Professional Circle: व िंध्याचल/ELIXIR

व िंध्याचल/ELIXIR
PROFESSIONAL CIRCLE
1
ENVIRONMENT FRIENDLY
UTILISATION OF FLY ASH
2
 CHALLENGES REGARDING FLY ASH UTILIZATION

 SCOPE OF ASH UTILIZATION
 PRESENT SCENARIO AT VSTPS
 NEW CHALLENGES
 FLUE GAS DESULFURIZATION (FGD)
 ELECTRON BEAM METHOD (EBM)
 FGD V/S EBM
 CONCLUSION
3
SOURCES OF ELECTRICITY
60% ELECTRICITY GENERATED FROM COAL

FLY ASH UTILISATION
 In India coal based thermal power plants are the backbone of the power sector.
 Coal used in Indian power plants are Sub-Bituminous or Lignite in nature and
contains 30-45% ash. Coal based power plants using pulverised coal as the fuel
generates huge amount of ash as by-product.
Large quantity of ash

Pulverized coal as
due to high ash content
fuel
of Indian coal
Fly Ash 80% Bottom Ash 20% 5

FLY ASH UTILISATION

N
O Conventional way is the disposal of fly ash to ash pond which
T requires large amount of precious land and also one of the prime
I source of air and water pollution.
F 2
I 0
C 0 As per notification issued by Ministry of Environment & Forests
A 9 (MoEF) in 2009, all the coal and lignite based power plants in the
T country has to achieve 100% utilization of fly ash in phased
I manner.
O
6
N
Conventional ways of Fly
Ash Utilisation
 Land Filling
 Mine Filling
 Cement & Construction
 Bricks & Tiles
 Soil Modification
 Roads & Embankment
7
PRESENT SCENARIO AT VSTPS
 Status of Ash utilisation (2015-2016)
Cumulative Coal Consumption 16069236
(MT)
Cumulative Ash Generation in 5844109

MT (up to Dec, 15)
% Ash Generation (up to Dec, 36.33

15)
% Ash Utilisation 17.34
Reasons of lagging:
 High transportation cost due to remote location of plant 8
 Non-availability of nearby auxiliary industry (like Cement)

 STRINGENT ENVIRONMENT NORMS
Parameters New Std St - I St - II ST - III St - IV St - V Remarks
R&M works in St-I &

PM 100 150 100 100 100 100 St- II under progress
600 St – I within limits.

SOx (<500MW) <600 >600 >600 >600 >600 St – II, III & IV
200 (500 & requires FGD unit
above)
NOx 600 <600 <600 <600 <600 <600 Already within
9
limits
FLUE GAS DESULPHURISATION (FGD)
 All fossil fuels contain certain amount of sulphur (0.1 – 5.0%)
 During combustion of coal significant amount of SO2 emitted from

power plants.
 As per the latest notification of MoEF the desulphurisation of flue

gas becomes very much essential to control SO2 emission.
10
 Low S fuels are not economically viable.
 The most commonly accepted SO2 emission control method is
Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) System
Dry type Wet Type
 Due to higher efficiency in comparison to dry type (40 – 50%), wet type flue gas desulphurization
system (around 90%) is the most popular one.
 After oxidation the final product of wet type FGD is Gypsum slurry, a solid waste with low economical
value.
 This waste can only be used in landfill and in cement industry. The remote location of the plant and
lack of nearby auxiliary industries (cement) restrict our option.
 We are in advance stage of commissioning of FGD system for U#13 but still in search of buyers for 11end
product (Gypsum).
12
CHALLENGES
 Wet scrubbing of SO2 ultimately leads to another burden of disposal /

selling of end product Gypsum.
 Increasing operational cost due to stringent environment norms

threatens our existence.
13
14
Possibilities of using fly ash as a source of coagulant
 Coagulants are generally used for the treatment of raw water as well as
waste water to reduce TSS i.e. Turbidity.
 Most commonly used coagulant is Ferric Alum.
 The raw material used for the production of Ferric Alum is Bauxite.
 The main constituent of Bauxite is Aluminum hydroxide, Ferric
Oxide and clay mineral Kaolinite.
 Alumina (Al2O3) being the one of the main constituent of fly ash enables
fly ash to be used as the potential source of coagulant.
15
Chemical Composition of Fly Ash
16
Consumption pattern of coagulant in Vindhyachal
 So Synthesis of coagulant from fly ash explores new possibilities of fly ash
utilisation as well as enables us to get relentless supply of one of the most
important chemical.
17
Schematic of production of Composite coagulant from fly

ash and simultaneous removal of SO2 from flue gas (EBM)
Boiler Dry
APH
ESP
STACK
Spray
Cooler
Fly Ash Slurry
18
E-beam vessel To Settling
Absorber
Pond
FLOW CHART
Flue gas • Through

from boiler APH
• For the removal of

ESP Particulate matter
• For temperature
Spray cooler reduction &
humidification
E-beam • Free radical production

radiation and oxidation of SOx &
vessel NOx
• Reaction of SO2 with

Absorber acidified fly ash 19
slurry PFS+PAS
CALCULATIONS
 For a typical 500 MW Unit, if

 PLF = 90%, Coal flow = 288 TPH,
 Ash produced per day= 7000*35% = 2450 MT,
 If S in coal = 0.45%, SO2 flow = 2.46 TPH
 SO2 production per day = 60 MT
 To consume this SO2 required Al2O3 & Fe2O3 = 208 MT
 Considering 10% reaction total Fly Ash required (approx)= 2000 MT
Total ash converted into coagulant ≈200 MT i.e 8-10% of total ash produced
20
Composite Coagulant V/S Normal Coagulant
Composite coagulant Normal coagulant

 Liquid in nature, easy to handle &  Solid in nature (20 kg slabs),
direct dosing to water. solution
 Control Turbidity & COD both preparation, dosing are tedious
parameters job.
 In house control of quality  Control Turbidity parameter
 Dependent on vendor for quality.
21
Lab reaction with pure SO2 cylinder in Special Testing In Situ Reaction with Flue Gas after ESP of Unit 10 at
Lab at NTPC Vindhyachal NTPC Vindhyachal 22
Performance of our coagulant
Clean Water
Clean Water
Settled Impurity
23
Settled Impurity
Advantages
 Getting rid of procurement and handling of large quantity of limestone (120
MT/DAY).
 Extra burden of end product (Gypsum) can also be avoided (170 MT/DAY).
 In house consumption of end product (Composite Coagulant).
 Simultaneous removal of NOx during bombardment of e-beam.

24
COST COMPARISON
FGD EBM
INSTALLATION COST: 248 CR INSTALLATION COST: 160-180 CR
RAW MATERIAL COST: 2 CR PER RAW MATERIAL COST: NIL
YEAR END PRODUCT IS IN-HOUSE
END PRODUCT SELLING TEDIOUS USEFUL
JOB COST SAVING: 3.3 CR PER YEAR
AUX POWER CONSUMPTION: ₹  AUX POWER CONSUMPTION: ₹
420/KW 360/KW 25
Better than FGD
In-house useful end

Fly ash utilization
product 26
REFERENCE
 LI, LING, "PRODUCTION OF A NEW WASTEWATER TREATMENT COAGULANT FROM FLY ASH
WITH CONCOMITANT SO2 REMOVAL FROM FLUE GAS" (2008).
 A REVIEW ON ELECTRON BEAM FLUE GAS TREATMENT (EBFGT) AS A MULTICOMPONENT AIR
POLLUTION CONTROL TECHNOLOGY, A. A. BASFAR ET AL., NUKLEONIKA 2010;55(3):271−277
 ABSORPTION OF DILUTE SO2GAS STREAM WITH CONVERSION TO POLYMERIC FERRIC
SULPHATE FOR USE IN WATER TREATMENT, A.D. BUTLER ET AL. / CHEMICAL ENGINEERING
JOURNAL 98 (2004) 265–273
 TECHNO-ECONOMICAL COMPARISON OF ELECTRON BEAM FLUE GAS TREATMENT METHOD
WITH CONVENTIONAL PROCESSES, ANDRZEJ G. CHMIELEWSKI ET AL., NUCLEAR
TECHNOLOGIES AND METHODS, 111-112
27
AND……
“Innovation
distinguishes
between a leader
and a follower”-
Steve Jobs
28
28
29

Professional Circle: व िंध्याचल/ELIXIR

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Professional Circle: व िंध्याचल/ELIXIR

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Professional Circle: व िंध्याचल/ELIXIR

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

व िंध्याचल/ELIXIR

 CHALLENGES REGARDING FLY ASH UTILIZATION

60% ELECTRICITY GENERATED FROM COAL

Large quantity of ash

Fly Ash 80% Bottom Ash 20% 5

FLY ASH UTILISATION

Cumulative Ash Generation in 5844109

% Ash Generation (up to Dec, 36.33

% Ash Utilisation 17.34

 Non-availability of nearby auxiliary industry (like Cement)

 STRINGENT ENVIRONMENT NORMS

Parameters New Std St - I St - II ST - III St - IV St - V Remarks

R&M works in St-I &

600 St – I within limits.

FLUE GAS DESULPHURISATION (FGD)

 All fossil fuels contain certain amount of sulphur (0.1 – 5.0%)

 During combustion of coal significant amount of SO2 emitted from

 As per the latest notification of MoEF the desulphurisation of flue

Dry type Wet Type

 Wet scrubbing of SO2 ultimately leads to another burden of disposal /

 Increasing operational cost due to stringent environment norms

Possibilities of using fly ash as a source of coagulant

Consumption pattern of coagulant in Vindhyachal

Schematic of production of Composite coagulant from fly

Fly Ash Slurry

Flue gas • Through

• For the removal of

E-beam • Free radical production

• Reaction of SO2 with

 For a typical 500 MW Unit, if

Composite Coagulant V/S Normal Coagulant

Composite coagulant Normal coagulant

Performance of our coagulant

 In house consumption of end product (Composite Coagulant).

 Simultaneous removal of NOx during bombardment of e-beam.

Better than FGD

In-house useful end

You might also like