Mercury Control for Plants Firing Texas Lignite and Equipped with ESP-wet FGD

Katherine Dombrowski

关键词: AIR HEATERS;    CALCIUM BROMIDES;    COAL;    CONFIGURATION;    CONTRACTORS;    ELECTRIC FIELDS;    EPRI;    FLUE GAS;    FLY ASH;    LIGNITE;    LIMESTONE;    MERCURY;    PERFORMANCE;    POWDER RIVER BASIN;    REMOVAL;    TESTING;   

DOI  :  10.2172/978670
RP-ID  :  None
PID  :  OSTI ID: 978670
Others  :  TRN: US201010%%524

美国|英语

来源: SciTech Connect

【 摘 要 】

This report presents the results of a multi-year test program conducted as part of Cooperative Agreement DE-FC26-06NT42779, 'Mercury Control for Plants Firing Texas Lignite and Equipped with ESP-wet FGD.' The objective of this program was to determine the level of mercury removal achievable using sorbent injection for a plant firing Texas lignite fuel and equipped with an ESP and wet FGD. The project was primarily funded by the U.S. DOE National Energy Technology Laboratory. EPRI, NRG Texas, Luminant (formerly TXU), and AEP were project co-funders. URS Group was the prime contractor, and Apogee Scientific and ADA-ES were subcontractors. The host site for this program was NRG Texas Limestone Electric Generating Station (LMS) Units 1 and 2, located in Jewett, Texas. The plant fires a blend of Texas lignite and Powder River Basin (PRB) coal. Full-scale tests were conducted to evaluate the mercury removal performance of powdered sorbents injected into the flue gas upstream of the ESP (traditional configuration), upstream of the air preheater, and/or between electric fields within the ESP (Toxecon{trademark} II configuration). Phases I through III of the test program, conducted on Unit 1 in 2006-2007, consisted of three short-term parametric test phases followed by a 60-day continuous operation test. Selected mercury sorbents were injected to treat one quarter of the flue gas (e.g., approximately 225 MW equivalence) produced by Limestone Unit 1. Six sorbents and three injection configurations were evaluated and results were used to select the best combination of sorbent (Norit Americas DARCO Hg-LH at 2 lb/Macf) and injection location (upstream of the ESP) for a two-month performance evaluation. A mercury removal rate of 50-70% was targeted for the long-term test. During this continuous-injection test, mercury removal performance and variability were evaluated as the plant operated under normal conditions. Additional evaluations were made to determine any balance-of-plant impacts of the mercury control process, including those associated with ESP performance and fly ash reuse properties. Upon analysis of the project results, the project team identified several areas of interest for further study. Follow-on testing was conducted on Unit 2 in 2009 with the entire unit treated with injected sorbent so that mercury removal across the FGD could be measured and so that other low-ash impact technologies could be evaluated. Three approaches to minimizing ash impacts were tested: (1) injection of 'low ash impact' sorbents, (2) alterations to the injection configuration, and (3) injection of calcium bromide in conjunction with sorbent. These conditions were tested with the goal of identifying the conditions that result in the highest mercury removal while maintaining the sorbent injection at a rate that preserves the beneficial use of ash.