Flue Gas Desulphurizer and Coal Fired Power Plant: An Operational Point of View

Muhammad Arif Susetyo & Mahendra Andriarso (PLN Unit Bisnis Pembangkitan Tanjung jati B) arif_susetyo@yahoo.com and mahendra.andriarso@plntjb.co.id
ABSTRACT To reduce harm to the environment from power plant operations, Indonesia has begun using Flue Gas Desulphurizer (FGD) in its coal fired power plants. The FGD system is a part of power plant equipment with the primary function of reducing SO2 gas discharged into the environment caused by power plant combustions. At the Tanjung Jati B Power Plant, a typical SO2 reduction figure is from 1000 mg/NM3 to 1800mg/Nm3 (FGD flue gas inlet), and reduced to 50-100 mg/Nm3 (FGD flue gas outlet). The FGD has been proven worldwide to work in reducing SOx emissions. As reference, United States currently operates 134 FGD scrubbers throughout the country. There are 2 kinds of FGD being operated in Indonesia ; Wet limestone scrubber type (Tanjung Jati B), and Sea Water scrubber type (Jawa Power and Paiton Energy at Paiton L). The Tanjung Jati B (TJB) Power Plant operates 2 types of wet limestone scrubber systems; which are seawater type, and freshwater type. The authors believe that FGD has not yet been widely applied in Indonesia. Therefore there is a need to educate the Indonesian Power Plant Practitioners and Regulators of the benefit of the FGD system. The authors are confident that the FGD system can be incorporated into new power plants to be built in the future. Furthermore, existing power plants can be retrofitted with the FGD system, as has been done at Mae Moh, the largest thermal power plant in Thailand. The authors would like to share some of the primary aspects of the operation of the FGD, such as: The cost and benefit of operating the FGD system in coal fired power plants The basic principles of the wet limestone FGD Operation The basic principles of the wet limestone FGD Maintenance The difference between Sea Water type (TJB unit 1&2) and Freshwater type (TJB unit 3&4) Potential problems in FGD operations, and how to avoid them Key words: Flue Gas Desuphurizer, Coal Fired Power Plant, Clean Technology, SO2 emission reduction

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of FGD Coal Fired Power Plant Coal Fired Power plant (CFPP is currently one of the most economic way to produce electricity. In Indonesia, CFPP is the premier method of electricity production, in which the majority of new power plant projects in Indonesia is CFPP type. In 2005-2010 period, out of average of 145.540 GWh electricity produced yearly, CFPP accounts for 42% of electricity production [1] Along with its wide application of CFPP, there lies several side effects, in which one of it is the environmental side effect in the form of air pollutants carried by flue gas being ejected to the environment. Along the flue gas emission that is produced by CFPP is soot, fly ash, metal fumes, Oxides of Sulfur (SOx), and partially Burned hydrocarbons such as aldehydes, oxides of Nitrogen (NOx), and Carbon Monoxide among others. Table 1.1 shows the various emission types and its concern to the environment.
Page 1 of 11

Table 1.1 Various emission types and its effect to the environment
Environmental Effect Local/ Regional Air Quality Air Toxics / hazardous Air Pollutants Emission Type Particulates, O3, NO2, SO2, CO, Lead Selected Aliphatic, aromatic & polycyclic hydrocarbons, selected Halogenated Hydrocarbon, Various Oxygenated organics, and metals CO2, CH4, N2O, stratospheric H2O, Tropospheric and stratospheric O3, C (soot), sulfates CH4, N20, CH3, Cl, CH3, Br, stratospheric H20, Stratospheric 03

Greenhouse Effect / Global Warming Stratospheric Ozone Destruction

Ref. [2] These said emission are strictly regulated and monitored by the government in every country, including Indonesia. The monitoring is strict in CFPP, because of the scale of emission production, and coal has inherently more impurities compared to other sources of nonrenewable fuels. In fuel combustion process, all of the sulfur contained in the fuel will be converted as SO2 and SO3, in the flue gas as combustion product. Nitrogen is converted into NOx as a function of combustion temperature. Table 1.2 shows comparison of various types of non renewable fuel in relation to its Nitrogen and Sulfur content. Table 1.2 Sulfur & Nitrogen Content of various fuels.
Fuel Type Coal Heavy Residual Oil Blended residual and crudes Diesel Fuel Unleaded Gasoline Nitrogen Content (% wt.) 0.5 2.0 0.2 3.0 0.6 2.15 0.02 0.60 Sulfur Content (% wt.) 10 0.5 4 0.2 3 0.0015 - 0.5 0.008

Ref. [2] Because coal has a tendency to have more sulfur content, this paper will focus on the SOx emission caused by coal combustion and methods of SO2 management for the application of CFPP. In Relation to the subject, The Ministry of Life and Environment regulates the emission of CFPP as stipulated in MOLE Regulation No. 21 Year 2008, as shown in Table 1.3. Table 1.3 Ministry of Life and Environment (MOLE) Regulation no 21 year 2008
CFPP Emission Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) Total Particulate Opacity(%) Maximum Cocentration 750 mg/Nm3 850 mg/Nm3 150 mg/Nm3 20 %

Note : Emission standard is 24 hours average, to be within compliance 95% in 3 months period. Ref. [4] 1.2 Introduction to SO2 emission reduction system (Flue Gas Desulfurization) In the combustion of coal, all of the sulfur contained in the fuel will be converted as SO2 and SO3, in the flue gas as combustion product. The ejection of SOx as product of fuel
Page 2 of 11

combustion to the environment will form H2SO4 (sulfuric acid), due to the reaction of SOx with water vapor in clouds, and create environmental problem. Because of this unavoidable conversion of sulfur to SOx, there are only two possible ways to control SOx emission : by removing the sulfur from the fuel, or by removing SOx from the product gases. This paper will discuss the method of removing SOx from the product gases by Method of Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD). Figure 1.1 Shows the various methods that can be employed to remove the SOx content in flue gas.

Figure 1.1 Classification of commercial FGD Processes. Ref. [3] Among the various methods of Flue gas Desulfurization, the most commonly used method of removing SOx from the flue gases involves reacting SO2 with Limestone (CaCO3). In this method, aqueous slurry of limestone or lime is sprayed in an absorber tower through which the flue gasses pass. The overall reaction for the process is [4], 3 + 2 + 22 0 3 . 22 0 + 2 (1.1)

The main function and application of FGD in CFPP is to reduce the SO2 level in Exhaust Flue Gas being ejected to the environment. FGD is widely used in countries with strict SOx regulation. In example, Korea limits its SO2 concentration emission to 100 mg/Nm3 in 30 minutes average. This regulation renders CFPP operation virtually impossible without the application of FGD. Thus, most developed countries employ FGD in most of their CFPP. Figure 1.2 shows the growing trend of FGD application in CFPP in various countries.

Figure 1.2 Growth of FGD application in CFPP, by Cumulative Capacity (GWe). Ref. [3]
Page 3 of 11

1.3 Benefit of FGD Installation - FGD and its relation to Sulfur content in coal In Indonesia, out of all pulverizer type CFPP in operation in Indonesia, 2 power plants ulitize the FGD system, which is Paiton CFPP Units 5&6 ( 600 MWNett - water type absorber tower), and Tanjung Jati B CFPP Units 1-4 (4 x 660 MWNett - Wet Limestone Absorber Type). In CFPP utilizing Coal Fluidized Bed (CFB) Boiler type, a simpler method of SO2 emission reduction is utilized by mixing limestone in the coal fluidized bed in the coal combustion process of CFB boiler. This reduces the SO2 being emitted to the environment, thus enabling CFB type boiler to consume coal with higher sulfur content in comparison to pulverizer type boiler not utilizing FGD system. In short, the application of FGD have the following benefit; - Reduced SO2 concentration in Flue Gas - Flexibility of Coal Consumption in relation to Sulfur Content. - More environmentally Friendly CFPP, less chance of acid rain within the CFPP area - The byproduct (gypsum) still have economic value 1.4 . Purpose of Paper The implementation of FGD need plant operators that are prepared to operate such system in a proper manner. In this paper, cost/benefit and various aspect & problem of FGD operation is explained. The basis of the paper is operation and maintenance of wet limestone type FGD in Tanjung Jati B CFPP units 1-4. CHAPTER 2 BENEFIT OF FGD OPERATIONAL IN CFPP 2.1. Principle of FGD System and compare with regulation in Indonesia (KLH) In Indonesia, the regulation of SO2 emission in CFPP as stipulated in MOLE Regulation No. 21 Year 2008 is 750 mg/Nm3 (Table 1.3). This is more lenient than regulation in more developed nations, which mostly employs strict SO2 standards. Due to the range of SO2 limitation, most CFPP in Indonesia do not utilize FGD. As explained in chapter , in countries with more strict regulation, operating a CFPP without SO2 reduction system is virtually impossible. However, because sulfur content in coal is directly related to the SO2 level being ejected to the environment, operation of CFPP without SO2 reduction system makes plant emission vulnerable to changes in sulfur content in coal. Even though the SO2 regulation in Indonesia is lenient enough, it is widely understood that In pulverizer type CFPP without FGD, there is strict limit in coal consumption in relation to its sulfur content. The consumption limit in sulfur content in coal is approximately 0.4% weight, because burning of coal with the aforementioned limit will create flue gas with SO2 concentration of 600 - 700 mg/Nm3. Slight increase in Sulfur concentration of coal will increase the SO2 level above MOLE limit and forces the unit into de-rating and dilute its flue gas to conform to the SO2 limit. Table 2.1 shows relation between sulfur content and SO2 concentration in untreated flue gas.

Page 4 of 11

Table 2.1 Coal Sulfur Level in coal and its relation to SO2 Concentration In Raw Flue Gas
Sulfur % wt. in Coal 0.4 % 0.9 % 1.05 % SO2 concentration in Raw Flue Gas 600 700 1400 1500 1600 1800 SO2 concentration treated Flue Gas Untreated 25 75 Mg/Nm3 150 250 Mg/Nm3 in Source of Data Suralaya Pulverizer type CFPP Tanjung Jati B Unit 3-4 Pulverizer Type CFPP Tanjung Jati B Unit 1-2 Pulverizer Type CFPP

2.2. Flexibility of Coal consumption in CFPP with FGD It can be concluded from the previous subchapter, that in power plants not utilizing SO2 reduction system, the only way to make the power plant more environmentally friendly in terms of SO2 emission is by reducing its sulfur content in coal. In the case of CFPP operation in Indonesia, Such method is highly restricting because it will further reduce the variety of coal able to be consumed. Also, existing coal contracts between Coal mines and CFPP will be disrupted if MOLE attempt to reduce the allowable SO2 concentration emission. This situation can be relieved by the application Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) System. With the application of FGD, sulfur content in coal will not be a major issue in SO2 emission control, because the majority of FGD design is capable of removing 80 to 98% SO2 content in flue gas. For example, Tanjung Jati B Units 3&4 currently has coal contract with rejection limit of 0.9% weight sulfur content. Prior to the raw gas entering the FGD system, the level SO2 in Raw Flue Gas reaches 1400 - 1500mg/Nm3, almost twice the limit of KLH regulation. However, after being treated by the FGD, the level of SO2 in flue gas is reduced to the range of 20-70 mg/Nm3, an industry leading figure, and far below the limit of KLH of 750 mg/Nm3. This is a major advantage in the operation of TJB CFPP. It can be concluded from table 2.1 that flexibility of operation in relation to SO2 emission is far greater than non FGD CFPP due to the reduced SO2 concentration level in the flue gas. In addition, in the system is capable of coping with coal shipment with elevated sulfur content while conforming to MOLE regulation. In theory, TJB units 1-4 utilizing wet limestone type scrubber can consume coal with high Sulfur content up to approximately 2.5 % weight, while still maintaining SO2 level within the allowable range. The principle of Tanjung Jati B Units 1&2 and 3&4 Wet Limestone FGD system is similar in concept. The difference between units 1&2 and 3&4 is type of water being used in the system units 1&2 utilizes sea water, and units 3&4 utilizes service water. Another difference is the utilization of Vertical Ball Mill for slurry preparation in Units 1&2, and Horizontal Ball Mill in units 3&4. The principle of SO2 reduction system based on TJB units 1-4 FGD operation is explained in Chapter 3. CHAPTER 3 FGD SYSTEM 3.1. FGD System in Tanjung Jati B CFPP (operational concept basic design) The operation concept of FGD system is to react Raw Flue gas with limestone slurry to reduce the SO2 concentration produced by coal combustion, as depicted in equation 1.1. After

Page 5 of 11

the limestone slurry is used to reduce SO2, it is further processed by forced oxidation system into gypsum, that can be utilized in the manufacture which utilize gypsum as raw material. Within the FGD system, There exist 4 following subsystem; : 1. Limestone Handling System 2. Reagent (Slurry) Preparation System 3. FGD Absorber 4. Gypsum Dewatering System Figure 3.1 shows the process within the FGD subsystem:
Raw Flue Gas (high SOx) RAW LIMESTONE 8u Limestone Barge

Limestone Handling System

Reagent Preparation System

Limestone Slurry

FGD Absorber (SO2 Reduction)

Gypsum

Gypsum Dewatering System

Gypsum Byproduct

Treated Flue Gas (low SOx)

Figure 3.1 Schematic of Typical Wet limestone Flue Gas Desulfurization System 3.1.1 Limestone Handling The purpose of limestone handling system is to transport raw limestone from limestone jetty to limestone storage silo . Raw limestone from barge is unloaded by Mobile Crane into hopper. Limestone in hopper is then transported Via belt conveyor into Limestone Yard as stockpile, and is managed my a wheel loader. When limestone is needed, Wheel Loader carry limestone from stockpile reclaim vibrating feeder that transfers the limestone to bucket elevator, carrying it upwards to the limestone silo. In TJB Unit 1&2 the silo stocks raw limestone, whereas TJB units 3&4, the limestone is crushed prior to entering the limestone silo. This limestone is ready to be used in the reagent preparation system. Figure 3.2 Shows The Schematic of limestone Handling system.

Figure 3.2 Typical configuration of Limestone Handling System. Ref.[5]

Page 6 of 11

3.1.2. Reagent Preparation System The function of reagent preparation system is to process raw limestone into slurry; a suspension of fine limestone mixed with water. Limestone in slurry form is needed is to effectively react with the flue gas in the absorber to reduce SO2 concentration. Raw Limestones from limestone silo is transferred to limestone coal pre crusher via weight feeder to enable control of limestone slurry concentration. The Function of coal pre crusher Is to reduce size of limestone prior to the in ball mill. After limestone is crushed in precrusher, material is mixed with water and transferred to ball mill to produce limestone slurry. Limestone product is classified using hydrocyclone classifier. Acceptable product is transferred to limestone slurry storage tank, ready to be used in the FGD absorber. Coarse slurry is transferred back to Ball mill to be further grinded.Figure 3.3 shows the limestone reagent preparation system.

Figure 3.3 Limestone reagent preparation system. Ref.[5] The limestone slurry produced by the reagent preparation system, is controled to produce slurry with limestone content of approximately 30%. Control of the reagent preparation system is conducted by the Central Control Room (CCR) operators. The system is operated most efficiently as a batch process with a constant design feed rate of limestone to limestone mill. 3.1.3. FGD Absorber The TJB Units 1&2 FGD absorber is designed to remove sufur dioxide emission of 516,24 kg/hr by converting SO2 in flue gas into Calcium Sulfite (CaSO3) The Calcium sulfite is then turned into Calcium Sulfate/Gypsum (CaSO4) by forced oxidation method. The Limestone forced oxidation system typically has a very low concentration in dissolved sulfite, with typical concentration less than 30 ppm. FGD Absorber convert or absorbs the sulfur dioxide (SO2) in the flue gas by chemical reaction with the limestone slurry. FGD Absorber has some main equipment and some supporting system to enable SO2 reduction process. The main equipment are oxidation air pipe, agitator, mist eliminator and wash mist eliminator pipe. The supporting systems are oxidation air system, absorber recirculation system and wash mist eliminator system. Figure 3.4 shows the FGD Absorber system.
Page 7 of 11

Figure 3.4 FGD Absorber system. Ref.[5] The operating principle of FGD absorber is as follow: 1. Flue Gas from ESP (Electrostatic Precipitator) enters the FGD and is scrubbed by Limestone Slurry to remove SO2 content, creating Calcium Sulfite (CaSO3) by the following chemical reaction : CaCO3 (solid) + SO2 (gas) CaSO3 (solid) + CO2 (gas) (3.1) 2. The Flue gas past through Mist eliminator to filter slurry carry over. The Treated Flue Gas FGD is reduced in SO2 content, moisture, and is free of solid particles. 3. The limestone slurry that is used to scrub the flue gas drops into the Forced Oxidation area, which converts the Calcium Sulfite into Gypsum by the following chemical reaction: CaSO3 (solid) + H2O (liquid) + O2 (gas) CaSO4 (solid) + H2O (3.2) 4. Gypsum is the continually taken to the Gypsum dewatering area to be separated from water. 3.1.4. Gypsum Dewatering System The function of Gypsum Dewatering system is to separate water and gypsum slurry sourced from the absorber. The gypsum slurry entering the Gypsum Dewatering system has solid content of approximately 15%. After dewatering system, The final product is gypsum cake, by design, containing 20% Water & 80% Solid (Unit 1&2), and 10% water & 90% Solid (Unit 3&4) . There are two main process used to separate water and gypsum slurry: 1. Hydroclone process. 2. Vacuum filter process. Hydroclone is the first process of gypsum slurry, and it is capable of partially separating water and gypsum, increasing the solid concentration from 15% to 45% Solid. The water content being separated is sent back to the absorber, and Solid content of 45% concentration is transferred to filter vacuum belt filter. The gypsum is then further processed to by the vacuum belt filter to remove the water increasing solid content is 80% (unit 1&2), and 90% (Unit 3&4). This final product of gypsum cake is then transported by truck to manufacturer utilising gypsum as raw material. Figure 3.5 shows the gypsum dewatering system :
Page 8 of 11

Figure 3.5 : Gypsum Dewatering System. Ref.[5] 3.2. Problem and Solution The operation of FGD requires several parameters to be maintained in the acceptable range. Deviation outside the allowable range will risk the FGD system into malfunction that will affect the rest of the power plant. In TJB units 1&2 and 3&4, some problems have occured to the FGD system. Table 3.1 shows several of the problems experienced by TJB FGD system. Table 3.1 Problems and Solution of TJB Units 1-4 FGD System
Unit 1&2 Problem Lack of Oxidation Air Effect Sulfite not being converted into Gypsum, causing sulfite scale formation and sulfite blinding Sulfite Scale Formation : Formation of large quantity of scale due to the high amount of sulfite in Absorber Sulfite Blinding : Excessive sulfite content in absorber causing blinding to limestone slurry molecule, reducing effectiveness of SO2 absorbtion and Lose control of pH in Absorber Oxidation Air Pipe in Absorber tank Blocked By Sulfite Scale formation Blockage of Cleaning Nozzle causing Myst eliminator to be dirty and blocked, reducing the effectiveness of the device. This causes Gypsum carry over to the environment. Gypsum Carry Over : Excessive carry over brought by Flue Gas causing localized Gypsum Rain creating environmental and corrosion issue. Lack of Grinding Ball causing FGD partial Bypass operation to preserve Grinding Ball. It increases SO2 emission, but not above KLH limit. In Unit 3-4, the limestone being stocked in silo is crushed limesone. In rainy season, this crushed limestone is wet and causes frequent plugging. Solution Normalize the Flow of oxiation Air to have sufficient air flow with minimum requirement.

1&2

Myst Eliminator wash nozzle blocked by sea shell

Maintain the cleanliness of sea water mist eliminator water suply tank, and increase chlorine dosing to reduce formation of sea shell. Maintain Sufficient Stock Of Grinding Ball Slightly enlarge the product of limestone crusher in the rainy season to reduce likelyhood of plugging.

3&4

3&4

Lack of grinding ball for Wet Ball Mill Frequent Plugging in Bucket Elevator and Limestone Silo

Page 9 of 11

CHAPTER 4 CONCLUSION It is understood from the previous chapter that FGD system, especially Wet Limestone type is a proven system in CFPP SO2 management. In relation to MOLE regulation No 21 Year 2008 with limit of 750 mg/Nm3 (24 hours Average), TJB CFPP Units 1-4 shows the benefit of FGD application, including the flexibility of CFPP operation in regard of sulfur content. It can be concluded that from a technical stand point, that FGD system is beneficial for CFPP operation, and the neighboring environment. Not Only it will reduce the harmful SO2 concentration being emitted to the environment, but it will also benefit the plant operator in other Table 4.1 Shows the cost/benefit of FGD System Table 4.1 Cost and Benefit comparison of FGD system operation
Benefit SO2 Removal from Flue Gas Emission Environmentally friendly CFPP, low risk of Acid Rain. CFPP able to consume more types of Coal with various sulfur level Possibility of KLH to implement more strict SO2 regulation Cost Initial Capital investment for System Installation Operating & Maintenance cost for additional Operator, consumable, and Spare Part Risk of FGD miss-operation causing localized environmental damage

Considering the mentioned Cost/Benefit ratio of FGD system, the Decision Maker must weigh in the various FGD system and its environment cots. The FGD system in its many form can be an effective method in Emission reduction that needs to be tailored in the necessity of CFPP.

Page 10 of 11

Reference : [1] Handbook of Energy and Economic Statistics of Indonesia, Pusdatin KESDM cited from http://prokum.esdm.go.id/Publikasi/Statistik/Statistik%20Listrik.pdf [2] Turns, Stephen R (2012) An Introduction to Combustion Third Edition. Mc Graw Hill, Singapore [3] Taylor, Margaret R., Control of SO2 emission from power plants : A Case of induced technological Innovation in the US. , http://www.cmu.edu/epp/iecm/rubin/PDF%20files/2005/2005d%20Taylor%20et%20al,%20T ech%20Forecasting%20and%20Soc%20Chg%20(Jul).pdf [4] Peraturan Menteri Negara Lingkungan Hidup No. 21 tahun 2008. Tentang Baku mutu emisi sumber tidak bergerak bagi usaha dan/atau kegiatan pembangkit tenaga listrik termal. [5] Babcock & Wilcox Flue Gas Desulfurization Training Material

Page 11 of 11