Posts

Zero Emission Coal (Los Alamos)

/0 Comments/in , /by

(One of a series of UFTO Notes based on the recent visit to Los Alamos National Laboratory)

Zero Emission Coal

Los Alamos is working to eliminate the environmental concerns associated with the use of fossil fuel, which will continue to be an important energy source well into this century. One technology the Laboratory is developing to achieve this goal is a zero emission process for converting coal and water into hydrogen, which is then converted into electricity, with virtually no emissions of pollutants. Thirteen entities with interests in coal production and energy generation have teamed up to form the Zero Emission Coal Alliance (ZECA) which plans to commercialize this process within five years.

The Technology In the context of DOE’s “Vision 21” goal to eliminate environmental concerns from the use of coal. Los Alamos is developing technology to achieve a zero emission process for converting a coal and water slurry into hydrogen, which is in turn converted to electricity via a high-temperature solid-oxide fuel cell.

The new process builds on CONSOL’s CO2 Acceptor Process, which was piloted in the 1970’s. While still relying on cycling of calcium oxide (CaO) to drive the production of hydrogen, enhancements produce separate streams of hydrogen and CO2. The hydrogen is used to generate emission-free electricity and the CO2 is reacted with abundant magnesium silicates to be permanently sequestered as a solid, inert and stable mineral carbonate.

Hydrogen gas is produced from water and coal using a calcium oxide (CaO) to calcium carbonate (CaCO3) intermediary reaction. Through a subsequent reaction, the calcium carbonate generated by hydrogen production is converted back into calcium oxide and a pressurized stream of pure CO2. The calcium oxide is recycled to drive further hydrogen production, and the CO2 stream is ready for easy disposal.

The hydrogen is fed to solid-oxide fuel cells to generate electric power, and the ~50% of waste heat produced by the fuel cells is not truly wasted because it is reinjected into the process to drive the calcination reaction.

The already pressurized CO2 stream is reacted with magnesium or calcium silicate mineral deposits to form geologically stable mineral carbonates. (The reaction is part of the natural geological carbon cycle; therefore, all mineral end products are naturally occurring and completely benign.) The mineral sequestration process is economically viable because the CO2 stream is non-mechanically pressurized in the hydrogen production process and the carbonation reaction is exothermic (i.e., it creates energy instead of consuming it).

In addition, the types of mineral deposits needed to carry out the reaction are abundant enough to handle all the carbon associated with the world’s coal reserves. Magnesium-rich ultramafic rocks, primarily peridotites and serpentinites, are the main candidates for mineral carbonation. Deposits distributed throughout the world, though in specific concentrated areas on each continent.
——–

The Alliance
Thirteen entities from the United States and Canada with interests in coal production and the use of coal for electrical generation have agreed to contribute $50,000 each to form ZECA.

Phase I: ZECA is currently structured with an executive team headed by Jim Berson, Director of Planning and Business Development from Kennecott Energy/Rio Tinto, a technology team headed by Dr. Hans Ziock, senior scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory, and a business team headed by Alan Johnson, President of The Coal Association of Canada. The goal of Phase I is to develop a business plan and a technical plan leading to the completion of a pilot plant in a five year time frame.

ZECA has begun to proceed with Phase I. The alliance however still welcomes the participation of additional members to ensure a broad spectrum of industry participation and expertise. As alliance members, participants in Phase I have the opportunity to help guide the work conducted under the supervision of the technical and business committees, as well as the opportunity to serve or participate on those committees at their discretion.

Additional information is available online:
http://www.lanl.gov/energy/est/zec/zec.html

for technical information:
Klaus Lackner, 505-667-5694, ksl@lanl.gov
Hans Ziock, 505-667-7265, ziock@lanl.gov

for business information:
Jim Berson, 307-687-6049, bersonj@kenergy.com
Alan Johnson, 403-262-1544, johnson@coal.ca

(I have several technical papers from Los Alamos, which I can send on request.)

Technology Transfer Opportunities – Oak Ridge National Laboratory

/0 Comments/in , /by

UFTO

PROPRIETARY

Final Report

Technology Transfer Opportunities in the Federal Laboratories

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Oak Ridge, Tennessee

June 1998

Prepared for:

Utility Federal Technology Opportunities (UFTO)

By:

Edward Beardsworth

Consultant

Contents:
Summary
Overview & Organization
Technologies & Programs

This report is part of a series examining technology opportunities at National Laboratories of possible interest to electric utilities

———————————————————–

This report is proprietary and confidential. It is for internal use by personnel of companies that are subscribers in the UFTO multi-client program. It is not to be otherwise copied or distributed except as authorized in writing.

———————————————————–

Summary

This report details findings about technology and technology transfer opportunities at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory that might be of strategic interest to electric utilities. It is a major update and revision materials developed previously, and is based on a visit to the lab in April 1998, and also draws from various publications, collateral information and website content.

Acknowledgments:

A special note of thanks to Marilyn Brown for arranging the agenda and her gracious and tireless support, and to all the ORNL staff who gave generously of their time and attention.

Also to Mr. Scott Penfield of Technology Insights, who accompanied the visits (as a representative of one of the UFTO utilities) and kindly provided his written account of the meetings for use in the preparation this report.

ORNL — Overview & Organization

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is a “GOCO” lab (government-owned, contractor operated). Lockheed Martin Energy Research Corp. is the contractor that manages ORNL. (Lockheed Martin also manages the Y-12 Plant in Oak Ridge, Idaho National Engineering Lab and Sandia National Lab.)

ORNL has a matrix organizational structure, where “divisions” aligned primarily by discipline have the people, and “programs” have the projects and budgets. On some occasions, divisions do get funds and projects of their own. ORNL finds that matrix management can work well if there is a balance of power and the right incentives.

Both divisions and programs live in research “ALD’s” or Associate Laboratory Directorates, headed by Associate Lab Directors who along with other administrative and support groups report to the Laboratory Director (Alvin Trivelpiece).

ORNL’s four research ALD’s are:

=> Energy and Engineering Sciences — Gil Gilliland 423-574-9920

(Div: Engineering Technology, Fusion., Instrum & Control)

(Prog: Energy Effic/Renew Energy, Energy Technology, Fossil Energy, Nuc Technol)

=> Life Sciences and Environmental Technologies

(Div: Chemical Technol, Energy, Environmental Sci, Life Sciences)

=> Adv. Materials, Physical and Neutron Sciences

(Div: Metals & Ceramics, Physics, Solid State, Chemical/Analytical Sci . . .)

=> Computing, Robotics, and Education

(Div: Computer Science and Mathematics, Robotics and Process Systems…)

There is work in all four ALDs of potential interest to utilities. The point of contact for this study was established through the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Program, which oversees activities involving 11 different research divisions. Contact was also made with the Fossil Energy Program, with a similarly broad scope. Divisions encountered include Engineering Technology, Instrumentation & Control, Metals & Ceramics, and others.

Staffing level is now at approximately 5000, of which 1500 are scientists, of which about 1/2 are PhDs. ORNL’s 1997 budget was about $550 million. Of this amount, the largest program areas were Energy Research (28%), Environmental Management (25%) and Energy Efficiency (16%). Nuclear programs, which were once the principal focus of the Laboratory, are identified at a level of 4% in the overall budget; however, when supporting research topics (e.g., High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR), materials, NRC Programs, etc.) are included, some $100 million can still be identified as nuclear related.

A major new initiative at ORNL is the Spallation Neutron Source facility. The 1999 budget year will constitute a major test for this project, as it will include a construction line item for the first time. If approved, construction is expected to take 6-7 years. A new ORNL directorate has been established to oversee the Spallation Neutron Source project.

———————–

Key Contacts:

Website: http://www.ornl.gov

Primary UFTO contact:

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Program:

A.C.(Tony) Schaffhauser, Director, 423-574-4826, schaffhausac@ornl.gov

Marilyn Brown, Deputy Director, 423-576-8152, brownma@ornl.gov

Working with ORNL:

Technology Transfer: (Licensing and CRADAs)

Dean Waters, Acting Director, Office of Technology Transfer,

423-576-8368, watersda@ornl.gov

Sylvester Scott, Director, Licensing, 423-576-9673, scotts@ornl.gov

Partnerships: (CRADAs, User Program, Personnel Exchanges, Guest Research Assignments)

Louise B. Dunlap, Director, Office of Science and Technology Partnerships,

423-576-4221, dunlaplb@ornl.gov

Public Relations: Joe Culver, Director, Public Affairs,

423-576-0235, culverjw@ornl.gov

Partnership Mechanisms

ORNL makes use of an increasingly broad array of contracting mechanisms, including CRADAs, Work for others, User Facility Agreements, etc. Greater use of simpler standard formats makes the process much quicker than in the past.

They are seeing an increasing number of “100% funds-in CRADAs” (i.e. no cost sharing by the lab) from industry, as a cheaper alternative to work-for-others with essentially equivalent intellectual property rights. The Lab also will have as many as 4000 guest assignments per year, 1/4 of which are from industry, where visitors use the facilities or work with staff on CRADAs, etc.

———————–

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Program

Tony Schaffhauser, Director 423-574-4826 schaffhausac@ornl.gov

Marilyn Brown, Deputy Director 423-576-8152 brownma@ornl.gov

The EE/RE Program is a matrix organization that draws on several line divisions at ORNL for the majority of its personnel and technical facility resources, to set up multi disciplinary teams. DOE is the sponsor for most of the work, but they see industry and the public as the real customer.

ORNL budget expenditures controlled through the EE/RE Program office amount to some $80 million. The ORNL Energy Efficiency/Renewable Energy (EE/RE) budget was lower in 1996, but the level now appears to be stable.

Major Research and Development Areas

=> Transportation systems, including advanced automotive technologies, advanced materials, utilization of alternative fuels including biofuels, and transportation data.

=> Efficient building systems and for state and community programs, including heating, cooling, and refrigerating equipment; roofs, walls, and foundations; insulating materials; technology transfer; and retrofit of existing residential and commercial structures.

=> Industrial processes, such as bioprocessing, electric motor systems, advanced turbine systems, advanced materials, industrial heat pumps, and evaluations of energy-related inventions.

=> Utilities, including high-temperature superconductors (for transformers and transmission cables), power transmission and distribution systems, electric and magnetic field effects, biomass for power generation, and international programs (including IEA and APEC programs).

Technologies & Programs

Superconducting Technology Program for Electric Energy Systems

Fossil Energy Technologies

Real-Time Corrosion Monitoring

Hot Gas Filters

Materials R&D

Furnace Wall Corrosion with retrofit low-NOx burners

Effects of Coal impurities on fireside corrosion

Improved Stainless Steels

“Perfect Microstructures”

Nickel-Aluminide Alloys

Sulfidation Resistant Alloys

Building Technology Center

Frostless Heat Pump

High Efficiency Refrigerator (1 kwh/day)

Power Systems Technology Program

Energy Conservation Standards for Distribution Transformers

Flywheels and Energy Storage Technologies

Utility Restructuring and Electric Power Ancillary Services

Grid Reliability-Control Center Survey

Electric and Magnetic Fields Bioeffects

Research and Public Information Dissemination (RAPID) Program

Advanced Turbine Systems

Bioenergy Program

Motor, Steam, and Compressed Air Challenge Programs

Oak Ridge Centers for Manufacturing Technology (ORCMT)

Electric Machinery Center

Power Electronics Technology Center and Inverter Technology

Instrumentation & Controls

Machine Condition Monitoring and Diagnostics

Electrical Signature Analysis (ESA) for Utility Applications

Nonlinear data analysis–Component Failure Prediction

NRC/INPO plant database

Photonics and Hybrid Lighting

Superconducting Technology Program for Electric Energy Systems

Bob Hawsey 423-574-8057 hawseyra@ornl.gov

Web sites: http://www.ornl.gov/HTSC/htsc.html

http://www.eren.doe.gov/superconductivity/

(See special report and series of articles on “Superconductivity in Electric Power,”

pp 18-49, IEEE Spectrum, July 1997)

The discovery of high-temperature (i.e., above the boiling temperature of liquid nitrogen) superconductor materials dates to 1986. Since that time, the challenge has been to develop these brittle, ceramic-based materials into a form that can be produced and practically used. DOE research in this area has taken a major step increase, from $19 million in 1997 to $32 million in 1998. (By comparison, Japan is investing $100 million/year in superconductor research.)

DOE HTS Program

Contacts:

Jim Daley, Team Leader, 202-586-1165, james.daley@ee.doe.gov

or Joe Mulholland, Utility Liaison

202-586-1491, joseph.mullholland@hq.doe.gov

The DOE HTS program supports a balanced technology development effort. Wire and device technologies are developed through a large number of collaborative projects between U.S. national laboratories and industry, and systems technologies are supported through the SPI and other vertically integrated project teams.

DOE’s Superconducting Partnership Initiative (SPI) is a systems technology program designed to accelerate the development of HTS electric power systems. Begun in the fall of 1993, the SPI encourages the formation of vertically integrated teams comprised of partners who usually do not interact in the development cycle, involving close collaboration among system integrators, wire and device manufacturers, end-users (typically electric utilities)

Major projects include

– 5,000 hp high-temperature superconducting (HTS) motor

– 100 MVA HTS generator,

– 115 kV and 12.5 kV HTS transmission cable (2 projects)

– 5/10 MVA HTS transformers (2 projects)

– 15 kV HTS fault current limiter (2.4 kV successfully tested in 9/95 at a utility host site)

Fault Current Limiter

Later this year, pre-commercial (alpha) prototype will be tested by So Cal Edison and Lockheed Martin. Rating is 15-kV, normal 2 kA, intercepts/reduces by 80% a 20-kA peak symmetric or 45 kA peak assymmetric fault. Also functions as a 1/2 cycle circuit breaker. If demo successful, Edison will install it at a substation, and anticipates $1million in savings from avoiding need for a second bus. Next stage will be beta units.

Contact: Eddie Leung, Lockheed Martin program manager

619-874-7945, ext. 4636, eddie.leung@lmco.com

ORNL is participating in two of these partnerships.

Transformers — There is a strong need for medium power transformers (10-150 MVA) that are smaller, more efficient and free of fire hazard, to meet the growth in urban power density. These transformers will go inside building and in multistory substations, and provide higher ratings from existing substations.

— Waukesha Electric Systems (WES), Waukesha, WI

For the Waukesha program, ORNL is responsible for the engineering, design and science of the cooling system, while Intermagnetic General is producing the HTSC coil. WES did the core, instrumentation tank, pumps and test rig. An initial 1 MVA prototype has been constructed and entered testing at WES in February 1998. Initial results are good–the first operational US HTSC transformer easily sustains 2X overloads. Rochester Gas & Electric (RG&E) and Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI) participated in this initial demonstration.

The next step will be a 5 MVA system, which will provide power to the WES plant beginning in 1999. A larger utility advisory group is participating in this second step (includes several UFTO members). The initial commercial target is a transformer in the range of 10-30 MVA.

Contact: Pat Sullivan, VP Marketing, Waukesha, 414-547-0121, x 1531.

There is a separate transformer development effort that involves ABB, EdF, Los Alamos National Lab (LANL) and American Superconductor.

Cable — HTSC Cables hold the promise of far greater capacity– 5X the power in the same 8″ diameter pipe of conventional buried cable, and without the losses, heat, oil and range limitations.

— Southwire,Carrolton, GA

The Southwire HTSC cable project is expected to culminate in an initial demonstration at Southwire in 1999. The planned 100 ft, 3-phase, 12.4 kV, 1250 Amp cable will provide power (30 MVA) to Southwire facilities. Southern Co, Georgia Transmission Co, and So Cal Edison are partners. DOE is providing half of the $14 million. Southwire has built a 200 ft clean room manufacturing facility, and recently delivered a 5 meter test cable to ORNL for testing.

Pirelli and Los Alamos are pursuing a parallel HTSC cable initiative, with participation by Detroit Edison. The initial objective is a 25 kV line.

Other HTSC development initiatives mentioned include motors/generators (including flywheel motors/generators under development at Boeing) and kaolin magnetic separation equipment being developed by Dupont for the paper industry.

NOTE- More uility participation is needed–to provide advice, and as partners, cofunders and beta test hosts. Any kind of innovative proposal is more than welcome.

RABiTS (TM) Process for Coated High-Temperature Superconductors

http://www.ornl.gov/~vhk/rabits.html

Oak Ridge researchers have produced a roll-textured, buffered metal, superconducting tape with a critical current density of 300,000 amperes per square centimeter in liquid nitrogen, which may pave the way for the future manufacture of practical yttrium- or thallium-based conductors for electric power applications.

To produce a superconducting wire sample, the ORNL researchers first developed a process called rolling-assisted biaxial textured substrates, or RABiTS(TM), which enables the superconducting materials to have a high degree of grain alignment in all directions, a necessary condition for more efficient current flow through the superconductor.

MicroCoating Technologies (MCT) in Atlanta and ORNL announced on April 16 that MCT has licensed key patents. “MCT scientists within a six-month period have successfully deposited both HTS coatings and oxide “buffer layers” on several single crystal oxide substrates. MCT also successfully deposited buffer layer on textured nickel. The epitaxy of some buffer layers is as good or better than with any other deposition technique to date. In addition, MCT’s open atmosphere process can meet or exceed industry-wide cost targets to enable commercial-scale production of superconductor technology.”

Other licensees include Midwest Superconductivity and Oxford Superconducting Technology, with two more pending.

Fossil Energy Technologies

Rod Judkins 423-574-4572 judkinsrr@ornl.gov

ORNL described some additional advancements in materials and technology for fossil and related applications that were not addressed in the ORNL survey of utilities (developed by Technology Insights and sent to UFTO members in mid 1997). Some examples are:

Real-Time Corrosion Monitoring: A flash of laser light is impinged on a fossil boiler wall. By observing the infrared response of the area, corrosion related effects, such as thinning, debonding and delamination can be inferred.

Hot Gas Filters: In partnership with manufacturers, ORNL has developed two distinct classes of hot gas clean up filters.

– A ceramic composite (SiC-based) filter developed with 3-M is primarily targeted to fluidized bed combustion applications. The filter has been tested in AEP’s Tidd Plant and a Studvik incinerator in S. Carolina. It is available through 3-M. Contact Ed Fisher, 612-736-1005

– A lower temperature (700 – 1000 deg C) iron-aluminide filter, with high resistance to sulfidation, has been developed in partnership with Pall Corp. (Portland NY) and is nearing commercial introduction. An alternative to ceramics, it can be made with standard manufacturing equipment. Tests at the University of Cinncinnati show excellent corrosion resistance. Coal gasification is the target application.

Materials R&D

Ron Bradley 423-574-6095 bradleyra@ornl.gov

Ian Wright, 423-574-4451 wrightig@ornl.gov

Furnace Wall Corrosion with retrofit low-NOx burners — root cause is flame licking walls, so that control of flame characteristics using sensor-feedback arrangements should be the best solution. Hence, there is a need to develop sensors to monitor flame condition as input to control mechanism. ORNL has approaches for this, using chaos theory to analyse the flame signatures, for instance (Stuart Daw, David Schoenwald). There will also be a continuing practical need for diagnostics, coatings, repair techniques, etc., since not all boilers will be amenable to combustion control, and the use of multiple and varying coal sources will lead to continuing corrosion problems in some parts of the furnace wall. Sulfidation-resistant ferritic alloys (ORNL’s iron aluminides) promising as overlay/cladding, but difficult to apply reproducibly. Development program with Lehigh Univ-utility boiler consortium (Prof. Arnie Marder) is showing good promise.

Effects of Coal impurities on fireside corrosion — Chlorine limits based on fundamental misunderstanding–only a problem when other combustion problems (flame impingement) present. Developing in situ probes to measure short-term corrosion.

Resonant Shock Compaction Solidifies Coal Ash

/0 Comments/in , /by

Resonant Shock Compaction, LLC (RSCL), has a new way to solidify coal ash and other waste into high value building materials. The patented process has already been in commercial use for over 10 years, producing special large refractory components from a variety of materials.

Basically, the material is placed between two “shake” tables, and resonant vibrations are applied, setting up a shock wave. The material flows and intermixes to become very uniform and very hard, compacted by 40-60%. The resulting block or panel contains 80-90% ash material, and is impermeable, nonleaching, and has very high strength, meeting ASTM standards for many construction applications. It also can be sawed and nailed.

The process features low capital costs, high process throughput, and large size shapes, suitable for many types of building products, and enabling new more economical building practices.

Besides turning coal ash into building products, the technology can also immobilize radioactive and hazardous material. A remediation service based on RSC is under discussion.

The technology has also been tested in combination with Argonne’s Ceramicrete binder (see UFTO Note October 23, 1997), and substantially enhances the performance of that process.

The company will grant site licenses, and is seeking equity investment for working capital and to support business development. Discussions and negotiations are already underway with a number of utilities. A revised business plan will be ready shortly, and technical and economic information is available from the company.

Contact: RSC,LLC, Denver CO
Keith Weir or Robert Pressey, 303-316-4080

—————————————–
Company News Release January 14, 1998

Resonant Shock Compaction, LLC (RSCL), a Colorado corporation, exclusively licenses the patented and proven resonant shock compaction (RSC) technology. The RSC technology converts coal combustion byproducts or mine tailings into value-added building materials. The process is also used to compact and stabilize hazardous and radioactive contaminated soil and debris for storage and disposal.

RSC applies rapid periodic impacts to granular material (e.g., coal ash, mine tailings, and soil) placed in a mold, to reduce volume and porosity. When combined with inexpensive proprietary binders, resonant shock compaction produces construction blocks, pavers and panels, or compacts and stabilizes waste for storage and disposal. The throughput is nominally 100 tons per day. Capital and operating costs are low.

RSCL has completed a series of developmental programs this past year to qualify resonant shock compaction for (1) converting coal combustion byproducts (CCB’s) into building materials and (2) treating radioactive and heavy metal contaminated soils for storage and disposal. Public Service Company of Colorado has supported a development program to convert Class F fly ash, Class C fly ash, and bottom ash into concrete-like blocks, pavers, and panels. Argonne National Laboratories (DOE) and the University of Denver supported the soil remediation program.

At the 1997 DOE Low Level Mixed Waste Conference it was reported that resonant shock compacted samples of cadmium and chromium contaminated soils passed TCLP leach test, were volume reduce by 50%, and greatly strengthened using cementaceous fly ash, and proprietary phosphates. Argonne National Laboratories conducted a comparison of resonant shock compaction, hydraulic pressing, and block compaction of contaminated soils and ashes incorporating their proprietary Ceramacrete binder. Results have shown the strength of resonant shock compaction parts to be far superior to block compaction, and with porosity and volume reduction superior to pressing.

ASTM certified laboratory tests reported that resonant shock compaction CCB ash- based products met ASTM compressive strength and durability (low porosity or freeze- thaw resistance) standards for aggregate, construction brick, facing brick, pedestrian light pavers, traffic interlocking pavers, concrete grids, and concrete blocks.

These products have the strength and durability of concrete or brick masonry products yet are as easily sawed, nailed, screwed, or bolted with conventional construction tools as wood, and less expensive than either. Tilt-up panels, for industrial or residential buildings, can be fabricated with built-in nailing studs and utility channels, which are immediately ready for finishes such as insulation, painting. stucco, plaster, or dry wall.

RSCL is developing a transportable resonant shock compaction unit for on-site processing of CCB’s or contaminated soil. This unit will validate capital, operating costs, manufacturing costs, and production capacity. It will also measure flexibility to produce durable (low porosity, freeze-thaw resistant) ash-based construction materials and stabilized waste. RSCL is seeking partners to develop a 50-100 tons per day commercial plant estimated to cost $500,000 to $1,000,000. Products can be manufactured as blocks or panels (up to one ton), or waste compacted into 55 gallon barrels.

For additional information or arranging tests of your materials please contact:

Robert Pressey, Managing Director, 303-316-4080 fax 303-316-8490

New EIA reports

/0 Comments/in , /by

DOE Energy Information Admin issued two major reports yesterday

Electric Power Annual 1996
Renewable Energy Annual 1997

The first section of their “What’s New” webpage is shown below. The website provides links to summary, content, and pdf versions of each.

What’s New at EIA http://www.eia.doe.gov/new.html
**Electric Power Annual 1996 – Volume I (11/5/97) This report presents a summary of electric power industry statistics at national, regional, and State levels. The objective of the publication is to provide industry decisionmakers, government policy-makers, analysts, and the general public with data that may be used in understanding U.S. electricity markets. View an on-line summary of the publication. The data tables from this report are also available in ASCII format. This entire publication is also available for downloading as a PDF

Quarterly Coal Report – April-June (PDF – 1.5 MB) (11/5/97) This report provides comprehensive information about U.S. coal production, distribution, exports, imports, receipts, prices, consumption, and stocks. Coke production, consumption, distribution, imports, and exports data are also provided. View an on-line summary of the publication.

**Renewable Energy Annual 1997 – Volume 1 (11/03/97) This report presents the following information on the history, status, and prospects of renewable energy in the United States: historical renewable energy data; estimates of renewable resources; characterizations of renewable energy technologies; descriptions of industry infrastructures for individual technologies; evaluations of current market status; and assessments of near-term prospects for market growth. View an on-line summary of the publication. This entire publication is also available for downloading as a PDF

The Impact of Environmental Compliance Costs on U.S. Refining Profitability (10/30/97) Analysis of effects of environmental compliance costs on U.S. refining profitability in the 1990’s for major energy companies.

Special Report on China’s Energy Sector (10/28/97) As Chinese President Jiang Zemin visits the United States during the week of October 27, 1997, the U.S. Energy Information Administration is releasing an extensive report on China’s energy sector. Included are some charts which include energy forecasts for China as well as analysis on the structure of China’s energy sector. Also included are some charts forecasting China’s carbon emissions from energy sources.

Mitigating Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Voluntary Reporting (10/28/97) Results of the second year of the Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases Program.

Pressurized Fluidized Bed Combustion Study

/0 Comments/in , /by

DOE Seeks US Power Company for Adv. PFBC repowering design study

Commerce Business Daily 4/13/96

The DOE is seeking a volunteer U.S. power industry electrical generation company interested in participating in a site specific study to develop a conceptual design for Advanced Cycle 2nd Generation Pressurized Fluidized Bed Combustion (PFBC) technology as a coal fueled repowering concept at the actual power industry company’s electrical generation site.

The site should be well-suited to such a repowering. Site selection preferred characteristics should align to the following: (1) Coal – Fueled Plant, (2) Currently Operating, (3) Subcritical Steam Plant, (4) 100 TO 300 MWe Single Unit Capacity or multiple units with combined capacity in this range, and (5) Medium to High Sulfur content in Fuel. The DOE and power industry participant will visit the site and develop lists of the necessary information about the plant, operations, fuels, and regional economics to allow preparation of the evaluation.

The DOE will work with the participant company to develop generation production costing evaluations to establish the capacity factor for each option for the unit dispatched using the host participant’s particular operating environment. This will be used to develop meaningful yearly projections of expected use, allow evaluation of the number of start-stop cycles avoided because of the improved dispatch with the repowering technologies, and to develop industry-method-based economic comparisons of the options. The DOE will develop a conceptual design and economic evaluation using procedures familiar to electrical generation company planners. The DOE will evaluate the technical requirements for equipment/plant compatibility as well as the economics and schedule requirements for a repowering project. Advantages and practical aspects of repowering will be determined. Issues such as remaining equipment life’ demolition requirements, spare parts requirements, permitting, and dispatch requirements will be addressed.

All power company participant information will be conducted under policies that would provide strict nondisclosure of information these companies identify as being ”company proprietary information.” The power plant site will not actually be modified, but sufficient detail will be developed to show the feasibility of upgrading the participant’s site to Advanced Cycle 2nd Generation PFBC technology.

A final report summarizing all study activities will be prepared and submission of a technical paper for publication on this work, and attendance at a conference is suggested by the DOE.

If your company is interested in a volunteer partnership with the DOE to develop a conceptual design for High Efficiency Advanced Cycle 2nd Generation PFBC technology as a repowering concept, please respond in writing providing background information about your company along with information regarding the proposed repowering site (e.g., coal fuel type, limestone/dolomite availability, repowering unit size (MWe)).

To be considered for this volunteer partnership your response must be received no latter then 4:00 P.M. EDT on May 3, 1996. All questions concerning this matter should be addressed to Mr. Robert Travers at (301) 903-6166, DOE Office of Fossil Energy.