cfb technology for biomass utilization in heat and power generation
DESCRIPTION
CFB Technology for Biomass Utilization in Heat and Power Generation. 5 Jun 2013, Belgrade, Biomass for District Heating Systems in Serbia Vesna Barišić. Presentation outline. Biomass as Energy Source Advantages of CFB Technology Challenges in Biomass Combustion - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
CFB Technology for Biomass Utilization in Heat and Power Generation
5 Jun 2013, Belgrade, Biomass for District Heating Systems in SerbiaVesna Barišić
2
• Biomass as Energy Source
– Advantages of CFB Technology
• Challenges in Biomass Combustion
– Advanced Biomass CFB (ABC) Technology
• Selected Foster Wheeler References
Presentation outline
3
Biomass as Energy Source
4
• Incentives against CO2 emissions promote renewable fuels => biomass
• Public institutions subsidize and support biomass projects
• Regulatory organisms do not release permits to fire fossil fuels
investors look into biomass
• Traditional biomass (wood-based) is costly and unavailable
• Agriculture residues are locally/globally available, and more economic
• CFB is IDEAL TECHNOLOGY for large scale power
generation for broad range of biomass alone, or co-firing
in larger fossil fired power plants!
Growth in Biomass Utilization in Energy Production
5
• Fuel flexibility and multi-fuel firing– Simultaneous and/or alternate use of broad range
of fuel qualities
• Excellent emission performance– DeSOx /DeNOx plants typically
not required
• High availability & competitive price
• Longer boiler life and improved reliability due to low even combustion temperature
Advantages of CFB Technology
6
CFB Technology Offers Wide Fuel Flexibility
Coal
• Anthracite• Bituminous• Subbituminous• Lignite
Waste Coal
• Anthracite Culm• Bituminous Gob• Coal Slurry
Oil Shale
Peat
Woody Biomass
• Bark • Wood Chips• Sawdust• Forest Residues• Willow/Salix
Agricultural Residues
• Olive Waste• Straw• Bagasse• Rice Husk• Sunflower• Dried Fruits• etc.
Waste Derived Fuels
• Recycled Wood/Paper/• Plastics• Solid Recovered Fuel • Tire Derived Fuel
Sludge
• Pulp and Paper Mill• Municipal
Gas
Oil
Petroleum Coke
CFB Technology Opens the Door to Fuel Flexibilityand Carbon Neutral Fuels
7
Challenges in Biomass Combustion
8
Compared to Fossil Fuels Biomass Ash Chemistry is More Complex
Ash 279 g/kg
0
40
80
120
160
Coal Peat Stem Wood
Forest Residue
Sunflower Husk
Wheat Straw
Olive Waste
Rapeseed Waste
Recycled Wood
RDF
Fossil Fuel Biomass Fuel Waste Fuel
Conc
entr
ation
[g/
kg fu
el, d
ry]
Si Al Fe Ca Mg K Na P S Cl Ash concentration
02468
10121416
Stem Wood
Forest Residue
Recycled Wood
Conc
entra
tion [
g/kg
fuel,
dry] Si Al Fe Ca Mg K Na P S Cl
9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Coal Peat Stem Wood Forest Residue
Sunflower Husk
Wheat Straw
Olive Waste
Rapeseed Waste
Recycled Wood
RDF
Fossil Fuel Biomass Fuel Waste Fuel
Prob
abili
ty In
dex
Agglomeration Fouling Corrosion
Challenges Associated with Biomass Combustion are Well Understood- Foster Wheeler Fuel Model -
Agglomeration Fouling Corrosion
10
Technical Solutions for Biomass Combustion
Advanced Biomass CFB (ABC) Technology
Control of Fouling & Corrosion
Control of Agglomeration & Fouling
Empty pass before conv. HX - Flue gas temperature
- Wider spacings in width - Flue gas velocities - Fully recractable sootblowers- Austenitic convection SH&RH
Conservative flue gas velocity
Integrated Steam Cooled Solid Separator and Return Leg
Step Grid Final SH & RH as INTREX
Active Bed Material- Normal sand + PC ash
During Operation:- Fuel quality management- FW SmartBoiler datalog & Diagnostic tools
Recirculation gas utilization for temperature control
Additives
11
Selected References
12
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2015
2015
2013
2012
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2008
2007
2007
2005
2005
2004
2003
2002
2000
1998
1998
1996
1995
1994
1992
1991
1990
1989
1988
1986
1983
Cum
ulati
ve T
herm
al C
apac
ity [
GW
]
Delivery year
Foster Wheeler CFB Reference – 414 units –
Coal70 %
Biomass10 %
Waste3 %
Peat5 %
Petcoke11 %
Oil-shale1 %
Polaniec
KaukasJyväskylä
Igelsta
Samcheok
Fortum Częstochowa
13*only at 100% load with Mix 1, 2, and 3
Total plant efficiency ~110%LHV 90%HHV
240 MWth, 73 MWe-net, 209 MWDH, 92 kg/s, 90 bar, 540°C
Multifuel CFB for Clean Biomass and Waste (CHP)
Igelsta, Söderenergi AB, Södertälje, Sweden
Mix 1 Mix 2 Mix 3
Biomass [%LHV] 75 30 100
Recycled Wood [%LHV] 0 70 0
RDF [%LHV] 25 0 0
Moisture [%ar] 44.3 35.6 50.0
Ash [%dry] 6.5 4.7 4.0
Nitrogen [%dry] 0.6 0.8 0.5
Sulfur [%dry] 0.09 0.08 0.06
Chlorine [ppmdry] 1200 800 200
LHV [MJ/kgar] 9.7 11.0 8.3
Performance Emissions, @ 6% O2, dry
NOx [mg/MJ] 35*
SO2 [mg/m3n] 75
CO [mg/m3n] 50*
Dust [mg/m3n] 10
NH3 ppm 10
TOC [mg/m3n] 10
HCl / HF [mg/m3n] 10 / 1
Cd+Tl / Hg / HMs [mg/m3n] 0.05 / 0.05 / 0.5
PCDD+F [ng/m3n] 0.1Commercial operation: 2009
14
Large Scale CFB for Clean Biomass (CHP)Kaukas, Kaukaan Voima Oy, Finland
385 MWth, 125 MWe-net, 110 MWDH, 149 kg/s, 115 bar(a), 550 °C
Fuel Biomass Peat
Moisture [%ar] 48 50
Ash [%dry] 2.5 5
Nitrogen [%dry] 0.6 1.9
Sulfur [%dry] 0.05 0.2
LHV [MJ/kgar] 9.2 8.5
Performance Biomass
Flue gas Texit [°C] 149
Boiler efficiency [%] 91
NOx [mg/m3n] 150
SO2 [mg/m3n] 200
CO [mg/m3n] 200
Dust [mg/m3n] 20
Commercial operation: 2010
15
Large Scale CFB for Biomass with 20 wt-% AgroPolaniec, GFD Suez Energia Polska S.A, Poland
Fuel Wood Chips 80% + Agro 20% (Straw, Sunflower, Dry Fuits,
PKS, ...)
Moisture [%ar] 35.9
Ash [%dry] 2.8
Nitrogen [%dry] 0.25
Sulfur [%dry] 0.05
Chlorine [ppmdry] <396
LHV [MJ/kgar] 10.5
Performance Emissions@ 6% O2, dry
NOx [mg/m3n] 150
SO2 [mg/m3n] 150
CO [mg/m3n] 50
Dust [mg/m3n] 20
World’s Largest Solid Biomass Fired Power Plant
447 MWth, 205 MWe, 127/20 bar(a), 535/535°C
Commercial operation: 2012
16
Co-firing Biomass and Coal
17
• Smaller investment cost per MWe than in smaller units
• Higher plant efficiency than in smaller units
• Not dependent on biomass availability
• Technical challenges (AFC) reduced in co-firing
Benefits of large scale biomass co-firing in CFB
100% coal
Thermie Ultimo
Thermie SR
Average Europe
CFB today
10% biomass
20% biomass
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60Net efficiency (lhv, %)
2 CO emission (g/kWh)
% biomass on LHV
37%
21%
18
Medium Size CFB for Cofiring Biomass/Coal (CHP)Fortum, Częstochowa, Poland
Fuel Coal Wood Residue
Willow
Mix % heat in. 75 15 10
Moisture [%ar] 12.0 45.0 45.0
Ash [%dry] 20.0 1.0 3.0
Nitrogen [%dry] 2.0 0.2 0.3
Sulfur [%dry] 0.5 0.0 0.0
LHV [MJ/kgar] 22.5 9.0 7.8
182 MWth, 66 MWe, 77.2 kg/s, 111 bar(a), 515°C
Performance Emissions@ 6% O2, dry
NOx [mg/m3n] 200
SO2 [mg/m3n] 200
Dust [mg/m3n] 30
Commercial operation: 2010
19
Large Scale CFB for Cofiring Peat/Coal and Virgin Biomass (CHP)Jyväskylä, Jyväskylän Energia Oy, Finland
Fuel Peat Coal Forest Residues
Moisture [%ar] 50.0 9.2 50.0
Ash [%dry] 5.0 14.1 2.0
Nitrogen [%dry] 1.2 2.3 0.3
Sulfur [%dry] 0.3 0.4 0.0
Chlorine [ppmdry] <500 <2000 <200
LHV [MJ/kgar] 8.3 25.7 7.3
Performance Peat
Flue gas Texit [°C] 90
Boiler efficiency [%] 94.1
NOx [mg/m3n] 150
SO2 [mg/m3n] 200
CO [mg/m3n] 200
Dust [mg/m3n] 30
455 MWth, 200 MWe, 160/143 kg/s, 164/40.5 bar(a), 560/560°C
Commercial operation: 2010
20
Coal & Biomass Co-Fired Supercritical CFB ProjectSamcheok 4 x 550 MWe
– 437/356 kg/s, 25.6/5.4 MPa, 603/603 °C
– Efficiency 42.4% (net)
• Fuel flexibility:
– Lignite/Subbituminous coal
– Wood Pellets max 5%
• KOSPO, Korean Southern Power Co. Ltd
• Foster Wheeler scope: Basic design of boiler plant and delivery of hot loop pressure parts etc.
• Contract Signed (NTP): June 2011
• Commercial operation: 2015
4 x 550 MWe supercritical OTU – CFB to feed 2 x 1100 MWe turbines
21
• Biomass has an important role in reducing the environmental effects of energy production both in pure biomass plants and in coal and biomass co-combustion
• CFB technology is an ideal Technology to be used for large scale power generation with broad range of solid biomass fuels
• CFB Technology with pure biomass firing available up to 600 MWe scale and with coal co-firing up to 800 MWe scale
Summary
www.fwc.com