EPA/600/D-85/253
October 1985
TECHNOLOGIES FOR CONTROLLING
POLLUTANTS FROM COAL COMBUSTION
Wade H. Ponder
Assistant to the Laboratory Director
Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
AIR AND ENERGY ENGINEERING RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC 27711

-------
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.

-------
-1-
Summary
Sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and particles are the predominant pol-
lutants emitted from the combustion of coal. One goal of current R&D activi-
ties is to reduce the costs for controlling these pollutants.
Several technologies have the capability to reduce emissions of one or
more of these pollutants. Some of the technologies are currently available.
Others will be available over the next 5-10 years, depending on market factors.
One problem associated with most of the currently available technologies is
high cost. For example, the capital cost of scrubbers can range as high as
30% of the cost of the power plant.
Some of the "advanced technologies" show great promise for more efficient
removal of pollutants at lower costs. We are particularly encouraged with
the cost saving potential of LIMB, E-SOX, Staged ESP's, and Electrostatic
Enhancement of Fabric Filtration which are currently under development by
EPA. For example, the application of LIMB (approximately 60% SO2 removal) as
a partial substitute for flue gas desulfurization (approximately 90% SO2
removal) may result in cost savings as great as $670 per ton SO2 removed.
This estimate is based on a 300 MW utility boiler firing coal which contains
approximately 2% sulfur.
Our research findings are encouraging. There is good potential
for major breakthroughs that will allow acceptable control of coal-related
pollutants at reasonable costs.

-------
Introduction
The Environmental Protection Agency has several programs mandated by
Congress to achieve environmental goals related to the combustion of coal.
Ihree of these programs are: (1) the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) program which attempts to set goals for ambient air quality which
ensure protection of human health and welfare; (2) the New Source Performance
Standards (NSPS) program which attempts to reduce future air quality problems
by requiring i nstal lation of best emi ssion controls on new or substantially
modified pollution sources; and (3) the National Acid Precipitation Assessment
Program (NAPAP) which attempts to identify causes and effects of acid precipi-
tation in order to provide a scientific basis for decision making by regulators
and legislators.
The NAAQS and NSPS programs have been in place for some time, and their
effects have already been factored into the coal use equation. There are no
current or near-term actions contemplated under these programs which would
alter coal markets. However, should the Congress pass acid rain legislation,
the result could be a significant impact upon future use of coal.
At present, the NAPAP program is developing the data base that will
improve the ability to make decisions concerning the need for acid rain
legislation. Current research efforts are focused on the identification and
assessment of acid rain sources and effects and the development of capabi1ities
for evaluating control strategies to mitigate these effects.
If the research on sources and effects of pollutants brings us to the
position of being able to make reasonable, defensible decisions concerning
control strategies, a number of control technologies will be considered in
the strategies.
Some control technologies are currently commercial, and other "advanced
technologies" which may help mitigate the adverse effects of pollutant

-------
-3-
emissions on the environment are being evaluated. At the EPA Office of
Research and Development, one of the efforts within NAPAP is to assemble
performance and cost data for all applicable control technologies. The
technology program is identifying and developing new technologies which may
reduce emissions in a more cost-effective manner and wi11 provide this infor-
mation to Congress and regulatory agencies in a timely manner to ensure that
the chosen strategies and legislation follow the most beneficial route (taking
costs into consideration).
We at EPA are hopeful that the emission reduction technologies currently
being evaluated will meet the dual challenge of reducing emissions and mini-
mizing the potential disruption in coal markets. This paper wi11 focus on
the status, effectiveness, and costs of the currently available and advanced
technologies for controlling sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particles, and
combinations of these pollutants.
Technologies for Sulfur Dioxide Control
Background
Currently, about 25 million tons of SO2 are emitted annually into the
atmosphere by various uti1ity and industrial sources in the United States.
SO2 has been associated with such environmental concerns as adverse health
effects, visibility deterioration, material corrosion, and acid rain.
Generally, there are three types of technologies which can reduce the emis-
sions of SO2:
1.	Pre-combustion technologies which remove the sulfur from the
coal before it is burned.
2.	Combustion technologies which capture or remove the SO? during
the combustion process,
3.	Post-combustion technologies which remove the SO? from the combus-
tion gases produced when coal is burned.

-------
-4-
Table 1 summarizes these control technologies for SO2 control.
Commercial Technologies
Flue Gas Desulfurization - The post-combustion technology known as flue
gas desulfurization (FGD) is the only technology which has been used exten-
sively by power plants for SO2 control. To date, more than 120 FGD instal-
lations control SO2 emissions from about 53,000 MW of power plant capacity.
By the year 2000, there will be approximately 215 FGD units controlling over
106,000 MW of power plant capacity.
Some FGD processes produce a waste byproduct and some produce a saleable
byproduct such as sulfur or sulfuric acid. Almost all current and planned FGD
installations are the waste-producing type because they are generally less
expensive. The most common FGD processes that produce a waste product are
those which use a lime or limestone slurry to remove S0£. The lime or lime-
stone reagent reacts with the SO2 and produces a waste byproduct.
Currently available FGD technology is expensive. Capital costs are
typically $200 to $300 per kW of power plant capacity. These costs amount to
as much as 20 to 30% of the cost of a new power plant without an FGD system.
Thus, for a new, 500 MW power plant priced at $1000/kW ($500 million), the
capital costs for FGD would be $200 to $300/kW ($100 to $150 million). FGD
costs can be expected to range from about $600 per ton of SO2 removed to more
than $1000 per tonJ1)
(1) Actual costs will vary depending on site-specific factors. The costs
have been determined to be $670/ton of SO2 for the following case:
1.	FGD unit installed at a new, 500 MW power plant.
2.	The capacity factor is 62.8%; i.e., the plant operates 5500 hr/yr.
3.	Coal is fired at a rate of 812 lb/MW-hr.
4.	The coal contains 3.36% sulfur.
5.	Levelized annual revenue requirement is $41 million (in 1984 dollars).
Source: Economics of Nitrogen Oxides, Sulfur Oxides, and Ash Control Systems
for Coal-Fired Utility Power Plants, EPA-600/7-85-006, February 1985.

-------
-5-
Since the early 1970's, EPA's research program has played an important
role in upgrading the performance and reliability of the lime and limestone
FGD technology. Recently, our Laboratory has demonstrated that the performance
and reliability of these FGD processes can be significantly improved by the
addition of organic acids to the lime or limestone slurry. This process has
produced beneficial results in several full-scale utility applications. We
continue to seek lower cost FGD processes with particular emphasis on a spray
dryer FGD system which offers the potential for significantly lower capital
costs than corresponding wet systems.
Physical Coal Cleaning - Physical coal cleaning is generally viewed as
a supplement to FGD for SOg control. Coal may be "cleaned" by crushing and
washing to remove mineral impurities (i.e., ash), including inorganic compounds
containing sulfur. The cleaning processes can reduce the SO2 emissions from
the combustion of coal by only 10 to 50%, depending on the composition and
characteristics of the coal. Currently, about 30% of coal used in power
plants is cleaned. While the cost of coal is increased by 15 to 30% by the
cleaning process, part of these costs may be offset by transportation cost
savings and reductions in boiler operating costs. Physical coal cleaning
costs are likely to be in the range of $300 to $500 per ton of S02 removed.^
(1) Actual costs will vary depending on site-specific factors. The costs have
been determined to be $450 per ton of SO2 removed for the following case:
1.	Coal cost is $30/ton.
2.	Coal cost is increased 25% by cleaning.
3.	The cleaning process results in a 25% decrease in SO2 emissions.

-------
-6-
Advanced (Not Commercial) Technologies
Chemical Coal Cleaning - The pre-combustion technology known as chemical
ooal cleaning has the potential for removal of both inorganic and organically
bound sulfur from coal before it is burned, thereby greatly reducing the
emissions of SO2 during combustion. The cost per ton of SO2 removed is
higher for chemical coal cleaning than for existing commercial technologies.
Chemical coal cleaning costs are likely to be in the range of $800 to $1500
per ton of SO2 removed. ^
Even though the technology is expensive, it may be important in allowing
conversion of certain existing oil and gas facilities to coal since the large
cost differential between coal and oi1 or gas may be sufficient to justify
the relatively high costs of chemical coal cleaning. The research programs
that we have conducted in this area and the ongoing research at DOE are
important first steps in bringing the technology to commercialization.
However, this can be accomplished only with significant involvement of industry,
and market factors will be the ultimate determinant of the extent of industrial
participation.
0) Actual costs will vary depending on site-specific factors. The cost range
specified was calculated from data obtained from the following sources:
1.	Evaluation of Physical/Chemical Coal Cleaning and Flue Gas Desulfuri-
zation, EPA-600/7-79-250, November 1979.
2.	Economic Evaluation of Limestone and Lime Flue Gas Desulfurization
Processes, EPA-600/7-83-029, May 1983.

-------
-7-
Technologies for Nitrogen Oxide Control
Background
EPA recently estimated that about 20 million tons of nitrogen oxides
ire emitted annually from stationary and mobile sources in the United States.
The combustion of coal by power plants accounted for nearly 30% of these
emissions. The family of nitrogen oxide compounds, including NO, NO2, and
other compounds, is usually referred to generically as MN0X." NO2 has been
designated by EPA as a criteria pollutant because it produces adverse human
health effects. It also contributes to the formation of photochemical oxidants
and is an acid rain precursor. N0X control technologies can be divided into
two categories: (1) combustion technologies and (2) post-combustion technologies.
Table 2 summarizes important N0X control technologies.
Commercial Technologies
Low Excess Air Firing - For existing coal-fired boilers, one N0X control
technique is the reduction of excess air supplied to the burner. This tech-
nique, referred to as low excess air firing, can reduce N0X emissions by as
much as 20% and has the added benefit of increased boiler efficiency. Capital
costs average only about $2/kW. All boilers, however, do not have sufficient
flexibility to achieve this level of emission reduction.
Staged Combustion (Overfire Air) - A variation of the low excess air
approach is to operate the lower burners (utility boilers have multiple rows
of burners located on the boiler's vertical walls) at the lowest excess air
level possible and provide additional air in the upper regions of the boiler.
EPA field tests of 22 pulverized-coal-fired boilers using low excess air
combined with staged combustion showed that N0X emission reductions of about
10-40% can be achieved at a cost of about $300 per ton of N0X removed.

-------
-8-
Reduced load - Utilities sometimes choose to reduce emissions by
reducing load. Obviously, this approach is equally applicable to existing or
new units.
First Generation Burner Technology - The major thrust of EPA's N0X re-
duction program is to develop the technology for new low-NOx burners which
may be either retrofitted to existing boilers or incorporated into new designs.
These burners reduce N0X by delaying the mixing of fuel and air, thereby
limiting the availability of free oxygen in the initial burning process.
First generation burner technology has already been applied commercially and
was the basis for reducing the New Source Performance Standard (NSPS) for N0X
in 1979 for coal-fired utility boilers. Costs have been estimated at about
$185 per ton of N0X removed.
Thermal De-NOx (Ammonia Injection) - This process involves the injection
of ammonia into the hot flue gas to reduce NO to N£ and O2, thereby decreasing
N0X emissions. The process is commercially offered by the Exxon Research and
Engineering Company. The process is expensive; recent estimates are in the
range of $600 per ton of N0X removed.
Advanced (Not Commercial) Technologies
Second Generation Burner Technology - While conventional combustion modi-
fications have been used to achieve emissions below NSPS levels, we are
exploring advanced combustion techniques to reduce N0X even further. The
most promising technique is second generation low-N0x burners. Two such
concepts developed under EPA sponsorship are the distributed mixing burner
(for wall-fired boilers) and the rich fireball (for tangentially fired boilers).
In experimental tests, these techniques have shown the potential to reduce
N0X emissions by more than 50% from current NSPS levels for pulverized-
coal-fired units. The distributed mixing burner has been installed on an

-------
-9-
industrial-sized boiler (22 MW) and has achieved up to 70% N0X reductions
under optimal conditions. The rich fireball, installed on a 400 MW utility
boiler, has achieved up to 50% reduction in N0X emissions in long-term opera-
tion. For new boilers, N0X levels of less than 50% of current NSPS levels
should be achievable. Although these control systems represent state-of-the-art
technologies, no ful1 scale field data exist because market factors and other
incentives have not yet generated industrial interest in commercialization of
the systems. The costs associated with this technology should be about the
same as for first generation low-N0x burners (about $185/ton N0X).
Reburning Technology - Studies are underway to reduce N0X emissions by
staged introduction of fuels in the firebox. This combustion technology,
referred to as reburning, involves the introduction of coal or heavy oil as
the first stage fuel and light oil or gas as the second stage fuel. Bench
scale tests have shown that the "reburning" of first stage combustion gases
during the second stage combustion under chemically reducing conditions
results in 50 to 80% N0X reductions. Pi 1 ot scale studies (10 million Btu/hr
or 3 MW) to veri fy laboratory findi ngs are underway. Although the Japanese
have evaluated this technology on commercial size units, no commercial demon-
strations have been conducted in the United States. Cost estimates are
approximately $300 per ton of N0X removed.
Flue Gas Denitrification - N0X emi ssions from power plants may be reduced
by 80 to 90% through the application of selective catalytic reduction (SCR) of
N0X in the flue gas with ammonia as the reactant. For the most part, this
SCR technology has been developed and commercially applied in Japan. EPA has
sponsored pi 1ot scale tests of an SCR process known as the Hitachi Zosen

-------
-10-
process. These tests show that the process can remove up to 90% of the N0X
in flue gases which contain the full loading of particles from a coal-fired
boiler. Cost estimates for utilizing SCR are very high—approximately $4000
per ton of N0X removed.
Technologies for Particle Control
Background
Coal-fired power plants are a major source of particle emissions to the
atmosphere, and the effect of fine particles on public health and welfare
continues to be a major national environmental concern. EPA promulgated both
primary (to protect health) and secondary (to protect welfare) National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Total Suspended Particulate (TSP) in 1971.
EPA also set New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for a number of important
sources of particulate matter, including coal-fired power plants.
Although these standards and compliance efforts have produced major reduc-
tions in the national TSP over the past 10 years, many regions are still
unable to meet primary standards. In these regions industries will not only
have to retrofit their existing equipment with particle control devices, but
they will also have to institute controls on sources of fugitive particles
if primary standards are to be met.
Additionally, there is increasing concern about the health effects of
respirable particles. Atmospheric particles appear to be a factor in a worsen-
ing visibility problem in many parts of the country. These and other concerns
continue to focus attention on fine particle control technologies. Table 3
summarizes information on important particle control technologies. Essentially
all effective approaches involve particle removal subsequent to combustion.

-------
-11-
Commercial Technologies
Electrostatic Precipitators - A portion of the incombustible portion of
the coal is emitted from the boiler as particles (sometimes called flyash).
Electrostatic precipitators (ESP's) are the most commonly used device for
controlling the emission of these particles. An ESP is basically a large box
with many rows of metal collection plates positioned parallel to the direction
of flue gas flow through the box. High voltage is applied to wires located
between these collection plates. The voltage produces an electric discharge
(corona) which electrically charges the particles. The charged particles
then move to the collection plates as a result of the electric field that
exists between the wires and the plates. Conventional ESP's are capable of
efficient particle control (greater than 99%).
ESP costs are likely to be in the range of $70 to more than $300 per ton
of flyash removed. (*)
Fabric Filters - Fabric filters (sometimes called baghouses) are the
major alternative to ESP's for particle control. These filters work like
very large vacuum cleaners. Combustion gases laden with particles are forced
through the filters, and the particles are entrapped in the fine mesh structure
(!) Actual costs will vary depending on site-specific factors. The costs
have been determined to be $80/ton of flyash removed for the following case:
1.	ESP is installed on a new, 500 MW power plant.
2.	ESP is "cold side"; i.e., it is downstream of the flue gas denitri-
fication process.
3.	The capacity factor is 62.8%; i.e., the plant operates 5500 hr/yr.
4.	Coal is fired at a rate of 812 Ib/MW-hr.
5.	The coal contains 15.1% ash of which 80% is flyash.
6.	Levelized annual revenue requirement is $12.8 million (in 1984 dollars).
Source: Economics of Nitrogen Oxides, Sulfur Oxides, and Ash Control Systems
for Coal-Fired Utility Power Plants, EPA-600/7-85-006, February
1985.

-------
of the filter. For most particles, the fabric filtration process is very
efficient (99.9%), but the filters are very large and expensive to install,
operate, and maintain. Costs may be expected to be in about the same range
as costs for ESP's ($70-300/ton of particles removed).
Advanced (Not Commercial) Technologies
The major problems with both ESP's and fabric filters are their high costs
and their operational uncertainties. Our research program is directed toward
reducing costs by as much as 50% and minimizing the operational uncertainties.
EPA engineers have made significant progress toward the achievement of these
ambitious goals, and two of the advanced technologies which have resulted from
their research are described below.
Multi-Stage Electrostatic Precipitator - This advanced ESP system, developed
by EPA, consists of a device for precharging the particles followed by a
specially designed downstream collector. Pilot test results of the staged ESP
concept have been most encouraging and suggest cost savings in the order of
50% for coals with difficult-to-collect ashes. Experience at a larger facility
will be necessary before the commercial potential of this technology can be
evaluated. Market factors will control the extent and the timing of the
commercialization of this technology.
Electrostatic Enhancement of Fabric Filtration - The most promising concept
for reducing the costs of fabric filters is electrostatic enhancement of the
filters. Adding an electric field in the fabric filter allows higher gas
flow rates through the filter at a given pressue drop without sacrificing
collection efficiency. The increased gas flow allows a drastic reduction in
the size of the filter required to get the job done, with a corresponding
cost reduction. Our research suggests that both capital and operating costs

-------
can be reduced by 30-60% over commercial systems. These findings must be
evaluated in some larger-scale tests to verify the research results. At
present, the research is still underway.
Technologies for Combined Pollutant Control
Background
In addition to separate controls for SO2, N0X, and particles, several
technologies simultaneously remove two or more of these pollutants. These
technologies are in various stages of development, and none has been fully
commercialized for power plant operation. Table 4 lists four such technol-
ogies that are now or have been components of the EPA R&D program.
Commercial Technologies
Currently, physical coal cleaning is the only commercial technology avail-
able for combined control of pollutants from utility boilers.
Advanced (Not Commercial) Technologies
Limestone Injection Through Multi-Stage Burners (LIMB) - This technology
evolved from the EPA-sponsored low-N0x coal burner development work previously
discussed. It was recognized that the condition which resulted in reduced N0X
might also promote capture of sulfur compounds if sorbents (e.g., limestone)
were added. Both retrofit and new applications of the technique to boilers
could be a comparatively simple and inexpensive way to reduce SO2 and N0X
emissions. The primary objectives of the LIMB R&D program are: (1) for
retrofit, 50 to 60% reduction of both N0X and SO2 from uncontrolled levels;
(2) for new systems, 70 to 80% N0X reduction and 70 to 90% SO2 reduction from
uncontrolled levels; and (3) cost savings of $224 to $670 per ton of SO2
removed (depending on coal sulfur content) compared to flue gas desulfurization
(FGD). I would like to emphasize that these are objectives of our research

-------
-14-
and development program and that many technical uncertainties must be clarified
before we can claim achievement of these objectives. Further, LIMB will not
serve as full substitution for existing technologies like FGD in those appli-
cations where high removal efficiency would be required.
The EPA research program has shown that removal efficiencies depend on
factors such as coal type, alkali selected, and boiler conditions. However,
recent research at the pilot scale has identified techniques that may increase
the levels of SO2 removal in the LIMB process. For example, the presence of
metal oxides such as MgO, Fe203, and M0O3 shows potential for the promotion
of limestone reactivity resulting in increases in SO2 removal efficiency.
Research is continuing in an effort to define the mechanisms by which these
and other additives promote limestone reactivity so that SO2 removal can be
maximized.
Our research has also shown that SO2 removal can be enhanced by the use
of high surface area sorbents. The high surface area sorbents are produced
by the calcination of limestone (CaC03) and dolomitic limestone (CaC03*MgC03)
to produce lime (CaO) and dolomitic lime (CaO'MgO). These products can then
be hydrated to produce hydrated lime and hydrated dolomitic lime which are
also high surface area sorbents. Even though high surface area sorbents are
more expensive than limestone, evaluations of the LIMB process using these
sorbents suggest that LIMB still may have a cost advantage over FGD for both
retrofit and new sources. The first commercial scale demonstration of the
LIMB process in the U. S. will be at the 105 MW single-wall-fired unit at the
Edgewater Station of the Ohio Edison Company. Long-term testing will begin
July 1987. Costs have been projected to be about 50-70% of the costs
associated with the use of FGD technology for SO2 control.

-------
-15-
Approximately 90% of utility boilers are either wall-fired or tangentially
fired, and the split between the two types is approximately equal. Because of
the substantial differences between the firing systems, technology developed
for wall-fired boilers is not directly applicable to tangentially fired boilers.
EPA's research program will evaluate LIMB-type technology on such boilers up to
the small industrial boiler size category.
Fluidized Bed Combustion - Fluidized bed combustion (FBC) is another
technology that simultaneously reduces emissions of SO2 and N0X. FBC involves
the burning of coal in a bed of limestone that has been fluidized with the
combustion air. The limestone in the bed reacts with the SO2 released during
the combustion of the coal. The solid material which results from this
reaction can be disposed of as a dry solid waste along with the coal ash.
Several successful industrial scale (as opposed to utility scale) FBC units
are currently in operation. FBC shows promise for removing SO2 from coal
combustion at a lower cost per ton of SO2 than conventional flue gas desulfur-
ization technologies. Although FBC is generally limited to new units, retro-
fit may be cost-effective in select cases where a utility may wish to upgrade
the capacity of an older unit. EPA does not have an active R&D program for
FBC, but we do monitor developments in this area. TVA, EPRI, and DOE have
had important FBC development programs in recent years. Three utility FBC
units are currently under construction in the U.S.
Electrostatic Precipitator Particle Removal and Spray Dryer S0X Removal
Process (E-SOX) - Laboratory and pilot scale experiments have proven the tech-
nical feasibility of combining multi-stage ESP technology and spray dryer
technology to collect both particles and SO2 in an existing ESP. The process
uses the multistage ESP to reduce the space requirement in the ESP for particle
removal, and the freed space is converted to a spray dryer by adding suitable

-------
-16-
spray nozzles. Initial experiments with NagCOj solutions show that the S02
removal efficiency ranges from 50 to 80% with inlet SO2 concentrations up to
1600 ppm. Similar encouraging results have been obtained in experiments with
CaO slurry. The process can be retrofitted during a planned outage and has
the potential for providing a very low cost option for SO? control with no
reduction in the level of particle control.
The costs associated with the E-SOX process are expected to be comparable
to LIMB costs; i.e., about 50-70% of the costs associated with the use of FGD
for SO2 control.
Conclusion
Table 5 summarizes comparative cost data for all of the technologies
discussed. The table indicates that some of the control technologies have
the potential for allowing the use of our abundant coal reserves at reasonable
costs and without undue environmental degradation. For this reason, the EPA
research program will continue to explore the fundamental interactions between
combustion products and sorbents in order to increase efficiencies and reduce
costs of the control technologies. This work—coupled with related research
programs at 00E, TVA, and the private sector (e.g., EPRI)--provides the
technical foundation needed should rapid commercialization of the tech-
nologies be required in the future to meet energy or environmental incentives.

-------
Table 1. Summary of Technologies for SO? Control
Description
State of
Application Development
Effectiveness
Availability
1. Pre-combustion
1.	Physical
Cleaning
2.	Chemical
Cleaning
Retrofit
Commercial 10-50% SO? removal Current
Replace	Not	Up to 90%	After 1990
Oil/Gas	commercial SO2 removal
(at an energy
penalty of
approximately
25%)
11. Combustion - Technologies which simultaneously remove SO? and other pollutants
during the combustion process are summarized in Table 4.
*-4
I
III. Post-Combustion
1. Flue gas
desulfuri-
zation
Retrofit/
New
Commercial
60-95% S02 removal
Note: The higher
removal efficiencies
may requlre the use
of organic acids to
enhance F6D.
Current

-------
Table 2. Summary of Technologies for NO* Control
—.				II i— ¦ . 			 1 ¦ nnnjr m	.... I m i rnlm— 	 mm ¦ —I Ail 				¦
Description
State of
Application Development
Effectiveness
Availability
I. Pre-combustion - None
II. Combustion
1. Low Excess Air Firing Retrofit
2.	Staged Combustion
(Overfire Air)
3.	Reduced Load
4.	First Generation
Burner Technology
5.	Second Generation
Burner Technology
6.	Reburni ng Technology
III. Post-Combustion
1.	Thermal De-NOx
(Ammonia Injection)
2.	Flue Gas Denitrifi-
cation (Selective
Catalytic Reduction)
Retrofit/New
Retrofit/New
Retrofit/New
Retrofit
Retrofit/New
Retrofit/New
Commercial
Retrofit/New Commercial
Commercial
Commercial
Demonstration
Experimental
Commercial
Commercial in
Japan; pilot
scale in U.S.
Research data suggest potential Current
for up to 20% N0X removal
10-40% NO* removal	Current
Up to 50%	Current
Research data suggest potential Current
for up to 50% NQX removal
Research data suggest potential 1988
for 50-70% N0X removal
Research data suggest potential after 1990
for 50-80% N0X removal
40-60% N0X removal	Current
80-90% N0X removal	1990
CO
I

-------
Table 3. Summary of Technologies for Particle Control
Description
Application
State of
Development
Effectiveness Availability
I. Pre-combustion
1. Physical	Retrofit
Coal
Cleaning
II. Combustion - None
III. Post-combustion
1.	Electrostatic Retrofit/
Precipitator New
2.	Fabric	Retrofit/
Filter New
3.	Two-Stage Retrofit/
Electrostatic New
Precipitator
4.	Electrostatic Retrofit/
Enhancement New
of Fabric
FiItration
Commercial
Commercial
Commercial
Pi lot scale
Pi lot scale
< 50%
99.5+%
99.5+%
99.5+*
99.5+%
Current
Current
Current
1990
1990


-------
Table 4. Summary of Technologies for Combined Pollutant Control
Description
Application
State of
Development
Effectiveness
Availability
I. Pre-combustion
1. Physical
coal
cleaning
II. Combustion
1. LIMB
2. Fluidized
Bed
Combustion
Retrofit/
New
Commercial
Retrofit/
New
New
Large scale pi lot;
commercial demonstra-
tion planned
10-50% S02
< 50% particles
Retrofit: 50-60%
N0X & SO2
New: 70-80% N0X
70-90% $02
Current
1989
I
0
1
Successful application 90% SO2
to industrial boilers NO* removal uncertain
Post-1990
III. Post-Combustion
1. E-S0X
Retrofit/
New
Pilot
50-80% S02
99% particles
1990

-------
Table 5. Summary of Costs for Pollutant Removal
Pollutant

Pollutant Removal
Removal
Removed
Technology
Costs, $/Ton
Efficiency, %
SOo
Flue Gas Desulfurization
600-1000*
60-95

£»
Physical Coal Cleaning
300- 500+
10-50


Chemical Coal Cleaning
800-1500+
up to
90
N0X
Low Excess Air Firing
< 10
up to
20

Staged Combustion (overfire air)
300
10-40


Reduced Load
-
up to
50

Low-NOx Burners
185
up to
50

Second Generation Low-NOx Burners
185
50-70


Reburning
200-300+
50-80


Thermal De-NOx (ammonia injection)
600
40-60


Flue Gas Denitrification
4000+
up to
90
Particles
Electrostatic Precipitator
70-300+
99.5+


Fabric Filtration
70-300+
99.5+


Hulti-Stage Electrostatic Precipitator
35-150+
99.5+


Electrostatic Enhancement of




Fabric Filtration
35-150+
99.5+

so2/nox
Limestone Injection Hulti-Stage Burners
50-70% Retrofit:
50-60


of FGD New;
70-80
NO*



70-90 S02
so2/nox
Fluidized Bed Combustion
< FGD
up to
90
S02/Particles
E-S0X
50-70%
50-80 S02

of FGD
99 particles

-------