX3"

             Methane de-NOX, developed by the Institute of Gas Technology (IGT), is
designed to compensate  for the lower combustion zone temperatures in MWCs by using
NGI to limit formation of NOX, rather than on reducing NOX after it forms, as is the
case with rebuming.5'6'7'8 As shown in Figure 2-3, this  is done by injecting natural gas
and recirculated flue gas (added to improve mixing) directly into the primary combustion
zone to reduce the availability of O2. Under these conditions, a portion of the NOX
precursors (e.g., NH and HCN) decompose and react to form N2, rather than being
oxidized to NOX.  Overfire air is injected high enough in the rurnace to allow' sufficient
residence time (~ 1  to 2 seconds) for reduction of NOX precursors to N2 before the
remaining hydrocarbons are combusted.  As with  rebuming, the overall excess air level is
reduced by about 50% compared to a conventionally operated MWC.

22          Development Status

             There are  currently no commercial-scale applications of these processes  on
MWCs. However, field  evaluations of these processes have been completed at two
full-scale MWCs and a commercial application is planned in Europe.

             The reburn process was evaluated in 1992 on one  of two MWCs located at
the SYSAV (Sydvastra Skines-Avfallsaktiebolag-Southwest Scania Waste Co.) facility in
Malmo, Sweden.2 Each combustor is designed to combust 340 tons per day (tpd) of
"lunicipal and industrial wastes.  The test unit is also equipped with a urea-based SNCR
system; however, this system was not used during the reburn tests. As shown in
Figure 2-4, NOX reductions of up to 50% were achieved during these tests when using
20% natural gas (on a heat input basis) and a primary zone stoichiometry (air/fuel ratio)
of -1.1. CO emissions at this operating condition, however, were significantly higher

sdg/nrtl
sccl-lrpl                                 2-5

-------
     Undergrate Air
                                   Combustible
                                     Burnout
                                            W/
                                      NO.-   ^
                                   Reduction^
                                                     Overfire Air
                      Natural Gas/
                     Recirculating
                      Flue Gases
             Figure 2-3. Schematic of Methane de-NOX3* Process
sdg/nre!
sect-it?*
2-6

-------
Isl «•
I a
       cf
JIKMJ
2500

2000

1500
1000

500
A

1
- 1 I
I 1
|f*
9 ,
- ! *C
1 t
• A . «
•v* "Afc*A A °
. f "^r«V^^R^Hii»rffri r*
              "0.8    0.9     1.0    1.1     1.2     1.3

                        Primary Zone Stoichiometry
1.4



X"S
Cf
^
r»
©
i
&
6
2




240

210
ISO

150


120

90

60
30

a
^ Oiietino emissions
"/
/ jr »

/ ff if i ^ Q v o -^
P. ^ _ _ . Jit) o <, ^
JV °

-------
than without reburn (up to 2,000 ppm versus less than 100 ppm without reburn).'  To
reduce CO emissions during reburn testing, the primary zone stoicliiometry was
increased to 1.2.  At this higher primary zone stoichiometry and gas reburn rates of 10 to
20%, NOX emissions were only 20 to 3C% lower than bi Mine levels.  Possible
explanations for the relatively low NOX reduction achieved during these tests are that the
residence time (-0.5 sec)  and  flue  gas temperatures in the reburn zone were too low for
the needed NOX reduction reactions. This problem may be  reduced by installing the
reburn injection nozzles lower  in the  furnace. However, given typicai MWC operating
conditions, it is uncertain whether an acceptable injection location is available.

            The Methane de-NOX  process was evaluated during  1990 and 1991 using
one of the two combustors at the Olmsted County MWC facility in Rochester,
Minnesota.3'4-5  Each unit is designed to burn 100 tpd of MSW.  The testing at  Olmsted
County was preceded by laboratory furnace simulation experiments on a 1.7 MMBtu/hr
facility at IGT and pilot-scale testing using a 2.5 MMBtu/hr MSW-fired combustor
operated by Riley Stoker Corporation.  As shown in Figure 2-5, the tests at Olmsted
County achieved an average reduction of 60% for NOX  and  50% for CO compared to
baseline  levels when injecting 15% natural gas at optimized  conditions. Flue gas
residence time prior to OFA injection was 1 to 1.5 seconds.  The testing also found that
20% NOX reduction could be achieved with FGR alone, but resulted in higher CO
emissions from incomplete combustion.

            To address uncertainties associated with the performance of  these two
approaches, the  new MWC in  Herning, Denmark is being designed with the ability to
use both approaches.9 The facility  is being designed and constructed by Volund Ecology
Systems, with the gas injection system design being performed through a partnership
between Volund R&D Centre  and  Nordic Gas Technology Centre.  The facility is
    "CO is used as an indicator of good combustion practices for destruction of organic
emissions. To achieve this objective, CO concentrations are generally maintained below
100 ppm.  As a result, increases in CO emissions such as measured at SYSAV are not
acceptable in a commercial MWC.
sdg/nrcl
scct-2.rpt                                  2-8

-------
 s
 ©
 6
    300
    250
    200
    150
    100
                              0  CONVENTIONAL FIRING 1987
                              •  CONVENTIONAL FIRING 1991
                              A  METHANE de-NOX - NON-OPTIMUM CONFIGURATION
                              A  METHANE de-NOX - OPTIMUM CONFIGURATION
     50
       20
40
60          80

CO (ppm @ 7% O2)
100
120
140
         Figure 2-5.  Effect of Methane de-NOX34 on CO and NOv Emissions
                     During Olmsted County Methane de-NOX5* Testing
sdg/nrcl
scct-Z.rpt
                   2-9

-------
scheduled for construction in 1994, with performance evaluations of reburning and
Methane de-NOX scheduled for the spring of 1995. The design objective for the facility
is 50% NOX reduction without adversely impacting emissions of other pollutants.

23          Key Design and Process Variables Affecting Performance

             Based on the testing conducted to date on MWCs, key parameters affecting
NOX control performance of gas injection processes include combustion zone
stoichiometry, gas injection location, and residence time prior to OFA injection.

             The effect of primary zone stoichiometry is critical to both CO and NOX
emissions.  As shown in Figure 2-4 for the testing at Malmtf, CO emissions increased
sharply without reburning as the primary zone stoichiometry decreases  to 1:1 and lower.
The reburn tests suggest that a portion of the injected natural gas was oxidized to CO,
but that the temperatures in the burnout zone were too low or  residence times were too
short to complete oxidation of CO to CO2. As a result, it was necessary to increase the
primary zone stoichiometry to more  than  1.2 to minimize CO emissions. When the
primary zone stoichiometry was increased, however, NOX emissions also increased.  As a
result, only a portion of the expected reduction  in NOX emissions was achieved.

             With the  Methane de-NOX process, natural gas is injected directly above
the grate, such that theie are not distinct primary and secondary zones.  As shown in
Figures  2-6 and 2-7, the primary influences of combustion zone stoichiometry on NOX
appears to be low O2 levels and optimized operation of the FOR system, and secondarily
gas injection rate.  As shown in Figure 2-7, varying the gas injection  rate between 9 and
15% had a relatively small impact on NOX reduction. With low O2 and FGR  alone,
however, there was an increase in CO levels. The benefit of gas injection is that it
allowed the combustor  to simultaneously achieve both low NOX and low CO.  Note from
Figure 2-6 that it was not necessary  for gas injection to fully deplete O2 (i.e, create
fuel-rich conditions), but rather only to  reduce O2 availability.
Blg/orel
sect-rrpt                                 2-10

-------
   200
s
   180
   160
   140
O  BASELINE
•  METHANE de-NOX
E 120
O  1CO
    80


    60
    40
          468

                Secondary Zone Oxygen (%)
                                                                            10
sdg/nnl
sect-Z.rpt
             Figure 2-6.  Effect of O2 Concentration on NOx Emissions
                        During Olmsted County Methane de-NOX5*1 Testing
                      2-11

-------
» B.
K> 9
•a. 3





^^
rs
o

®
§,
0.
5
z





zuu
190
180
170

160
ISO


140
130
120

110
100
90
80
70
60
«n

o • Optimized NCI
• Non-Optimum FGR
Baseline
_
+


-
-
-
i
-
-

• ^"
'
-
i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
4        6       8        10       12

      Natural Gas Heat Input (%)
                                                                                        14
16
                             Figure 2-7.  Effect of Natural Gas Injection Rate on NOv Emissions
                                        During Olmsted County Methane de-NOXSN' Testing

-------
             As already discussed, gas injection location is important because it defines
whether fuel nitrogen compounds are still present in the combustion gas as NOX
precursors or have been oxidized to NOX.  If natural gas is injected into the combustion
zone while NOX precursors are still present, the gas will reduce the availability of O2 and
result in reduced formation of NOX.  If gas is injected after NOX is formed, NOX
reduction reactions are required. As  indicated in Figure 2-2, however, the gas
temperatures in  MWC may be too low for these reactions to proceed rapidly, thus
limiting the achievable NOX reduction.

             The effect of NGI residence time on NOX emissions reduction is shown in
Figure 2-8 for the Methane de-NOX process. These data, based on synthetic combustion
gases generated by a laboratory  furnace, show that at a given natural gas injection rate,
NOX emissions decreased with increasing residence time prior to OFA injection.  For
example, with  15% gas injection, NOX emissions decreased from  135 ppm at a residence
time of 0.6 seconds to about 100 ppm at  1.6 seconds and 75 ppm at 4.5 seconds (about
40% reduction).  The effect of increasing natural gas usage on NOX emissions is also
shown  in Figure  2-8.  Compared to slightly over 200 ppm NOX with no natural gas
addition, NOX levels  decreased by 15% with 4% gas and 50 to 60% with 15% gas.
Full-scale data from Olmsted County  suggest a 1 to 1.5 second residence time is
sufficient for 60% reduction.

2,4          Recent Advances and Further Research Needs

             Both gas injection approaches have been tested at commercial MWCs-
reburning at Malmd and Methane de-NOX at Olmsted County.  Based on the data from
these two test  programs, Methane de-NOX appears to be better able to reduce  NOX
without adversely impacting CO emissions. However, the Methane de-NOX testing has
been limited to a single, relatively small (100 tpd) combustor. If this approach is  to be
applied to other  existing MWCs, further analysis of the ability to achieve adequate gas
penetration into  the primary combustion zone of larger MWCs is needed to define
achievable NOX  reductions.  Further,  additional testing to assess continuously achievable

sdg/nnl
Ktt-lrpl                                  2-13

-------
s
a
Q.
Q.
250




225




200




175




160




126





100




 76



 fin
       0.6       1.6       2.6       3.6


                            Residence Time (Sec)
                                             4.6
6.6
    Figure 2-8. Effect of Natural Gas Injection Residence Tune on NOX Emissions

            During Pilot-Scale Testing of Methane de-NOX5* Process
 sdg/nrel

 sccl-2.rpl
                            2-14

-------
NOX reduction capabilities at various load conditions and to investigate possible
long-term impacts on MWC operation are needed prior to commercialization of the
process.  Although the initial explanation for the high CO levels measured during the
Malmo testing is that furnace temperatures in MWCs are too low for the  needed NOX
reduction reactions, further assessment of this issue is warranted.

             Greater reductions in NOX emissions (75 to 85%) may be possible if gas
injection is combined with SNCR. With this approach, referred to as advanced NGI, the
NOX level is first controlled by gas injection to reduce NOX emissions by 50 to 60%,
followed by injection of ammonia or urea to achieve an additional 50 to 60% reduction.
This concept  has been tested by combining reburning with SNCR on a 10 MMBtu/hr
pilot-scale coal-fired furnace.10 Based on the existing SNCR system at the plant, the
Malmo MWC would appear to be an ideal site for testing this concept. Such a program
could also address  the use of Methane de-NOX in an MWC with less furnace residence
time than at Olmsted County. The economic benefits of advanced NGI are discussed in
Section 3.5.

25          Cost  Analysis

2J>.1         Design Basis

             As discussed in Section 2.1, two different NGI processes have been
developed for MWC's:  reburning and Methane de-NOX.  Although the performance
estimates used in this section are based on the Methane de-NOX  testing conducted at
the Olmsted County MWC, the costs estimates are believed  to be generally
representative of both processes. Costs for reburn could be  higher because of the
increased number of injectors, tube penetrations, associated  piping, etc. needed with this
process.

             The design  basis for the NGI system includes 60% NOX reduction at 15%
natural gas heat  input and natural gas is available at the plant boundary.  Based on an

sdg/orel
sect-Z.tpt                                 2-15

-------
uncontrolled NOX concentration of 250 ppm at 7% O,, the average stack concentration
associated with this system is 100 ppm at 7% O2.  The 60% reduction represents
long-term (annual average) performance capabilities. Performance at individual plants
will vary, and this average performance level may not be achievable at all plants,
especially when considering retrotit situations.

             Capital cost estimates for commercial gas injection systems applied to
MWCs are limited to a comparative analysis of gas injection and SNCR processes
prepared by IGT and Ogden Martin Systems for a 264 tpd MWC.7  That analysis
concluded that the capital costs for these two processes were essentially equal.  As a
result, the capital cost estimate used in this analysis  is based on the SNCR costing
procedures described in Section 3.5 and Appendix A. Based on the limited commercial
experience of this control technique, a process  contingency of 20%  is assumed.  As
discussed in Section  2.5.2, capital costs  have a n. 'atively small impact on the overall
economics of NGI. As a result, the lack of detailed procedures for estimating NGI
capital cost is not critical to defining key cost factors affecting process economics.

             A key economic assumption associated with gas injection is whether the
combustor typically operates at 100% of design heat input or at less than design heat
input because of insufficient MSW flow or other factors.  If ihe MWC operates at  100%
of design beat input  capacity, application of NGI may require the facility to reduce the
MSW feed rate by an amount comparable to the heat input of the natural gas.  As a
result, NGI may reduce the amount of  MSW burned and  the associated tipping fee
revenues, while the plant electrical output remains constant. As discussed in Section 2.3,
it may be possible to operate the combustor at lower excess air levels and, therefore,
higher thermal efficiency when injecting gas than when operating with 100% MSW.
However, because of the complexity of the  combustor heat transfer and steam generating
systems, operation at higher thermal efficiency does not necessarily result in more steam
generation and turbine electrical output.  Therefore, costs discussed in the following
sections do not include economic credit for operation at higher thermal efficiency. If the
sdg/nrcl
tcct-2.rpt                                  2-16

-------
NGI system is built into the system as part of the original design, the heat recovery
capacity could be optimized to provide additional revenue from electricity/steam sales.

             If the MWC is operating at less than 15% of its design heat input capacity,
NGI can be used to increase the total heat input to the combustor and to increase the
amount of steam supplied to the turbine. In this case,  the total amount of waste fired
and associated tipping fee revenues remain unchanged, but electrical sales revenues will
increase.  An alternative case would be if the MWC's MSW input rate is air-supply
limited (e.g, inadequate fan capacity), but the MWC has adequate heat transfer  and
turbine capacity to operate at greater than design thermal input. Provided that the
MWC's operating permit is not thermally limited, the ability to reduce excess air levels
by using NGI may allow some MWCs operating at 100% of design MSW flow to use
NGI without reducing MSW flow, and gain additional revenues from the increased sale
of electricity.

             Cost estimates for NGI applied to an MWC operating at maximum MSW
and heat input and to an MWC operating at reduced load and heat  input are presented
in Section 2.5.2.

252         Cost Results

             Cost estimates for the NGI system were developed for 100,  400, and
750 rpd model combustors, assuming the units are able to operate at 100% of design
capacity on MSW alone (referred to as NGI-100).  System-specific input and output
values for the 400 tpd model combustor are shown in Tables 2-1 and 2-2. Additional
inputs (e.g., labor rates, fuel price) are presented in Table A-l of Appendix A.

             Table 2-3 presents the estimated capital cost per ton of capacity, tipping
fee impact, and NOX control cost effectiveness for the  NGI system applied to the three
model MWCs.  The tipping fee impacts are calculated  based on the actual amount of
MSW burned when NGI is applied, not on the design capacity of the combustor. In

sdg/nrel
scct-2.rpt                                 2-17

-------
                                 Table 2-1
                     Model Combustor Inputs For NGI (a)
                                Plant Characteristics
       Unit Size (tpd)
       Flowrate (dscfm @ 7% O2)
       Flowrate (wscfm @ 11% O2)
       Capacity Factor
       Uncontrolled NOx (ppmv, dry)
       NOx Removal Efficiency (%/100)
       NGI Percentage (%/100)
       Outlet NOx (ppmv, dry)
       Tons of NOx removed (tons/yr)
       Plant Tipping Fee ($/ton MSW)
       Original MSW Heat Input (MMBtu/hr)
       Natural Gas Heat Input (MMBtu/hr)
       Resulting MSW Heat Input (MMBtu/hr)
       Actual Tons/day of MSW Processed (tons/day)
       Actual Tons/yr of MSW Processed (tons/yr)
       Capital Recovery Factor (1/yrs)	
                                400
                             41,271
                             70,462
                                0.9
                                250
                                0.60
                                0.15
                                100
                                152
                                 80
                                150
                                 23
                                128
                                340
                             111,690
                             0.0944
       (a) For an MWC which does not have additional heat input capacity (NGI-100).
cdg/nnl
s«ct-2.rpl
2-18

-------
                                Table 2-2
                          Cost Outputs for NGI
              Applied to the 400 TPD Model Combustor (a), (b)
Capital Cost Section ($1000)
Total Process Capital ($1000)
Engineering
Contingency
Total Control Cost ($1000)
Pre-Production
Inventory Capital
Total Capital Requirement ($1000)
Total Capital per Capacity (S1000/TPD)
Total Annualized Capital Requirement ($1000/yr)
429
86
206
720
32
31
783
1.96
74
Variable O&M Cost Section ($1000/yr)
Fuel Cost
Electricity
Lost Revenue
Total Variable O&M ($1000/yr)
621
3
1,577
2,201
Fixed O&M Cost Section ($1000/yr)
Operating Labor
Maintenance Material
Maintenance Labor
Administrative & Support Labor
Total Fixed O&M ($1000/yr)
22
5
3
8
38
Total Cost Section
Total Annualized Cost ($1000/yr)
Tipping Fee Impact ($/ton of MSW)
Cost Effectiveness ($/ton of NOx)
2,313
20.7
15,204
       (a) For an MWC which does not have additional heat input capacity (NGI-100).
       (b) $/ton can be converted to $/Mg by multiplying by 1.1.
sect-lrpt

-------
                                                  Table 2-3


         Model Plant Cost Estimates for NGI for MWCs without Additional Heat Input Capacity (NGI-100) (a)

NOx Reduction {%)
100 TPD Mass Burn MWC
400 TPD Mass Burn MWC
750 TPD Mass Burn MWC
Total Capital Cost
($1000/TPD capacity)
45
5.18
1.92
1.41
60
5.22
1.96
1.45
65
5.23
1.97
1.46
Tipping Fee Impact
($/ton MSW)
45
14.5
12.6
12.3
60
22.7
20.7
20.4
65
25.7
23.7
23.3
Cost Effectiveness
($/ton NOx)
45
15.103
13,126
12,818
60
16,687
15,204
14,974
65
17,053
15,684
15,471
    (a)  $/ton can be converted to $/Mg by multiplying by 1.1.
to
o

-------
addition to the costs for a 60% NOX reduction, costs are also presented for 45% and a
65% NOX reduction.  This represents the expected range of performance considering the
control technique and plant-to-plant performance variations.  The natural gas injection
heat input levels associated with the 45% and 65% NOX levels of reduction are 9% and
17%, respectively. As shown in Table 2-3, capital costs, tipping fee impacts, and NOX
control cost effectiveness values decrease with increasing combustor size.

             For a given combustor size, variations in NOX reduction level have little
impact on costs.  A greater impact is observed for tipping fee impact and cost
effectiveness.  For all three combustors, the tipping fee impact and cost effectiveness
value increase with increasing NOX reduction. This is primarily caused by the increased
revenue loss resulting from displacement of MSW when firing more natural gas.
Increased fuel (natural gas) costs are also incurred with increasing NOX reduction.

             These data indicate that NGI economics are driven  by the cost associated
with displacing the MSW -- !th natural gas.  A more attractive application of NGI is for
an MWC that has unused capacity such that little or nc MSW is displaced when  using
gas injection.  Table 2-4 presents the results of NGI applied to the model combustors
assuming they have 15% additional heat input capacity available (referred to as
NGI-85)."  The capital cost associated with this application is the same as those
presented in Table 2-3.  However, the tipping fee impacts and cost effectiveness values
are 70 to 90% lower than for the previous case.  The lower end of this difference occurs
at the  higher NOX reduction level.  For the 65% NOX reduction, the higher amount of
natural gas needed (17% versus 15%) exceeds the additional  available  heat input
capacity. Therefore, a portion of the waste is displaced, and the costs assor'.ated with
this are accounted for.
    "The costs associated with this scenario are also generally representative of the case
for an MWC whose heat input is limited only by fan capacity such that the MWC can
continue to operate at design waste feed while using NGI.
sdg/nrcl
sect-2.rpt                                  2-21

-------
s s,
?«s.
(hi 3
la
                                                 Table 2-4

         Model Plant Cost Estimates for NGI for MWCs with 15% Available Heat Input Capacity (NGI-85) (a)

NOx Reduction (%)
100 TPD Mass Burn MWC
400 TPD Mass Burn MWC
750 TPD Mass Burn MWC
Total Capital Cost
($1000/TPD capacity)
45
5.18
1.92
1.41
60
5.22
1.96
1.45
65
5.23
1.97
1.46
Tipping Fee Impact
($/ton MSW)
45
3.50
1.60
1.31
60
4.15
2.13
1.81
65
6.73
4.66
4.34
Cost Effectiveness
($/ton NOx)
45
3,649
_1,672
1,365
60
3,044
1,561
1,331
65
4,459
3,090
2,878
    (a) $/ton can be converted to $/Mg by multiplying by 1.1.

-------
2.53         Sensitivity Analysis

             To account for site-specific differences and other uncertainties in costs
used to develop Table 2-3 (NGI-100:  MSW displaced case), an analysis of the sensitivity
of tipping fee impacts and NOX control cost effectiveness to differences in plant size (100
to 700 tpd), fuel cost  ($2 to 5/MMBtu), annualized capital cost (±30%), plant tip fee
($40 to 120/ton), and NOX reduction (45 to 65%) was performed. Figure 2-9 presents
the effect of plant size, fuel cost, plant tip fee, and annualized capital cost on  tipping fee
impact and cost effectiveness.  Figure  2-10 presents the sensitivity of tipping fee impact
and cost effectiveness to NOX reduction.  Since a 60% reduction is the design reference
plant reduction, the intersection of tipping fee impact and cost effectiveness occur at this
point.

             The  range in annualized capital cost accounts for differences in  the actual
capital cost of a natural gas injection system, contingency factors, and the cost of money
used for project financing.  For example, the annualized capital charge for a natural gas
injection system would be 24% higher if the capital discount rate (cost of money) is 10%
compared to the model combustor, which is based on a 7% capital discount rate. The
plant tip fee represents  the amount of revenue a plant would lose per ton of MSW
displaced. The variation in NOX control efficiency results from varying the amount of
NGI to achieve higher or lower NOX reductions, rather than the variability in NOX
reductions that may be achieved by different combustors operating at the same NGI
level.

             As shown in these figures, the tipping fee impact and NOX control cost
effectiveness associated with the  reference MWC (the center point on Figure 2-9 and
2-iO) are approximately $21/ton of MSW and $15,200/ton of NOX removed.  Of the
parameters shown in Figures 2-9 and 2-10, the variation in plant tip fee has the greatest
effect on tipping fee impact and  cost effectiveness because this parameter is tied to the
amount of revenue lost  when less MSW is burned. Going from the reference plant tip
fee of $80/ton of MSW to $ 120/ton of MSW results in almost a 35% increase in tipping

sdg/nrtl
s«t-2.rpt                                  2-23

-------
 8 E.
 Ic,
Kl
30-

28-
                             Rthrencc MWC Parmmctcrs
                              Uocontroltcd NOx = 250 ppm
                              NOx Reduction = 60%
                  12-
           Unit Size (tpd)  100
      Purl Cost (J/MMBlu) 2.00
Anoualized Capital (JlOOO/yr)  49
  Pl.nt Tip Fe* (J/lon MSW)  40
                                                                                        1°7
        Uuit Sizr
                                         -S- Fu«ICost
Auuualixrd Capital
                                                                                Pbut Tip F«
                       Figure 2-9, Effect of Unit Siie, Fuel Cost, Annualized Capital and
                      Plant Fee on Tipping Fee Impact and Cost Effectiveness for N^MOO
                                 (for MWCs without additional heat input capacity)
                                                                                    12°

-------
i a
It
                 30-
                 28-
.    26H
(A
s
§  24-
                 14-
                 12-
    NOx Reduction (%)  45
Rtfe«ncc MWC ParmmfUrs
Unk Size = 400 ipd
Fuel Cost = S3.50/MMBIU
Aonualized Capita) = $74,000/yr
Plant Tip Fee *= $*0/loa MSW
UncontroUed NOx - Z5Q ppm
  ,..•*""
    48
                            50
                                   53
58
                                            ' Tipping Frr Impact -§§- Cost Effrclivmrcs
                                22.0
                               -20.6
                               -19.1
                               :17.6
                                      s~-
                               1-16.2  |
                               M4.7
                                                                            -13.2
                                                                                                       -11.7
                                                                                          -10.3
                                                                                                                  $
                                                                                                                  G
                                                                                                                  O
                                                                                                              3   8
                                                                                                              6  '•§
                                                                                                                  .s
                                                                                                                  U-i
                                                                                                                  w
                                                                             8.8
                 Figure 2-10. Effect of NOx Reduction on Tipping Fee Impact and Cost Effectivenes
                           for NG1-100 (for MWCs without additional heat input capacity)

-------
fee impact and cost effectiveness value. Similarly, a decrease to $40/ton MSW results in
a comparable decrease in tipping fee impact and cost effectiveness value.

             Changes in NOX reduction also have a large effect on tipping fee impact,
since the amount of MSW that must be displaced increases with the increased amount of
natural gas needed for the larger NOX reduction.  As discussed earlier, when MSW is
displaced by natural gas, revenues from that MSW are lost.  With an increase in NOX
reduction from 60% to 65%, the tipping fee impact increases by close to 15%.  A
decrease of NOX reduction to 45% results in a decrease in tipping fee impact by close to
40%. Changes in NOX reduction have a smaller impact on cost effectiveness. Increasing
NOX reduction to 65% results in small (<5%) increases in cost effectiveness values.
Decreasing NOX reduction to 45% reduces cost effectiveness values by close  to 15%.
This results from a relatively constant balance between the amount of additional NOX
removed and the increased costs associated with the burning more gas.  As a result, the
ratio of cost to the amount of NOX removed remains essentially unchanged.

             Variations in fuel cost from $2.00 to SS.OO/MMBtu result  in the next
largest effect on  tipping fee impact and cost effective^  -, with these values increasing
linearly with the  price of natural gas. Changes in annualized capital cost and unit size
have smaller effects, with annualized capital having almost no affect on  tipping fee
impact and cost effectiveness. Unit size has a more pronounced effect on costs for the
small combustors.

2.6          References
1.            Seeker, W. R., G. C. England, R. Lyon, and P. Duggan. Advanced
             Pollution Control in Municipal Waste Combustors Using Natural Gas.  In
             Proceedings:  1991 International Conference on Municipal Waste
             Combustion.  Vol.  1, EPA-600/R-92-209a (NTIS PB93-124170),
             November 1992.
2.            Bergstrom, J. NOX Reduction Using Reburning with Natural Gas-Final
             Report From Full-Scale Trial  at SYSAV's Waste Incineration Plant in
idg/nrel
sed-2.rpt                                  2-26

-------
            Malmo.  Nordic Gas Technology Center, Hersholm, Denmark.
            September 1993.

3.           Hura, H. and B. Breen.  Mixing and Heat Loss Effects on Nitric Oxide
            Reduction During Natural Gas Reburning in Pulverized Coal Boilers.
            Presented at the Tenth Annual Pittsburgh Coal Conference, Pittsburgh, PA.
            September 1993.

4.           Pasini, S. and G. DeMichele.  Reburning Scaling Via Mathematical
            Modeling.  Presented at  the 7th Topic Oriented Technical Meeting of the
            International Flame Research Foundation, Gas Research Institute, and
            American Flame Research Council, Chicago, IL.  1993.

5.           Abbasi, H., M. Khinkis, C. Penterson, F. Zone, R.  Dunnette, K. Nakazato,
            P. Duggan, and D. Linz.   Development of Natural  Gas Injection
            Technology for NOX Reduction from Municipal Waste Combustors.  In
            Proceedings:  1991 International Conference on Municipal Waste
            Combustion, Vol. 1, EPA-600/R-92-209a (NTIS PB93-124170),
            November 1992.

6.           Biljetina, R., H. Abbasi,  M. Cousino, and R. Dunnette.  Field Evaluation of
            Methane de-NOX at Olmsted Waste-to-Energy Facility. Presented at the
            7th Annual Waste-to-Energy Symposium.  Minneapolis, MN.  January 1992.

7.           Abbasi, H., M. Khinkis, and R. Scherrer.  An Engineering and Economic
            Evaluation of the Methane de-NOX Technology. Presented at the Third
            International Specialty Conference on  Municipal Waste Combustion.
            Williamsburg, VA.  April 1993.

8.           Abbasi, H. A. and F. J. Zone.  Emissions Reduction from MWC
            Combustion Systems Using Natural Gas, Task 3--Field Evaluation.  Gas
            Research Institute, Chicago, IL. GRI-92/0370.  December 1992.

9.           Gas Reburning at a Waste Incineration Plant in Denmark. NGC News,
            Nordic Gas Technology Centre, Horsholm, Denmark.  October 1993.  p.6.

10.          SanyaJ, A., T. M. Sommer, B. A. Folsom, L. Angello, and R. Payne.  Cost
            Effective Technologies for SO2 and NOX Control.  Presented at Power-Gen
            1992. Orlando, FL. November 1992.
sdg/nrtl
sect-2.rpt                                 2-27

-------
3.0         SELECTIVE NON-CATALYTIC REDUCTION

3.1         Process Description

            Selective non-catalytic reduction refers to add-on NOX control techniques
that reduce NOX to N2 without the use of catalysts.1 A generalized schematic of SNCR
applied to MWCs is shown in Figure 3-1. As indicated in the figure, one or more of
several reducing reagents is injected into the upper furnace to react with NOX and form
N2 and water.  Specific SNCR processes  include Thermal DeNOx™ (originally licensed
by Exxon Research and Engineering), based on ammonia (NH3) injection,2 NOXOUT™
(Electric Power Research Institute/Nalco Fuel Tech) which uses urea [CO(NH2)J
injection,J>4 and the addition of urea followed by methanol.5 This discussion is limited to
the Thermal DeNOx  and the NOXOUT processes because of their predominant use.

3.1.1        Thermal DeNOx™

            With Thermal DeNOx, either aqueous or anhydrous NH3 is injected into
the upper  furnace of the combustor.  Ammonia and NOX react according to the
following generalized reactions:

                      4  NO + 4 NH3 +  O2 - 4 N2 + 6 H2O                  (3-1)
                         4 NH3 + 5 O2 - 4 NO +  6 H2O                     (3-2)

At 870 to  980°C (1,600 to 1,800°F), the first reaction dominates and NOX is reduced to
N2. Above 1,100°C (2,000°F), the second reaction dominates and NH3 is oxidized to NO.
Below 870°C (1,600°F), both reactions proceed slowly and a significant fraction of the
NH3 remains unreacted. These reaction pathways are illustrated in Figure 3-2.

            As shown in Figure 3-2, the amount of amide radical (NH2) formed
through thermal decomposition of NH3 is critical to the destruction of NOX.  Flue gas
temperature and carbon monoxide (CO) concentrations influence both the

sdg/nrel
s«t-3.rpt                                  3-1

-------
              Figure 3-1. Schematic Diagram of SNCR Applied to an MWC
sdg/nrel
                                      3-2

-------
8 £.
?«!.
Ut 3
                              NH
                              NB,
                              NH,
                         OH —-  NO +
 NO  —- N2 + H2O
NH3 slip
Temperature
                                         Figure 3-2. Ammonia Reaction Pathways

-------
decomposition of NH3 to NH2 and the interaction of NH2 with NO. If there is too much
CO present, excess hydroxyl (OH) radical is formed, which react with NH2 to eventually
form NO rather than reducing NO to N2.

3.12         NOXOUT™

             The NOXOUT™ process uses stabilized ure.. injection to reduce NOX to
N2, CO2, and water. The generalized reaction pathways for this control technology are
shown in Figure 3-3.6

             As shown in Figure 3-3, urea decomposes to NH3 and HNCO.  The
reaction of NH3 with NO is similar to Thermal DeNOx d:,cussed above. The reaction of
NCO (produced by reaction of HNCO with hydroxyl [OH] radical) provides several
additional reaction paths. A». temperatures above 1,100°C (2,000°F), NCO reacts with
hydrogen and oxygen radicals:

                              NCO + H ^ NH + CO                         (3-3)
                              NCO + O -» NO + CO                         (3-4)

At these temperatures, NH can react with O2 and OH  to form NO. Between 800°C
(1,500°F) and 1,100°C (2,000°F), the primary reaction is:

                             NCO + NO - N2O + CO                        (3-5)

This alternate reaction is important because both of the products, nitrous oxide (N2O)
and CO, are of environmental concern  (N2O is of special concern because of its role as a
global warming "greenhouse" gas). However, at temperatures above 950°C (1.750T),
N2O will decompose thermally or react with oxygen to  produce N2, and CO will react
with oxygen to produce CO2:
sdg/nrtl
wct-B.rpt                                  3-4

-------
s B.
?1
<" =
•3 1
                     + OH
                                     + H
                                         + OH —- NO  + H2O
                                                        O
NCO
                                             + NO 	" N9O -»- CO    L* CO + O —- CO2
N2O
NO + CO


        Temperature

N2+O
                                                                                  N2O + CO
                                       Figure 3-3. Urea Reaction Pathways

-------
                                  N2O - N2 + O                              (3-6)
                               N2O + O - N2 + O2                           (3-7)
                                 CO  +  O - CO2                             (3-8)

At lower temperatures, however, the rates of reaction are relatively slow and the
potential exists for significant emissions of NH3, N2O, and CO. To reduce these
emissions, a variety of chemicals can be injected to promote reactions at temperatures as
low as 800°C (1,500°F) and thereby minimize by byproduct emissions.7

32          Development Status

             SNCR has been applied to a number of MWCs in Japan, Europe, and the
U.S.  MWCs in the U.S. that have permanently installed SNCR, have conducted
demonstration tests, or are currently in the planning stage are listed in Table 3-1.

33          Key Design and Process Variables

             Five  factors influence the performance  of ammonia- or urea-based SNCR
systems:  reagent-to-NOx ratio, flue gas composition, temperature, reagent distribution,
and residence time.

             The reagent-to-NOx molar ratio, or more specifically the NH2-to-NOx ratio
(also known as the normalized stoichiometric ratio-NSR), ultimately determines the
potentially achievable NOX reduction.4'7'8 For NH3-based systems, the reagent  ratio is
equal to the NH2-to-NOx molar ratio*. For urea-based systems, each mole of urea
contains two moles of NHj, such that a urea-to-NOx  ratio of 0.5 results  in an NSR of
1.0.  Figure 3-4 shows that at an NSR of 1.0, reported NOX reductions from MWCs are
40 to 60%.  Although not directly indicated  on the figure, much of the variability in
    'Molar ratio, as used in this instance, refers to the number of moles of reagent (e.g.,
NH3) to the number of moles of NOX in the flue gas.
sdg/nrel
s«n-3.rpt                                 3-6

-------
                           Table 3-1




Summary of U.S. SNCR Applications on Municipal Waste Combustors
Name/Location
Capacity
Cily ot' Commerce, CA
I x 380 tpd
Stanislaus County, CA
2 x 400 tpd
Lone Beach, CA (SERRF)
3X^60 tpd
Huntington, NY
3 x 25c
103 ppm
140 ppm
52 ppm
I50ppmk
--
9«ppm
96 ppm
< 165 ppm
70 ppm
70 ppm
-
--
                                                                    (continued)

-------
                                                               Table 3-1

                                                              (Continued)
Name/Location
Capacity
Falls Township, PA
2 x 750 ipd
Montgomery County. MD
3x600tpd
Onondaga County, NY
3 x 330 fpd
Other
APCDs3
SD/FF/CI
SD/FF/CI
SD/FF/CI
Reagent
Urea
NH3
NH,
New or
RctroGt
N
19
New
1995
New
1995
Permitted
NO/
180 ppm
180 ppm
180 ppm"
200 ppm
Averaging
Tune
24-hr
24-hr block
24-hr block
3-hr rolling
Measured
N0,b'c
A
--
-
--
00
a APCD = air pollution control device
  SD = spray dryer
  FF = fabric tiller
  FOR = flue gas recirculation
  ESP = electrostatic precipitator
  CI = carbon injection
''Emissions corrected to 7% O2 unless otherwise noted.
cMeasured values reflect  performance test and/or typical values,
 and are not  appropriate  for setting short-term permit limits.
^Limit is a South Coast Air Quality Management District limit for
 all liquid and solid fuel-tired units in the basin.
eAlso must meet a 40 Ib/hr limit (1-hr basis) and a 825 Ib/day
 limit.
 Must also meet a 1130 Ib/day limit. Also has a.; NH-j limit of
 50 ppm at actual C^-
SOr 160.5 Ib over a 3-hr period, whichever is more stringent.
.Or 1200 Ib/day, whichever is more stringent.
'Also must meet a 34 Ib/hr limit (1-hr basis) and a 720 Ib/day
.limit.
JAIso must meet a 65.5 lb/1 r/furnace limit (8-hr basis).
^Emissions coireeled to !2% CO2-
'Corrected to 12% CO2.  Based on a permit that expired 1/92.
mAlso  must meet a 801b/hr limit.
"Also must meet a 58 Ib/hr limit (3-hr rolling average) and a
 0.35 Ib/MMBtu limit.

-------
•3*
                       100
                  &
                  ra
                  o
                  8
                  z.
90





80





70





60




50





40




30




20




10
                                Midrange + 25%
                              Midrange
0.4       0.8
                                                     1.2
                                       1.6


                                     NSR
2.4       2.8
                                     Figure 3-4.  Effect of Reagent Feedrate on SNCR Performance

-------
reported performance levels reflects the differences in NOX reductions achieved between
individual MWCs, rather than variability in performance at a single MWC. The
performance curves shown on the figure are generally reflective of the relationship
between NOX reduction and NSR experienced at individual facilities.  At an NSR near
2:1, NOX reductions of 50 to  80% have been reported.  Increasing the ratio beyond 2:1
has little additional effect on NOX reduction.  However, at high NSR  ratios, emissions of
unreacted NH3 (known as "NH3 slip") can be significant. Note from Figure 3-4 that
there is not a clear distinction in NOX reduction between NH3 and urea.

             Second, the composition of the flue gas is also critical in determining the
potential efficiency of SNCR.4 The concentration of NOX determines the necessary
amount of reagent injection.  In addition, CO and O2 levels at the point of reagent
injection affect process chemistry. High levels of O2 (above 6%)  tend to improve
performance.  CO concentration above 100 ppm can shift the reaction kinetics and lower
the effective temperature range for the NH2/NOX reaction. Other constituents typically
present in MWC  flue  gas, such as chlorides, do not seem to have a significant effect on
process gas phase chemistry.9

             The third factor affecting NOX is flue gas temperature.  Figure  3-5, which
is based on urea injection but is generally representative of NH3 injection, shows the
effect of combustion gas  temperature and composition on NOX removal.6  At
temperatures below the acceptable operating range of 700 to 800°C (1,300 to 1,500°F),
the desired NOX reduction reactions do not occur and NH3 slip increases. Above the
acceptable temperature range, NH3 is oxidized to NOX, resulting  in low NOX reduction
efficiency and reagent utilization. Also shown in Figure 3-5, N2O emissions are highest
between 800 and  1,000°C (1,500 and 1,800°F).

             For MWCs, the required  temperature window occurs in the upper section
of the furnace. Because  of variability in MSW composition, however, there can be
significant variations in combustion gas temperatures over relatively short time  intervals.
This can lead to significant changes in gas temperature  at a given furnace elevation.  As

sdg/nirl
sert-3.ipt                                  3-10

-------
•3 i
                                    725
825           925
 Temperature (°C)
1025
             1125
                         Figure 3-5.  Effect of Temperature and Flue Gas Composition on SNCR Performance

-------
a result, MWCs typically have installed several rows of reagent injection nozzles in order
to allow injection of reagent within the required temperature window. Because of
difficulty in monitoring furnace temperature, however, existing facilities have conducted
SNCR optimization tests soon after the MWC has commenced operation to determine
the injector elevation that generally provides the best balance between NOX reduction
and NH3 slip.8'10  During subsequent operation of the SNCP system, reagent is injected
through the injector row that was found to have  the best performance during the
optimization test. Because  of high and low temperature fluctuations that occur during
normal operation, however, the reagent can oxidize to increase NOX emissions or may
not fully react and result in NH3 slip.  Recently developed techniques for providing
real-time monitoring of furnace temperature are discussed in Section 3,4.

             The fourth factor affecting SNCR performance is distribution of the
reagent with the flue gas. The zone surrounding each reagent injection nozzle is mixed
by the turbulence of the flue gas. Distribution in regions distant from an injection nozzle
depends on adequate reagent velocity and momentum for penetration.  Because of
reduced flue gas turbulence, stratification of the reagent and flue gas can be a problem
at low combustor loads.

             The fifth factor affecting SNCR performance  is the residence time of the
injected reagent within the  required temperature window. A residence time of
0.5 seconds is generally adequate in most systems. If the residence times are too short,
there will be insufficient time for completion of the desired  reactions between  NOX and
NHj. Based on gas velocities and cooling rates in the upper furnace  of MWCs,
residence time limitations are less severe than in many fossil fuel-fired combustor
applications.

             Additional concerns related to SNCR processes are associated with
secondary environmental impacts caused by high reagent feed rates.  These impacts
include NH3 emissions to the atmosphere and NHj concentrations in APCD ash.  At an
NR of 1.5 and less, NH3 slip rates are generally less than 10 ppm and NH3 levels in

sdg/nrel
sfa-3.rpt                                  j-l£

-------
APCD ash are low.4-7-8 As injection rates increase beyond an NSR of 1.5, NH3 slip and
ash concentrations increase substantially.  In addition, because of health and safety
concerns associated with accidental release of NH3 during reagent transport, handling,
and storage operations, most SNCR systems are being designed for aqueous NH3 or
urea.

             The variability in the reported data suggests that NH3 slip measurements
are also highly dependent on system design variations (residence time, temperature,
reagent distribution, APCD type), sampling location  (prior to or after APCD), and
sampling method.  Currently, there is not an established method (i.e., EPA standard) for
measuring NH3. Potential NH3 measurement problems include the  loss of NH3 on cool
surfaces in the sampling train where water or ammonium salts may form and the release
of NH3 from sampling train  impingers if acidic pH is not maintained

             Unreacted NH3 can react with  residual HC1 exiting the stack to form a
detached ammonium chloride  (NH4C1) plume. These plumes are whitish in color and
can create concerns with visible emissions. Such plumes have been  observed under
certain process  and atmospheric conditions at several of the U.S. MWCs with SNCR. In
addition, ammonium sulfate salts can form when the unreacted NH3 contacts SO3 in the
flue gas.  These salts can potentially lead to heat transfer surface scaling and corrosion;
however, these  problems have  not been reported to  date by U.S. MWCs. If NH3 levels
in APCD ash are high (due  to high NSR  injection levels), it may be necessary to install
NH3 stripping and vapor collection equipment to protect worker health and safety during
ash handling operations.

             An unresolved issue related to NH3 slip is the NH3 collection efficiency of
a fabric filter (FF) versus an ESP.  Most of the  NH3 slip data are from systems  using a
FF for paniculate control.  Relatively little data are  available on units equipped with
ESPs or where  NH3 levels have been measured prior to and after the control device.
Testing at a FF-equipped coal-fired boiler reported significant NH3  reduction across the
FF.11  Testing at an MWC indicated that  NH3 levels following the FF were low  except

alg/nrel
sect-3.rpt                                 O-lj

-------
after extended operation at high NH3 feed rates." Discussions with MWC personnel
indicate that an NH3 odor is present in collected ash.12 All of these data suggest that
the filter cake removes a significant portion of the NH3 in the flue gas unless inlet NH3
levels are sufficiently high  to exceed the adsorption capacity of the filter cake.  It is
unclear, however, that an ESP will  be equally effective at controlling NH3 slip emissions.
As a result, NH3 slip levels and the potential for an NH4C1 plume may be higher for an
MWC equipped with an ESP than for a unit with a FF.

3.4          Recent Advances and Further Research Needs

             As discussed above, SNCR performance depends on injection of the
reagent within the desired gas temperature window.  Because of the variability in MSW
composition, however, it has been difficult to monitor the flue gas temperature within
the furnace and to adjust the reagent injection elevation accordingly. As a result, a high
temperature excursion within the furnace  can result in oxidation of NH3 to NOX, while a
low temperature excursion will delay the NH3/NOX reactions, which results in reduced
NOX reduction and  increased NOX and NH3 emissions. High NH3 emissions during low
temperature excursions can be further  increased if the SNCR control system is designed
to increase NH3 or urea feed rate in response to the higher NOX reading by the NOX
CEM located downstream of the furnace.

             To overcome these limitations, two new technologies have been applied:
real-time furnace pyrometry to continuously monitor gas temperature and continuous
NH3 monitoring.

3.4.1         Temperature Monitoring

             Two advanced techniques exist for continuously monitoring furnace
temperature.13 These are infrared  (IR) pyrometry, which measures IR radiation emitted
from the hot combustion gases, and acoustic pyrometry, which determines gas
temperature based on the  speed at which sound travels through heated gases.  Infrared

tdg/nrcl
sect-3.rpt                                 3-14

-------
pyrometry is a simpler technology that measures IR emissions from solid "black body"
particles entrained in the combustion gases. Because of variations in the "dirtiness" of
the combustion gases over time, however, the black body emissivity characteristics of the
gas vary. As a result, the IR signal received by the pyrometer can vary independently of
temperature. For example, a relatively clean gas (one containing few solid particles) and
a dirty gas (one containing significant soot, "sparklers", or other solid particles) at the
same temperature will result in different IR responses.  Despite these limitations,
however, IR pyrometry can be used to monitor fluctuations in gas temperature and  to
detect flames (as opposed to hot gases) in the instrument's viewing plane.

            Acoustic pyrometers determine the mean gas temperature between  two
points by measuring the travel time for a sound signal and then converting this time to a
temperature based on the travel distance and the relationship between the speed  of
sound and gas temperature.  The advantage of this approach is that the speed of  sound
in combustion  gases is relatively insensitive to the dirtiness of the gas and, therefore,
provides a direct indication of gas temperature.  In addition, by installing  several
pyrometers in the furnace and measuring the travel time between each pyrometer pair, a
temperature (i.e., isotherm) map of the furnace can be generated.

            Use of IR pyrometry to improve SNCR performance was evaluated during
a technology demonstration test funded by Ogden Martin Systems (OMS) at the
Lancaster, Pennsylvania MWC (conducted  in January-March 1993).14 The system used
during this test, shown in Figure 3-6, included an IR pyrometer in the lower furnace to
monitor lower furnace temperature and flame height, two reagent injection rows,
separate aqueous NH3 and dilution water tanks, NOX and NH3 CEMS (see
Section 3.4.2),  and a process controller. The pyrometer was used to determine which
injector row to use, while the CEMS were used to control the NH3 injection rate.
Dilution water was used to assure proper reagent injection momentum (i.e., good
distribution) as the NH3 feed rate varied.  Using this scheme, during high temperature
periods, all of  the NH3 was injected through the upper row, while the lower row was
used during  low temperature periods.  In addition, the NH3 analyzer was used to  avoid

sdg/nrel
iect-3.rpt                                 3-15

-------
AMMONIA SIGNAL
FROM ECONOM
                                                                   BOILER
                                                                 FURNACE
                                                                  SECTION
   AQUEOUS
   AMMONIA
     ©
   DILUTION
   WATER
     NOx SIGNAL
     FROM  CEM
1.  AQUEOUS AMMONIA  STORAGE.
2.  DILUTION WATER SUPPLY.
3  CENTRIFUGAL PUMP  FOR AMMONIA.
4.  CENTRIFUGAL PUMP  FOR DILUTION WATER.
5.  AMMONIA MANIFOLD  (REGULATES DISTRIBUTION OF AMMONIA  TO EACH ZONE).
6.  WATER MANIFOLD (MAINTAINS CONSTANT PRESSURE  AT EACH NOZZLE FOR
   PROPER ATOMIZATION).
7.  INJECTION NOZZLES  - 2 ZONES.
8.  ISOLATION VALVES.
9.  AQUEOUS AMMONIA  CONTROL LOOP TO MODULATE AMMONIA  FLOW.
10. DILUTION WATER PRESSURE CONTROL LOOP.
11. AQUEOUS AMMONIA  FLOW CONTROL VALVE.
                                   t
FLUE
GAS
FLOW
(NOTE: During subsequent testing, a NOX signal from the economizer was used for
process control instead of the NH3 signal).
           Figure 3-6. Schematic Diagram of Advanced SNCR Applied to the
                            Lancaster County MWC14-15
  sdg/nrcl
  JcctO.rpe
3-16

-------
overfeeding NH3 during periods of increased NOX resulting from slow NH3/NOX
reactions at low furnace temperatures. During the initial testing at Lancaster County,
NOX levels (corrected to 7% O2) varied between 30 and 120 ppm and averaged
approximately 70 ppm.14  Based on an assumed uncontrolled NOX level of 250 ppm, the
average emission rate of 70 ppm equates to a reduction of approximately 70%. These
tests indicated.^however, that at the NSR levels required to achieve this NOX reduction,
there were periodic excursions in NH3 slip  that resulted in visible emissions. To better
define  the ability of advanced SNCR  to control visible emissions, OMS conducted
additional testing at Lancaster County in September-October 1993.'5  As part of these
subsequent tests, process control was  maintained by measuring NOX with a fast response
analyzer located at the economizer, instead of using the NH3 analyzer.  OMS replaced
the NH3 analyzer because it was not as reliable for process control as originally
anticipated. During these additional  tests,  OMS reduced the NSR and achieved visible
emissions of less than 10% opacity (based on 6-minute averages) at all times and of 5%
or lower opacity for 90% of the time. During these approximately 550 hours of testing,
NOX emissions averaged 100 ppm with a maximum recorded 3-hour average of 126 ppm.
Based  on these data, OMS believes that a 3-hour emission limit of 140 ppm can be
continuously achieved with advanced  SNCR.

             Acoustic pyrometry has been in use at the North Munich MWC in Munich,
Germany since the summer of 1991.l2 This system consists of a six pyrometer array
(two each  on the rear and two side walls) located approximately 33 feet  (10 meters)
above  the  grate. As opposed to using the system solely lo determine the NH3 injection
elevation, the system is also used to control the rate of waste feeding and the distribution
of undergrate and overgrate air to minimize both temporal and spatial variations in
combustion gas temperatures.  Although emissions performance data have not been
reported, the system is claimed to have reduced the variation in instantaneous furnace
gas temperatures from 300°C (540°F) using the previous control scheme  to approximately
150°C  (270°F) and  reduced CO spikes due  to better combustion control.  By allowing
more careful control of the localized  combustion conditions, the system is also claimed to
.dg/nrel
stct-J.rpt                                 J-l/

-------
be capable of reducing furnace and superheater tube wastage caused by localized hot
spots and reducing environments.

3.4.2       Ammonia Continuous Emissions Monitors

            As SNCR and SCR have become more common NOX control methods, the
need for real-time measurement of NHj for process control has increased. Ammonia
measurements can be used as part of a feedback loop to optimize SNCR-based NOX
control systems by allowing increased NH3 or urea injection rates while minimizing NH3
slip.

            To meet this need, a number of vendors have been working to develop
NH3 CEMs. These instruments use a variety of spectrographic techniques, including
chemiluminescence, non-dispersive infrared (NDIR), ultraviolet (UV), ion mobility
(IMS), and differential optical adsorption (DOAS).  Based on vendor data, UV and  IMS
have the best measurement accuracy  (± 1%) in low SO2 flue gases, but cannot be used
in high-SO2 environments (SO2:NH3 ratio s 80) due to measurement interference.
NDIR has somewhat lower accuracy (±  3%), but can operate at SO2 levels of up to
2,000 ppm. Chemiluminescence measurement of NH3 uses two monitors, one measuring
the NOX level in the flue gas and the other measuring the NOX concentration following
a reactor chamber that converts  NH3 in  the flue  gas to NOX.  Although
chemiluminescence can be used  in high-SO2 environments, it has relatively low accuracy
(±  10%) due to potential measurement errors of the two monitors.

            Based on typical MWC flue gas composition, any of these monitors may be
feasible.  However, long-term operating and reliability data are limited  and their use as a
process control or an emission compliance monitor has not been validated.
sdg/nrcl
tcct-3.rpt                                 3-18

-------
3.5          Cost Analysis

3.5.1         Design Basis

             Several variations of SNCR technology exist, depending on the reagent
type and method of injection.  As discussed in Section 3.1, reagent options include
anhydrous NH3, aqueous NH3, and urea. An anhydrous NH3 system generally will have
the lowest capital cost, but requires storage of potentially hazardous anhydrous NH3.
Aqueous NH3 (typically consisting of 25 to 29% NH3 dissolved in water) is safer to store
than anhydrous NH3, but requires a larger  storage tank. Aqueous NH3 can be  injected
either as a vapor, with an injection system  similar to that described for an anhydrous
NH3 system, or as  a liquid.  If it is  injected as a vapor,  a steam- or electrically-heated
vaporizer is used to liberate the NH3 from the water carrier. If aqueous NH3 is injected
as a liquid or if urea is used, the cost of the vaporizer and high-pressure carrier gas
system are avoided; however, the thermal efficiency of  the combustion process  is reduced
because of the energy loss resulting from vaporization of the carrier water by the
combustion gases.

             The costs presented in this section are based on injection of aqueous NH3
as a liquid. The capital costs for this system are similar to the costs for a urea-based
system, although the costs may be distributed somewhat differently.  The capital cost for
an anhydrous NH3 system is expected to be slightly  lower, while the  cost of aqueous  NH3
system with a vaporizer will be somewhat higher. The  SNCR system designs examined
include:  a conventional SNCR system similar to that described in Section 3.1,  two
variations of the advanced SNCR system based on the  concepts presented in Section 3.4,
and an advanced NGI system,  which combines SNCR and NGI as described in
Section 2.4.

             The design basis for the conventional  SNCR system includes two rows  of
reagent injectors, an average NOX reduction of 60%, and manual control of the NH3
injection system. Based on a typical uncontrolled NOX concentration of 250 ppm  at  7%

sdg/nrcl
seo-3.rpt                                   3-19

-------
O2, this NOX reduction results in an average stack concentration of 100 ppm at 7% O2.
The 60% reduction represents long-term (annual average) performance capabilities when
considering performance at all facilities.  Performance at  individual plants will vary, and
this average performance level may not be achievable at all plants, especially when
considering retrofit situations. The average NSR needed  to achieve this reduction is
assumed to be 1.4."  The number of reagent injectors in each row is based on the
assumption of one injector per 40 tpd of MWC capacity.  Control of the reagent
injection system is handled manually by the combustor operator based on visual
observation of furnace conditions and the measured NOX level in the stack.  Because the
furnace camera and NOX CEM used for these purposes are required for other reasons,
the cost of these items are not included in the SNCR capital cost.  Based on the
commercial status of this technology, the process contingency assumed for conventional
SNCR is 10%.

             The advanced SNCR system design also includes two rows of reagent
injectors, as  in the conventional SNCR system, but also includes automatic control of the
NH3 injection system. The NH3 injection control system includes an acoustic pyrometer,
an NH3 CEM, and a control system designed  to vary injection location and rate based on
the pyrometer and CEM measurements.  Through the use of this control system, a 60%
reduction is  assumed to be achievable with an NSR of 1.0 (versus 1.4 with the
conventional SNCR system).  As with the conventional SNCR system, this NOX
reduction results in an average stack concentration of 100 ppm at 7% O2, based on an
inlet concentration of 250 pprn at 7% O2. As stated above, this reduction level
represents long-term performance capabilities.  A limited examination of an advanced
SNCR system with a 70% NOX reduction and an average stack concentration of 75 ppm
is also presented.  An NSR of 2.0 is assumed  to achieve the higher reduction.  Also,
because of the potential for high NH3 levels in the ash resulting from the higher NSR,
    " This level was selected as a reasonable balance between NO, reduction and NH3
slip. Because of fluctuations in "uncontrolled" NO, levels and furnace temperatures,
however, instantaneous NSRs, NOX reductions, and NH3 slip rates may be higher or
lower.
cdg/nrcl
s«ct-3.rpt                                 3-20

-------
NH3 stripping and vapor collection equipment ty protect worker health and safety during
ash handling operations are included.  Based on the limited number of advanced SNCR
demonstrations, a process contingency of 25% is used for both advanced  SNCL scenarios
to cover additional testing and potential costs for system modification.

            The advanced NGI system design reduces NOX emissions by first using
natural gas injection to achieve a 60% reduction in NOX, followed by a 50% reduction
through the liquid injection of aqueous NHj. This results in an overall NOX reduction of
80%, which equals  an outlet level of 50 ppm at 7% O2 assuming an uncontrolled NOX
level of 250 ppm at 7% O2.

            For the gas injection portion of the system,  natural gas is injected equalling
a heat input level of 15 percent. It is assumed that the MWC has additional heat input
capacity available such that lost revenue does not occur from diverting waste. The
SNCR portion of the system is the same as for the conventional SNCR system except
that to reduce  the SNCR inlet NOX level (100 ppm) by 509o, an NSR of 0.8 is used.

352        Cost  Results

            Cost estimates for the conventional and advanced SNCR and for advanced
NGI were developed for 100, 400, and 750 tpd model combustors.

            Conventional SNCR
                                                                             s
            Conventional SNCR-specific input and output values for the 400 tpd model
combustor are shown in Tables 3-2 and 3-3.  Additional inputs (e.g., labor rates,
electricity price) used in  the cost analysis of both technologies are presented in
Table A-2 of Appendix A.  Table 3-4 presents the  estimated capital cost  per tpd of
capacity,  tipping fee impact, and NOX control cost effectiveness for the conventional
SNCR system applied to the three model combustors.  In addition to 60% NOX
reduction, the table also  presents the estimated cost for 45% and 65% NOX reduction.

sdg/nrel
s«t-3.rpt                                  3-21

-------
                                 Table 3-2
                 Model Combustor Inputs For Conventional SNCR
                              Injection System
          Number of Wall Injectors
          Ueagent
          Injection Method
          Fuel
                 Aqueous Ammonia
                           Liquid
                            MSW
                              Plant Characteristics
          Unit csize (tpd)
          Flowrate (dscfm @ 7% O2)
          Flowrate (wscfm @ 11% O2)
          Capacity Factor
          Tons/yr of MSW Processed Oons/yr)
          Uncontrolled NOx (ppmv, dry)
          NOx Removal Efficiency (%/100)
          Normalized Stoichiometric Ratio (N/NO)
          Reagent Injection Rate (lb/hr)
          Outlet NOx (ppmv, ciry)
          Tons of NOx removed (tons/yr)
          Capital Recovery Factor (1/yrs)	
                              400
                           41,271
                           70,462
                              0.9
                          131,400
                              250
                             0.60
                              1.4
                              32
                              100
                              152
                           0.0944
sdg/nrc'
s«ct-3.rpt
3-22

-------
                             Table 3-3
                  Cost Outputs For Conventional SNCR
                Applied to the 400 TPD Model Combustor (a)
Capital Cost Section ($1000)
Storage
Injection System
Compressor
Instrumentation
Installation
Total Process Capital (SI 000)
Engineering
Contingency
Total Control Cost ($1000)
License Fee
Pre-Production
Inventory Capital
Total Capital Requirement ($1000)
Total Capital per Capacity ($1000/tpd)
Total Annualized Capital Requirement (SlOOO/yr)
71
178
94
0
86
429
86
154
669
96
24
5
79*
1.98
75
Variable O&M Cost Section (SlOOO/yr)
Reagent Cost
Electric - Compressor
Energy Loss - Vaporization
Dilution Water
Total Variable O&M ($1000/yr)
38
2
2
0.16
42
Fixed O&M Cost Section (SlOOO/yr)
Operating Labor
Maintenance Material
Maintenance Labor
Administrative & Support Labor
Total Fixed O&M ($1000/yr)
44
10
7
15
76
Total Cost Section
Total Annualized Cost ($1000/yr)
Tipping Fee Impact ($/ton of MSW)
Cost Effectiveness ($/ton of NOx)
193
1.47
1,268
         (a) $/ton can be converted to $/Mg by multiplying by 1.1.
sdg/nrcl
nctO.rpt
3-23

-------
S £.
?e.
<- =
i *
                   Table 3-4


Model Plant Cost Estimates For Conventional SNCR (a)

NOx Reduction (%)
100 TPD Mass Burn MWC
400 TPD Mass Burn MWC
750 TPD Mass Burn MWC
Total Capital Cost
(S1000/TPD capacity)
45
5.05
1.97
1.49
60
5.06
1.98
1.50
65
5.07
2.00
1.52
Tipping Fee Impact
($/ton MSW)
45
3.74
1.30
0.92
60
3.91
1.47
1.09
65
4.06
1.62
1.24
Cost Effectiveness
($/ton NOx)
45
4,308
1,496
1,058
60
3,378
1,268
940
65
3,235
1,289
986
     (a) $/ton can be converted to $/Mg by multiplying by 1.1.


-------
This represents Ihe range of performance considering the control technique and
plant-to-plant performance variations. To achieve these alternate NOX reduction levels,
NSR of 0.6 and 2.0 were assumed. Although not quantified, the higher NOX reduction
rate is expected to also have higher NH3 slip levels and higher NH3 levels in  the ash.
Costs for NH3 stripping and ash handling equipment are not included in the estimates
presented in Table 3-4.  As shown in Table 3-4, capital costs, tipping fee impacts, and
NOX control  cost effectiveness values decrease with increasing combustor size.  Within a
model combustor size range, the impact on costs caused by variations in NOX reduction
level is smaller.  This is especially true for capital cost.  A more significant change is
observed in tipping fee impact and NOX control cost effectiveness.  For all three model
combustors, the tipping fee impact increases with increased  NOX reduction, primarily
due to increased reagent costs.  NOX control cost effectiveness values for the 400 and
700 tpd model combustors are lowest at the 60% NOX reduction level, with increased
cost effectiveness values at the lower and higher reduction levels. For the  100 tpd model
combustor, cost effectiveness values are  highest at the 45%  NOX reduction level and
lowest at the 65% NOX reduction level.

             Advanced SNCR

             The estimated capital cost per tpd of capacity, tipping fee impact, and NOX
control cost effectiveness for ilw advanced SNCR system at  a 60% reduction are
presented in Table 3-5 for the tlaee model combustors.  As discussed in Section 3.5.1,
this advanced SNCR system is assumed to achieve this reduction with an NSR of 1.0.  To
address the uncertainty of cost associated with this concept,  the capital cost is varied
±  30% from the model case. Depending on the capital cost variance of ± 30%, the
capital costs associated with this system range from 16% higher to 3 times  higher than
for the conventional system because of the  costs of the  controls and the higher  process
contingency.  The tipping fee impacts and cost effectiveness values,  which  consider
operating costs as we!l as capital costs, are  5 to 90% higher for the  advanced system than
for the conventional system. As would be expected, the cost differential between
advanced and conventional systems is greatest for the 100 tpd MWC and decreases as

tdg/nrcl
«ct-3rpt                                  3-2.)

-------
                                               Table 3-5
                            Model Plant Cost Estimates for Advanced SNCR (a), (b)

Capital Cost Variance (%)
100 TPD Mass Burn MWC
400 TPD Mass Burn MWC
750 TPD Mass Burn MWC
Total Capital Cost
($IOOO/TPD capacity)
-30%
8.30
2.62
1.73
0%
11.9
3.74
2.47
+30%
15.4
4.86
3.22
Tipping Fee Impact
($/ton MSW)
-30%
5.24
1.69
1.14
0%
6.26
2.01
1.35
+ 30%
7.28
2.33
1.56
Cost Effectiveness
($/ton NOx)
-30%
4,524
1,460
983
0%
5.407
1,738
1,167
+ 30%
6,289
2,016
1,351
(a) $/ton can be converted to S/Mg by multiplying by 1.1.
(b) Based on a 60% NOx reduction and an NSR of 1.0.

-------
MWC size increases. Although not quantifiable in a cost sense, the advanced system
operating at the lower NSR is expected to have lower levels of NH3 slip.

             Another option for applying advanced SNCR is to increase the NSR to 2.0
to achieve a NOX reduction level of 70%. As with the conventional system, increasing
the amount of reagent increases the amount of NH3 slip and the levels of NH3 in the
ash. As presented for the advanced system at a 60% reduction level, the amount of
reagent required to achieve this level of reduction with  the advanced system is less than
with the conventional system.  Similarly, operating the advanced system to achieve a 70%
reduction would require an NSR of 2.0 as compared to  a conventional  system which
would have to operate at an NSR of 3.0 or higher.  Nonetheless, the secondary impacts
still result with the NSR of 2.0. As discussed in Section 3.3, NH3 stripping equipment
and a vapor recovery system can be used to address the issue of potential ash handling
problems. The estimated costs for the advanced SNCR system operating at a 70%
reduction, including equipment costs for NH3 stripping and vapor recovery for ash
handling, are presented in Table 3-6 for the 400 tpd model combustor.  Also shown in
this table are costs for the conventional and advanced SNCR systems at 60% reduction.
Although higher NOX reduction is achievable with the advanced SNCR system at the
NSR of 2.0, this additional reduction comes with higher costs and the potential for NH3
slip levels equal to or greater than the systems operating at 60% reduction.

             Advanced NGI

             The results of the advanced NGI cost evaluation are presented in
Table 3-7. The estimated capital cost per tpd of capacity, tipping fee impact, and NOX
control cost effectiveness are shown for the three model combuslors. In this evaluation,
the price of natural gas is varied from  $2 to 5/MMBtu, as this parameter has the
greatest effect on the economics of this control technique. As discussed in Section 3.5.1,
the design basis for this process assumes a 60% NOX reduction based on gas injection
and a 50% reduction based on SNCR. This equals an overall NOX reduction of 80%.
As shown in Table 3-7, advanced NGI is a capital intensive control technique, especially
sect-3.rpt

-------
                                   Table 3-6
            Comparison of Conventional and Advanced SNCR Systems (a),(b)
Plant Characteristics
Unit Size (tpd)
Uncontrolled NOx (ppmv, dry)
NOx Removal Efficiency (%/100)
Normalized Sloichiomctric Ratio (N/NO)
Reagent Injection Rate (Ib/hr)
Outlet NOx (ppmv, dry)
Tons of NOx removed (tons/yr)
Conventional
400
250
0.60
1.4
32
too
152
Advanced
400
250
0.60
1.0
24
100
152
Advanced
400
250
0.70
2.0
48
75
177
Capital Cost Section ($1000)
Storage
Injection System
Compressor
Injection System Installation
Instrumentation
NH3 Stripper and Ash Handling
Total Process Capital ($1000)
Engineering
Contingency
Total Control Cost ($1000)
License Fee
Pre-Produciion
Inventory Capital
Total Capital Requirement ($1000)
Total Capital per Capacity ($1000/tpd)
Total Annualized Capital Requirement ($lOOO/yr)
71
178
94
86
0
0
429
86
154
669
96
24
5
793
1.98
75
71
178
94
86
350
0
778
156
420
1353
96
38
8
1,495
3.74
141
73
178
94
86
350
780
1.561
312
843
2,715
96
70
16
2,898
7.24
274
O&M Cost Section ($1000/yr)
Total Variable O&M ($1000/yr)
Total Fixed O&M ($1000/yr)
42
76
32
92
61
127
Total Cost Section
Total Annualized Cost ($IOOO/yr)
Tipping Fee Impact ($/ton of MSW)
Cost Effectiveness ($/ton of NOx)
193
1.47
1,268
264
2.01
1 ,738
461
3.51
2,599
(a) $/ton can be converted to $/Mg by multiplying by l.l.
(b) All three systems are assumed to have two rows of reagent injectors.
  sdg/nrel
  Kci-3 rpi
3-28

-------
                                                    Table 3-7
                              Model Plant Cost Estimates for Advanced NGI (a), (b)

Fuel Price ($/MMBtu)
100 TPD Mass Burn MWC
400 TPD Mass Burn MWC
750 TPD Mass Burn MWC
Total Capital Cost
($1000/TPD capacity)
2.00
10.2
3.88
2.89
3.50
10.3
3.92
2.94
5.00
10.3
3.97
2.98
Tipping Fee Impact
($/ton MSW)
2.00
5.21
1.05
0.40
3.50
7.25
3.09
2.44
5.00
9.28
5.13
4.48
Cost Effectiveness
($/ton NOx)
2.00
3,214
648
249
3.50
4,471
1,905
1,506
5.00
5,728
3,163
2,764
(a) $/ton can be converted to $/Mg by multiplying by 1.1.
(b) Based on an 80% NOx reduction and assumes the MWCs do have additional heat input capacity.


-------
for smaller MWCs.  Both unit size and gas price have a large effect on tipping fee
impact and cost effectiveness. For all three model combustors, the costs increase with
decreasing unit size and increasing gas price.

3.53         Sensitivity Analysis

             To account  for site-specific differences and other uncertainties in the costs
used to develop Table 3-4 for conventional SNCR, an analysis of the sensitivity of tipping
fee impacts and NOX control cost effectiveness to differences in plant size (100 to
700 tpd), reagent cost (±  30%), annualized capital cost (± 30%), and  NOX reduction (45
to 65%) was  performed.   Figure 3-7 presents the effect of plant size, chemical cost, and
annualized capital cost on tipping fee and cost effectiveness.  Figure 3-9 presents the
sensitivity of  tipping fee impact and  cost effectiveness to NOX reduction.  Since the 60%
reduction level represents the design reference plant reduction, the intersection of the
tipping fee impact and cost effectiveness occur at this point.

             As discussed in Section 2.5.3 for the NGI sensitivity analysis, the  range in
annualized capital cost accounts for  differences in the actual  capital cost of a system,
contingency factors, and the cost of money used for project financing.  The variation in
NOX control  efficiency effectiveness reflects the impact of varying the reagent feed rate
to achieve higher or lower NOX reductions rather than the variability in NOX reductions
that may be achieved by different combustors operating at the same reagent feed rate.
Again, although not quantified, variations in reagent feed rate to achieve  higher or lower
NOX reductions will also  impact NH3 slip rates and NH3 levels in the ash.

             As shown in these figures, the tipping fee  impact and NOX control cost
effectiveness  associated with the reference MWC (the centerline point) are
approximately $1.50 of MSW and $l,270/ton of NOX removed.  Of the parameters
shown in Figures 3-7 and 3-8, the variation of unit size from  100 tpd to 700 tpd has the
greatest effect on tipping  fee impact and cost  effectiveness.   Both the tipping fee impact
and cost effectiveness value are inversely related to unit  size, and thus, as unit  size

sdg/nrel
seci-3.ipt                                  3-30

-------
   8 s.
   a?°_
   w 9
   •a 2.
                CO
                 o
                 o
                 o
                 a
                 a.
                 E
                I-H
                 
-------
K S.
?«t
^ 3
•a a
OJ
Kl
           O
           C
           O
           «
           ro
           Q,
           E
          oo
          C
 NOx Rfduclion (%)
n~


»-
3-

2.5-

O —

C
1.5-
4
) 4










*——___


5

Reference MWC Parameters
Unit Size - 400 tpd
Reagent Cost = $300/ion
Annualized Capital - $75,000/yr
Uncontrolled NOx - 250 ppm






S-~_ 	 	
— — — & — ,

I 1 1
48 50 53











	 - 	 rj-j* • „,..«•• wiM'Jh" ********

111!
55 58 60 63 6
-
-------
decreases, the tipping fee impact and cost effectiveness value increase.  This is especially

noticeable for a small MWCs, where a decrease in unit size from 400 tpd to 100 tpd
results in an almost three-fold increase in tipping fee impact and cost effectiveness values.


             Variations in  reagent cost and annualized capital cost of ± 30% have a
smaller impact on tipping fee and cost effectiveness and follow a similar trend to each
other.  (Reagent cost refers to the cost of the reagent, not the solution.) This trend is

opposite that for varying unit size.  The effect of variations in NOX reduction on tipping
fee impact is similar to varying reagent cost and annualized capital cost. Cost
effectiveness values are lowest at the 60% NOX reduction level.  At lower  NOX

reductions, the increase in cost effectiveness value reflects the reduced  tonnage  of NOX
reduction over which fixed  costs are distributed. At higher NOX reductions, the increase

in cost effectiveness value reflects the higher reagent injection requirements and costs.


3.6          References
1.            U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal Waste Combustors--
             Background Information for Proposed  Standards: Control of NOX
             Emissions, Vol. 4.  EPA-450/3-89-27d  (NTIS PB90-154873).  Research
             Triangle Park, NC.  August 1989.

2.            Hurst, B. and C. White.  Thermal  DeNOx:  A Commercial Selective
             Non-Catalytic Reduction Process for Waste-to-Energy Applications.
             Presented at the ASME National Waste Processing Conference, Denver,
             CO. June 1986.

3.            Wolfenden, L. R., W. F. Flowers, III, B. K. Luftglass, and S.  M. Peters.
             Commercial Application of the NOxOut Process at a Municipal Waste
             Combustor.  Presented at the  84th Annual Meeting of AWMA.
             Vancouver, British Columbia.  June  1991.

4.            AJbanese, V., J. Hofmann, and R.  Pachaly.  NOX Control for Waste
             Combustors.  Presented at the 1993 International MWC Conference,
             Willia-  ^urg, VA.  April 1993.

5.            Jones. ..  G., L. J.  Munzio, E. Stocker, P.  C. Nuesch, S. Negrea, G.
             Lautenschlager, E. Wachter, and G.  Rose. Two-Stage DeNOx Process
             Test Data from Switzerland's  Largest Incineration Plant.  In  Proceedings:
             1989 International  Conference on  Municipal Waste Combustion, Vol. 4,
             EPA-600/R-92-052d (NTIS PB92-174687), March 1992.

sdg/nret
scct-3.rpl                                  3-33

-------
6.           HER Inc. and Westinghouse Resource Energy Systems Division. Technical
            and Cost Analysis for Urea Injection Used for NOX Emission Reduction.
            Submitted to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources in Support of
            the Oakland County, Michigan Resource Recovery Facility Project.
            September 1990.

7.           Sun, W. H., P. G. Carmignani, J. E. Hofmann, D. A. Prodan, D. E. Shore,
            L. J. Muzio, G. C. Quartucy, R. C. O'Sullivan, J. W. Stallings, and R. D.
            Teetz. Control of By-product Emissions Through Additives for Selective
            Non-Catalytic Reduction of NOX with Urea.  Presented at the Power-Gen
            American '93.  Dallas, TX. November 17 to  19, 1993.

8.           Personal communications between K. Nebel (Radian Corporation) and J.
            Hofmann (Nalco Fuel  Tech). April 1994.

9.           McDonald, B.  L., G.R. Fields, and M. D. McDannel. Selective
            Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR) Performance on Three  California
            Waste-to-Energy Facilities. In Proceedings:  1991 International Conference
            on Municipal Waste Combustion, Vol. 1, EPA-600/R-92-209a (NTIS
            ?B93-124170), November 1992.

10.          Tozin, G. and L. Brasowski. Thermal DeNOx Optimization Program at
            the Huntington MWC.  Presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of AWMA.
            1993.

II.          Hunt, T., G. Schott, R. Smith, L. Muzio, D. Jones, and J.  Steinberger.
            Selective Non-Catalytic Operating Experience Using Both Urea and
            Ammonia.  Presented at the 1993 EPRI/EPA NOX  Symposium. Miami,
            FL.  May 1993.

12.          Personal communications between D. White (Radian Corporation) and C.
            Tripp (City of Long Beach, California), F.  Ferraro (Wheelabrator), and L.
            Brazowski (Ogden Projects).  May 1993.

13.          Kleppe, J.  The Reduction of NOX and NH3 Slip in Waste-to-Energy
            Boilers Using Acoustic Pyrometry. Presented at Power-Gen Americas '93.
            Dallas, TX.  November 1993.

14.          RTF Environmental Associates, Inc.  BACT Determination for NOX
            Emissions for the Proposed Mercer and Atlantic Counties Regional
            Resource Recovery Facility. June  1993.

15.          Ogden Martin Systems of Clark, Limited Partnership. Update of the
            BACT Analysis for NOX Submitted in the  PSD Application and the Ohio
            EPA PTI Document of November 12, 1992 for the Mad River Energy
            Recovery Facility. April 1994.
sdg/nrel
sect-3.rpl                                  3-34

-------
4.0          SELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTION

4.1          Process Description

             Selective catalytic reduction is an add-on control technology that
catalytically promotes the reaction between NH3 and NOX to form N2 and water.1 SCR
systems can be designed to utilize aqueous or anhydrous NH3, with the primary
differences being the size of the NH3 vaporization system and the safety requirements.
The primary reactions in an SCR system are:

                       4 NO + 4 NH3 + O2 - 4 N2 + 6 H,O                   (4-1)
                         4 NH3 + 5 O2 - 4 NO + 6 H2O                      (4-2)

             These overall reactions are the same as those occurring in NH3-based
SNCR systems; however, the temperature at which 'hey occur are much lower.
Depending upon the catalyst,  reaction 1 can take place  at temperatures from  190°C
(375°F) to over 535°C  (1000°F); however, most individual catalyst formulations used  by
MWCs work best within a temperature window of 250 to 350°C (480 to 660°F).  The
oxidation of NH3 (reaction 2) begins around 400°C (750°F) and becomes significant
above 480°C (900°F).  Below the minimum recommended temperature for a given
catalyst, the NO/NH3  reaction becomes very slow and significant amounts of NH3 can be
emitted.  Ammonia slip levels from a properly operated system are less than 10 ppm.

             Two options exist for achieving the required catalyst temperature.  These
options are shown schematically in Figure 4-1. The first option, sometimes referred  to as
"cold-side" or "clean-gas" SCR, is the more common approach applied to MWCs.  With
this approach, the catalyst is  installed downstream of the other air pollution control
(APC) devices in order to avoid damage to the catalyst caused by acid gases,  metals, and
particulate matter in the untreated flue gas.  Because of the reduced flue gas
temperature following the final APC device, typically < 150°C (<300°F), it is necessary to
heat the flue gas to an acceptable catalyst operating temperature.  The other  option,

sdg/nrcl
stcM.rpi                                 4-1

-------
8£
I"!
Boiler


Acid
Gas
Scrubber


Baghousc
Or
ESP


         Boiler
                                 NH,
   ESP
vv
                                          Cold-Side SCR System
                                          Hoi-Side SCR System
1
SCR






AGIO
oas
Scrubber






uagnouse
ESP
\/\/









<;
tac


                                   Figure 4-1. Schematic of SCR Configurations

-------
referred to as "hot-side" or "dirty-gas" SCR. is the generally used approach where catalyst
damage from contaminants in untreated flue gas are acceptable.  This approach avoids
the need for flue gas reheat, but is a harsher environment for the catalyst.

             Most MWC SCR catalysts utilize a base metal oxide, such as vanadium
pentoxide and titanium oxide (V2O5/TiO2) or V2O5/TiO2 impregnated with tungsten
oxide (WO3).  The exact composition of the catalyst can be varied to control its
operating characteristics.  For instance, WO3 is used to increase catalyst resistance to
chemical deactivation and to  reduce SO2 oxidation to SO3. Because of the critical role
of long-term catalyst performance on overall SCR system economics, catalyst resistance
to poisoning (chemical deactivation), pluggage (mechanical deactivation),  and erosion
(physical wear) are key considerations in SCR system design.  Specific MWC flue gas
constituents influencing catalyst design include acid gases (SO2 and HC1), alkali metal
oxides (Ca,  Na, and K), several trace metals (Pb and As), and paniculate loading. The
significance of individual flue gas constituents on catalyst performance is discussed in
Section 4.3,

42          Development Status

             To date, SCR has not been applied to any MWCs in  the U.S. However, as
shown in Tables 4-1 and 4-2,  SCR  has been or is scheduled to be installed on a number
of units in Europe and Japan. The initial applications were installed in Japan  in 1987
and in Europe in 1990.2J  Most of these systems were cold-side designs. Although
operating data from these facilities are limited, deactivation of catalysts located
downstream of the particulate matter and acid gas control equipment has been within
acceptable limits. Vendor guarantees on catalyst life for these systems are approximately
24,000 hours (3 years); actual lifetimes are  expected to be longer.

             Several  hot-side systems have been installed in Japan and Europe, mostly
since 1992.  The oldest of these systems, the Hikarigoaka MWC in Tokyo, is the only
hot-side system with significant operating experience.  This system was a retrofit

sdg/nrei
sect-4.rpt                                   4-3

-------
                          Table 4-1
Summary of SCR  Applications on European MWC.s
Name/Location
Cwpaclty
Munii'li S<»illi. Gcniuny
2 x %0 irxl
Spiitclug/VicniM, Ausirin
1 X 960 trxJ
Joscfstn»,sM:/iU»rich, Switzerland
1 » ?00 iptl
FlowcrsicUi/Vicnnii. AuMriu
1 x 720 ipO
ImjolittaUi. Ocniwny
1 x IftOtfxl
HaucnliolA/Zuriih. Swiurrtautl
2 » 300 t(vt
AVR/R.Mlcrituii, HolliiiKt
6 x 620 tfxj
RQTEB/RoiierUiUii. HollumJ
4 i 330 i(xJ
Sfuiumrt. Gcnnauy
2 I 440 <|Kl
Augshwrj!. Ocmiany
JxlBOcfxl
ARN/Niimcecn. Hutl»n4
1 t 240 tpd. 1 * 570 (fx!
Other AI'CIV
Dsi/rr
ESH/3-.-iUijjc WS
SD/USP
ESP'3-siaj;c WS
ESP/WS
I-SP/WS
BSP/2.»Wfc WS/CF
J:SP/2^wt'5 WS'CF
ESPAVS/CSP
ESP/WS
F.SP/SD/BSP/Q'CP
SCR IxKailon &
Temperature
A Her FF
.VXTF xv/ rchciii
A her WS
536° F w/ rclieiit
AKer ESP
5(WF w/ reltcai
AKcr WS
500 "Fv/i rcliem
AKcr WS
SOO'F w/ reheat 1
flciwccn ESP & WS
$00' V wA> relieat
Ader CF
360" Fw/ rchciii
After CF
36U'F w/ rclical
After 2)HJ ESP
580 °F w/ tchcai
After WS
500* F w/ «hcai
Atlci 4«ciu.t>
570' F w/ reheat
Year Startup
New or Retrofit
1990
Retrofit
1990
Retrofit
1991
Retrofit
1992
iktrutii
1992
Retrofit
1993
Retrofit
1993
Retrofit
1993
Retrofit
1993
Retrofit
1993
l«WS
New & Retrofit-1
Target NO,
pptn"
48 ppni
70 pptn
48 ppni
70 ppni
34 ppni
44 ppni
48 pptn
48 ppm
48 ppm
50 ppm
48 ppm
Measured NO,
ppni & % Red."1'
39 ppm/84%
52 ppin/--
35 ppni/8T%
../..
29 ppin/--
29 ppin/91 %
../..
../..
../..
../..
../..
• APCD = »ir pollution control <
 DSI  = Ury *irt*m
 FF * fthrit  |llt«f
 SO * spray  ijryri
 BSP = clcv'Moiis(it
 WS = wvi stryhhcr
 CF = tailniii filter I
 Q - qiKiK.li vt
                             S torrcctcd t» 1% 0,.
                              values rctlcti pcrt'unnaiitc lexi aiul/or
                     appropriate for setting shon-icnn pcrniii limits
                     Ootli the new ami existing units wnl he equipped
typical values, aiiJ ;i.c nut

with SCR.

-------
If
  2.
                       Table 4-2
                                        Summary of SCR  Applications on Japanese MWCs
Name/Location
Capacity
Iwatsuki
2 x 65 tpd
H ikarigaok«i/Toku>
2 x 150 ipd
Kaisushika/Tokyo
3 x 400 ipd
Sagamihara
3 x 150 ipd
Toyohashi
1 x 150 ipd
Kashawafuji
3 x 150 ipd
Nerima/Tokyo
2 x 300 ipd
CHh osc/Tokyo
1 x 600 tnd
Takalsuki/Osaka
2 x 180 tpd
Urawa/Saitama
3x 150 ipd
Tsurumi/ Yokohama
3 x 400 tpd
Nishi/Kobc
3 x 200 Ipd
Rinkai/Tukyo
;. r 200 tpd
Yao/Osaka
2 K 300 tpd
Sankaku/Chiba
3 x 190 ipd
Other APCDs"
SD/FF
ESP/WS
DSJ/ESP
SD/FF
Q/FF
ESP/WS
ESP/WS
SD/FF/WS
ESP/WS
SD/FF/WS
O/FF/WS
SD/FF
SD/FF/WS
SD/FF
SD/FF
SCR Location &
Temperature
After FF
410°F
After ESP
428"F
After ESP
M2°F
After FF
.192-F
After FF
4l(fF
After ESP
554°F
After ESP
51K°F
After FF
4l!fF
After WS
4IO'F
After FF
4lO°F
Afler FF
3W*F
After FF
3'tt'F
After WS
4IO°F
After FF
3'»2°F
After FF
m°?
Year Startup
1987
1987/1989
1989/IWI
1991
1991
1992
1992
1995
1995
1995
1994
1994
1994
1995
19%
Target NOj ppin
& % Rcd>
155 ppm/33%
120 ppm/38%
180 ppm/35%
80 ppm/58%
m ppm/67%
80 ppm/58%
95 ppm/25%
75ppm/5I%
80 ppm/67%
80 ppm/67%
80 ppm/50%
m ppm/75%
1 10 ppm/46%
KO ppm/58%
80 ppm/72%
Measured NO
ppm & % Red6-*
30 ppm/87%
93 ppm/02%
40 ppm/64%
../..
•-/--
--/--
-"/--
--/--
--/-•
--/--
• ../.,
•-/-
«/•-.
--/--
-/-
          APCD = air pollution control device
          DSI = dry sorbent injection
          FF = fabric filler
          ESP = electrostatic prccipitatur
WS = we,t scrubber
SD = spray dryer
Q  = quench chamber
  Emissions corrected to 7% O2.
c Measured values are based on performance tests, not
  continuous emission monitoring data, and are not
  appropriate for setting short-term permit limits.

-------
application designed to achieve a 30% NOX reduction.  Testing conducted following
approximately two years of operation found some catalyst deactivation, but performance
recovered to near original conditions following washing.4  Information on other hot-side
SCR systems should become available with the next few years.

43          Key Design and Process Variables

             Key SCR design considerations include flue gas composition, flue gas
velocity, catalyst volume and surface area, catalyst temperature, NSR, and outlet NH3
slip concentration.5

             Flue gas composition plays a critical role in SCR design and performance.
As discussed in Section 4.1, flue gas composition is the key factor dictating whether a
cold-side or hot-side SCR system is required. Primary concerns are the levels oi
participates, acid gases, and metals in the flue gas. Paniculate matter is critical because
of its erosive effect or the catalyst and its potential for plugging or blinding of the
catalyst surface.  Because of these concerns, the maximum allowable paniculate loading
into the catalyst  is generally 50 mg/dscm (0.02 gr/dscf).6  The reported paniculate
loading exiting the ESP and entering the hot-side SCR at the Hagenholz MWC in
Zurich, Switzerland is 10 mg/dscm (0.004 gr/dscf).7 By comparison, typical flue gas
paniculate loadings exiting most U.S.  MWCs are 2,000 to 6,000 mg/dscm (1 to
3 gr/dscf). As a result, use of a cold-side SCR system or a high-efficiency paniculate
matter control device (e.g., an ESP) upstream of a hot-side SCR system is required.

             Acid gases are of significance because of the potential for catalyst
poisoning from ammonia salts such as ammonium chloride (NH4C1), ammonium sulfate
[(NH4)2SOJ, and ammonium bisulfate (NH4HSO4). Depending on the concentration of
NH3, HC1, and SO3 present in the flue gas, these salts can condense on and deactivate
the catalyst surface at temperatures of 200-350°C (400-660°F) and  lower.8'9 Catalysts can
also be deactivated by various metals, including Pb, As, P, and various alkali metals.  In
general, the greater the basicity of the metal oxide, the greater the deactivation rate.

sdg/nrcl
sect-4.ipt                                    4-6

-------
Addition of WO3 to the catalyst significantly reduces the rate of deactivation from both
acid gases and metals.

             Gas velocity is significant in SCR design because of the erosion potential
from paniculate matter and because of the impact of velocity on gas residence time
within the catalyst.  Gas residence time is typically referred to as "gas hourly space
velocity" [defined as the standard volumetric gas flow rate (ai 20°C [68°F]) divided by the
catalyst volume, vol/hr-r vol  = hr"1] or "area velocity" [the standard volumetric gas flow
rate divided by the  total surface area of the catalyst exposed to  the gas flow, vol/hr  -r
area = m-hr'1 (ft-hr'1)]. In addition to residence time, these two parameters also reflect
the configuration of the reactcr and catalyst.  In general, NOX reduction increases as
space velocity and/or area velocity decrease (i.e., catalyst volume and surface area
increase). However, as catalyst volume and surface area increase, pressure drop also
generally increases  due to limitations in cross-sectional area.  Most systems have a limit
on the allowable pressure drop (usually on the order of 20 to 25 centimeters [8 to
10 inches] water for MWCs).  Based on vendor data, NOX reductions on the order of
80% can be achieved on MWCs with space velocities ranging from approximately 4,000
to 6,000 hr'1, while  keeping NH3 slip below 10 ppm.

             Figure 4-2 illustrates the impact of temperature on NOX reduction.  All
SCR catalysts have  design operating temperatures for producing the maximum NOX
reduction.  Below this temperature range, NH3 slip increases and NOX  removal
decreases.  Above this range, NH3 oxidation to NOX increases.  For cold-side SCR
systems, the catalyst operating temperature is critical because it defines the amount of
flue gas reheat required. At  several Japanese  and European MWCs producing steam for
district heating purposes, steam is used for flue gas reheat. In these applications, the
flue gas reheat temperature is 180 to 210°C (360 to 410°F).  To minimize catalyst
poisoning at these temperatures, target SOX levels are less than 5 ppm.6 At MWCs
generating electricity (as is common in the U.S.), use of steam for flue gas reheat may
not be feasible.  In  these situations, auxiliary fuel is generally fired directly into the  flue
gas to  provide the needed temperature increase.  For this type of application, an
sect-4.rpt
                                        4- /

-------
                    Increased
                    NH,Slip
                          Increased
                      _^.  Reagent
                         Conversion
                           toNOx
      c
      o
      o
     U
      X
     o
     Z
                                           Desired
                                          Operating
                                           Window
                                       Temperature
               Figure 4-2.  Effect of Temperature OD SCR Performance
«Sg/nrtl
sect-4-rpt
4-8

-------
operating temperature of 250 to 290°C (480 to 550°F) is typically used to provide longer
catalyst lifetimes.

             SCR systems are generally designed to maintain near theoretical
stoichiometric performance (1 mole NH3 per mole NOX reduced) up to approximately 70
or 80% reduction. At these reductions, the fractional NOX reduction equals the NSR,
Because of incomplete  mixing and secondary reactions, however, somewhat higher NH3
levels must be injected  to achieve higher NOX reductions. At NOX reductions near 90%
and higher, the higher required NSR ratio results in incomplete use of NH3 and, thus,
increased NHj slip. To reduce NH3 slip at these high NOX reduction rates, additional
catalyst is needed.

4.4          Recent Advances and Further .Research Needs

             Because of catalyst poisoning concerns, most MWC SCR systems have
been installed downstream of the paniculate and acid gas control systems.  Because the
outlet temperatures from these systems are typically 50 to 150°C (90 to 270°F) below the
operating range for the catalysts, flue gas reheat has been required. As  discussed in
Section 4.5, flue gas reheat can have a significant impact on NOX control costs. As a
result, significant research has been conducted by catalyst manufacturers to develop
catalyst formulations that are tolerant to common poisons.  As discussed in Section 4.2,
several  hot-side SCR systems have been installed in Europe and Japan since 1992 which
should provide information needed for assessing catalyst  performance  and lifetimes of
these systems. The economic tradeoffs of hot-stds versus cold-side SCR systems are
discussed in Section 4.5.
sdg/nrcl
tect-4.rpt                                  4-9

-------
45          Cost Analysis

4.5.1         Design Basis

             The design basis assumes a cold-side SCR system, a NOX reduction level of
80%, and an NSR of 0.84.  The 80% reduction represents long-term (annual average)
performance capabilities. Performance at individual plants will vary, and this average
performance level  may not  be achievable at all plants, especially considering retrofit
situations.  The space velocity at the 80% reduction level is 4,400 hr'1, and the expected
NH3 slip is 8 ppm. The catalyst operates at a temperature of 290°C (550°F) and has a
catalyst life of 3 years. Reheat of the flue gas from 260°C (500°F) to 290°C (550°F) is
required.  Based on the 80% NOX redaction and a typical uncontrolled NOX
concentration of 250 ppm at 7% O2, the average stack concentration associated  with this
system is 50 ppm at 7% O2.

452         Cost Results

             Cost estimates for the SCR system were developed for 100, 400, and
750 tpd model combustors.2"3 The system-specific input and output values for the 400 tpd
model  combustor are  shown in Tables 4-3 and 4-4.  Additional inputs (e.g.,  labor rates,
fuel price) are presented in Table A-3 of Appendix A.

             Table 4-5 presents  the estimated capital cost per ton of capacity, tipping
fee impact, and NOX control cost effectiveness for the SCR system applied to the three
model  combustors.  In addition to the costs for a 80% NOX reduction, costs are also
presented for a 70% and a  90% NOX reduction, which represents the expected range of
performance considering the control technology and plant-to-plant performance
variations.  The NSR  associated with these levels of reduction are 0.74 and  0.94,
respectively.  As shown in Table 4-5, capital costs, tipping fee impacts, and NOX control
cost effectiveness values increase with decreasing combustor size. Within a given
combustor ran^e, variations in NOX reduction level have less of an impact on costs. For

tdg/BJCl
iec«-4.rpt                                  4-10

-------
                                      Table 4-3
                          Model Combustor Inputs for SCR
                                 Plant Characteristics
        Unit Size (tpd)                                                 400
        Flowrate (dscfm @ 7% O2)                                   41,271
        Flowrate (wscfm @ 11 % O2)                                  70,462
        Capacity Factor                                                0.9
        Tons/yr of MSW Processed (tons/yr)                          131,400
        Uncontrolled NOx (ppmv, dry)                                   250
        NOx Removal Efficiency (%/100)                                0.80
        Outlet NOx (ppmv, dry)                                          50
        Tons of NOx removed (tons/yr)                                  203
        Space Velocity (1/hr)                                         4,400
        Catalyst Volume (ft3)                                           895
        Catalyst Life (yrs)                                                3
        Normalized Stoichiometric Ratio (N/NO)                         0.84
        Ammonia Injection Rate (Ib/hr)                                   20
        Reheat Fuel (MMBru/hr)                                       5.9
        Capital Recovery Factor (1/yrs)                               0.0944
sdg/nrtl
s«ct-J.rpt                                4-1 I

-------
                                      Table 4-4
         Cost Outputs for SCR Applied to the 400 TPD Model Combustor (a)
Capital Coat Section ($1000)
Flue Gas Handling
-dueling and reactor housing
Ammonia Handling, Storage, and Injection
Instrumentation & Controls
Reheat System
Installation
Total Process Capital ($1000)
Engineering
Contingency
Total Control Cost ($1000)
Pre-ProductioD
Inventory Capital
Initial Catalyst Charge
Total Capital Requirement ($1000)
Total Capital per Capacity ($1000/TPD)
Total Annualized Capital Requirement (SlOOO/yr) (b)

754
53
352
1,209
2,162
4,531
906
1,631
7,069
267
36
958
8,330
20.8
696
Variable O&M Cost Section (SlOOO/yr)
Ammonia Cost
Catalyst Replacement & Disposal
Fuel Cost (Reheat)
Electricity
Total Variable O&M ($1000/yr)
24
365
164
51
604
Fixed O&M Cost Section <$IOOO/yr)
Operating Labor
Maintenance Material
Maintenance Labor
Administrative & Support Labor
Total Fixed O&M (SlOOO/yr)
44
109
72
35
260
Total Cost Section
Total Annualized Cost (SlOOO/yr)
Tipping Fee Impact (S/ton MSW)
Cost Effectiveness (S/ton NOx)
1,560
1 1.9
7,689
sdg/nrel
sect-4.rpt
(a) S/ton can be converted to S/Mg by multiplying by 1.1.
(b) Initial catalyst charge not included in total annualized capital requirement.

                           4-12

-------
« a
It
                                                    Table 4-5
                                      Model Plant Cost Estimates for SCR (a), (b)

NOx Reduction
100 TPD Mass Burn MWC
400 TPD Mass Burn MWC
750 TPD Mass Burn MWC
Total Capital Cost
($1000/TPD capacity)
70
49.7
20.6
14.9
80
49.9
20.8
15.1
90
50.4
21.3
15.6
lipping Fee Impact
($/ton MSW)
70
23.8
11.7
9.35
80
24.0
11.9
9.56
90
24.3"
12.3
9.94
Cost Effectiveness
($/ton NOx)
70
17,588
8,635
6,924
80
15,525
7,689
6,191
90
14,021
7.055
5,723
   (a) $/ton can be converted to $/Mg by multiplying by 1.1.
t  (b) Based on an 80% NOx reduction.

-------
example, an increase in ammonia injection rate and catalyst volume at the higher NOX
reduction levels results in a small increase in capital cost and tipping fee impact. For
cost effectiveness, the values decrease with increasing NOX reduction, since the increase
in cost of the SCR system associated  with the higher NOX reduction is smaller than the
additional amount of NOX removed at the higher NOX reduction levels.

             A comparison of the costs for the cold-side SCR system to those for a hot-
side SCR system are presented in Table 4-6. As discussed earlier, hot-side systems
typically follow a PM control device upstream of acid gas controls.  Such a system could
be installed on an existing ESP-equipped  MWC that is considering  acid gas and NOX
control  retrofits, if the ESP-controlled PM level is low enough [50 mg/dscm
(0.02 gr/dscf)) and the flue gas temperature is greater than 250°C (480°F).

             Table 4-6 presents selected  plant characteristics and costs to demonstrate
potential differences between cold-side and hot-side systems. To address uncertainties
regarding the catalyst performance of the  hot-side systems, two systems are presented;
one with a catalyst life of 3 years, and one with a catalyst life of 2 years.

             As shown in Table 4-6,  the process capital for the  hot-side systems is 30%
less than for the cold-side system because no reheat system is required.  However,
because of the potential  for increased catalyst degradation, the  hot-side system will
require  either more  catalyst volume or installation of a high efficiency  paniculate matter
control  device prior  to the SCR inlet.  For the example  presented, increased catalyst
volume  is utilized, and the  initial catalyst  charge for the hot-side  system is assumed to be
twice that for the cold-side system.  As a result, the total capital requirements for the
hot-side systems are only 15% less than for the cold-side system.  The  reason for the
difference between the total capital requirements for  the two hot-side systems,
specifically the preproduction costs, is the cost for catalyst replacement and disposal
which factors into the preproduction cost.
sdg/nrel
Mct-».rpt                                  4-14

-------
                                Table 4-6
                Comparison of Cold- and Hot-side SCR Systems (a)
Plant Characteristics
Unit Size (tpd)
Uncontrolled NOsc (ppmv, dry)
NOx Removal Efficiency (%/IOO)
Space Velocity ( I /hr)
Catalyst Volume (ft3)
Catalyst Life (yrs)
Reheat Fuel (MMBtu/hr)
Cold
400
250
0.80
4,400
895
3
5.9
Hot
400
250
0.80
2,200
1,791
3
0
Hot
400
250
0.80
2,200
1,791
2
0
Capita! Cost Section ($1000)
Total Process Capital ($1000)
Total Control Cost ($1000)
Prc-Production
Inventory Capital
Initial Catalyst Charge
Total Capital Requirement ($1000)
Total Capita! per Capacity ($100Q/TPD)
Tolal Annualized Capital Requirement (SlOOO/yr)
4,5.11
7,069
267
36
958
8,330
20.8
696
3,153
4,973
239
26
1,916
7,154
17.9
494
3,153
4,973
269
26
1,916
7,184
18.0
497
O&M Cost Section ($1000/yr)
Catalyst Replacement & Disposal
Fuel Cost (Reheat)
Others (Ammonia, Electricity)
Total Variable O&M (SlOOO/yr)
Total Fixed O&M ($1000/yr)
365
164
51
604
260
730
0
77
802
198
1,060
0
77
1,132
198
Total Cost Section
Total Annualized Cost ($IOOO/yr)
Tipping Fee Impact ($/ton MSW)
Cost Effectiveness ($/ton NOx)
1460
11.9
7,689
1,495
11.4
7,370
1,827
13.9
9,010
  (a) $/ton can be converted to $/Mg by multiplying by I.I.
sdg/nrel
seci-4.rpt
4-15

-------
             The catalyst replacement and disposal cost takes into account the amount
of catalyst that must be disposed (proportional to the catalyst volume) and the life of the
catalyst.  Therefore, the cost for the hot-side systems is greater than for the cold-side
system, especially for the hot-side system with the 2-year catalyst life.  As a result of the
catalyst replacement and disposal cost, the variable O&M costs  for these systems may be
higher than cold-side systems, even though the hot-side systems  do not require reheat
(no fuel cost incurred). Fixed O&M costs for the hot-side systems are slightly lower than
for the cold-side  system because of the lower process capital associated with the hot-side
systems.

             Overall, the total annualized costs, tipping fee impact, and cost
effectiveness for the cold-side system fall between the costs for the hot-side systems.  As
shown, the shorter catalyst life results in higher costs.  More information on the
long-term effects of flue gas properties on catalyst degradation and poisoning is needed
to fully evaluate the economics of a hot-side system.

4.53         Sensitivity Analysis

             To account for site-specific differences and other uncertainties in the costs
used to develop Table 4-5, an analysis of the sensitivity of tipping fee impacts and NOX
control cost effectiveness to differences in plant size (100 to 700 tpd), catalyst
replacement cost (±50%), annualized capital cost (±30%), and NOX reduction (70 to
90%) was performed. Figure 4-3 presents the effect of plant size, catalyst replacement
cost, and annualized capital cost on tipping fee and cost effectiveness.  Figure 4-4
presents the sensitivity of tipping fee and cost effectiveness  to NOX reduction.

             The range in annualized capital cost accounts for  differences in the actual
capital cost of an SCR system, contingency factors,  and the  cost of money used for
project financing. The variation in NOX control cost effectiveness reflects the impact of
varying the  amount of ammonia injection to achieve higher or lower NOX reductions.
sdg/nrel
sect-4.rpt

-------
     5 E
     h
    •a a
           Uoil Siie <«pd)


     •C.R. Co»l ($IOOO/yr)

Anouilizr-d Capital (JlOOO/yr)
                                                                              Reference MWC Parameters
                                                                              uncontrolled NOx • 250 ppm

                                                                              NOx Reduction - 83%
 * = C«t«lyil Repltcemrnt
                           -X- Uiiil S'atf
Cal>l;«t
l Cod
A«*«*lizni Capital
                             Figure 4-3. Effect of Unit Size, Catalyst Replacement Cost, and

                      Annualized Capital on Tipping Fee Impact and Cost Effectiveness for SCR

-------
If
•3 5.
*..
oo
26-
                  24-
                  22-
                  10-
                   8-
     NOx Reduction (%)  70
                                                                   Reference MWC Parameters
                                                 Unit Size - 400 tpd
                                                 Catalyst Replacement Cost = $365,000
                                                 Annualized Capital » $696,000/yr
                                            16.8


                                           hi 5.5
                 7}
                              —p..

                              77
1—

 80
                                                                                       -6.5
                                                                                        5.2
87
                                                                                                        90
                                          *^K* Tipptug Fet Impact  E3 Cost Effrctivrurss
                           Figure 4-4. Effect of NOx Reduction on Tippng Fee Impact and
                                               Cost Effectiveness for SCR

-------
             As shown in these figures, the tipping fee impact and NOX control cost
effectiveness associated with the reference MWC (the centerline point) are
approximately Sl2/ton of MSW and S7,690/ton of NOX removed. Of the parameters
shown in Figures 4-3 and 4-4, the variation in unit size has the greatest impact on  tipping
fee and  cost effectiveness. The costs increase with decreasing unit size, with the cost for
units between 100 to 300 tpd showing the steepest increase.  From the reference unit size
of 400 tpd to the 100 tpd unit, tipping fee impact and the cost effectiveness  value roughly
double.  The  costs decrease by less than 20% when going from the 400 tpd  unit to the
700 tpd  unit.

             Variations in catalyst replacement  cost of ±50% and annualized capital
costs by ±30% have practically the same effect on tipping fee impact and cost
effectiveness.  Increases  in catalyst  replacement cost and annualized capital  cost increase
the tipping fee impact and the cost effectiveness value. Variations in NOX reduction
have a similar but opposite impact  on cost effectiveness, with increases in NOX reduction
resulting in a decrease in the cost effectiveness value. The effect of NOX reduction on
tipping fee impact is smaller, with increases in NOX reduction resulting in a slight
increase in the tipping fee impact.

4.6          References
1.            U. S.  Environmental Protection  Agency.  Municipal Waste  Combustors--
             Background Information for Proposed Standards: Control of NOX Emissions,
             Vol.  4, EPA-450/3-89-27d (NTIS  PB90-154873). Research Triangle
             Park.  NC.   August 1S89.
2.            FAX from M. Tomiku, Mitsubishi International Corporation, to D. White,
             Radian Corporation. SCR Study for Weste to Energy Plant.  October 5, 1993
             and February 11, 1994.
3.            FAX from V. Patel, Joy Environmental Technologies, to  D. White, Radian
             Corporation.  SCR for MSW Plants. October 6, 1993.
4.            California Environmental Protection Agency.   Aii  Resources Board.  Air
             Pollution Control at Resources Recovery Facilities-1991 Update.
sdg/nrcl
seci-4 rpi                                  4-19

-------
5.            Becker, E. R. Selective Catalytic Reduction of NOx-Catalysis and Reactor
             Design.   Environmental Catalyst  Consultants Short Course.   Presented
             May 8-10,  1990.  Boston, MA.

6.            FAX from M. Tomiku,  Mitsubishi International Corporation, to D. White,
             Radian Corporation.  MWC SCR Data.  December 13, 1993.

7.            FAX from H. Meier, Abfuhrwesen Zurich, to D. White, Radian Corporation.
             Municipal waste combustor plants Hagenholz and Josefstrasse. February 23,
             1994.

8.            Technical and Economic Feasibility of Ammonia-Based Postcombustion NOX
             Control. Electric Power Research Institute. EPRI CS-2713.

9.            Chen, J., R.T. Yang, and J.E. Cichanowicz, Poisoning of SCR Catalysts.  In
             Proceedings: 1991 Joint Symposium on Stationary Combustion NOX Control,
             Vol. 2, EPA-600/R-92-093b (NTIS PB93-212850), July 1992.
sdg/nrcl
scct-4.rpt                                 4-2U

-------
                                 APPENDIX A
                       Description of Costing Framework
A.1          Inputs
             The NOX control costs for NGI, SNCR, and SCR are dependent on a
number of parameters including plant unit size (tpd and flue gas  flowrates), fuel or
chemical costs, and economic assumptions. Table A-l presents the inputs (e.g., O2 level,
higher heating value) needed for calculating the flue gas flowrates of the model plants.
The tlowrates were calculated using EPA  Method 19. For the purpose of sizing and
costing equipment, the flowrates were multiplied by a factor of 1.15  to account for
variability of short-term flowrates relative to design flowrates. Tables  A-2, A-3, and A-4,
present the additional inputs (e.g., costs of chemicals) needed to  calculate the outputs for
NGI, SNCR,  and SCR,  respectively.

A.2          Methodology

             The basic methodology used to determined NOX control cost and cost
effectiveness  is described in this section.

AJ2.1         Capital Costs

AJ2.1.1       Total Process Capital

             Total process capital  (TPC) includes equipment and installation costs and
is technology dependent.  The equipment required and associated installation costs are
discussed in the  individual sections of the report for each technology.
$dg/2S6,nrel
appcnd~a

-------
                                     Table A-1
                       Generic Inputs For Flowrate Calculations
Parameter
Corrected O2
Actual O2
Higher Heating Value
H20, exhaust
Units
(%/100)
(%/100)
(Btu/lb)
(%/100)
Input
0.07
0.11
4,500
0.18
sdg/Z56.nrel
append-a
A-2

-------
                                 Table A-2
                          Generic Inputs For NGI
Parameter
Density of Air
Specific Heat of Air
Energy per ton Constant
Compressor Demand
Fuel Cost (NG)
Electrical Cost
City Water
Labor Rate
Operating Labor
Discount Rate
Book Life
Maintenance
Admin & Support
Process Contingency
Project Contingency
Units
(Ib/scf)
(Btu/lb F)
(kWh/ton MSW)
(kW/wscfm)
($/MMBtu)
($/kWhr)
($/1000gal)
(S/hr)
(hr/shift)
(%/100)
(yrs)
(%/100)
(%/100)
(%/100)
(%/IOO)
Input
0.075
0.28
550
0.091
3.5
0.046
0.6
20
1.0
0.070
20
0.02
0.3
0.2
0.2
s
-------
                                    Table A-3
                             Generic Inputs For SNCR
Parameter
Molecular Weight
Weight Ratio
Reagent N content
Dilution Ratio
Density of Air
Specific Heat of Air
Energy per ton Constant
Compressor Demand
Reagent Cost
Electrical Cost
City Water
Labor Rate
Operating Labor
Discount Rate
Book Life
Maintenance
Admin & Support
Process Contingency
Project Contingency
Heat of Reaction
Change in Enthalpy for H2O
Units
(Ib/lb mole)
(Ib solution/lb reagent)
(mol reagent/ mol N)
(Ib reagent/!b inj sol)
(Ib/scf)
(Btu/lb F)
(kWh/ton MSW)
(kW/wscfm)
($/ton)
($/kWhr)
($/ 1000 gal)
($/hr)
(hr/shift)
(%/100)
(yrs)
(%/100)
(%/100)
(%/100)
(%/100)
(Btu/lb)
(Btu/lb)
Input
17
3.4
1
0.1
0.075
0.28
550
0.091
300
0.046
0.6
20
2.0
0.070
20
0.04
0.3
0.1
0.2
-7671
1114.6
sdg/2S6.nrcl
appcnd-a
A-4

-------
     Table A-4
Generic Inputs For SCR
Parameter
Molecular Weight
Weight Ratio
Reagent N content
Density cf Air
Specific Heat of Air
Energy p«r ton Constant
Compressor Demand
Chemical Cost (reagent)
Catalyst Cost
Catalyst Startup cost
Fuel Cost
Waste Disposal
Electrical Cost
City Water
Labor Rate
Operating Labor
Discount Rate
Book Life
Maintenance
Admin & Support
Process Contingency
Project Contingency
SCR Temperature
Stack Temperature
Heat Ex. Exit Temperature
Catalyst Pressure Drop
Unite
(Ib/lbmole)
(Ib solution/lb reagent)
(mol reagent/ mol N)
(Ib/scf)
(Btu/lb F)
(kWo/ton MSW)
(kW/wscfm)
(S/ton)
($/ft3)
(J)
(S/MMBTU)
(J/ton)
($/kWhr)
(S/lOOOgal)
($/hr)
(br/shift)
(%/100)
(y«)
(%/lOO)
(%/100)
(%/100)
(%/100)
(F)
(F)
(F)
(in H20)
Input
17
3.4
1
0.075
0.28
550
0.091
300
1,070
60,000
3.5
8.9
0.046
0.6
20
2.0
0.070
20
0.04
0.3
0.1
0.2
550
280
496
8
     A-5

-------
A3.A2       Total Control Cost

             Total control cost (TCC) includes TPC plus costs for engineering and
contingency.  Assumptions used for engineering and contingency are discussed below.

             Engineering.  Engineering is assumed to be 20% of TPC and includes
engineering home office, overhead, and general facilities.

             Contingency.  Contingency is comprised of process contingency and project
contingency.  Process contingency is calculated as a percentage of TPC. and project
contingency is calculated as a percentage  of TPC plus engineering and process
contingency.  The percentage assumptions for each NOX control technology are
presented in Tables A-l, A-2, and A-3.

A.2.13       Total Capital Requirement

             Total capital requirement (TCR) includes TCC,  preproduction costs,
inventory capital, and other technology specific costs such as license fee  for SNCR or
initial catalyst charge for SCR.  Information on preproduction costs and inventory capital
are provided below.

             Preproduction Costs.  Preproduction costs cover operator training,
equipment checkout, extra maintenance, and inefficient use of fuel and materials during
start-up. To estimate this, preproduction costs are calculated to be one  month fixed
O&M costs, one montli variable O&M costs at full capacity, excluding fuel, 25% of
full-capacity fuel cost for one month (SCR and NGI only), and two percent of TCC.

             Inventory Capital.  Inventory capital is estimated to be 0.5% of TCC and
the cost of  two weeks'  inventory of chemicals (SNCR, SCR) or fuel (NGI).
sdg/256.nrel
append-a                                  A-O

-------
A.2.1.4       Total Capital Per Capacity

             To calculate capital costs in terms of capacity, the TCC is divided by the
unit size of the plant.

A2.13       Total Annualized Capital Requirement

             Capital costs are annualized by multiplying TCR by a capital recovery
factor.  Equations to calculate the CRF and the annualized costs are shown below.

                       CRF(l/yr) = i (1  * i)n / ((1 * i)n  -1]
where:
                         i  = discount rate (decimal fraction)
                        n  = book life of the loan
A.22        Operating and Maintenance Costs

             Operating and maintenance cos's include variable and fixed O&M costs.

A2.2.1       Variable Operating and Maintenance Costs

             Variable O&M costs include those O&M costs that are directly
proportional to the amount of time the facility is operating.  Examples of variable O&M
costs are chemical, fuel, and electricity costs for a specific control technology.

A.2.2.2       Fixed Operating and Maintenance Costs

             Fixed O&M costs include operating labor, maintenance materials,
maintenance labor, and administrative and support labor.
sdg/256,nrel
appcnd-a                                  A-7

-------
             Costs for operating labor depend on how many hours of labor per shift are
required for each technology and the labor rate.  Tables A-l, A-2, and A-3 nclude the
inputs for these for each technology.

             Total maintenance costs (materials and labor) are calculated  based on a
percentage of TPC.  The assumed percentage for each technology are included in
Tables A-l, A-2, and A-3. These costs are broken into the specific components
(materials and labor) based on a 60/40 breakout (60% attributable to materials and 40%
attributable to labor).

             Overhead charges are assumed to be the cost for administrative and
support labor. This cost is taken as 30% of the O&M labor.  General and administrative
expenses are not included, because they  will  be site specific, dependent on  management
philosophy.
idg/256.nrel
appcnd-a                                  /\-o

-------