pf

CONF-800428 - Vob t
Volume 1 of 3 Volumes

'qh Proceedings of the Sixth International

Conference on Fluidized Bed Combustion
Volume i - Plenary Sessions

April 9-11, 1980

I Atlanta Hilton
Atlanta, Georgia
Published August 1980

U.S. Department of Energy

Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy
Office of Coal Utilization

a
 DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an

agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States
Government nor any agency Thereof, nor any of their employees,
makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal
liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or
usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process
disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately
owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product,
process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or
otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement,
recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any
agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein
do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States
Government or any agency thereof.
 DISCLAIMER

Portions of this document may be illegible in

electronic image products. Images are produced
from the best available original document.
$Y&$abX& from
 CONF-800428 - Vol. 1
Volume 1 of 3 Volumes
UC-9Oe

The Proceedings o f t h e Sixth International

Conference on ~luidized' Bed Combustion
Volume 1 - Plenary Sessions

April 9-11, 1980

Atlanta Hilton
Atlanta, Georgia

Published August 1980

Sponsored by. :- ,

U.S. Department of Energy

Electric Power Research Institute . .
U.S. Environmental protection Agency
Tennessee Valley Authority

Coordinated by
Courtesy Associates, Inc. I DISCLAIMER
This b w k ux prepared or sn acmunl o f work wnrofed by an agem o l the Unired Sxates Gowmmen!.
- ,
Neither ?he United S l a e h e r n m m t m r any agenn.lherml. nor any o l their emDlayee. makelany
warranty. expres or implied. or e u v m any lwl liability or reyantibilily for the -racy.
mmDletency. Or v r l v l n e n 01 any information. aDWralur. owducl. Or w o r n dirclose3. or
rcprentr that its u r -Id mt inlringe priwlely o m e d righrr Rclerence herein 10 any q l e i f i c
mmmercial pmducl. proseu. or rervice by trade mme. Irudemark. manuf3cturCr. or o l h e l w i ~ d , on
not n-urily mnttilvle 0. imply ilr endorrmenl. remmmcndstion. or tworing by the United
Scale Government or anv aym, thereol. The v i e w and Opinion$o l authors exor& herein do mt
net-ilv stareor r e l l r t t h o s o l the United States Government or any a J e w thereol.

U S . Department of Energy . ,

Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy

nffice ot Coal Utilization
lashington, D.C. 20585
 NEITHER THE U.S. GOVERNMENT NOR ANY OF I T S EMPLOYEES
MAKES ANY WARRANTY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED OR ASSUMES ANY LEGAL L I A B I L I T Y
OR RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ACCURACY, COMPLETENESS, OR USEFULNESS
OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, PRODUCT, OR PROCESS D I S C L O S E D O R
REPRESENTS THAT I T S USE DOES NOT INFRINGE UPON PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS.
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

VOLUME I - PLENARY SESSIONS

PLENARY 1 - Technology Overview

KEYNOTE ADDRESS: Roger LeGassie,

U.S. Department of Energy
Washington, D.C,

OVERVIEW OF U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL PROGRAMS

.Tnhn Byam, U.S. Departnle~~t

of Energy,
Morgantoim, West Virginia

Douglas Willis, Coal Research ~stablishment,

Stoke Orchard, United Kingdom

Johann Batsch, Kernforschungsanlage Julich

GmbH, Julich, Federal Republic of Germany

Zhan~,Xu-Yi, Tsing Hua University, Beijing,

People's Republic of China

Michael D. High, Tennessee Valley Authority,

Chattanooga, Tennessee

Kurt Yeager, Electric Power Research Institute,

Palo Alto, California

D. Bruce Henschel, U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina

PLENARY 2 - Fluidized Bed Combustion Development and Commercial

. .
Status Summary

he Technologist - H. Raymond Hoy, National Coal

Board,.Leatherhead, United Kingdom

The Utility User - Manville Mayfield, Tennessee

Valley Authority, Chattanooga, Tennessee

he Industrial Operator - David McKee, E.I. DuPont company,

Wilmington, Delaware . .

The Scandinavian Viewpoint - Vagn Kollerup, B.W. Damp,

Virum, Denmark

The Asian Viewpoint - Nagoya Institute of Technology,

Nagoya, Japan

The Continental Viewpoint - Johann Batsch, Kerntorschung-

sanlage, Julich, Federal Republic of Germany

The Coal Combustion Developer - William T. Reid, Consultant,

Coluinbus, Ohio
 .PLENARY 3 - The Customer Speaks: Panel Discussion

Shelton Ehrlich, Electric Power Research Institute,

Palo Alto, California

Steven I. Freedman, U.S. Department of Energy,

Germantown, Maryland

Robert Statnik, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Washington, D.C.

Ronald Read, International Harvester Company,

Chicago, Illinois

David McKee, E.1 . DuPont de Nemours, Inc., ~ilmington,

Delaware

Paul Bobo, Mead Corporation, Dayton, Ohio

Bruno Brodfeld, Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation,

Boston, Massachusetts

Andrew Jacobs, Analytic and Research and Development,

American Electric Power Service Company, New York, New York

Jack Apel, Columbus and Southern Ohio Electric Company,

Columbus, Ohio

Robert E. Uhrig, Advanced Systems and Technology,

Florida Power and Light Company, Miami, Florida

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

ATTENDEES - Alphabetical Listing 84

........................................................

VOLUME I1 - TECHNICAL SESSIONS

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Volume I1

OPERATING EXPERIENCE SUB SCALE

Industrial Coal Fired Fluidized Bed Demonstration

Program: A Progress Report: J.I. Accortt, J.R.
Comparato, W.R. Norcross, Combustion Engineering,
Inc., Windsor, Connecticut

The Operation of a Small Industrial Coal Fired

Fluidized Bed Hot Water Heater: C.I. Metcalfe, K.E.
Fegley, T.D. Halnon, A.M. Squires, Virginia Polytechnic
Institute & State University, Blacksburg, Virginia

COKQC;G, A Self-cleaning Coal Burner for Bi,p,h Temperature

Applications: W.F. Dawson, Alex Wormser, Wormser Engineer-
ing, Inc., Middleton, Massachusetts

Operating Experience with an 18 FT* Fluidized Bed

Combustor: Henry A. Hanson, Darrell D. Kinzler, Douglas
'C. Nichols, FluiDyne Engineering Corporation, Minneapolis,
Minnesota
VOLUME I1 - continued
. ,
Instrumentation and Controls for the 6 x 6 Fluidized
Bed Boiler Test Facility: R.P. Apa, Babcock & Wilcox
Company, Alliance Ohio; D.L. Bonk, Babcock 6 Wilcox
Company, Barberton, Ohio; C.J. Aulisio, Electric .
Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, California

Design of In-Bed Surface for Efficient Turndown:

Robert J. Divilio, Robert R. Reed, Pope, Evans
and Robbins, Alexandria, Virginia

Unit Performance of the EPRI/B&W 6' x 6I.Fluidized

Bed Combustor: J.A. Lewis, T.A. Morris, T.M. Modrak,
The Babcock & Wilcox Company, Alliance, Ohio; C.J.
Aulisio, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo
Alto, California

Industrial and Utility Fluidized Bed combustion

Designs: A.J. Grant, Babcock Contractors Inc.,
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Combustion in the Circulating Fluid Bed: An

Alternative Approach in Energy Supply and Environmental
Protection: V. Petersen,,G. Daradimos, H. Serbent and
H-W. Schmidt, Lurgi Chemie und Huttentechnik GmbH,
Federal Republic of Germany

he IEA Grimethorpe Pressurized Fluidised Bed Combustion

Experimental Facility.: E.L. Carls, M. Kaden, D. Smith,
S.J. Wright, A.R. Jack, NCB (IEA Grimethorpe) Limited, .
South Yorkshire, England

GAS CLEANUP

Investigations on the Leatherhead Pressurised Facility:

H.R. Hoy, A.G. Roberts, NCB Coal Utilisation Research
Laboratory, Leatherhead, United Kingdom

Activated Bauxite and Diatomaceous Earth Used as

Granular Sorbents for the Removal of Alkali Vapors
from Simulated Hot Flue Gas of PFBCs: Sheldon H.D.
Lee, William M. Swift, Irving Johnson, Argonne National
Library, Argonne, Illinois

Control of Particulate Emissions from the Pressurized

Fluidized Bed Combustion of Coal: R.C. Hoke, M. Ernst,
Exxon Research and Engineering Company, Florham, New Jersey.
VOLUME I1 - Continued

1
Turbine Systems Integration for Economic
Electric Energy Cost: D.L. Keairns, R.A. Newby,
-
D.F. Ciliberti. A.Y. Ranadive. R.A. Wenerlarz.
M.M. Ahmed, M.A. Alvin, D.H. Archer, Westinghouse
Research and Development Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Experiments on Electrostatic Charging of Dust

in the PFB Combustor Environment: P.W. Dietz, G.A.
Kallio, General Electric Company, Schenectady, New York

Fabric Filtration at High Temperatures: Dale A. Furlong,

Envirotech Corporation, Lebanon, Pennsylvania, Thomas
S. Shevlin, 3M Company, St. Paul, Minnesota

Ceramic Fiber Filter Media for High Temperature, High

Pressure Gas Cleanup: M. Shackelton, Acurex, Mountain
View, California

OPERATING EXPERIENCE COMMERCIAL

Operation of the Georgetown University Fluidized Bed

Steam Generator: Robert L. Gamble, Foster Wheeler "
Energy Corporation, Livingston, New Jersey

Operating Experience with Prototype Fluidised Bed

Boilers: J. Highley, W.G. Kaye, D.M. Willis, National
Coal Board, Stoke Orchard, England

Atmospheric Fluidized Bed for Coal and Wood Waste

Combustion, Especially for District Heating: Vagn
Kollerup, Burmeister & Wain Energi A/S, Virum, Denmark

Introduction of a Package Water Tube Fluidized Bed

Boiler: Michael J. Virr, Stone Platt Fluidfire Limited,
Brierly Hill, United Kingdom

Operating Experience and Test Results of the Prototype

Fluidized Bed Combustion Boiler at BHEL: Y.P'. Abbi,
-- -

R. Thirunavukkarasu, S. Srinivasaraghaven, K.T.U. Malliah,

Bharat Heavy Electricals ~td.,Tiruchirapalli, India

INDUSTRIAL SYSTEM DESIGN

Application of the Battelle Multi-Solid Fluidized Bed

Combustion System to Oil Field Steam Generators: J.P.
Fanaritis, Struthers Wells Corporation, Warren, Pennsylvania,
and H. Nacb, C.J. Lyons, Battelle Columbus Laboratories,
'Columbus,Ohio

Plant Auxiliary Systems in the Georgetown University

AFB Plant: V. Buck, C. Sala, Pope, Evans and Robbins
Incorporated, New York, New York

potential for FBC Firing in a Refinery: L.P. Golan,

G.M. Matta, EXXON Research and Engineering Company,
Florham Park, New Jersey
VOLUME I1 - Continued

Economic Evaluation of Fluidized Bed coal Burning ,.

Facilities for Industrial Steam Generation: J.E.

Mesko, Pope, Evans and Robbins Incorporated, New
York, New York

An Anthracite Culm Fired Fluidized Bed Steam

Generator for the City of Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania:
Ian G. Lutes, Frederick C. Wachtler, Foster Wheeler
Boiler Corporation, Livingston, New Jersey

The AFBC Coal Combustor for Cogeneration Development .

Program: P.A. Berman, Westinghouse,Electric Corp., ' ,

Concordville. Pennsvlvania. J.W. Smith. Rabcock 6

.
Wilcox Co. , R. s ~oicomb,union ORNL, oak Ridge,
Tennessee

BEHAVIOR OF MATERIALS OF CONSTRUCTION BOILERS

In-Bed Corrosion of Alloys in Atmospheric Fluidized

Bed Combustors: J. Stringer, Electric Power Research
Institute, Pa10 Alto, California; A.J. Minchener, D.M. ,

Lloyd, H.R. Hoy, National Coal Board, Stoke Orchard, . ,

United Kingdom ,... . .
Heat'Exchanger Materials for Fluidized Bed Coal . .
Combustors: T.G. Godfrey, R.H. Cooper, J.H. DeVan, . .
.c .
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee;
K.R. Drake, FluiDyne Engineering Corp., Minneapolis,
Minnesota

A Comparison of the High-Temperature Erosion-Corrosion

of Boiler Tube Materials by Pulverized Coal Fly Ash
and by Atmospheric Fluidized-Bed Combustion Fly Ash:
I.G. Wright, V. Nagarajan, R.D. Smith, Battelle's
Columbus Laboratory, Columbus, Ohio

Behavior of Heat Exchanger Alloys in Pressurized Fluidized

Bed Coal Combustion Environments: C. Spenger, J.W. Clark,
Westinghouse Research and Development, Pittsburgh, Pennsyl-
vania, M;S. Nutkis, Exxon Research and Engineering, Linden,
New Jersey; S.J. Dapkunas, U.S. Department of Energy,
Washington, D.C.
Materials for Pressurized Fluidized Bed Air Heater System:
J. Mogul, S. Moskowitz, S.M. Wolosin, Curtiss-Wright Corp.,
Wood-Ridge, New Jersey

Effects of Salt Treatment of Limestone on Sulfation and on

the Corrosion Behavior of Materials in AFBC Systems: O.K.
Chopra, G.W. Smith, J.F. Lenc, J.A. Shearer, K.M. Myles, .
I. Johnson, Argonne National Laboratory, ~r~onne,'Illinois
VOLUME I1 - Continued

UTILITY SYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS

20mw Atmospheric Fluidized Bed Combustion (AFBC)

Utility Pilot Plant - Design Features Resulting
from Performance Data of Operating AFBC Units:
C.K. Sadler, J.D. Fourrow, R.L. Lumpkin, Jr.,
Tennessee Valley Authority, Chattanooga,
Tennessee

Technology Assessment for an Atmospheric Fluidized-

Bed Combustion Demonstration Plant: M. Siman-Tov,
J.E. Jones, Jr., Union Carbide Corporation, Oak
Ridge, Tennessee

Fluid Bed Combustion Augmented Compressed Air

Energy Storage Systems: A.J. Giramonti, R.D.
Lessard, United Technologies Research Center,
East Hartford, Connecticut; D. Merrick, Coal
Processing Consultants, Harrow, England

Preliminary Assessment of Alternative Atmospheric

Fluidized-Bed Combustion Power Plant Systems: S.
Panico, Bums and Roe, Inc., Woodbury, New York;
C.R. McGowin, Electric Power Research Institute,. -
Palo Alto, California

Atmospheric Fluidized Bed Combustion Coal Feeding

Test Program: C.S. Daw, J.F. Thomas, R.S. Holcomb,
C .K. Andrews (TtiA'); Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
Oak Ridge, Tennessee

Wet and Dry Limestone Feeding Using an L-Valve:

T.M. Knowlton, I. Hirsan, Institute of Gas Technology,
Chicago, Illinois

Fuel Feed System for Fluid Bed Boiler: James C.

Short, Fuller Company, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania

OPERATING EXPERIENCE COMMERCIAL

Operating Experience with a Variety of Low Grade

Fuels in Fluidized Bed Combustors: G.G.:Copeland, .
Copeland Associates, Inc.. Oak Brook, Illinois

-
Design and Operation of FBC Hot Gas Producers for
Industrial and Agricultural Drying: J. Highley,
W.G. Kaye, National Coal Board, Stoke Orchard,
England; P.C. Wheatley, G.P. Worsley & Co. Ltd.,
Ha)Tdock, England

FBC Packaged Boilers-Accomplishments to Date:

H.J. "Mike" Michaels, Johnston Boiler Company,
Ferryaburg, Michigan

Performace and Testing of the Rivesville 30 MWe

Multicell Fluidized Bed Boiler:. G.T. Claypoole,
D.L. Hill, T.E. Stringfellow, L.L. Gasner, P.F.
Lipari, J.M. MacNeill; Pope Evans and Robbins, Inc.,
University of Maryland, Stone and Webster Engineering
Corporation
 -
I '
VOLUME I1 Continued

~tmospherccFluidized Bed combustors 35 MW-Flingern

and 6 MW-Konig Ludwig:Test and Demonstration Facilities:
Herman G. Krischke, Josef Langhoff, Ruhrkohle Oel
Und Gas ~ m b West
~ , Germany

. Development and Commercial Operation of a Circulating

Fluidized Bed Combustion System: F. Engstrom, Hans
Ahlstrom Labbratory, Hensinki, Finland

COMBUSTION AND BED PHENOMENA FLUIDIZED BED PHENOMENA

Two-Stage Fluidized Bed combustion of Coal: M. Tomita,

. T. Hirama, T. Adachi, H. Yamaguchi, Government.Indus-
trial Develo.pment Laboratory, Hokkaido Sapporo, Japan;
M. -Horio,Nagoya University, Nagoya; Japan

Experimental odeli ling of a High Temperature Partially

Defluidized Bed: D.J. Bushnell, N. Sitthiphnng, Oregon
State University, Corvallis, Oregon

Cold S1umping.Characteristics of a Fluidized Bed:

. .
'. M.E. Lackey,.H.W. Withers, Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
Oak Ridge, Tennessee ,

Summary of Alexandria PDU Test Results: R.R. Reed,

P.N. Dunne, N.P. Rossmeissl, Pope, Evans and Robbins Inc.,
Alexandria, Virginia

Improved Fluid Bed combustor Efficiencies through

Fines Recycle: William S. Rickman, General Atomic Company,
San Diego, California

Bed Carbon Loading and Particle Size Distribution in

Fluidized Combustion of Fuels of Various Reactivity:
M. D'Amore, G. Donsi, L. Massimi-lla,Universita Labora-
torio di Ricerche sulla Combustione, Naples, Italy

Fluidized-Bed Combustion Applications: J. Chrostowski,

R. Davis,-J.Zakaria, B. Jazayeri, Energy Resources Co.
Inc., Cambridge, Massachusetts

BEHAVIOR OF MATERIALS OF CONSTRUCTION/GAS.TURBINE AND POWER RECOVERY

Turbine Materials Performance in Combustion Gases from

Bed Combu~tor: S.A.
a Coal-Fired Pressurized Fl.~ldd.Lzed
Jansson, N.G. Nilsson, B.O. Malm, STAL-LAVAL Turbin AB,
Finspong, Sweden

High Temperature Corrosion/Erosion in the Effluent from

Pressurized Fluidized Bed Combustors: D.A. Grey, A.M.
Beltran, R.P. Brobst, R.L. McCarron,-GeneralElectric Co.,
Schenectady, New York
-
Assessment of Gas Turbine Erqgjon hy PFR Cnmbl.lstion Producto~
R.R. Boericke, R. Hantman, J. Kuo, General Electric Company,
Schenectady, New York; T. Mullen, New York State Energy
Research and Development Authority, New York
VOLUME I1 - Continued

-
Fluid Catalytic Cracker Power Recovery Expander
Applied to Pressurized Fluidized Bed Combustion:
W.G. Mathers, Roger Schonewald, Ingersoll-Rand
Company, Princeton, New Jersey

Improved PFB Operations: 400-Hour Turbine Test

Results: R.J. Rollbuhler, S.M. Benford, G.R.
Zellars, National Aeronautics and Space Adminstra-
tion, Cleveland, Ohio

Pressurized Fluidized Bed Technology Status for

. Coal Fired Combined Cycle Utility Power Generation:
R. Roberts, R.K. Amand, C.W. Knudsen. General Electric
Company, Schenectady, New York

VOLUME 111 - TECHNICAL SESSIONS

TABLE OF CONTENTS - Volume 111

MODELING

A Mathematical Model for Simulation of AFBC Systems:

J.W. Wells, R.P. Krishnan, C.E. Ball, Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee

Modeling of Flow Behavior and Finned Tube Performance

in the Turbulent Flow Regime: F.W. Staub, M. Kuwata,
A.C. Ku, R.T. Wood, ~ e n e r x ~ l e c t r iCompany,
c Schenectady,
New York

A Plume Model for Large Scale Atmospheric Fluidized Bed

Combustors: D. Park, 0. Levenspiel,.T.J. Fitzgerald,
Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon

A ~echniqbeto Pro1ect the Sulfur Removal Performance

of Fluidized-Bed Combustors: R.A. Newby, N.H. Ulerich,
D.L. Keairns, Westinghouse R6D Center, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania

Cold Fluidized Bed Modeling: T.J. Fitzgerald, S.D. Crane,

Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon

COMBUSTION AND BED PHENOMENA LOW GRADE FUEL COMBUSTION

Operational Application of Fluidised-Bed Furnaces in

Burning Low-Calorific and Waste Fuels in Czechoslovakia:
F.1-Knor, P. Novotny, Fuel Research Institute, Prague,
CSSR

Combustion Characteristics of Anthracite Culm in a . 827

Fluidized Bed: A.M. Leon, P.J. Choksey,,Dorr-Oliver
Incorporated, Stamford, Connecticut
VOLUME I11 - Continued

Fluidized-Bed Combustion of Israeli Oil Shale:

J.S. Mei, J.Y. Shang, R.L. Rice, U. Grimm, J.S.
Halow, -U.S. ~epartmentof Energy, Morgantown,'
West Virginia; W.J. Ayers, Jr., EG&G, Morgantown,
West Virginia; Y. Keren, IMI, Haifa, Israel

Combustion of Western Coal in a ~luidizedBed:

W.T. Ahel, R.L. Rice, J.Y. Shang, U.S. Department
of Energy, Morgantown; West Virginia; W.J. Ayers,
Jr., EGbG, Morgantown, West Virginia; D.G. Turek,
Science Applications, Inc. , Morgantown, west Virginia

Atmospheric Fluidized Bed Combustion Testing of

North Dakota Lignitc: G. Goblirsch, Grad Forks
Energy Technology CenterIDOE, North Dakota;
R.H. Vander Mol'en, Keith Wilson, Combustion
Power Company, Menlo Park, California; D. Hajicek,
Grand Forks Technology CenterIDOE, North Dakota

Fluidized-Bed Combustion of North Dakota.Lignite:

R.L. Rice, J.Y. Shang, U.S. Department of Energy,
Morgantown, West Virginia;.W.J. Ayers, EG&G,
Morgantown, West Virginia

Atmospheric Fluidized Bed Combustion of Municipal

Solid Waste: Test Program Results: L.C. Preuit,
K.B. Wilson, Combustion Power Company, Inc., Menlo
Park; California

SORBENT UTILIZATION

Status of Research on Agricultural Uses of Fluidized

Bed Combustion Residue: O.L. Bennett, W.L. Stout, J.L.
H e n , R.L. Reid, U.S. Department of Agriculture in
cooperation with the U.S. Department of Energy

Human Nutrition: W.L. Stout, E. Fashar

R.L. Reid, O.L. Bennett, USDA-SEA and West Virginia
University, Morgantown, West Virginia

Fluidized-Bed Combustion Residue Disposal: Environ-

mental Impact and Utilization: C.C. Sun, C.H. Peterson,
Westinghouse R&D Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Utilization of the B;-products from Fluidized Bed

Combustion Systems: L. John Minnick, Research
Consultant, Devon, Pennsylvania; Richard H. Miller,
Valley Forge Laboratories, Inc., Devon, Pennsylvania

Laboratory and Field Studies of Pressurized FBC Waste

Leachate Generation and Attenuation: T.W. Grimshaw,
D.N. Gamer, W.F. Holland, Radian Corp., Austin, Texas;
D.A. Kirchgessner, EPA Industrial Environmental Research
Laboratory, Research Park Triangle Park, North Carolina
VOLUME 111 - Continued

Use of Fluidized Bed Combustion Spent Sorbent

in Energy Forrest Production and Agriculture:
D.A.A. Arthursson, K. Valdmaa, Arthursson- I

Laboratoriet, Enkoeping, Sweden

ENVIRONMENTAL EMISSIONS NOx AND SO2 EMISSIONS

NO Formation and Reduction in ~luidizedBed
Combustion of Coal: J.M. leer, A.F. Sarofim,
Y.Y. Lee, I.lassachasetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, Massachusetts

NO, Control through Staged Combustion in

Fluidized-Bed Combustion Systems: T.E. Taylor,
Foster Wheeler Development Corporation, Livington,
New Jersey

Research and Development of NO, Emission Abatement

in a Fluidized Bed Coal Combustor in Japan: M.
Horio, Nagoya University, Japan; S. Mori, Nagoya
Institute of Technology, Japan; T. Furusawa, University
of Tokyo, Japan; S. Tamanuki, Japan Coal Mining
. Research Center, Tokyo, Japan
Control of Sulfur Dioxide and Nitrogen Ojtide Emissions
by Battelle's Multisold Fluidized-Bed Combustion Process:
H. Nack, Battelle, Columbus, Ohio; K.T. Liu, Gulf Science
& Technology Company; C.J. Lyons, .Battelle, Columbus,
Ohio

Simultaneous NO, and SO7 Emission Reduction with

Fluidized Bed Combustion: J. Tatebayashi, Y. Okada,
S. Ikeda, Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd., Osaka,
Japan

SORBENT EFFECTIVENESS

Sulfur Capturing Effectivity of Limestone and

Dolomites in Fluidized Bed Combustion: H. Munzner,
B. Bonn, Bergbau-Forschung GmbH, Essen, Federal
Republic of Germany

Agglomeration Methods of Improving FBC Sorbent

Utilization and Combustion: P.G. Dunne, Pope,
Evans & Robbins, Inc., Alexandria, Virginia;
L.L. Gasner, University of Maryland, College
Park, Maryland

:, K.M. Myles, W.M. swift, I. ~ohnson,Argonne

National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois

Natural Sorbent Attrition Studies Related.to Fluidized

Bed Coal Combustion: J. Franceschi, A. Kolar, G. Miller,
V. Zakkay, C. Ho, W. Skelley, S. Hakim, New York University,
. Westbury, New York '
 An Assessment of Advanced Sulfur Removal Systems
for Electric Utility AFBC: R.A. Newby, D.M. Bachovchin,.:.
C.H. Peterson, N.D. Rohatgi, N.H. Ulerich, D.L. Keairns, '
Westinghouse R&D Center, Pittsburgh,'Pennsylvania

Regenerative Portland Cement Sorbents for Fluidized-

Bed Combustion of Coal: A.S. Albanese, D. Sethi, M.
Steinberg, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton,
New York

I MODELING

An In-Situ Model of Fluidized Bed Coal Combustion:

S . Rajan, D. Dey,.Southern Illinois University,
Carbondale, Illinois

A Radiative Packet Model for Heat Transfer in

Fluidised Beds: K.K. Pillai, National Coal Board,
Leatherhead, England

The Effects,of Devolatizatton Kinetics on the

Injector Region of Fluidized Beds: R.J. Bywater,
The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, California

Ignition and Extinction Characteristics of Atmos-

pheric Fluidized Bed Coal Combustors: J.P.
Congalidis, C. Georgakis, Massachusetts Institute
of Technology, Cambridge, Massachueetts

A Fluidized Bed Combustor Freeboard Model: C.Y. Wen,

L.H. Chen, West Virginia University, Morgantown,
West Virginia

Char Combustion in the Freeboard Region: S.E. Tung,

T.Z. Chaung, P.K. Sharma', J. Hodges, J.F. Louis,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge,
Massachueetts

A Mathematical Model for Char Combustion in a Fluidized

. -
Bed: S.C. Saxena, A.
Argonne, Illinois
Rehmat, Argonne National Laboratory,

HEAT TRANSFER, INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL

Design Relationships for Predicting Heat Transfer to

Tube Bundles in Fluidized Bed Combustors: L.R. Glicksman,
N.A. Decker, Massachusetts Institute of Technology,
Cambridge, Massachusetts

An Investigation of the Influence of Bed Parameters on

the Variation of the Local Radiative and Total Heat
Transfer Coefficients Around an Embedded Horizontal Tube
in a Fluidized Bed Combustor: R. Vadivel, V.N.
Vedamurthy, Perarignar Anna University of Technology,
Madras, India

High Temperature Heat Transfer Studies in a Tube Filled

-
Bed: L.P. Golan, G.V. LaLonde, S.C. Weiner, Exxon Research
and Engineering Company, Flnrhnm Park, Ncw Jcrscy ' .
 Automatic Control of the ~eorgetownAtmospheric ,
Fluidized-Bed Boiler: R.J. Divilio, Pope,"Evans
and Robbins, Alexandria,Virginia; KL.' Criswell,
Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation, Livingston,
New Jersey
A Transient Sulfur Capture Model for a Fluidized
Bed Combustor: K.J.. Daniel, .S.D. Fimigan, General
Electric,Company,Schenectady, New York'
Process ~emperaturecontrol Using A Mixed Phase
Fluidized Bed Combustion System: Donald'Anson,
Battelle-Columbus. Columbus,.Ohio

Special Control & Instrumentation considerations

for Pressurized Fluid Bed Applications: A.H. 2011,
E. J. Garruto. ~urtiss-~right Coruoration Power
Systems, wood-Ridge, New jersey '

ENVIRONMENTAL EMISSIONS '

Update on Emission Measurements from Fluidized-Bed

Combustion Facilities: P.F'. Fennelly,R.R. Hall,
C.W. Young, J.M. Robinson, R.J. Kindya, G, Hunt,
GCA Corporation, Bedford,,Massachusetts
Control of partictilate Emissions from Fluidized-Bed
Combustion: Fabric Filters or Electrostatic'
Precipitators: D.V. Bubenick, D.C. Lee, R.R. Hall,
P.F. Fennelly, GCA Corporation;.Bedford, Massachusetts
The Response of Hot-Side Electrostatic Precipitators
and Fabric Filters to Fluid-izedBed Combuitors: N.Z.
Shilling, W.J. Morris, Envirotech.Corporation,Lebanon,
Pennsylvania
Physical, Chemical and Biological Characterization
.ofAFB Coal Combustion Effluents: C.H. Hobbs, A.L.
Brooks, R.L. Carpenter, C.R., Clark, P.B. DeNee, R.L.
Hanson, R.F. Henderson, J.O. Hill, G.J. Newt'on, S.J.
Rothenberg, S.H. Weissman. H.'c. Yeh,' Inhalation Toxi-
cology Research Institute, Albuquerque, New Mexico
~o&rehensive Characterization 6f Emissions from a
6' x 6' Atmospheric~luidizedBed Combustion System:
J.E. Howes,'Jr., S.E. Miller, Battelle-ColumbusLab-
oratories, Columbus, Ohio; T. Modrak, Babcock and
Wilcox Research Center, Alliance, Ohio; C. Aulisio,
Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, Cali-
fornia
 PLENARY -1
TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW
 TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW
Roger LeGassie
U.S. Department of Energy
Thank you-
Speaking on behalf of the Department of Energy,
let me welcome you to this Sixth International
Fluidized Bed Combustion Conference. I especially
want to extend - a warm welcome to those who h a v e
traveled here from other countries and other
continents.
I am pleased at the turnout here today --not
only the numbers but particularly the composition
of the audience. I am told that at the First
International Conference, the 40 or so attendees
were primarily scientists and research engineers.
Today, as I look out on 500 or more of you, I see
the largest proportion to be equipment manufactur-
ers involved primarily in producing commercial
fluidized bed boilers.
That's the way it should be. That's telling me
we are moving in the right direction. This is the
type of program we in the Department of Eqergy.can
be proud to be a part of.
As you have heard, I am here today representing
the Department's Assistant Secretary for Fossil
Energy, George Fumich. This is a conference George
wanted very much to be a part of. As many of you
know from personal experience, George has b.een
advocating fluidized bed technology as a clean way
of burning coal since the early 1960s.
Unfortunately, commitments both to a hectic
Washington schedule and to his doctors have pre-
vented him from being here today; But I pass along
his welcome and wishes for a profitable three days.
his conference comes at a particularly adpro-
priate time. We stand today at a pivotal point..ln
our history. Our nations have just completed a
decade in which the twin shocks of first a quad-
rupling of world oil prices in the first half of
the 708, then their subsequent doubling again last
year have told us that our energy problem is real,
that its economic and national security ramifica-
tions are severe, and that there is no quick. fix.
At the same time, we are ,entering .a new decade
-- a decade where fundamental changes will have to
be made in the way we use energy and in the fuels
we must burn to produce it. This transition is
worldwide. It requires cooperation among all the
industrial nations, and particularly it requires
the maximum in cooperation between industry and
government.
These changes are not ~ o i n gto happen over-
night. They are going to take time, and as indi-
vidual citizens in business , labor and government,
we have to build. the momentum now so that our
future vulnerability, to decisions made in a par-
ticularly unstable part of the world can be
reduced.
. In this country alone, we will be paying almost
.$90 billion this year alone for foreign oil --
that's $10 million an hour, every hour. of every
day. And with that money flows jobs and the
ability to maintain control of our economic
future.
The situation facing us is compounded by the
fact that the world's largest producer of oil, the
,Soviet Union, ii expected to become a net importer
of oil during this decade. That's a complicated
compounding factor with obvious, unfavorable
impacts.
There will be some increased production in
Mexico, the North Sea, and here in the U.S. where
more drill rigs are operating today than ever
before. But the picture is rather clear. World
potential for producing oil will soon begin to
decline.
That means if the consuming nations do not take
concerted and strong actions in the very near
future to substitute alternative energy ,supplies
for oil, . import prices considerably higher than
today's could become a reality.
We don't have the luxury of making unilateral
decisions about oil. To find a common ground that
serves ,all of our interests is a step-by-step
process that requires a lot of patience and coop-
eration.
. The effort among the industrialized consuming
nations began at the Tokyo summit last June. That
was followed in the fall by a meeting of energy
ministers in Paris. And that meeting was expanded
in December 'to a meeting of 20 nations of the
International Energy Agency.
. .Step-by-step; ,these sessions are setting the
framework for an international response to our
energy problems. Import ceilings have been set.
And it ii now the responsibility of individuals
like us --
in each country -- to go about finding
the mechanisms and the technology to meet or lower
these quotas.
 conferences like this are an important part of
the international commitment and cooperation that
will be needed to do just that. Just as our
energy problems are worldwide, so too can be the
solutions.
For those nations represented here today, coal
can be one of the answers. Our countries are not
energy poor. But we have built our social and
economic infrastructures on a foundation of cheap,
easily attainable oil. That is no longer a real-
istic premise. It therefore becomes incumbent on
us to turn to other energy sources, the ones we
have the most of -- like coal.
As I have said, we have completed an eventful
decade. Not only did it display the realities of
the energy problem, but it also revealed several
hints of potential solutions. From a technology
standpoint, one of those solutions is fluidized
bed combustion.
In the early' 19706, we saw fluidized beds
progress from bench scale engineering concepts to
the fabrication of actua'l commercial hardware.
From where I stand, that is the measure of
success -- hardware that is ready to operate in a
commercial environment, that can hold its OM in a
marketplace where regulations must.be met, permits
obtained, and in which a n ,investment must be
attractive before it is made.
It is hardware in which the private sector has
sufficient confidence -- technologically, economi-
cally and environmentally -- to begin. moving
forward on its om. It is a success measured by
commitments from manufacturers to produce and
warrant equipment. It is a success measured by the
confidence of users that the technoloy is advan-
tageous to own and that it can function dependably.
You will be hearing about some of these suc-
cesses during the next three days -- developments
resulting from both government programs and private
sector initiatives worldwide.
You will be hearing about our commercial proto-
type unit at Georgetown University in Washington,
D.C. Silce last summer, it has accumulated more
than 1400 hours of running time and has provided
steam throughout the winter to heat 51 campus
buildings totaling 2.2 million square feet.
We are about ready to begin operating a second
commercial prototype at the Great Lakes Naval
Training Center near Chicago. And two more units
-- these designed specifically to burn anthracite
or anthracite wastes -- have begun construction in
Pennsylvania.
You will be hearing about last month's run at
the Rivesville utility fluidized bed unit, which
achieved 200 hours of continuous operation after
substantial modifications were made to the coal
feed system.
And you will be hearing about activitiei and
recent successes in the United Kingdom, the Federal
Republic of Germany, the Peoples Republic,of.China,
India, and in the Scandanavia countries.
So if I had to subtitle this conference, I think
I would underscore "pronress" -- progress that is
producing. results, progress that has brought
fluidized bed combustion to the threshold of
commercial acceptance.
So where do we go from here? I prefer to view
this conference not as simply a recitation of
success stories, but as a guidepost to the work
that still needs to be done. And there is still,
considerable progress that must be made in the
future if we are truly to have commercially viable
fluidized bed systems.
The question of reliability must still be ad-
dressed -- particularly what the government's role
should be in building industries' confidence in
these units. As you know, we issued a solicitation
last year for firms to come in with proposals to
demonstrate several large industrial fluidized bed
systems. These systems would be operated in energy-
intensive industries where reliability is critical.
Yet a question remains of where government's
role ends and private industry becomes the dominant
player. We requested no additional funds in our FY
1981 budget for this program, but we recently asked
those companies that submnitted proposals to extend
them to June 1. This will enable us to gauge more
precisely whether this is something we in govern-
ment need to do, particularly in a time of Federal
budget restraint, or if so, how many demonstrations
are necessary.
You may be interested to know that last week, a
subcommittee of the House Science and Technology
Committee voted to add $10 million to our fiscal
1981 budget specifically for these industrial
demonstrations. We, along with many of you I'm
sure, will be watching to see if the other authori-
zation and appropriations committees follow suit.
In the utility sector, with the Tennessee Valley
Authority taking the lead in developing the atmos-
pheric fluidized bed system, we have re-focused our
attention on the pressurized concept.
The 1000-hour test run of a pressurized flui-
dized bed linked to a small gas turbine at Curtiss-
Wright's testing station l'ast fall was a sig-
nificant milestone in achieving the materials
durability that e l l be needed for PFBIcombined
cycle operations.
And we .are preparing to move ahead with con-
struction of a 13-megawatt fully-integrated PFB
pilot plant with Curtiss-Wright, beginning probably
by next spring.
It is in.the pressurized fluid bed work where
some of our most active and beneficial interna-
tional activities are taking place. At Grime-
thorpe, England we are preparing for firing the
first coal and beginning "hot" shakedown later
this year. As a precursor to this work, the
project is currently performing "link tests" at the
Leatherhead facility, and it was there that we
recently completed 1000-hour test with General
Electric and Stal-Lava1 cleanup systems and cas-
cades. This test achieved favorable results and
confirmed our conclusion that the technology is
ready to move ahead.
This work will be essential to the eventual
commercial success of PFBs in both the U . S . and
Europe, and'you will be hearing more about these
activities as the conference'progresses.
In all, I think we have a comprehensive flui-
dized bed program with government and industry from
several. nations playing key roles. Now it's up to
us --representing those governments and industries
-- to make that program work. The economic and
national security stakes are very high, and we
don't have the luxury of failure as an option.
With the technical expertise, along with the
marketing ingenuity and the international coopera-
tion, that exists in this room today, we can do
this and still maintain our commitments to a clean
environment and a healthy economy.
Once again, let me say on behalf of the Depart-
ment of Energy that we appreciate your attendance
and commend your interest and support of this new
and important technology. I hope in the upcoming
sessions that you wil be candid about your concerns
and talkative about what you think our future
actions should be.
That's the only way the progress we achieved in
the 1970s will carry over into the 1980s.
Thank you.
OVERVIEW OF U . S . AND INTERNATIONAZ. PROGRAMS
 FLUIDIZED BED COMBUSTION; A
STATUS CHECK
JOHN W. BYAM
THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
MORGANTOWN ENERGY TECHNOLOGY CENTER
SIXTH.INTERNATIONAL FLUIDIZED-BED
CONFERENCE - - APRIL 9-11, 1980
Good morning. I would. like to
speak to you this morning concerning..
DOE s . fluidized-bed program, in gen-
eral, a basic talk that I have titled
"Fluidized-Bed Combustion, A Status
Check." This is a review of the status
of DOE'S program, where we are and where
we are going in fluidized-bed technology.
DOE, as you know, has been active in
fluidized-bed combustion of coal since
the late 60's when it was known as the
Office of Coal Research. The work was
originally started with the Alexandria
facility, and in the early 70's the
Rivesville project was undertaken and
the Rivesville unit built and operated
since 1976.
The question comes up as to why
DOE is interested in fluidized-bed com-
bustion. The primary reason, of course,
is the advantages over conventional
combustion. I am sure that many in the
room know the.se advantages; but for the
interest of those who may not, I will
briefly review the FBC advantages as we
in DOE see them.
The primary advantage of fluidized-
bed combustion is the reduction of SO,
emissions during the combustion process.
There is also a reduction in NOx emis-
sions and the capability to burn a very
wide range of fuels. Other advantages
include a modest reduction in cost for
the capital, equipment, and operations
of a fluidized-bed plant versus a con-
ventional steam plant; the fact that
fluidized-bed technology can be used to
burn the high ash western coals and
lignites as well as the Anthracites
and high sulfur bituminous coals of
the east; and the fact that FBC tech-
nology can burn low-grade combustibles,
not only coals, but industrial waste.
DOE has therefore established a program
to address these various objectives and
our program goals are shown in figure 1.
- haw CePcNwr kLIne~~ln/(Pw\e~~ln
- ~ ~ ~ T P Ah RISK CYCLE
I E
- S v s m CPmax PRmss T w r m ~VELCUENT
Figure 1 - FLUIDIZED BED COMBUSTION PROGRAM GOALS
AFB PROGRAM
In the area of Industrial Atmospheric
Fluid -Bed Boilers (AFBB), DOE is
attempting to demonstrate in a very wide
variety of industrial applications,
AFBC reliability. We are also attempt-
ing to develop and are in the process
of, at this time, d.eveloping a very
good operating cost data base.
In the area of AFB application to
Utilities, we are assisting TVA in
addressing the technology issues and
are coordinating and working with TVA
who has the lead in applying AFB tech-
nology to Utilities.
In PFB applications, we are working
in the areas of developing component
reliability, operability and demonstrat-
ing a low-risk cycle, optimizing the
system process for turndown, and finally
in the area of developing a wide tech-
nology base. In this last area, we
are looking ahead at advanced technolo-
gies as well as establishing additional
data to answer some of the questions
that exist today. In addition, we are
developing very comprehensive data base;
and are working to define improved proc-
ess configurations.
 Fron theee projects we have devel-
oped a series of design development
goals for the fluidized-bed program,
an$ this is b a s i c a l l y where &e see our-
selves going. We feel that we must
develop a fuel f l e x i b i l i t y multi-fuel
fir* c a p a b i l i t y and a high c ~ u s t i o n
cfficiencp and overall p l a a t efficiency.
Of course, it must be w f t h i n envirqn-
mental compliaace at all times. Vork
on r e l i a b i l i t y , safety, ease of mainten-
ance for the p l a t , a rapid start-up
and shutdown f o r the larger u n l t s so
that they are comparable with the e x i s t -
ing utilftAes, atad p o d load following
tamdown capabilftfes i n also required.
Fiwre 2 8-IP of
8h0ppg &
AFBC facilities that DOE has available
t o it plus those that &re available in
private indnmtry. These are the sites
that are available now to addres-s the
issues, As you can see, there is a
large nuder of sitee that are in the
r a g e of 10 square feet or l e s s . We
are now beginuing to g e t in place zhs
larger units, the d-s, wh&ch will
give US an expanded data base at the
around the 100 t o
next step
YP
1,000 square oot range.
We Bwe a group of f a c i l i tfes that
are egpebla o f addreasSng all phases of
S E X work, the AFB atility p b s e , the
dFB industrial plume which a t e repre-
qstd by tbe demonstration units, tech-
nology muppbtt bars units, and unit6 to
aupport the pressurized fluid1zed-bed
work.
I, would like to now give you n
brief ovamieta of the activity in each
of these areas. 1 have intended this
t o he a very brief overview and hoge
you will attend the various sessions
that will follow which will cover each
of these projects in detail.
The Mrsr unit, as memtioaed by
Mr. LeGasaSey i s the Georgetown unit
whic;b .had b e a operating since August
of 19791 It produce 100.,000 pwnde en
honp of satatat& steam at 25.0 -paig with
the capability to go to 625 psig. To
data, it has urceeded 1,600 hours of
o eration and hen ~ o d w c e da durn of
88,000 pounds per hour of steam.
Figure 3 is a 1 ayout eft &ha * h i p -
merit a t .Ceoqg&omi. Of $narrlinte&qt
. is the fact :that i * nt -1bem o s t o k e
merbed. fbed Wmtsr far e'P feed ansf a
gravSty f l a w fadbed linp tune fedd 8.8-
tam. Ffguke 4 g W e s y0Q4 a better idea
the
sf the werull War eappnmts af the
faeiltfp. ihe ficiuty uttriZ%$t. a bag-
house, ar' du$t coileetioa .
'
The ijext facilitfr' i a a
t Great fidkes
=it be- bul'lt by Cokbuation 'Ibkir-
. Pi te 3 1s an m i b t t s 3 n s e p t
T
of Ehc d f 'e as it w i l l lo& &cie it 5s
c'apletc. mf!are $n t h e f . w t r u c t i f +
phsil- rfght 'now. The bprilbiag @$milLd
up,, bd'ltr f s in 'plaqd, d tlira"t
'
boiler. ldtre Lo cuw oq k+ ' m$ Yls
opcri.Cycmal 3h 'Sahae. o f 3 9 9 . , - --. - *
+-
-.
AhqZBer -oh$$ prdjeet 3s' the
m an Emad+ 'Qfl &zi:er ~ r q ~ i $:*hi+ i
hverki.p.cea uaimA* a f lulbi~ad-bed
boilmr' t o h e i e e e fee3 rpcIrIr''Par4
3
reg4sry. In t h e studies that &h
dursug Phase I, it was , d e t e m e d thut,
in fact, veryi mfficiqmt: h-t traaufur
wal arcormflliehiea~ and the, p$gc$as wae
viqble Ero* a c&i beating erw@bt.
K w w e ~ : , the pru155ea beewe me pf
logistics. ' ~&catt& a$ t& @at
of u d t a . that would be q b 3 r + - $a' s
rafinerp; $0 to 90 a t e , the& a
.qpiry sesioua prokXer sd* coil &4 1-he-
dtmc trant@aktstfon. When the. overall
econo&cs iavolved --red, ft
appeared that t h i s process wad not ~ C D -
n o u l ~ a l l yfeasibLa for a tsfuefg appli-
icetion and therefore DOE chose not t a
proceed w i t h the demonstration unit.
3 - BEOM- UMASfTY AFB WU
TY MODEL
19
 has, as Mr. LeGesie m n t h e d ,
D ~ E
twa autkareite pmdeeta underway. The
entb~aaite, c u b prdjeck at ~ k f w ial l
prw1d.e 20,POO povsds an hour of steam
to an indus'trial park. That f a c i l i t y
1s in the ~ondtruceion pbame now and
w i l l be starting up in April af 1981.
The 'lJflkes-Barre facility w i l l pro-
vide 104,000 pound~per Botv of heating
ateam to ttne a m t o w n area af the City
Wilkear Barre. me f a c i l i t y is iq
the f h a l design stages and constrtrction
will he start; th28 fa11 w i t h opera- -
3
tion in late 19 1.
Tke uti&t$y pmgram fnc1.4des the
Rivesville unit wh2CB has urn completed
a ZOO-hour run a f t e r U a p sewera1
Dbdclificatians to the fuel Eihd systea,
which haa. been one of the maj a r prublema
eacounttvd at Uvesullle. That was a
very aucceirshl rum, and ho Mar pro%-
1- d t e d . Currently, Rive#ills
is in a W n t e m h c e woluetton phase
1aaWtq at the d e t d l s of what h a p p e d
and w h a t Was t4e e;rtaet perfo-ce of
the &t. One thing t o note, tbe titack
duri-ag tbia rua was clear at 'all times;
and it &@ear?the unit had better than
99 percent efficiency in the hot electro-
etatie precipitator. So fxrrm that, it
& @ p a r sthat S P my y e t be an accepta-
b l e approach t o stack gas cleanup for
fluid5zed bed.
Figure 6 reprksents a model 05 the
AFB-CTIU which was under construction
t o be wed as a compQneet test f a c i l i t y
f a r AFB. Shwn are the bunker syetem
out back am well &a the equipment as it
wap to be located in the building. It
inc-Ludd a three-cell stacked bailer
with a .multi-clone primary cleanup and
a baghoase for final eleauup. Figure 7
III~OWS the buildilrg as i t now appears
w i t h the unloading facility located out

available to indnstry a t chdir request.

u ~ t r,et~ ufe hk b&%&ly a t the

pm*, %%a 1s where W ts
,

&mp&aadr'Eo'r the fp$ $'%.a w$&&@%. SOW

a*, t-&e a d d ~ ~ ~ .~ errW
Weg eek @
 ~ m i . ~ i + i i&t'~on ma ot. durse high- The iatemati~nalprojects include
c d w s Q % e e#E&c&pey; a W 'ex -la- the IRA Grimethorpe, as mentbned,, where
Mtx*c bs% '+le:b%, iM & inibed the XKlE objcct4va is tq' work ria f i e
b t st~t*&.Ev rete, .f&& c&& f b d International her- Agency t o build 7.
1

& d , 8& mti- and upexate a PFB -facilPty t t p obtrixl I-

1
-
&%If& f * gas ~ '*&i%if.e &&&&a3 eye??= data on prdfo t p puilnrs fnelud5ng em-
s y B 8 t c m q* bustion ~haraeteristics,emissitins, and 5
turbAne matmi@gr. The CURL f a g i l f t y t
The v&&otls. f a c b @ & i w . g h w 3.n is being operated now with the objeetlve i
f t w e .a: prB w p %
ye+lr* w&laP$t m of sypportiag tIm'',IU project: and defh-
us -< % w&kp.es
i
!
plant has ~.wfJ&Med
M d S f *k3 a
desdig. @tW.
in PFB kombusf ipn cbfget&kiqti'soxi a
f
p i at neala, win, these f a c i l i t i e s
i
4,
Wmetbae E46 f t$,
The& L-13 Chi
*f
~e g e o ~ e jwe
a ~ ~ts,
so.@@:
brcissOigu,
@mg$#$tt:f*
w i l l be di'sscusbie~ more in d&a%l at
late* s b s ~ t o n ' ~ , .
5'
3
b i

. GeJwral :z%&*ie.rnB**3*1e P m W 3 *e
;It,
r*

sot. ggs 'tgr,@m~b:

XyOXk, &Id.the&-- fa .summaryrlooking st our'achieve-
?ra*rc; Bib-*= 'Sea& , daj,t. .g4x ments to date, there are the i>&ustrial
pmgqm pWed aty_:=@w5n %&@re; 9. dmnstratfons; we have d-atrated
ye ~ ! 1 ~ ~ . * e ' x " a @,=*& r Qe iI I i 3 r pwcessi f l q i b i J $ t y on a larger tlumb,er
~ a c e~ m&s.
l Q&e,&ll
~ ~ &&d of cpslg and t e £ u ~ eq t e r i a l e and the
a M6e' pi- -pn$Qcs,+kw w $ $ w u t i l f t y c o q ~ e p t has been denwnstrated
E9;%1 .&ti hd= (Srfhethwpa. d.sa. p+*
t$ere t#e ~ $ 1 1w i;nga a repom- &mop-
a t kivesvilIe= the area ef technol-
ogy baee, t h e e is a modest b e e avail-
HV ?:
.
s t t a t a n aft mi6 $dl3 l$& ia,i%e'
and Be 0paItdofmd en
W able to WE right -, and we are m ~ d -
eliy to expand both the design data
IS%% rime. &we. avai able and she data base.

FiB" 10 @haw8 the 'Gur&%ms

pjtlof p me,, rQrwm~tion
m X
df qhich is
to be&a sh~rt&y,S t w 3 l l be abut txm
*eats to c@erafonc
 FMuever, it is hat a11 Buccess.
There are some problems that remain to
be addre'ssed and a fkw gf them inclade
the following : Demons.kration of low-
tern reliabilft y - indusxry rwtinuee
to state they want to s'ee a unit that
can start up and run for a year. We
need to reditee the oq5plexftjr of the
fuel feed system especially on the
larger units. The long-term perform-
ance of materials in th* fluidized bed
has yet to be demonstrated in the
10-2Q,00Q heur range. ?hare i s a need
t o contiBue t o develop. a firm data base
for desfga and scaleup fn the area of
heat trhsfer, combustfan a£ ficiency,
and d ; ~ a & o m . There is a need to
develop htethods for utilb.atioa of t%e
spent-bed matesfals. On a system basis,
a defin3tiua of the best p&er geiiera-
tiou and cogenexatfofl systeras, Tor first
generation commercial plaqt;s is required.
From an 'economic &tadpoint, confirma-
tion of t sconwaic advantager of
fluidi ed bed on a demonstration scale
8
i s nee ed.
The DOE is inte~estedin your ideas,
pour discoveri+s, and 'your concerns. We
look forward to thds eonferenee as e
£0- t o exchange ideas, define poten-
tial problems t h a t t-emafn, and identlfy
P means t o solve these p r o b l a s . We of
M E thank you %or participating. Hay
the conference be bebef f cia1 t o us all,
 IaTIqN& COAL B P r n
COAL RE-m E - S T ~ ~
sw ORCHARD U&Lt%WIHAM GLWCE(SHTRL GL52 4RZ WTEIl SCZNGDW

beds.
X t i s a &reat p- pleasure f o r w to Be
heri ep%ddngt;o you C o w rsrpresentlag #g
United Kingdom betor%such a d h k i n p i e h e d You wYI.b a r n abouut t h e cankinuing work
$ t ~ t h e ~ i q g . h* ,t))q 1977 Cwrferencg, Dr. W. Q. w b i ~ ha&e8 & i n ,.We CURL laboratory'fras me
Kaye presented & i ~ ov<emiewbut, tmforlamtely , m a r by R-md Hoy and Alan Roberts, 'but what
he ie-o* k$,WiGh $oy t q w aa~he ia amow the el mare 4mpbr~antyou will hew tbis afternQm
bulb fields M Holbmd m&rq the &or &nut the D A prpjeet at Grueehoype and, as an
p ~ ~ q b Wtrom4 w o s i u m on ~ e w Coal ~ e c h m l o g y engineer, ma of M e p i ~ t u r e awhich brings home
th$@ wltm Hgrtsl, '@%$e@$m. (Isl3alld haye tp me the r&JL%y o f *a ady@t,ages of , E M &
bough* s h ~ ian the :Hilton). t e c w i o g y i s e picture o f that 86 blW* boiler
W F ~ Y & &qnr ~ pie* on a Low loader. This
k s d e hfs'bes* vi- t&YOP t w d i Joe i i a n w near ta ooplmfssianfqg.
QSb-on, David Ddnkpn a d Jack mm* MY
P @ w w d q f r o m PCB, J* H*lW Wd fi.- Anow& p-mJedt @out which we e h a l L h e w
paberter, -me 1~1th QI# wd b* prsrentitw m o m i n the f i t w e f s We Wit$& Columbia HgdFo
p a g e ~n dpiafied mrk fn @3eh w e , in t h e soh,m$ whPbh fs be* de8ignd by C o d
ems- $a'Wl$-t ok $he Nati.onal CQaL moeessing u-ltqwt& .lpef f i t i o w C a d Boakd'er
+I
B m W , b e been i n d u e d . o*iaat%on
MOT
e d
c&$deht
mr a&UM k n & w h ~ , ) . This
v A wtbt-ematfro prpsgdt r5nB we
&at 1% fill l d ,CQ mom ,ofthe same
'*a

type and Is-@.

$ow t o abnaapherie pressure developments-

& if me* a W those In tke wdf#cl who do not
lmwl the diIfepwle~,stay tuned to t h i s ahm
thmqh till FriW and w i l l lawn.

'Startinn rXr=k w&kh the larger end of the

me,x F p t e of IiU I w ' k two >yeam
ago h a -#d%>#uidiaM b w l ~ a ~ 'h#d ~ ~eirivsdl.
m i
$h q w O d o t , wk ,Tsot: W l ~ - e C m t . ~llpplrlnghe& t o the
are now ewe n i ~ em n j i w ~ ai p U.K. who we
he*
wrr. tu offer on q a6rmnereial b w i g i B r i k i l B'&&& - isation w i t hprovie&
$@
vatvast amount
$lufdSei@ bdd W i l w or eurngee. m p e w 18 o f -iilforhlaq&=ai3 ng a Nde range of he&-,
hot lm* but me p a e ~~f a e v ~ l ~ m mkst B U C ~that smk af *ie%.sb riWan&e we d#ht not hava
+
@ W ~ r d yaars mch has barn l e m k and much pomsfde~rdt@* as $#Pilsa. taw yeam -0.
net think kIit39 he$ectr$ed c-1
I: do
duag ye* Wwh.
aca~l$ehed.
One of the ~ 4 m s n ~ lm&x~p r a s ~ i m&P
~ *is is, of
We, in t h e National C o d eaF t
I, like to feel cowse, the $e*~pa% ir)stallation gy Babqock
3ht w& are at t h e forefronk of this developttl8etit ~ n t e m a t i o dC-ion at central Ohio
though *e mrk o f the Coal Reeearch PsyEhfatirto ~aepft&.
$~Waliahmatand the C o a l UtfliiiatOon Research
Laboratory, but it i s a great encwwgement km us Installa%ion .of We h u h prassure Mitchell
that so many British firms hre now inve~tingtheip coil boiler wi* output of 30 KWth and 'd0 bar
opm r k a e w t e e iR dwalwmarlt ad yr.ducLlurr. i s n m vlrmally complete and though evmte in khe
British Steel Corpora%ion hava delayed its
L& me now very briefly look over the U.K. completion, o ~ l dcon%irissioningtests have been
scene, starting f f h t l y w i a gre~surisedfluidiasd carried out.
 Tha Enmw Equipment r e - f i t a p t a n an sr On more umconventLoria3 lines Che v-8~
small iMusWial water tub& boflatr hrrrr be- H ~ F l z b r r h lOpen H e t b boil- *oh is :- into
insk&led and ptuwed. rrur boiler k s t house at CRE MSI
at 5 PW at 10 b e g
-* (P&A
%hq<BaQqp>ek
'Ehare-is a *E of other projects fn the (Pack& Boile*~lbmpo b ~ i - &a 1 ~ i~ go-
~ C e r g twf'th
early. a'w5g~ ~ a m&er of k n b .the teak hmse erne t--in Awat. m a
nrapufawem, M a BUEh being the retrofi#ing latter & s W , though imitfelly af:8 W the& M
of a high pwasium 54,W kgm. @ t e abailer rhwmwlar, lhes the potsnUaL of going up t o
ppHim .was In&talZ& s fen y!?m ago, of1 fised Me-1 in Unit an8 ~ U S S .pHSHlWe8
L ~ ~
but plfkh an e~reto pnmible Rtwe coavergion a f 4 0 ba'.
t~ -1 Wd fTd&l~& bid* S U b j m t to
watt~*actbrgfwd-, &at h&we h b arrtvwl. F X 3 y , I.must nrwtLm me suce-e~f3f'nl
J d k b n b o i k fn the m, Fm rfiilak-thisi~ a
B r i t i s h q v w i & , $he Elufd be6t-m 5s
based u ~ m w&k.b~ the N&timtaI C a d Bawd

.
The mu1 rerweal fire tube boPLarel fbr 1~cerrBB;1.tn +OW-& Bailers! *ugh ~-lrsti#a
tbe t m t a e i ~ rnhau~
r J am t%at&)~8Finhw3,es Sys!te~as'LM4 -8 b o a e r w U 1 be d@eer~b& %n
at Marden ,(ahot: w a b r boiler) ' and me 0-1- the WFP by W&a WFhwls on Thursday diemo~n,
tio%l# a* Antleii U&i$a S a d z w at BuQ:+me
cont€nued to operake,for a Past Myewe.
Be of ~ S t* B ha@, be& the c?Q 4qiler
~ cite fc@ t w ' y e a ~ kmd h a ,6rhrrle3j I314 I d . 8-BrQm f W$,& q I* oxervieai, I m0S.t
Beth e v e be- wed test & ~ ~ & m l L a i o n anot , qufcey lMk at .We q 4 0 S . l s~a n e and tn
6pk fro? !wmlng,,d3ff*$ e d a but a d o f ~ r part3:eu;l& i c e field 9 Qvt* a. bkt of
tw diT$eW--mthwla of stwrbup. 1 1 ~ i aw i l l en- i s &npLJt hsCE Pbr d q i n g and a b v . 1 ~ ~ 5 p
hear more of t h i s w~rkin T h w d a y rsomin&ta hoz gasre6 fMm a flNCTis& h a can. k used Eor
&e~iif.onon Wemtkng experiebce fr& Jahn ElWkey. *ir pr~rg&. Again J&n EUgRLey, this t i m e on
Th* d b m m (busy day J e h ) w i l l am=
This paf.treular v&t:$.cal fire tubs bcdXar the work in m q e datmfl.
has been ti&- bb Vospw Thorrlgcfof't
WbWeain,, a divipiw of shrpbuil&~s 'ppp g ~ b -rC
a arq . p e w wbll asWIiWed
mid e~l~mwcnlwl gmtromes bP ar'wnd 6 Wth Ieteam an8 by &their operating exgerienca have sk- &a
or hat m-1, at p r m ~ ef e ~aa?pund 10 bw are favmrabl* a~moinbs. 43. Wor$l!ley h p a auld
h e W . ~ ~ ~ ! A $ k b me' . Fkrst of hw 'now five and Pm* h e em,on oPdef. Ail of tbese
been dblivwed t o a , d t e in h d w - It in w e Yibrma QLl*uf8, of 5 ,m,gnerm RJqment
e?epe&@ k+k dmqt hmll a dmkn wilJ be have alsa m;lP three (two in a s UrK. a d me &
i n ~ h l l e db~ t h e the rear. w h i l e other France).
are d e v e h i w 7 s h t similar
ds8*. The m e Fluddfgre -1 A t We lwer and of the dirtrct d* market
pm&e ate^ W e boiler for a&& at abart the 15 MW thermal ~ l g drYfSlat plaat at t h e sanent
3 WV C h e m d 6s now ;tnstdked at a Eactoqy In works has been very sucmesfu~ia &pwlng s
York&i* fm p ~ f kri&s. w Ym will h m s h t a n t i a l . saving wer the fnrr~ero i l fired
ehia aev~lopwant:from Michael V i e on Thursday ~ ~ e .
/
morniw.
On the ho'rf~ontdf i r e tube boiler a number
of people are mckive using 'ramrenkimdl and I have, b-se of the time factor, left out
'UncWd~Iti-1' deSi&~~, A l a ~ ~ W a t i drefersnce to the w k on C a i U q g a cbbw.tion,
~ ~ m 58 c #a
b Northern Engineering b d u s t r i d ~ refemnee W the .mppmt sad a t m o t ,wek done
berhaps ?till b a W p *eogfiisd & fn4iufbal for m w dr8wgsetfpm bpl W$h fmgormt,mrawmi
wee v $ ' W suoh as J a b !lbomgaon, as corroeim wd e r ~ ~ i o l orj
l , fluid bed ga~ifi~ation
I n t e r n a t i d Coglbuetfon,Cocbane and Qark ta ~ r ~ g d u cre gas for fwrnfv In fbmacm- m gas
Cb@hn,
s a d for
q e QP f w aT th&& boi lere -&-e no#
lm#laMon In Mzes up t o about: 6 bWm
tufbXh,e~,g t c .
for eteam ar hot mter an8 ~ulllkd i t ~ t a l l e d There Is much &ing on -yet a l l the time
trarards $be e M of the mar aPtec substantial we can see new near developments to
ideas to try,
proving in one of mTts warrufkcturing wrk8. FEU8

Energy Equipment: have &o sold their system
for installation in thPee Robey boiler@ and the
first af these is now on t e s t in their works.
Similar equipment, haa been sold for inshllation
in a bailer in Hungary.
Parkinson Cowan GWB Ltd. have also aold
three boilers at 2 MW them& each for
inatallation later this sear or early next ye&.
8111 Elaye concluded h i s 1977 o w r u i e ~ rby
swing that fluiaimed bed combustion had arrived.
I have come back into research and development
after pny years fp technical marketing. I can
see tlmt fluid be8 roaibuation hea amivrjd, but
mureaver, I can see that it cgn, w3th the t'fght
f Z m c i a 1 st;rucWe, be sold on a C O m w ~ i E a lb u t s
m d I b a l i w e that in U.K. we should be in 61
d m &o& g08390ll t o do =Ma8 0f British
o w l , British idsa~8md B r i t f sh eqdpment.
 I m s t , bowever, md on a souib+e note and
set fluidised bed c ~ s t i o n in pempective
-inst the world energy sihatim. If we
da n o t speedkly dwrelop fie new kechniquee of
coal burning, and I bel3eve f l u i d i s @ be* to be
a most importank one, and persuade people to
revert t;o coal fir+*, thus relieving the
gmsmires on a gre-esriorrs world of1 slhmtion,
-
the results for a e idustrierlisud western world
m a ~ rbe horrendpus

Fig. 3 Fluldised be$ boil boiles by

l@3 Boilers 17.R.
Hatiwlal Cml Board gmjw*

Fig. 2 Fluidised bed retrofit to Central

Ohio Psychiatric Hospital
Babcocg I n t e r n a t i d
Fig. 4 Babcock b o i l e r for proposed retrofit
cmvoreion f r o m o i l t o f l u i d i s e d bed
coal firiw U.K.

Fig. .6 Clonsast 2.8 IN vve~ticaXfhkKdFstl8 bga

rteam bai1er
rational C o a l B o d profeat
rig. s SC-~ZQ w%idn-emrr)
Eng,fne%rSngt-hiwt hwf z w b l
shill

pig. 9 Bguimt ~M , Qbe4

~P&
ew~itibn i n st J yw bWw
seem boiler for Hi30 ette

FIL. 20 CWB Bailer with development

f l u i d i s e d bed
3oinb P m * k i ~ ~ uCuw ~a n~/ N C B project
F i g . 13 YdmstrJn hUer Camgang
FwrysbUrg. mGM@m4 9 0 9

F i g . 14 G.P. Worsley 5 fl~idisedbed

f o r grass dryers
Joint G.P. W o r s L e y / m prodeck
Fig* 16 G - P , Yorsley 115 W fluid bed furnace for
clw dryer
 ovm'vlw o r ~ 3 ~ p 1 q g ~Bs aB cdmb~qti-ori
~
P r s g m m e of ehe Federal W b l i c of Bepmny

14°F ' >

4
. .
me ea rlufai~eabed aombustion (PFEC)
'me b y i e gual 09
gmpame of tbe B B @ ~ pF
mans Zs Mh d e v ~ 1 o g m taf
~
' b W~*R
~
t
+qr$ij, :-eepial advantqges with ~eepp?c'tGO
~p m t w k i o n , acxrmbus5Yon eHL-
I
Prslltph tag qqntrbute &B a , :crdwq, g e m e t ~ f caise a$,$f eo@f pee
enex;,$gr *@ply for o w ca with r# P;w 'ttlfb2w, $0- thermal ltexamp
nomie& favourable of 8- tu.tal plant ( F i g . 1, and 2 I .
acaepmble MW.
!
The development of wit ahlp tachno-
1ogfa.s fom 3nc~saseBand more ePTi*&en*
n coal g l a ~ san imgo~tmt
u t i l ~ z a % i uof
r o l e l i t h b $his g o a & ~ ma@
, , c0&2 ia
the only do#&sC fc g~5m.w energy ~ o y r a e
whish is &vafl&BLein 1mke quaf %%lea
in Gemmp.
&cordshgly, ab-t half OF Mr6 &Q-
vemqa9 fun@ f o r non-rmqlep energy
~ea.e&G'h if$beSng cm&uned fqv coal ~ e -
a*#&. -Ih the ama of dbwt eombq&ion
of coal, f o p Mat and ppwe~$$mrat50ns
the bffart;8 ape aonc,enb~atedan the fnr
f ith
bm
~f~ $C Q I ~ V POWqP
P I ? Q V W ~ @ F0 ~~%
r&$e& to @nv3zvomueatal~ 9 0
and ad-&
ecCibn
%ecMfloghswwch o m b i n e
Il a c s
high tlCiLbati0l'i
~~~'~,C$PHOY , o f 1W gade
c a M d 3 etzvSmrm~&allg atre 'pt,&L+ ape-
ration. Bere, Zlugdizqd bed &mWziiqo
velopment .
(FEE) Pepsesntw *he 11Pgea.at r e a of ds-
F i g , f ; 50, *Gaacantrat5on aa a fmatlan of
Befare snterlng into 8 ~ 9 S l sof-oui! ex$ea$
flutdis@ bed kolttb,uerpion Pepe.wch qe- Se~&ouadWeIapm&nf prob lems ,have to
velppment pmrpame x w m d iL@ t5 ~turr
be OP$F&W& h the case of P m . !I%e~~.f.ozre
UIRP~ZB some @wit ~ d v q t a g e sof
atmQ..8$bgx'ie,Pl~iq3==dbeg pgM,wt$On [AFBC 5
- The furnace temperature is @p$ l o w .m$ w a s h w p o ~ a t e 3in o u r PBd pearparch prxr-
.unifdm. Cdneeauantlg, NO, fbPW&ion9s p y n e be@U!+ Pb can be devel.loped fo'p pm-
Law. aerojal a p g h c & iaq *thin a aomide~ably
&W~% e t,m =Em
- b aT a d i t f an s re-
- Beotisa SO - W s ~ i mcan b~ r e d u e d bjr Ls$i*X$ afibple ,ci@~ep&i b fawurable SOT
the additi%n of limestone or dolomite, amall plarktar, such aa incIu&~Aal.hoilew
an expensive qnd efficiency n o n s d n g and mall power station units, wh*re a
flue g m de~ulphu~isation p2mt is no* complex technology leads to oomgaratively
required. high fnvestment cobta.

- Heat transfer caefficient s are high.

2hi8 means, that the heat-exchanger
areas and cor&equenfly the b o i l e ~ ecm
be m l l e r than in pulverized fuel
firing.
- how wade fuela can be use&
F i g . 2: NO -concentaation as a function o f
c x z e s s air
In the Federal Republic of Germany a
c o m s i ~ r a b l epapt of *he prima* e n e r a
demand is being consumed in industrial
boilers. In this a r e a primrily oil and
natural gas a r e b e h g u e d at the present
time. The bevelopraent of Am,C can reduce
Che dependence on these energy so.uTces,
aa this technologp offers similar advan-
tages -1~3th respect tn automatic operatbn
and environmental prokection.
The projemts an aonventi~nalAFBC
as executed Ln the Federal Republic o f
Germany cover a range ~f ,$herma1capa-
c i t i e s from 6 EIW to 124 MW.
AFBC-Pro j e c t s
A t the power" station in M s s e l d ~ r f -
Flingern an e x i s t i n g boiler waa converted
from travelling grace firing t o fluidized
P i g . 3: ~ i o wscheme
35 m! Fluidized Bed Combustian
Plant
A newly c o n a t ~ ~ t second
d plant with a ther-
ma1 capacity of 6 MW, located in Reckling-
hausen, entaped into operatution in 1979.
If produces saturated steam whlch is fed
i n t o a district heating system. Its flow
scheme (Pig. 4 ) shows t h a t f o r t h i s amall
u n i t a bimphr technology aspeoisllg w i t h
respect to coal prepmation and feeBing has
been applied. C o a l and limestone are eon-
veyed by a screw feeder i n t o the fluidized
bed.
Both p~ojectsare being performed by
Rubrkohle All in urnperation with the Deut-
sche Babcock group and the consortium
Thyssen Engineering, Standard Kesael,
respectively. Details o f these projects
farence .
will be presented Later during this conc

bed combustion. This glmt, with a thermal

capamity o f 35 MW, has bean in operation
since the second half of 1979. It produces
supegheafed steam of 17 b w pressure and
400 c which is supplied to the s t e m SF-
stem of the power station. The superheater
is located above the bed. Fig. 3 shows the
flow scheme of t h i s pla,llt. A premixed coal
and limestone mixture is Eed pneumatically
into t h e bed. The produced heat is trans-
ferPed to in-bed-heat-transfer-~urfaces
and to tube banks outsicle the bed. The
flue gas is cleaned in the cyclones and in
baghouse filters. The dust collected in
the cyclones can be recirculated into the
bed t o imprevs combustion efficiency,

F i g . 4: Flow scheme 6 MW - AFBC Plant

31
 An additional plant wFth a t h e m 1
capae'ity of about 124 MW w i l l be aonsWyc-
wad. 5?i Hameu. me contracbop is the $l+k-
'tir$k$t&tswe~keWesesltal h b ~ ,& @aal uki-
l-itg. m$ boiler w i l l be wgUna b ~ !tBe
Ve+eini&e Keasalwerke AQ, whf ch $180 awp-
ligd t W & bailer f a r W = - P l a n t Qrime-
tbb-e. Th%splant will kiave a gaFt 'or the
aupa~heaterw5$hln the be&, ma FBC b 0 i l e ~
6t Hsmeln w i l l erupplJ! ateam %P ebiDbined
heab and pm@rpneration.
PB$C-Ppaj ects
As already mena loned , pr.eqewiaed
fluidized bed combustion has by fap greater
potentJal than a t m p h e r i . c fl,uidf zed be@
eambiz&ion. F i g . 5 shows the O l d scheme
D* -the ,?F!BC p;Cank oonaept -@hioh promises
the h i a e s t eTPic5ency. ALp is%.pbb88ed t.0
the PluiGsed be& via We compressor of
a gas bwbtne. Coal a d limea$one ape fed
grmixed in- t b fluidbe&.bed. ma, eo-m
bustion gaaas leave the cpbut%t.qrwith a
temperature of abou* 850 C, are ddeuated
in suitable equipment and then geqned to
t h e gas turbine. Heat f a tran&fprl.edt o
'the watestesnn cimlUtt from heat exchan-
ger w i t h h the combusWr and from the waste
h&C' of the gwturb'ine. Beca~dfngt o pre-
l m n a r y sludiea this concept. sill mve an
,&ificfen07 of abou* 39 $ based on the lower
heakhg value,
Fig. 5: Pressurized Fluidized Bed Carbustlo31
with Combined Cycle
The problem areas which have to be
solved before commercial application can
be d i v i d e d i n t o probleme of t h e combustion
process and it8 optimization and into pro-
blems which arise by the combination w i t h
a gas turbine.
!€be r l r s t problem w e & is Being in-
vestigated eriehisl the fr-wock sf tbs
well-know TEA-Ppojeet. me crmetFuction
of t h e PFBG plant Zn &imethorpe, IJK, is
nearly complete and cold ~0nm~9aaion5ng
is being perfomped. I* fa s n v 5 ~ ~ g ekdo
start the experimental pragramm zn emly
1963
Ee~manyis one al" the three w t n e r s in
thia project. This project w i l l be grs-
sented Ln d e t a i l later during thia con-
fe r e m e .
Our nrrbional projecte h hhe PFBC
area are .eoprcen$rated an Problems c o m e -
t e d w i t B the combination of the PFBC with
a gas turbine.
A poodeot whiah is beQng oarrfed ~ u t
by a -ameortium of Be~gbaa-Forsohung&&If
and Vereinigte Keasslwerge AQ CPRWl an&
daals with a piloteplant orfth a
t h e m 1 capacity of about 32 MW for testing
t h i s emb5nation. In t$e o ~ f g i n a lconcept
it wae @n*sagea to use an s l e c t m t a t i c
grecfpitator f o p hot gas cle-g ak a
preBsure of 4,'5 &ar.
During the enginee~fng:evaluation it
became claiw, that thfs system cannot be
used without special dev~lopmentdevoted
ta the dea b e d gag corn&* ions. Theref ore,
a different concept f o r this plant is now
w d e mpm3dder&tian
~ .
CHg. 6 ) It is naw
p l r n B I d to used %bee$%age cwlcne ,&as
ale&. m. cumensate far the reUt3vd-
ly high dusk load in Che g a b after the
cycbqes, a special 8ust; resistant turbine
w i l l be used, which was r4,eveloped fox ener-
w recovery af%erflufdised bed c a t CP-
The preseure in the conibuator will be rai-
sed t o About 8 ba*,
Fig. 6: Flow heme o f the AqW-Plant
R. HoLigbaus
J. Batsch
As it carnot be expected that t h e above
concept offers the apthum ecommical and
technical solution , Surther work I s being
done in the development of high temperatu-
-/high pressure gas cleaning equipment.
Two projects of the University of Easen
deal, in labomtory bcale, with electro-
static p~ecipitatoraand high temperatwe
.
r a b r i e filtesa Up to naw the results in-
dicate t h a t oper+tion of an electrostatic
precipitator w i t Q pressures &ove 7 b w is
possible at: 850 C and that f i l t e ~p t e -
rials for temperatures up to 1.000 C can
be mnuf"actumd. With this I n mind regard-
less of the dlfficultiea we encduhter in
the developmen; oP high temperature elea-
trostatic grecApita6ors at I* pressU?es,
it is atilr our opinian t h a t this c a n c ~ p t
offers 'a prohlaing p a a s i b i l i f g for higher
pressures. merefore, a design study for
an eleckroststic precipitator b a ~ e don
the results bf the experinthts at t h e Uni-
versitg of Esssn was s t a r t e d in January
lg80.
P 9 ~ a U e lto the experbents at the
University of zssen, Ktm f s performing
laboratory scale experhents to fmprove
the efficiency o f the tornado ~ y c L m e ,
It; c a n be expected that the optimym
technical and economio solution for the
problems of the combination o f p ~ e s s w i -
eed fluidized bed c~mbu8t.ion~ 5 t hB gas
turblne wL11 be a mmpromise between
.
highly e f f i c i e ~ tgas eleanfng and h i g h l y
dust re8istant gae turbipea Therefore,
it appeapa s e n s i b l e t o develop both tech-
nalogies, ,- ia planned in our programme.
Pig. 7: Baaf o F l u i d Bed Combustion %atems
Beoaueiel o f bhe apeaial. ad~&&ctge~
found in fast sp aireulating f ~ u i d i a e d
bed oomb.ustion, we have ~ b e e n t l yadtled
thia oanaepk to OUP pesea~chprogramme.
Bf &. 7 campwss the diffemnt staten n f
fluidized bed.
- The classical or stationary Pluiaized
bed with a relatively w e l l - d e f h e d
aurfate of the f l u i d i z e d bed and only
a small carry-auc o f solid^.
- very b5gh carry-over,
The circulating f l u i d i s e d bed with a
which results in
a very intensive internal and external
reaycling of s o l i d s .
In F i g . 8 the flow s2heme of an atmo~phe-
ric cirewlat3ng fluSd9ze8 combustion plant
is illust~etsd. Tn tbe recycling cyclone
the two heat camierer, flue gas and solids,
are sepamf ed. Heat is extracted from the
flue gas,in a waste heat boile.er and from
the sol5ds fn a Iluidiqed bed heab exchan-
gep. Becau~sthe Re&& transfer *om the
two heat carriers ean be influenced sega-
~ a t s l ~the
l , eont~odand gar% Load behaear
of this ouncep% is more favou~abZethan
that o f the stationary i l u i d i z e d bed. Ad-
ditional advantages of the ci~culating
fluidized bed a r e
- img~ovemenoe with respect t o and NOx SO
-
emissions achieved by f i n e r gm$ned sor-
and ataged combustfan,
- bent
consideraB1.~r~mallsrbed meas than in
elasai&al fl u i dised bed, shahling la~g@r
=pacities per unit,
- parrated,
Combustion and heat t p e s f ex oan be
enabling a senaik5vs
very
ae-
EQn-
trol ~f hea! transfer.
1 . r
mrmlta
41R
P
1
kA
W
w
Fig. 8.: Flow Scheme of a Ciraulatfng
Flufd f sed Bed Combustian Plant
In LUnen,at the Versinigte Alumhiurn-
a circulating f l u i d i z e d bed
w e r k e (TAW)
plant with a thermal capacity oP 77 will
be constructed. It w 1 1 1 serve for beating
molten salta in the f l u i d i z e d bed heat
exchangers and for praducing procsas
steam. The molten salt will be wed as
the heat carrier POP $he Bayer hgctr.olieing
process, The projeot stsrted in early 1980.
R, HoLi&aqs
3 . b%eeh
A d&fyr 9tXlq f o r a ,250 (kh) c h - f waul8 like to mention a f u ~ t h epo- ~
CUM-. z q g a e a WI w i q e ~lo~@tea
an Ore* station conceg?t inwhfah khe conven-
Dui- "$Uo &&sd in w.Bb. tional fltdcliaed bed plwa an i r a p o r b n t
. . role, As $8 ,&om in the fxow eoheme
I& inkmiled
~ I B %Ha+ Mils A p i W
c U Z be (Ng. 9) the $oncdpt is oha~aakerlzedby
Wed. Par' eom4F.fwd beet an& W e pner%tf the Y0.1lming
&teat &f '9 &;pr
R
The Imae8e k l lie fed & d p b e he&%- sy-
aE Drz&sbwg. Bmau- o$
on,
- Idth
combination of fluidized bed eon4ustion
$bm 1diStpm We atlwz@%q&&of the sir6iu- guly&d.zed ~ O a l f%Ping.
e4 bed p~Me&plsw e of ape- The flue 8 of the FBC mich Q& be
&* &$35ww%
sli*m*.tt@ aperated &h l o w paqe ca@l is pasped
*a the gtalveriz&d £Uel b w r s , Bp do-
i* t h i s in a guitabls NO i f o m -
- b 2 0 ~can be r e ~ d k e ic o ~ ~ a e i t i f i y .
co&in&k$on of .AEc8C with gn open ey'cls
g# turb5Ae. - The a i P oswng f p ~ n th&
eomgressor af the %as turbine 5s pm-
b & W h $he Tn-bed tlxbe b w k bef ox*
enter5ng the cmbustion chmibsr. fn
tMa vay a par6 of the energy mioh
3s ~ t s @ p l i s dt o bhs H d t u p b h e is provi-
ded by coal. me riak of smsion and
OOP~PB oh~ of $he turbines blades ky
pustladkn exhkuert gases is e k W a t e 8
in khfs methad.
- the flue gas d e a u l p h i z i o plant f a
incorporated into the natural d r a f t
oo~lingf o w e ~ .The pme& plant doesn't
nwd, a tack. Itl this way, no reheating
of t,Rb desulphuriesd flu!$ gae ail1 be
necesa m y , thus inereaaing the efficisn-
c;y or the power station.
A power station af thb type wfth a elec-
tric capacity of 220 .MW, is under ~dnatruc-
tipn B$ bhe lbataberg~bkeAQ.
The Fig. 10 lists tbl major p m j e o t s that
the Fadefal Republie of Germmy has under-
taken,
The total coat o f a l l FB~-&odecte
irrelu4ing the develcrpmnt hot &era cleaning
and dust-reelstant twoines amounts bo
824 Hio. DK for r1~6~e $bin 400 Mio. US-DoL-
l a r ) . The goveFmeqta1 faulda for these pro-
jects a m u n t a $0 asbut 315 Mio. DM (03. more
than 150 Hie. US-Dcrllatr).
This sum is,,an indimeion sf the Sm-
.
portmce t,h& my government attaahea to
tllese developmenea
R . Holighaus
J . Batsch

F i g . 10: FBC-Projects i n t h e Federal

Republic of Germany
 THE PROGRESS OF FLUIDIZED-BED BOILERS
IN PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
Zhang Xu-Yi
Tsinghua University
Beijing, People's Republic of China
FORWARD
Early in the 1960fs, based on the broad
adoption of successful fluidized-bed calcin-
ation technology, China began its research
work on fluidized-bed combustion boilers.
In 1965, Mouming Petroleum Company, Tsinghua
University, and several other institutions
cooperated to design the first fluidized-bed
combustion boiler in China. It was con-
structed and put into operation in Mouming.
In 1969, Tsinghu'a University installed a
fluidized-bed combustion boiler for her
Experimental Power Plant, and that boiler
has been used for power generation studies
for several years. These successes gave
impetus to the progress of fluidized-bed
combustion boilers in China.
Presently, there are over 2,000 fluidized-
bed combustion (FBC) boilers in China. Many
boilers have capacities of 4-10 T/h and are
used for generating saturated steam, while
others with capacities of 10-50 T/h a r e used
for power generation and industrial appli-
cations. FBC boilers with 'a capacities of
130 T/h are now being tested.
The fuels used in China for most FBC boilers
are low-grade fuels such as shale fines,
low-grade bituminous coal and anthracite,
coal washery waste, stone-like coal, lignite,
etc. The heating value of the fuels now
being used, ranges from 1,000-1,500 Kcal/kg.
The boilers are being used either for indus-
trial purposes or for generating electricity.
Many boilers possess more than 40,000 hours
of accumulated operational experience.
In China, there are a number of organizations
taking part in the research and development
of fluidized-bed combustion-fired boilers.
Many technical institutes, such as Tsinghua
University, Zhejiang University, Harbin Tech-
nical Institute, etc., are the niajor insti-
tutions conducting research work. Shanghai
Boiler Works, Dungfang Boiler Works, and
Kuangchow Boiler Works, etc. , are the chief
FBC boiler designers .and manufac:tur'ers.
Extensive research work has been done on the
fluidized bed operating parameters selection,
combustion of low-heating value fuels,
improvement of thermal. efficiency, desulfuri-
zation with limestone, and boiler structures.
The following are a number of selected repre-
sentative fluidized-bed boilers:
1. 14.5 Tons/Hour Steam Industrial Boiler,
Mouming Petroleum Company-- The boiler
., bv Mouminy!- Petroleum Com-
is designed
pany, Fushuen Designing Institute of
Petroleum, Tsinghua University, etc.
This boiler burns shale fines with a
heating value of 1,,034 Kcallkg as fuel;
the steam pressure is 13 kg/cm2 and the
superheated steam temperature is 250°C.
This is the first demonstration
fluidized-bed combustion tioiler in
China, with a circular bed of 2.25 m
diameter and a superficial air velocity
of 2.7 m/sec through the 'bed. The bed
temperature is about 800°C. This boiler
was commissioned in December 1965.
2. 14 Tons/Hour Tsinghua University FBC
Boiler -- This is the first demonstra-
tion fluidized-bed combustion boiler in
Chins for power genetstion. It is
designed by the staff of Tsinghua Uni-
versity and commissioned in July 1969,
its steam pressure is 24 kg/cm2 and a
superheated steam temperature of 390°C.
The main fuel used i.s anthracite from
the Beijing district; a mixture of low-
grade bituminous coal and coal washery
waste with a heating value of 2,500 Kcallkg
was also used in the test.
This boiler has two independent beds to
achieve a good turndown ratio between
35-110 percent. When burning coal with
low volatile content, the bed combustion
temperature is roughly 1 ,OOO°C.
The total operating time of this boiler
has already reached 20,000 hours; much
valuable experience has been acquired.
Most of the research work has been in
the area of in-bed heat transfer sur-
faces and the prevention of erosion of
the in-bed surfaces.

3. 130 TonsIHour Fluidized-Bed Boiler --
This is the largest power generating
fluidized-bed combustion boiler in China
at present. It has six beds with six
screw feeders. The fuel used is coal
washery waste with a heating value of
1,500 Kcallkg. The immersed surface
has an inclination of lSO to the hori-
zontal. This boiler is now in the proc-
ess of shakedown testing for power gen-
eration. Figure 1 is the 130 T/h FBC
boiler designed for power generation.
Bed volume heat release rate (~cal/m~h) (2-3.3)
Superficial bed air velocity (mlsec)
Fuel particle size (mm)
Q = lower heating value of the fuel.
Figure 1 -- 130 T/h Fluidizei-~edBoiler
RESULTS OF SOME RESEARCH
1. Determination of the .Optimum Super-
ficial Bed Air Velocity and Bed Parti-
cle Size -'In order to achieve a high
bed volume heat release rate, the
Chinese are trying to burn coarse par-
ticles in fluidized-bed combustors.
'For a given size fuel, there is a mini-
mum bed superficial air velocity
required to insure vigorous heat and
mass transfer between the bed materials.
To avoid high-temperature clogging or
particle-size segregation which may lead
to the formation of "cold slag," Tsinghua
University has carried out the cold-bed
testing with controlled-size bed parti-
cles. Research findings on the movement
of particles inside the bed, especially
those near the distributor plate, have
revealed that to maintain identical
fluidizing conditions, the following
relationship represents the hot and cold
air superficial velocities:
where Uh, U are the superficial air
velocities d$ring combustion and cold
condition; ph, .pc are the gas densities
during combustion and cold condition.
The data obtained by cold-bed testing
and the calculation are being used in
the design of Chinese fluidized-bed
boilers.
Table 1 lists the heat release rate
per unit bed volume, as a function of
superficial air velocity, and maximum
size of fuel particle:
TABLE 1
OPERATING PARAMETERS
x lo6
2.8-4:2
c
lignite 30
other fuels
Q > 4,000 Kcallkg < 35
Q = (2,000-4,000) Kcallkg 8
Q < 2,000 Kcallkg < 6
The Arrangement of In-Bed Surfaces and
Prevention of Erosion -- For small boilers,
the immersed in-bed surfaces are the side
walls; therefore, the erosion rate is
insignificant. For ordinary carbon steel,
the wall erosion rate is only about
8 x 10 mm/h. As the boiler capacity
increases, side water walls are insuf-
ficient :o
r heat absorption and in-bed
heat transfer surface must be employed.
The erosion rate of the in-bed gurfaces
is very fast, nearly 1.3 x 10 mmlh.
By adopting some protective mechanism,
in PRC, the life of these steel pipes
may be extended by nearly 20 fold.
In China, all the fluidized-bed boilers
are using natural circulation. For FBC
boilers of the capacity range of 10-130 T/h,
the most common in-bed surfaces are
arranged. at 15' to the horizontal.
Although within the bed there is a much
better heat transfer due to intensive
disturbance of the bed particles, unsat-
 i s f a c t o r y arrangement of t h e immersed
in-bed s n r f a c e s can cause l a r g e tempera-
t u r e d i ~ f e r e n c e s within the fluidized
bed. Figure 2 shows the relation
between t h e in-bed t e m p e r a t u r e d i f f e r -
ence along t h e t u b e l e n g t h when t h e t u b e
i s placed a t 15O t o t h e h o r i z o n t a l .

Figure 3 -- R e l a t i o n Between In-Bed S u r f a c e

Area and F u e l Heating Value

For l a r g e s i z e , low-heating v a l u e , and

high ash content f u e l p a r t i c l e s , t h e
a s h c r u s t hampers t h e d i f f u s i o n of g a s e s ;
t h e r e f o r e , it i s hard t o burn o u t t h e
i n s i d e carbon. For example, no m a t t e r
how long i t s t a y s i n t h e f l u i d i z e d bed,
t h e t h i c k n e s s of burned o u t s c a l e f o r
hard s t o n e c o a l s i s only about 1 . 5 mm.

For a s h - r i c h and heavy f u e l , it i s e a s y

t o form "cold s l a g " a t t h e bottom of
t h e f l u i d i z e d bed. This w i l l d i s t u r b
t h e normal o p e r a t i o n of t h e b o i l e r , and
it i s n e c e s s a r y t o d i s c h a r g e t h i s - s l a g
Figure 2 -- R e l a t i o n Between Transverse f o r smooth o p e r a t i o n . The a i r d i s t r i b u -
Temperature D i f f e r e n c e and Length t o r should be designed t o induce movement
of t h e Bed of t h e bed m a t e r i a l s and improve t h e
a v a i l a b i l i t y of t h e FBC b o i l e r o p e r a t i o n .

Improvement of t h e Combustion E f f i c i e n c y --
I n China, f u e l s of wide-size d i s t r i b u -
Combustion of Low-Heating Value F u e l s -- t i o n a r e used i n f l u i d i z e d - b e d b o i l e r s .
3'.
Sometimes, t h e amount of p a r t i c l e s of
Fuels with d i f f e r e n t heating values
s i z e s l e s s t h a n 1 mm exceeds 40 p e r c e n t .
a f f e c t t h e in-bed h e a t i n g s u r f a c e a r e a .
The c a r r y over of t h e f i n e s by t h e f l u e
F i g u r e 3 shows t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between
g a s , many f u e l p a r t i c l e s e l u t r i a t e o u t
t h e h e a t i n g s u r f a c e a r e a and t h e f u e l
without adequate combustion, r e s u l t s i n
h e a t i n g f a l u e o f some b o i l e r s . When
a g r e a t amount of unburned carbon l o s s
f u e l heating value i s l a r g e r than
i n t h e f l y a s h . I n 1971, Tsinghua Uni-
3,000 Kcal/kg, the curve gradually
v e r s i t y d i d r e s e a r c h work on f l y a s h
f l a t t e n s out, a s the f u e l heating value
carbon burn-up i n a low s u p e r f i c i a l
drops t o l e s s t h a n 1,500 Kcallkg, t h e
v e l o c i t y f l u i d i z e d bed (carbon burn-up
curve drops a b r u p t l y . F o r most b o i l e r s ,
c e l l ) . For low v o l a t i l e c o n t e n t f u e l s ,
the adaptability for f u e l heating vari-
t h e t o t a l combustion e f f i c i e n c y a t t a i n e d
a t i o n i s a v e r y important problem f o r
90 p e r c e n t . Presently, the f l y ash
FBC burning of low-grade f u e l s . The
burn-up f l u i d i z e d bed used i n China
work on improving t h e a d a p t a b i l i t y of
operates a t a superficial a i r velocity
low-grade f u e l s i n some Chinese f l u i d i z e d -
of 0.6-1.4 m/sec. According t o p u b l i -
bed b o i l e r s i s under i n t e n s i v e s t u d y .
c a t i o n s , h i g h bed temperature and more
e x c e s s a i r w i l l be b e n e f i c i a l t o t h e
improvedent of combustion e f f i c i e n c y .
Owing t o t h e low h e a t load of f l y a s h
 burning . i n a f l u i d i z e d bed, t h e super-
f i c i a l v e l o c i t y can be r e l a t i v e l y low.
I t has a l s o been shown t h a t bottom f l y
a s h r e i n j e c t i o n can improve combustion
efficiency. Therefore, it i s q u i t e s a f e
when t h e bed temperature i s only 50-100°C
h i g h e r than t h a t of normal bed. Accord-
i n g t o t h e r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s , no s i g -
nificant improvement of combustion
e f f i c i e n c y i s observed f o r f l y a s h r e i n -
j e c t i o n i n t o a high s u p e r f i c i a l velocity
FBC bed.

When f e e d i n g h i g h - v o l a t i l e c o n t e n t f u e l s , '
t h e e v o l u t i o n of v o l a t i l e mat$er i s
excessive near the feeding points.
There i s a g r e a t amount of unburned
v o l a t i l e l o s s due t o t h e s t a r v a t i o n of
oxygen n e a r t h e f e e d p o r t . By p r o p e r
arrangement, a combustion e f f i c i e n c y of .
94-98 p e r c e n t can be a t t a i n e d w i t h f u e l s
of high v o l a t i l e c o n t e n t .

Figure 4 -- R e l a t i o n Between SO, Absorption

5. D e s u l f u r i z a t i o n with Limestone -- I n E f f i c i e n c y and t h e Concentra,tion
1973, Tsinghua . U n i v e r s i t y began t h e of R e a c t i v e S u r f a c e Layer of,
r e s e a r c h o; t h e - a b s o r p t i o n of SO2 by t h e Limestone Granule i n the4,Bed
,
l i m e s t o n e i n a f l u i d i z e d bed. The ,

e f f i c i e n c y of SO2 a b s o r p t i o n i s d e t e r - U t i l i z a t i o n of Ash and Spent Bed M a t e r i a l --

6.
mined by t h e c o n c e n t r a t i o n of CaO i n
the outer s h e l l . By experiment, t h i s
r e l a t i o n may be expressed a s :
where q i s t h e a b s o r p t i o n e f f i c i e n c y of
SO2 i n f l u e g a s , p e r c e n t ; W i s t h e con-
c e n t r a t i o n of CaO i n t h e g e d , p e r c e n t ;
H i s t h e bed h e i g h t , m e t e r s ; and V i s
s u p e r f i c i a l a i r v e l o c i t y i n t h e bed,
meters p e r second.
F i g u r e 4 shows t h e t e s t i n g r e s u l t . This
e m p i r i c a l e q u a t i o n shows t h a t t h e kind
and s i z e of limestone has e x h i b i t e d no
i n f l u e n c e on s u l f u r d i o x i d e a b s o r p t i o n .
The f r a c t i o n , 6, of CaO a b s o r p t i o n i n
t h e o u t e r s h e l l of l i m e s t o n e p a r t i c l e s
(calcium u t i l i z a t i o n ) with d i f f e r e n t
s i z e s of l i m e s t o n e s from t h e T a n l i d i s -
t r i c t of B e i j i n g has been determined.
F i g u r e 5 shows t h e r e s u l t . Limestone
p a r t i c l e s w i t h d i f f e r e n t s i z e s have
n e a r l y t h e same d e p t h of s u l f a t e pene-.
t r a t i o n . I t i s about 32.5 pm f o r T a n l i .
limestone. The f r a c t i o n of calcium'
u t i l i z a t i o n , [, i s n o t i n f l u e n c e d by
t h e type of c o a l o r s u p e r f i c i a l v e l o -
city. I t a l s o shows t h a t when t h e par-
t i c l e diameter i s l a r g e r t h a n 3 mm, t h e
calcium u t i l i z a t i o n i s v e r y poor. The
s u l f u r c o n t e n t s of c o a l s used i n t h e
experiment a r e q u i t e d i f f e r e n t , Hebi
c o a l has 3 p e r c e n t s u l f u r ; and Shangsi
coal i s 8 percent s u l f u r .
China focused much a t t e n t i o n t o t h e
u t i l i z a t i o n of t h e a s h and s l a g from
fluidized-bed b o i l e r s . Low c o m b ~ s ~ i o n
temperature and low carbon c o n t e n t ' o f
t h e a s h and s l a g e n a b l e good u t i l i z a -
tions. The methods of u t i l i z a t i o n .@re
d i f f e r e n t f o r each d i s t r i c t . It:.is
b e i n g used a s an a d d i t i v e f o r cement t o
improve cement's c o l o r and s t r e n g t h .
I t has been used t o make b r i c k s , t i l e s ,
and medium-sized b l o c k s ' ' f o r b u i l d i n g
constructions. The e x t r a c t i o n of vana-
dium from s o u t h China s t o n e c o a l a s h
has a l r e a d y been achieved. Use of
f l u i d i z e d bed f o r c a l c i n a t i o n of l i g h t
c o n s t r u c t i o n m a t e r i a l s has a l s o been
successful.
CONCLUSION
The r a p i d p r o g r e s s of f l u i d i z e d - b e d b o i l e r s
i n China has made p o s s i b l e t h e use of a wide
v a r i e t y of energy r e s o u r c e s . China has a l s o
a c q u i r e d many hours of o p e r a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e
i n f l u i d i z e d - b e d b o i l e r s . The s t u d y of l a r g e
f l u i d i z e d - b e d b o i l e r s has a l r e a d y begun. It
w i l l p l a y an important r o l e i n t h e moderni-
z a t i o n of C h i n a ' s FBC development.
The a u t h o r acknowledges w i t h g r a t i t u d e t o
t h o s e o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n China f o r t h e permis-
s i o n of u s i n g t h e i r e x p e r i m e n t a l . r e p o r t s and
data.
Figure 5 -- Fraction of CaO Absorption Outer
S h e l l of Limestone P a r t i c l e s
(Calcium U t i l i z a t i o n ) Ve.rsus
Granule S i z e
 TVA'S AFBC PROJECTS
Michael D. nigh, Acting Director
Energy Demonstrations and Technology
Tennessee Valley Authority
Each year, the Tennessee Valley Authority
(TVA) b u m s an average of 36 million tons of
coal in 12 central station steam plants. This
coal-fired generation produces 17,796 MW or
nearly 60 percent of our total system capacity
of 29,867 MW. Nuclear and hydro plants provide
a total of 30 percent of the system's capacity
with the rest consisting of combustion turbines
and imported power. From these figures it is
easy to understand TVA's strong interest in
coal.
This interest will not diminish in the
future. Although TVA has embarked upon the
nation's largest nuclear power plant construc-
tion program, we will continue to burn massive
quantities of coal for mtmy years to come. In
the mid 19901s,when the final nuclear reactor
is placed in service, our total system capacity
will be approximately 44,400 MW. Of this figure
nuclear will provide 45.6 percent, or nearly
half of the system capacity. Coal will come in
second with 37.2 percent, and the rest of our
capacity will be provided by hydro and combus-
tion turbine generation.
Even though coal will not be our main
generation source in the future, we will conti-
nue to use a substantial amount of coal. There-
fore, TVA is heavily committed to developing
new coal technologies that will enable us to
augment or replace existing coal-fired steam
plants. One coal technology that offers
reliable, efficient, and environmentally
acceptable operation is Atmospheric Fluidized
Bed Combustion (AFBC).
Like other developing coal technologies,
AFBC is not. new. The concept of a fluidized-
bed has been employed extensively in the
petrochemical industry for many years. Other
industries with steam requirements in the range
of 150,000 pounds per hour are also'beginning'tn
use fluidi'zed bed concepts.
However, the concept of using AFBC for
large-scale utility use is relatively new.' The
major thrust of AFBC development for utility use
to date has been in bench-scale studies, re-
search, and hotlcold AFBC modeling. This
research has resulted in a degree of progress.
The 30-MW Rivesville AFBC unit, for example,
demonstrated that AFBC could generate electricity.
.
Since ~ivesvillewas a converted steam plant,
however, it did not have the capability of experi-
menting and testing new AFBC designs as they
became available. Nor did the Rivesville'AFBC
unit provide much in the way of data collection
on its operation. The EPRI-supported Babcock
& Wilcox 6' x 6' AFBC unit was a significant
advancement on both counts since it permitted the
inclusion of design changes and provided much
needed operating and performance data. Even with
the success of this unit, it became apparent that
a larger plant having the capability of retrofitting
design changes was needed to test new hardware and
to resolve uncertainties concerning plant operation.
After all, it would be a very difficult task to
scale up from a small prototype with a 36 sq. ft.
bed to a full-scale utility power plant having
literally thousands of square feet of fluid-bed
area.
TVA's 20-MW AFBC pilot plant will address
uncertainties concerning peripheral hardware
systems and plant operation. By late 1981, TVA
will have a 20-MW AFBC pilot plant and is consid-
ering constructing a 200-MW AFBC demonstration
plant that would commence.operation in late 1985.
These two plants would be the culmination of.
research and development that dates back to 1974
when TVA first became interested in AFBC develop-
ment. At that time, load forecasts indicated a
need for additional generation in the late 1980's
and 90's. Also, it became apparent that some of
TVA's aging coal-fired units, some of which have
been in service since the early 1950's would need
to be replaced. Furthermore, AFBC appeared to be
a cost effective way to both use the high sulfur
coal (of which the Tennessee Valley region has
tremendous reserves) and to protect the environment.
In 1976, TVA's involvement in AFBC went into
full swing with a project authorization to prepare
a conceptual design of a 200-MW AFBC demonstration
plant. Preliminary conceptual design was
completed in mid-1978 and information from this
design work aided in the development of design
specifications for the 20-MW pilot plant.
Followon contracts have been placed with three
boiler manufacturers to prepare a final conceptual
design for the 200-MW demonstration plant. Design
completion is slated for late this year. In
addition, TVA has a contract with Combustion
Engineering, who is subcontracting with Lurgi, to
prepare a conceptual design of a second generation
AFBC plant.
Initial funding for the 20-MW AFBC pilot plant
design and fabrication was authorized in April 1979
by the TVA Board of Directors. In September of
that same year, the Board of Directors authorized
construction and operation of the pilot plant.
Because of TVA's large generating capacity and
its engineering capability, TVA is in a unique
position to demonstrate and develop AFBC for large
scale commercial use on the TVA system and possibly
by the utility industry.
TVA's 20-MW AFBC Pilot Plant
At the risk of repeating what my colleague
Roy Lumpkin will say in his presentation, I will
now turn our attention directly to the TVA pilot
plant project.
TVA's 20-MW ~ B pilot
C plant will be located
on the Shawnee Steam Plant reservation near
Paducah, Kentucky. Site preparation for the
pilot plant has just begun this month with
initial construction to begin this summer and
fall. Plant start-up and testing should begin
by the latter part of 1981 or early 1982.
' As I mentioned earlier, the AFBC pilot plant
will be used to resolve many of the uncertainties
concerning full-scale AFBC development. Specifically,
the plant will be used to test and evaluate control
equipment and procedures, to investigate key
systems for performance and reliability, and to
train personnel in operating and maintenance
procedures. Testing at the pilot plant will
involve a cooperative effort between TVA and
Electric Power Research Institute. Since AFBC
is a completely different type of coal combustion
process, it will obviously require different
modes of operation than a conventional steam plant.
Like any generating facility, a commercial-sized
AFBC must be able to respond to changes in
electricity demand. Start-up, turn-down, load
control, shutdown procedures, and the safety
related systems will be tested and developed.
One area of uncertainty in AFBC development
that will hopefully be alleviated by work at the
pilot plant will be the testing of coal/limestone
feed systems. Supplying these materials to a small
unit is no significant problem, but in full-scale
units with thousands of square feet of bed area,
the distribution is something of a mechanical
nightmare. To date, no feed system has been proven
- to withstand the
to be reliable and durable enough
torture of prolonged plant operation. Because of
the large uncertainty involved, the development
- of
adequate feed systems is a must for any
commercial-sized AFBC unit.
The pilot plant itself will be highly
flexible and able to operate under a wide variety
of operating conditions; consequently, it is
necessary to monitor these conditions. A
sophisticated data acquisition and computer system
will be installed to completely monitor all aspects
of the pilot plant operation.
The 20-MW AFBC pilot plant will not generate
electricity. It is not a commercial plant, and
thus, no turbogenerator is currently planned.
Instead the steam produced by the pilot plant wil-
be routed through a surface condensor. This will
allow us to simulate actual utility load demand.
It will provide us with operating experience and
w%ll enable us to scale up to commercial scale
units.
TVA's 200-MW AFBC Demdnstration Plant
As I stated, TVA is also considering
constructing a 200-MW AFBC demonstration plant.
If approved by the TVA Board of Dfrectors, the
present plans call for the 200-MW AFBC demonstration
plant to go Into operation during late 1985.
Unlike the 20-MW AFBC pilot plant, the demonstration
plant would be operated as a commercial plant; that
is, ft's job would be to produce electricity for
the TVA power system.
When steam from the 200-MW AFBC boildr goes
to the turbogenerator, kt would be the culmination
of nearly 10 years of work. We are now at the
half-way point in that decade of AFBC development.
In 1976, TVA authorized the preparation of concep-
tual desfgns of a 200-MW AFBC demonstration plant.
Combustion Engineering, Babcock 6 Wilcox, and
Fluidized Combustion Company were contracted to
provide both a preliminary conceptual design and
cost estimate. Phase I conceptual design took
two years to complete.
Babcock & Wilcox chose a top-supported
stacked-bed arrangement of four main beds and
a separate carbon burnup bed. B&W's feed systems
m h e s coal and limestone, pneumatically transports
and splits the mixture, and injects the mixture
into the beds through the grid plate.
Combustion Engineering chose a "ranch-style"
desfgn in which all beds are on a single elevation
supported from the bottom. A top-supported hood
a b w e the beds collects and directs the hot gases
to the convection pass. The feed system is based
on the Fuller-Kinyon solids pump which introduces
a coal-limestone mixture fnto a dense-phase
pneumatic transport system and then splits and
feeds the mixture into the bed through the grid.
Fluidized Combustion Company's steam generator
is a top-supported stacked-bed arrangement of four
beds. Coal is fed from above the beds with
spreader-stokers whereas limestone is fed by a
gravity fegd.
Despite the differences in the three Phase I
conceptual designs, the cost per kilowatt for
each design was comparatively similar.
Phase I preliminary design for the 200-MW
AFBC demonstration plant was completed in mid-1978.
In early 1979, TVA authorized three contractors to
complete final conceptual designs (Phase 11) by
the final months of 1980. These designs will be
finished at the end of 1980.
 These designs are well underway at this
time. Combustion Engineering, Babcock & Wilcox,
and Eabcock Contractors, Inc., were the three
contractors chosen for the design contracts.
The objectives of the Phase 11 conceptual
design are to refine previous designs and to
provide additional information needed for ongoing
environmental evaluations and to make decisions
on how to proceed to demonstration plant construc-
tion and operation. Each contractor will: prepare
cost estimates; determine the probability of
successful operation of the 200-MW plant and
its inherent risks; define major problems and
areas requiring additional research and development;
.preparedetailed schedules for all proposed Phase I11
activities; establish a conceptual design of the
200-MW AFBC boiler and related systems; and finally,
determine the structural steel requirements for boiler
and related equipment to permit structural steel
procurement.
Design of the 200-MW AFBC boiler and
related systems is geared to the following
specifications:
Gross Turbogenerator Rating, MW 200
Continuous Rating, pounds of steam
per hour 1,325,000
Turbine Throttle Pressure 2,450
Superheat/Reheat Temperature, F 1,000
Also, each contractor is to keep in mind the
relationship.between their particular design of
the 200-MW demonstration unit and the design of
a steam generator in the. 600- to 800-MW size range.
This will hopefully ensure the feasibility of
the design of the larger units.
Following the completion of Phase I1
conceptual designs, TVA will make a decision on
whether or not to pro'ceed with Phase 111. If
approved by the TVA Board of Directors, detailed
design and site preparation will begin in the
summer of 1981.
Environmental and Technical Support Work by TVA
Because of the size of the AFBC demonstration
plant, it is necessary for additfonal work to be
performed. Preparation of environmental impact
statement (EIS) and completion of the necessary
technical support work are required. Secondly,
it is necessary that technical support work be
finished in several different areas. First 'let's
address the preparation of the EIS.
It is a new experience for TVA to have to
prepare an EIS on a coal-fired plant. The last
large coal-fired steam plant that TVA built,
which was Cumberland Steam Plant, was completed
in 1973, and no EIS was required. Another
significant point is that this will probably be
the first EIS written for a fluidized bed unit.
Even for those of us at TVA who have had the
fortune of preparing an EIS in the past, there are
other changes and requirements that make this EIS
unique. For one thing, the final version of the
EIS is to be concise. EIS's in the past were
often multi-volumed publications that were as
complicated as the projects that they attempted
to explain.
Work on the demonstration plant EIS is well
underway at this time. We have completed a ,
description of the process itself, an extensive
description of the site, and the background
information needed for screening possible sites.
While no firm decision has been made on site
selection, the Shawnee Steam Plant reservation
has been named the "preferred site." The Shawnee
site will be the scope of the most detailed portion
of the EIS, but the final selection of a site
will not be made until the environmental work has
been completed and the environmental constraints
of the Shawnee and other candidate sites are made
known.
We have performed the first formal step in
the EIS process by holding a scoping meeting to
determine what will be covered in the EIS. A
public meeting was held in Paducah, Kentucky, to
outline our EIS plans to other agencies,
individuals, citizens, and groups who were in
attendance at that meeting. Questions, suggestions,
and comments submitted at this meeting and in
writing have been tabulated, summarized, and
will be appropriately addressed in the EIS.
The draft of the demonstration plant EIS will
be completed in Septeniber of this year. That draft
will be submitted for review and comment to
interested individuals, groups, and agencies. After
TVA evaluates the comments it receives, the EIS
will be finalized. Incidentally, more than 18
subgroups within TVA are involved in the writing
of the demonstration plant EIS. After the final
EIS is released to the public, the TVA Board of
Directors will be asked to.approve construction
of the 200-MW plant.
It is obvious that a large plant, such as
the 200-MW demonstration plant, will have some
impacts upon the environment during construction
and operation. However, because of the inherent
environmental benefits of AFBC, we believe it
can easily meet the New Source Performance
Standards as set by the Environmental Protection
Agency. We feel that the environmental benefits
of this technology will outweigh any associated
impacts.
Technical Support
One point that I' have made several times in
this discussion is the need for additional technical
research and development on AFBC. While our
projects continue to reach maturity, we are at the
same time addressing some of the technical problems
related to AFBC. As I have mentioned previously,
one of the problems with AFBC is in the develop-
ment of coal/limestone feed systems. We hope to
get some answers to these problems in a program
that we have recently initiated that involves
the testing of a Fuller-Kinyon feed pump at an
existing TVA steam plant. TVA has awarded the
Fuller Company a turnkey contract to build a
coal-feed test facility at the Watts Bar Steam
Plant. Construction will be completed in six
months with a six-month testing period to follow.
The Watts Bar coal-feed test will be the
only large scale demonstration of a feed system
that is applicable to the 200-MW AFBC demonstration
plant. Also, since the 20-MW pilot plant will use
a Fuller-Kinyon pump, the test facility will
provide the added advantage of proving the
 effectiveness of the pump and splitter prior to
construction. Clarence K. Andrews, of TVA's
FBC staff, will provide more details on coal-feed
systems in his presentation.

Other technical support includes work with

the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. In a program
with the Department of Energy, TVA and ORNL are
working together on a number of task programs
that use an AFBC bench-scale combustor to test
coal and limestone, a cold flow model for
slumping tests, modeling and simulation, materials
research, and other miscellaneous technical support
activities.

TVA is now investigating the recycling of

elutriated particulates from the AFBC process
that includes fly ash and unburned carbon. The
idea is to devise some way to recycle the elutriated
. . solids back into the main bed rather than using a
separate carbon burnup cell. General Atomic
was chosen for the investigation because of its
experience in recycling and burning graphite.

While the major thrust of AFBC development

by TVA is of the "bubbling bed" type of atmospheric
fluidized bed combustion, TVA is also keeping track
of other fluidized bed concepts. These include
alternates to first generation (bubbling bed) AFBC
such as pressurized fluidized bed combustion,
intermediate pressurized fluidized bed combustion,
and second generation AFBC (circulatfng bed).

Scenario for the Future

Following a complete demonstration of AFBC

in a large-scale mode, full-scale units in the
range of 600- to 1,000-MW range may be built by
TVA in the mid- to late 1990's.. AFBC will not
replace existing conventional coal burning in
steam plants but it will offer an excellent
alternative for new plants as load forecasts
indicated. This near-term alternative may offer
an interim method of producing bulk power from
coal to carry us to the day when advanced
technologies come into widespread commerctal
availability.
The contents of this paper do not necessarily reflect the views
and policies of the Tennessee Valley Authority, nor does mention of
trade names, commercial products, or .companies constitute,endorsement
or recommendation for use.
 FLUIDIZED BED COMBUSTION - AN EVOLUTIONARY
IMPROVEMENT IN ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION
Kurt E.
Electric Power Research Inst.
INTRODUCTION
Over the past year major technical ad-
vances in the commercial application of .
fluidized bed combustion (FBC) have occur-
red. These advances are particularly dra-
matic for the electric utility industry
where FBC represents an evolutionary im-
provement in coal utilization providing re-
duced fuel sensitivity and simplified e-
mission control capabilities. Both Atmos-
' of current power plants and have adversely
pheric FBC and Pressurized FBC may fill
important roles in the electric utility in-
dustry: AFBC to lower the cost of elec-
trity generated from the conventional
steam-electric power plant; PFBC for the
high efficiencies available from the more
complex combined-cycle power plants.
Sixty years ago the use of pulverized
coal combustion was pioneered in the elec-.
tric utility industry. This evolution in
coal-burning technology.was set in motion
by a number of considerations which par-
allel the issues of today. The then gen-
erally applied stoker furnace was not well
suited to these new conditions. Specifi-
cally, utilities needed much larger fur-
naces, fuel conservation became more signi-
ficant and the use of coal fines, pre-
viously considered a waste, was econom-
ically desired. In addition, pulverized
coal firing was considered environmentally
superior because it could reduce smoke and
ground level concentrations of particulate
matter.
As we move into a new era with greatly
expanded needs for coal-fired power gene-
ration, EPRI and the utility industry are
.accelerating the development and appli-
cation of fluidized bed combustion as a
further evolutionary improvement in coal
utilization to meet the new requirements
of today.. The improvements.whichexcite
this utility interest include reduced sen-
sitivity to fuel quality thus permitting
the use of a much broader fuel supply,
from anthracite to municipal refuse, with-
out suffering large loses in efficiency and
reliability in a single.boiler design.
Second, less cost sensitivity to unit size
in a period when load growth and siting
restrictions may prefer smaller rather
eager
than larqer furnaces.
A third primary advantage of FBC that
may lead to the displacement of pulverized
coal boilers is environmental performance.
The invention of pulverized coal boilers
occurred at a time when all that was ex-
pected of a furnace was to burn out carbon.
Today, environmental requirements for the
control of sulfur and nitrogen oxides add
substantially to the complexity and cost
impacted plant reliability. By comparison,
our experiments with fluidized combustion
of coal confirm that it is possible to
economically control sulfur and nitrogen
oxides without parasitic post-combustion
cleanup devices.
Thus, fluidized combustion of coal
provides a promising response for today's
new requirements on power production.
Development has successfully progressed
from the process confirmation stage to
engineering prototype making commercial
utility scale systems a distinct possi-
bility within this decade.
It is our position that utility FBC
boilers in the U.S. will have to be cap-
able of the following performance with an
average bituminous coal:
o Combustion Efficiency Over 99%
o Thermal Efficiency >90%
o Sulfur Dioxide 90% removal
with Ca/S <1.5
o Nitrogen Oiides Less than 0.4
lbs/l06~tu
o steam Conditions 2400 p s i / l ~ ~ O O ~
/1000°~ or
higher
o Load Following >1% per minute
o Tube Life Low corrosion
and erosion to
allow > 15 year
life
The purpose of EPRI's R&D is to develop
the process flow sheet and the needed
hardware to achieve these objectives.
ATMOSPHERIC FLUID BED COMBUSTION
Over the past year EPRI efforts in
Kurt E. Yeager
Page 2
atmospheric fluid bed comhstuion (AFBC)
have focused on testing a 6 ft x 6 ft
(2 MWe) pilot unit with Babcock and Wilcox
incorporating bed recycle. The results
have shown that recycle of bed material
will be applicable for utility AFBC de-
signs. This has successfully eliminated
a major factor restricting utility appli-
cations; i.e., the need for large quan-
tities of limestone to maintain adequate
sulfur oxide sorptiori. In addition,
this test facility incorporates a large,
18 ft. freeboard which has permitted car-
bon burnup within the furnace thus elin-
inating the need for an auxiliary carbon
burnup cell. NOx formation has also been
significantly reduced relative to pulver-
ized coal combustion. A final area of
process improvement achieved this year has
been at least a fourfold reduction in coal
feed points within the bed, thus simpli-
fying the fuel supply and control problem
in large scale fluidized beds.
Based on these promising process re-
sults, the utility industry and its boiler
suppliers have agreed that a cost effective
utility-scale AFBC design is likely, but
important hardware issues remain that
should be resolved in an engineering pro-
totype in the 20 MWe size range. These
hardware issues involving feeding and con-
trolling the process reliably result from
the specific utility requirements for large
boiler size, high efficiency, rapid load
following, high superheat and reheat,
stringent emission standards and a pre-
mium on availability. Recognizing these
requirements, TVA has taken the lead for
the utility industry, with EPRI support, in
implementing a 20 MWe engineering prototype
at the Shawnee power station. This proto-
type being built by Babcock and Wilcox
will in turn provide the technical basis
for a 20 MWe commercial scale demonstra-
tion also planned by TVA. EPRI's R&D pro-
gram is aimed at making it possible (and
desirable) to start construction of a 600
MWe AFBC boiler in 1990 after operating
this 200 MWe demonstration by 1987.
In addition to this aggressive devel-
opment of classical fluid bed technology
operating at low gas vel'ocities in the 4
to 12 foot per second range, EPRI is also
exploring higher velocity, circulating bed
designs. These are under development in
differing forms by several manufacturers
including Lurgi and General Electric.
Lurgi test results have been particularly
impressive in producing high combustion
efficiencies as well as very high lime-
stone utilization for up to 95% SO2 remov-
al. Furthermore, this system has shown it-
self capable of reducing NOx emissions to
the 100 ppm range. This encouraging tech-
nology is now in active engineering evalu-
ation for the United States under license
with Combustion Engineering.
PRESSURIZED FLUID BED COMBUSTION
In pressurized fluid bed combustion,
attention during the past year focused on
resolving the key hurdle which the tech-
nology must pass for commercial utility
consideration, i.e., achieving practical
gas turbine reliability. During this
year, 1000 hour reliability testing of
turbine components and hot gas cyclones
has been successfully completed under
joint DOE/EPRI sponsorship at the PFBC
pilot facility of the British Coal Utili-
zation Research Laboratory (CURL). A
second successful EPRI project activity
has been the screening of promising ad-
vanced hot gas cleanup devices on a large
PFBC simulator operated by Westinghouse.
This project has demonstrated extended
operation of ceramic bag filter units at
15000F and 11 atm while maintaining a
particulate collection efficiency of 99.5%.
This may provide the means to achieve a
much larger reliability margin for PFBC
gas turbine s9stems. This has encouraged
PFBC/combined cycle prototypes of suffi-
cient size to incorporate actual rotating
gas turbine machinery. A proposed near
term commercial approach is the develop-
ment of a coal-fired gas turbine for re-
powering existing power plants. This
could be the simplest and most rapid PFBC
utility application.
The next critical development step,
from the user standpoint, is the demon-
stration of extended operation of complete
PFBC qas turbine/hot gas cleanup combi-
nations at a sufficiently large scale to
permit engineering extrapolation to util-
ity service. Both the International Ener-
gy Agency (IEA) Grimethorpe PFBC test
facility and the Curtiss-Wright PFBC pilot
sponsored by DOE may provide the necessary
vehicle for achieving this development
milestone. EPRI has also recently initi-
ated a joint project with Brown-Boveri and
Babcock and Wilcox to perform engineering
evaluations and design of alternative PFBC
combined cycle power plants. This effort,
together with the successful achievement
of gas turbine/hot gas cleanup reliability
is intended to provide the basis for ac-
tive utility industry participation in
large scale PFBC demonstration and comer-
cialization programs. American Electric
Power (AEP) has provided much of the ini-
tiative in bringing this technoloqy for-
ward for serious utility consideration.
ADVANCED COAL TECHNOLOGY ANALYSIS
In order to judge the commercial po-
tential of both :'TA 7nd PFBC f c r utility
use, they must be considered not only in
terms of conventional power plant design
but other advanced options as well. The
 Kurt E. Yeager
Page 3
following comparison is therefore offered C. Net Hea.t.Ra:t.e. (.Btu/kWh) and Net Effic-
a s . an example'showing their relative mer- 'i'e'n'c'
': (:% )

its'and the status of the "horse race" in

which they are involved. (Adv. Pc/FGD 8460 40
1. (GCC 8465 **8980 40 **38
The conditions assumed are as fol- (PFBC 8467 40
lows,: 5. Baseline 9450 36
4. AFBC . 9650 35
- Plant location - Kenosha, Wisconsin
- Capacity factor - 70% (1000 MW capa- D. Water. Cohsumpti,on (gal/hr/MW)
city
- Coal-Illinois bituminous: 4% S, 16% 1. (PFBC 490
ash, 10,000 Btu/lb 3. (GCC 490 ** 523
- Environmental control requirements 2. (Adv. PC/FGD 507
o SOx - 90% removal
o Particulate - 0.03 lb/MBtu
4.
5.
AFBC
Baseline
620
675
o NOx - 0.6 lb/MBtu
o .Water quality - Zero discharge
o Solid waste - RCRA "special waste"
requirements
- Plant Availability - 75% or greater (GCC
(Adv. PC/FGD
0
10 Regenerable FGD
The 1979 EPRI Technical Assessment 3. Baseline 76
Guide (TAG) was used as a basis for this 4. AFBC 132
comparison; it was updated where appro- 5. PFBC 145 Dolomite
priate by more recent, published EPRI R&D F. ,so.l'i:d'
Waste (dry tons/hr/1000 MW)
results. * ,

All options can meet the environ- (GCC 70

mental control requirements specified, l' (Adv. PC/FGD 70
with the gasification combined cycle (GCC) 3. Baseline 170
having the highest inherent capability for 4. PFBC 185
SOx control without process modifications. 5. AFBC 193
Both the GCC and PFBC should inherently G. Land i?equ'i:rem'ent(acres/1000 MW/30 yrs)
' control to 0.2 lb/MBtu of NOx while the
advanced PC and AFBC should control to 0.3
lb/MBtu or better. Although the GCC has 1. GCC 750
excellent air pollution control potential, 2. Adv. PC/FGD 1050
the possibility that toxic and/or carcin- 3. PFBC 1150
ogenic hydrocarbons will be produced under 4. . AFBC 1450
the reducing.conditionspresent in the pro- 5. Baseline 1650
cess may make workplace control as well as H. P;uxi'l'i'ary ~nvi;rbnm~rital
Control cost
control of wastewater and solid wastes in-
( % of plant capital cost)*
herently more expensive and, at this time,
more risky than for the other options.
1. GCC 14
The following results for the four 2. AFBC 21
advanced coal options are assembled in de- 3. PFBC 24
creasing order from best to lowest for 4. Adv. PC/FGD 33
each criterion. The baseline for com- 5. Baseline 35
parison is present-day, conventional super-
critical PC/FGD. NOTE: * Does not include heat rejection
control
A. Capital Cost $/kW ** Lower temperature (20000F) gas
turbine capability
1. PFBC $700
2. AFBC $710 A number of considerations evolve
3. GCC $765 **815 . from this comparative analysis. A sum-
4. Baseline $804 mary of several of the more striking are
5. Adv. PC/FGD $800 summarized as follows.
B. Busbar Costs (mills/kWh-30 yr lev- The several technologies considered
elized) all have potential merit for improving
1. PFBC 58 coal-fired power production relative to
2. Adv. PC/FGD 59 present conventional pulverized coal
3. GCC 60 plants. The present economic and techni-
4. AFBC 61 cal base is inadequate to either eliminate
5. Baseline 64 any of these advanced options or identify
one as clearly superior. They all should
Kurt E. Yeager
Page 4

be developed to the point of proving or alternatives are also undergoing vigorous

disproving their potential benefits. It development in the "horse-race" for the.
is again emphasized that the information coal-fired power plant market of the
summarized here represents a performance 1990's and beyond. Thank you and Good
forecast based on the current technical Luck.
status of each option for a specified set
of conditions. Developments can be postu-
lated for each option which could further
improve its performance and relative merit.
Improvements in the environmental,
cost and efficiency performance of the ad-
vanced coal options relative to current
pulverized coal practice are likely but
are generally in the range of lo%, with
the exception of NOx emission control
where a 50-70% improvement is possible for
every option. The improvements are gener-
ally within the range of development un-
certainty and could also erode completely
during the further course of development.
Therefore, a decision to apply any of
these options commercially is more likely
to be made on the basis of confidence in
availability and operability, siting flex-
ibility and fuel flexibility. These are
all factors which should favor fluidized
bed combustion.
From a practical standpoint, the po-
tential improvement in plant availability
is at least 2 to 3 times larger than im-
provement in efficiency, and the R&D risks
are probably smaller and less costly.
Accordingly, power plant cycle deve'lopfient
and inipro.venient''sliou'ldpla'c'e''c'o'r:re's'pon:&i:ng.
priority tin'ava'i'lab'i'l'ity. This importance
2s reflected in an implicit improvement
factor incorporated in advanced coal op-
tions relative to current practice, i.e.,
minimization of auxiliary environmental
control. The payoff is primarily reduced
complexity and failure modes which, in
turn, tend to improve availabilty and op-
erability.
CONCLUSION

In conclusion, fluid bed combustion

offers promise of providing a substantial
but evoPutionary improvement in the utili-
zation of coal for electric power pro- .
duction. Flexibility to burn alternative
fuels with miniinurn performance and reli-
ability penalty has been established.
The stringent emission standards existing
and proposed in the United States should
be met without complicated and parasitic
post-comhrlst.ion clea~iupdevices. These
significant improvement opportunities have
fostered major utility industry develop-
ment efforts for both AFBC and PFBC. In
the final analysis, however, the utility
marlcct potential of these Lechiloluyies
will depend primarily on demonstration of
power plant reliability and availability
advantages over the alternatives. As we
move forward we must remember that these
 CONCLUSIONS OF THE EPA FLUIDIZED-BED
COMBUSTION PROGRAM
D. Bruce Henschel
I n d u s t r i a l Environmental Research Laboratory
U. S. Environmental P r o t e c t i o n A ency
Research T r i a n g l e Park, N. C. 27711
Summary
The purpose o f t h i s pa e r i s t o summarize
t h e c u r r e n t conclusions o f !he U. S. Environ-
mental P r o t e c t i o n Agenc I s (EPA's) I n d u s t r i a l
Environmental Research {aboratory , Research
T r i a n l e Park, NC (IERL-RTP), concernin t h e
abil iZy o f atmospheric and p r e s s u r i z e d !l " i d i z e d -
bed combustion systems t o meet c u r r e n t l y iden-
t i f i e d environmental requirements. I n summary,
based upon a v a i l a b l e data, i t i s a n t i c i p a t e d
t h a t b o t h atmos h e r i c and-pressurized s stems
should be capable o f meet1n t h e recentyy rev! r e d
New Source Performance ~ t a n % a r d s NSPS) c o v e r i n g
a i r emissions o f s u l f u r d i o x i d e ($! 02), n i t r o g e n
oxides (NO,), and p a r t i c u l a t e s from e l e c t r i c
u t i l i t steam- e n e r a t i n g u n i t s . NSPS f o r indus-
t r i a l t o i l e r s !ave n o t e t been r o osed b EPA;
however, f 1uidized-bed { o i l e r s s i o u f d be a i l e t o
meet t h e i n d u s t r i a l b o i l e r standards as w e l l ,
i f these standards a r e n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y more .
s t r i n g e n t , o r a r e l e s s s t r i n g e n t , t h a n t h e stand-
ards c o v e r i n g u t i l i t y steam generators. The EPA
standards should be achieved i n f l u i d i z e d - b e d
combustion systems i n a manner which i s economi-
c a l l y competitive w i t h t h e a l t e r n a t i v e o f a
conventional b o i l e r w i t h f l u e gas desul f u r i z a -
t i o n ; t h e r e a t e s t economic u n c e r t a i n t y concerns
t h e c o n t r o y o f p a r t i r u l a t e s a t .elevated tempera-
t u r e s and pressures i n p r e s s u r i z e d combustors.
A d d i t i o n a l data from l a r g e f l u i d i z e d - b e d combus-
t o r s , r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f commercial-scale
systems, a r e necessary t o c o n f i r m these
conclusions.
S o l i d residues from atmospheric and pres-
s u r i zed f 1u i d i zed-bed combustors, i n general,
should n o t be considered as "hazardous" wastes
under t h e Resource Conservation and Recovery
A c t RCRA), based upon RCRA procedures as cur-
{
r e n t y defined. However, t h e p r o p e r t i e s o f
leachate from the r e s i d u e w i l l n e c e s s i t a t e some
a t t e n t i o n i n t h e design o f a " s a n i t a r y l a n d f i l l "
under RCRA, f o r disposal o f t h e residues as non-'
hazardous wastes.
{
Introduction
I n p a r a l l e l w i t h t h e e f f o r t s b t h e U. S.
Department o f Ener t h e E l e c t r i c {over Research
I n s t i t u t e (EPRI), 8' e Tennessee V a l l e y A u t h o r i t y
ITVA , and o t h e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s t o develop
1uidized-bed combusti on techno1 ogy, EPA i s con-
d u c t i n g a c o n t r a c t research and develo ment pro-
gram aimed a t com l e t e environmental c i a r a c t e r i -
z a t i o n o f t h e teclnology. The EPA p r o ram has
been described p r e v i o u s l y (References 7.2).
O b j e c t i v e s o f t h e EPA f l u l d l r e d - b e d combus-
t i o n program a r e t o i d e n t i f y any p o t e n t i a l
environmental problem areas, and t o develop any
necessary environmental c o n t r o l techiiol ogy ,
w h i l e t h e f l u i d i z e d - b e d combustion process i s
under develo ment. I d e n t i f y i n g any problem
areas as earyy as p o s s i b l e d u r i n g t h e develop-
ment hase should a1 low any necessary environ-
m e n t a l c o n t r o l s t o be i n t e r a t e d i n t o t h e process
on t h e most t i m e l y and C O S T - e f f e c t i v e basis.
Results from t h e R&D program.are intended
p r i m a r i l y t o ensure t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f an ade-
quate research data base.to enable t h e develop-
ment o f standards and guide1 i n e s by EPA's regula-
t o r y o f f i c e s , and t o enable t h e issuance o f
p e r m i t s f o r f l u i d i z e d - b e d b o i l e r p l a n t s by EPA's
p e ~ i t t i n go f f i c e s . The r e s u l t s a r e a l s o - t o
ass1s t t h e developers and b u i 1ders o f f 1u i d i zed-
bed b o i l e r s i n t h e s e l e c t i o n and a p p l i c a t i o n o f
control alternatives.
The EPA program c u r r e n t l y c o n s i s t s o f seven
p r o j e c t s w i t h a v a r i e t y o f c o n t r a c t o r s . Many o f
he p r o j e c t s a r e discussed i n d e t a i l i n o t h e r
papers presented a t t h i s conference by t h e i n d i -
v i d u a l contractors. For f u r t h e r reference, some
o f t h e published r e o r t s generated by EPA con-
t r a c t o r s s i n c e t h e F i f t h I n t e r n a t i o n a l Confer-
ence a r e l i s t e d as References 3 through 20.
Emission Sources and Appl i c a b l e Federal Legi s-
lation
There a r e f o u r major general sources o f
emissions from f l u i d i z e d - b e d b o i l e r plants.
These sources are: (1) t h e s t o r a e handling,
and f e e d i n g o f c o a l and sorbent; 721 t h e steam
c y c l e (e.g., c o o l i n g tower d r i f t , l i q u i d e f f l u -
e n t s from b o i l e r blowdown, and feedwater t r e a t -
p e n t ) . 63) stack gas emissions; and (4) emissions
o f s o l i residue, i n t h e form o f bed m a t e r i a l
I spent sorbent, w i t h some coal ash) withdrawn
rom t h e combustor, and i n t h e form o f c a r r y - o v e r
( l a r g e 1 f l y a s h , w i t h some e l u t r i a t e d spent
sorbentf . t h a t i s removed .from t h e f l u e gas by
t h e p a r t i c l e c o n t r o l devices.
' Emissions r e s u l t i n from t h e s o l i d s storage
and h a n d l i n g system, an! from t h e steam cycle,
a r e n o t unique t o f l u i d i z e d - b e d combustion, b u t
should be reasonably t y p i c a l o f any c o a l - f i r e d
combustion system d r i v i n a steam t u r b i n e .
Accord1 ngly, subsequent % i s c u s s i o n wi 11 focus .
on t h e stack gas and s o l i d r e s i d u e emission
sources.
 D. B. Henschel
The stack as emissions w i l l be covered by
a p l i c a b l e reguyations developed by EPA under
t t e Clean A i r Act, as amended There a r e a
number o f requirements under t h i s Act which can
a f f e c t t h e u l t i m a t e s i t i n g and c o n t r o l l e v e l s
f o r a f l u i d i z e d - b e d b o i l e r plant. The s e c i f i c
t y p e 6 f r e g u l a t i o n o f most meaning f o r t % e d i s -
cussion i n t h i s paper i s t h e NSPS, which speci-
f i e s acce t a b l e emission c o n c e n t r a t i o n s from
new o r s u g s t a n t i a l l y m o d i f i e d sources, and which
i s based on best a v a i l a b l e c o n t r o l ~ t e c h n o l o q y .
Revisions t o t h e NSPS f o r l a r g e u t i l i t steam
enerators ( l a r g e r t h a n 73 MWt), promuygated i".
7979, are: f o r 0 an absolute maximum e m i s n o n
o f 1.2 l b SO2/1o2 &u heat i n p u t (520 n g l J ) , w i t h
a t l e a s t 90 percent SO2 r e d u c t i o n r e q u i r e d so
l o n g as t e emissions remain between 0.6 and
1
1.2 lb110 B t u (260 and 520 ng/J) and a t l e a s t
70 percent r e d u c t i o n r e q u i r e d so i o n as emis-
s i o n s do n o t excee 0.6 1b1106 B t u $260 ng/J);
!l
f o r NOx, 0.6 1bIbO B t u 260 n J ) o r most
coals, 0.5 lb110 B t u IZ!p ng/!l f o r subbitumi-
nous coals, and 0.8 l b 10 B t u 340. n I J ) f o r
some l i g n i t e s i n some furnaces; and !or par-
1
t i c u l a t e s , 0.03 lb/106 B t u 13 n g / ~ j . .These
standards are based u on a 0-day r o l l i n g aver-
age. U t i l i t y - s c a l e fyuidized-bed b o i l e r p l a n t s
would have t o be designed i n o r d e r t o achieve
these emission standards; however, t h e operators
o f t h e i n i t i a l p l a n t s may apply f o r a commercial
demonstration permit a1 l o w i n 85 percent SO2
removal i n s t e a d o f 90 percen!, under t h e p h i l o s o -
phy t h a t , w i t h o u t previous ex e r i e n c e i n t h e
design and o p e r a t i o n o f u t i l icy-scal e fluidized-
bed p l a n t s , t h e goal o f 90 e r c e n t may n o t be
achieved i n t h e i n i t i a l i n s i a l l a t i o n s Under
t h e r e v i s e d u t i l i t y NSPS, t h e f i r s t 460 t o
3,000 MWe o f cumulative i n s t a l l e d atmospheric
f l u i d i z e d - b e d b o i l e r capacity, and t h e f i r s t
4 0 0 . t o 1,200 MWe o f p r e s s u r i z e d capacity, may
be issued such commercial demonstrati on permi ts.
NSPS f o r i n d u s t r i a l b o i l e r s a r e c u r r e n t l y under
development;
The s o l i d r e s i d u e generated.by t h e process
can have t h e f o l l o w i n g environmental e f f e c t s :
f u g i t i v e a i r emissions from d i s p o s a l s i t e s , i n
t h e form o f wind-blown dust, which would be
covered under t h e Clean A l r Act; r a i n w a t e r perco-
l a t i o n through t h e disposal p i l e s i n t o t h e s o i l
and groundwater, which would be covered under
RCRA; and r a i n w a t e r r u n o f f i n t o s u r f a c e water
systems, which would be covered under t h e Clean
Water Act and RCRA. Under RCRA, EPA has r e c e n t l y
promulgated c r i t e r i a f o r determining whether a
r e s i d u e i s t o be considered "hazardous" f o r t h e
purposes o f t h e Act. EPA must promul a t e standards
coverin the and t h e trea!ment/storage/
disposa? o f ' l h a z a r d ~ ~ swastes. " I f a waste i s
n o t hazardous, i t would, i n general, b e disposed
o f i n a " s a n i t a r y l a n d f i l l " i n accordance w i t h
s o l i d waste management plans developed by t h e
i n d i v i d u a l stat$s. EPA has promulgited some c r i -
teria definin s a n i t a r y l a n d f i l l s , and has pro-
posed (but no! y e t promulgated) a d d i t i o n a l
criteria.
Sulfur Dioxide Control
S u l f u r d i o x i d e removals o f 90 percent and
h i g h e r can be achieved i n b o t h atmospheric and
r e s s u r i z e d f l u i d i z e d - b e d combustion t h u s ena-
g l i n g compliance w i t h t h e r e v i s e d EPA New Source
Perfornlance Standard f o r u t i l i t y steam generators.
Thesc removals should be achievable w i t h reasona-
b l e sorbent feed r a t e s , and i n a manner which i s
c a l l y competitive w i t h t h e a l t e r n a t i v e o f
a conventional b o i l e r w i t h f l u e gas d e s u l f u r i z a -
t i o n . However, i n o r d e r t o achieve h i g h SO2
removals economically, f l u i d i z e d - b e d b o i l e r s may
have t o be o e r a t e d w i t h increased c o n t a c t t i m e
between t h e O! and t h e sorbent, and w i t h reduced
sorbent p a r t i c ?e size. Increased SO I s o r b e n t
c o n t a c t t i ~ eand reduced sorbent p a r f i c l e . s i z e
can s i g n i f i c a n t l y increase sorbent e f f e c t i v e n e s s
i n SO2 removal, and hence s i g n i f i c a n t l y reduce
. s o r b e n t feed requirements.
In t r a d i t i o n a l dense- hase f l u i d i z e d - b e d
systems, increased ~ ~ ~ / s o r ! e nc to n t a c t t i m e i s
achieved through increased gas residence t i m e i n
t h e bed. Increased gas residence t i m e - t r a n s -
l a t e s i n t o a decrease i n gas v e l o c i t y through t h e
bed, a n d l o r an increase i n bed height. There has
been an i n c e n t i v e f o r designers t o attempt t o
minimize gas residence time, i n o r d e r to'maxi-
mize b o i l e r throughput, and t o reduce b o i l e r
s i z e and c a p i t a l cost. However, EPA's s t u d i e s
suggest t h a t , a t h i h l e v e l s o f SO2 .removal,
t h e c o s t p e n a l t y (tRe increased ca i t a l i z a t i o n
c o s t ) associated w i t h a l a r g e r b o i f e r i s more
t h a n o f f s e t by t h e r e d u c t i o n i n o p e r a t i n g c o s t s
associated w i t h ' t h e reduced sorbent feed r e q u i r e -
ments. The r e d u c t i o n i n sorbent feed r e q u i r e -
ments achievable through increased gas residence
timelreduced sorbent p a r t i c l e size, becomes
more pronounced as t h e r e q u i r e d l e v e l o f SO2
removal increases.
T h i s p o i n t i s i l l u s t r a t e d by an en i n e e r i n g
study conducted by V e s t i n house f o r u t i y i t y -
s c a l e b o i l e r s (Refere"ce go), some r e s u l t s o f . .
which a r e summari.zed i n F i g u r e 1. F i g u r e 1
presents t h e c o s t o f e l e c t r i c i t y as a f u n c t i o n
o f sorbent c o s t f o r an 800 MW atmos h e r i c f l u i d -
ized-bed b o i l e r p l a n t operated t o o g t a i n 90 per-
c e n t SO removal. P r o j e c t e d costs f o r a conven-
t i o n a l goi!er w i t h a s c r u b b e r - a r e a l s o p l o t t e d
f o r comparison. The sorbent feed r a t e s shown
i n F i g u r e 1 (ex ressed as t h e c a l c i u m - t o - s u l f u r
mole r a t i o , o r &/s) were p r o j e c t e d by Westing-
house using a f a i r l y simple k i n e t i c model based
upon l a b o r a t o r y thermogravimetric k i n e t i c data
f o r t h e sorbentlS02 r e a c t i o n .
The bottom curve f o r atmospheric f l u i d i z e d -
bed combustion i n F i g u r e 1 was developed assuming
a as residence t i m e o f '0.67 second (a gas
ve?ocity o f 6 f t l s e c o r 1.8 m sec, and a bed
depth o f 4 f e e t , o r 1.2 meters(. The curve a l s o
assumes a 500 pm s u r f a c e mean sorbent p a r t i -
c l e s i z e i n t h e bed (which corresponds t o a mass
mean o f perhaps 700pm); t h e a c t u a l s i z e o f t h e
fresh sorbent feed, o f course, c o u l d be coarser
t h a n t h i s in-bed value. These.values f o r r e s i -
dence t i m e and p a r t i c l e size, although n o t nec-
e s s a r i l y r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e economic o timum, a r e
f e l t t o represent reasonably good seyections
f o r these v a r i a b l e s from t h e s t a n d p o i n t o f c o s t - .
e f f e c t i v e SO2 removal. The values f o r v e l o c i t y ,
bed depth, and in-bed p a r t i c l e s i z e are, i n d i v i d u -
a l ' l y , w i t h i n t h e ranges considered i n various
design and experimental programs conducted by -.-. --. -
o t h e r o r a n i z a t i o n s . As i n d i c a t e d on t h e curve,
f o r a 0.87 second residence t i m e and a 500
a r t i c l e size, t h e sorbent feed r a t e p r o j e c t e d
! t h e Westi nghouse mode! i s a c a l c i u m - t o - s u l f u r
y
mole r a t i o o f 2.9, assuming a sorbent o f represen-
tative reactivity.
The t o p curve f o r f l u i d i z e d - b e d combustion i n
t h e f i g u r e was developed assumin a gas r e s i -
dence t i m e o f 0.4 second (gas v e y o c i t y o f 10
f t l s e c , o r 3.0 mlsec, and a bed depth o f 4 f e e t ,
o r 1.2 meters); sorbent p a r t i c l e s i z e i n t h e bed
was assumed t o have a s u r f a c e mean.value o f 1000
At this lower gas residence t i m e and l a r g e r
1:;ticle size, t h e model p r o j e c t s (somewhat
 D. B. Henschel
p e s s i m i s t i c a l j y ) t h a t t h e r e q u i r e d calcium-to-
s u l f u r r a t i o 1s 7.0.
The comparison o f t h e t o p and bottom curves
i n d i c a t e s t h a t - - d e s p i t e t h e h i g h e r annualized
c a p i t a l i z a t i o n cost associated w i t h t h e l a r g e r
f l u i d i z e d - b e d b o ~ l e rrepresented by t h e bottom
curve--the reduced sorbent feed requirements f o r
t h i s b o i l e r r e s u l t i n a several mill/kWh n e t sav-
ings i n t h e cost o f e l e c t r i c i t y a t a t pica1
r o r b e n t c o s t o f $lO/ton ($9/metric tony. Even
i f sorbent feed r e uirements f o r t h e s m a l l e r
b o i l e r (representea by t h e t o p curve) were l e s s
t h a n t h e Ca/S o f 7.0 p r o j e c t e d b t h e model, t h e
l a r g e r b o i l e r would continue t o i e economically
more a t t r a c t i v e than t h e s m a l l e r one unless t h e
model i s over-estimating t h e sorbent requirements
o f t h e smal l e r b o i l e r by a f a c t o r g r e a t e r t h a n
two. As shown i n F i g u r e 1, t h e c o s t o f e l e c -
t r i c i t y from t h e l a r g e r f l u i d i z e d - b e d b o i l e r , w i t h
a Ca/S o f 2.9, i s p r o j e c t e d t o be l e s s t h a n t h a t
from t h e conventional b o l l e r l s c r u b b e r a t a1 1
b u t t h e h i g h e s t sorbent costs.
Since t h e sorbent feed requirements p r o j e c -
t e d by t h e Westinghouse model p l a y a key r o l e i n
t h i s c o s t comparison, i t i s important t o assess
t h e r e l i a b i l i t o f t h i s f a i r l y simple model.
The model has t e e n t e s t e d a a i n s t t h e a v a i l a b l e
d a t a from experimental f l u i l i z e d - b e d combustors,
and has been found t o represent most o f t h e
combustor data very we1 1. Rigorous comparison
o f model p r o j e c t i o n s a a i n s t data a t s p e c i f i c
c o n d i t i o n s from i n d i v i l u a l f l uidized-bed combus-
t i o n u n i t s i s resented i n References 10, 14 and
17. u n f o r t u n a t e 1 most o f t h e data frqm atmos-
p h e r i c f l u i d i z e d - k d combustion f a c l l i t i e s a r e
f o r SO removals below 90 percent, s i n c e t h e pre-
vious PA 1 ew Source Performance Standard f o r SO
(1.2 l b I 1 0 Btu, o r 516 ng/J)--which served as t i e
g u i d e l i n e f o r most r e v i o u s t e s t i n g - - r e p r e s e n t s
a percenta e removay o f o n l y 83 percent w i t h a 4 .
percent s u y f u r coal. Accordingly, t h e model can-
n o t be e x t e n s i v e l y confirmed a t removals o f 90
percent and above. However, EPA i s c u r r e n t l y
conducting a c a r e f u l l y designed m a t r i x o f t e s t s
on t h e 40- by 64-inch (1- by 1.6-meter) atmos-
p h e r i c combustor a t F l u i d y n e aimed a t generating
d a t a which can be used t o h e l p c o n f i r m t h e
model a t removals o f 90 .percent and above: Con-
f i r m a t ~ o no f t h e model 1s u l t i m a t e l y r e q u l r e d
on o p e r a t i n g f l uidized-bed b o i l e r s s u f f i c i e n t l y
l a r e t o p r o v i d e data r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f commer-
cia?-scale unlts.
Rather t h a n attempting t o repeat t h e r i g o r -
ous model-versus-data comparisons I n t h i s paper,
a more general i z e d approach wi 11 be employed
which, although l e s s rigorous, p r o v i d e s o v e r a l l
p e r s p e c t i v e regarding how model p r o j e c t i o n s
compare a g a i n s t t h e mass o f SO2 removal data
which have been generated t o date. F i g u r e 2
presents percentage SO2 removal a t atmospheric
pressure as a f u n c t i o n o f sorbent f e e d r a t e , as
e r o j e c t e d by t h e Westinghouse model a t t h e condi-
Ions o f gas residence t i m e 0.67 second) and
in-bed p a r t i c l e s l z e (500 umf f e l t t o be d e n r a b l e
f o r e f f e c t i v e SO2 removal. Curves a r e shown f o r
t h r e e d i f f e r e n t sorbents: carbon limestone,
r e p r e s e n t i n one o f t h e more r e a c t i v e o f t h e
approxinateYy 25 sorbents t e s t e d t o date on t h e
Westinghouse.1aboratory thermogravimetric analy-
zer. Grove l ~ m e s t o n e( r e f e r r e d t o as l ~ m e s t o n e
13541, one o f t h e l e s s r e a c t i v e sorbents; and
Greer limestone, r e r e s e n t i n g an i n t e r m e d i a t e
r e a c t i v i t y . The caycium-to-sulfur feed r e u i r e -
ments o f 2.9 f o r 90 percent removal, used ?or t h e
bottom curve o f F l g u r e 1, can be read o f f t h e
c u r v e f o r Greer limestone i n F1gur-e 2. Some
sorbents have been t e s t e d which are s i g n i f i c a n t l y
l e s s r e a c t i v e than 1359 limestone; however, such
u n r e a c t i v e sorbents would g e n e r a l l y n o t be u t i l -
i z e d i n f l u i d i z e d - b e d combustors, s i n c e they
would make t h e process economically u n a t t r a c t i v e .
A p o t e n t l a l user o f f l u i d i z e d combustor technology
should be a b l e t o s i t e h i s p l a n t i n order t o have
a v a ~ l a b l e , w i t h i n reasonable distance, a l t e r n a -
t i v e sorbents having a r e a c t i v i t y n o t substan-
t i a l l y l e s s than t h a t o f limestone 1359. Accord-
ingly--although t h e c u r v e s . i n F i g u r e 2 do n o t nec-
e s s a r i l y encom ass t h e e n t i r e range o f sorbent
r e a c t i v l t i e s tRat inight be,conridered f o r commer-
c i a l f l u ~ d i z e d - b e dcombustion a p p l i c a t i o n s - - t h e
curves a r e f e l t t o i l l u s t r a t e a reasonable range
o f commercially achievable r e a c t i v i t i e s .
These model p r o j e c t i o n s from F i u r e 2 a r e
compared a a i n s t a v a 1~a b l e experimenPa1 atmoi-
p h e r i c com%ustor data i n F i g u r e 3, which i s
adapted from Reference 14. The u p e r curve i n
F i g u r e 3 i s t h e curve f o r carbon Timestone,
. p a r t i a l l y redrawn from F i g u r e 2; t h e lower curve
i s t h e curve f o r 1359 limestone. The data shown
i n F i g u r e 3 were obtained from a v a r i e t y o f bench-
and p i l o t - s c a l e combustors over a wide spectrum
o f as residence times, sorbent p a r t i c l e sizes,
s o r j e n t types, and o t h e r combustor c o n d i t i o n s ;
these data are n o t l i m i t e d t o data obtained.at
c o n d i t i o n s n e a r T e 0.67 second r e s ~ d e n c et ~ m e /
500 sorbent s i z e t h a t .served as t h e basis f o r
t h e curves from F i g u r e 2. The.units from which
t h e data were obtained ranged i n s i z e from 6 Inches
(15.2 cm) i.d. t o 10 by 10 f e e t (3 by 3 m i n
cross section. The data shown i n F i g u r e
from: t h e Babcock & Wilcox 3- by 3 - f o o t (0.91- by
4are
0.91-m) u n i t a t A l l i a n c e , Ohio; t h e 6-inch
A .-b
15 2 cm diameter atmospheric combustors a t
1
rgonne a t i o n a l Laboratory (ANL and a t t h e
N a t i o n a l Coal Board NCB) i n En and; t h e 1.5-
b 6 - f o o t (0.46- b 1.8-m) ~ l u i i i z e d - ~ eModule d
(FBMI operated by $0 e Evans and Robbins (PER
t h e .5- by 3 - f o o t (6.46- by 0.91-m) u n i t a t N i b
t h e 6- b 6 - f o o t (1.8- by 1 . 8 4 ) EPRI/B&W combus:
t o r a t ~ y l i a n c e ; t h e 10- by 1 0 - f o o t (3- by 3-m)
B&W Ltd. b o i l e r a t Renfrew, Scotland; and t h e
1.5- b 1 5 - f o o t 0.46- b 0.46-m) and 40- by
64-incK (i- by 1.b-m) com{ustors a t Fluidyne.
As shown i n F i g u r e 3, t h e mass o f data gen-
e r a l l y f a l l w i t h i n t h e boundaries o f t h e curves
p r o j e c t e d by t h e model. Some data even suggest
performance s u p e r i o r t o t h a t p r o j e c t e d f o r carbon
imestone. Those data which suggest perfomlance
poorer than t h a t w i t h i n t h e curve boundaries are,
i n many cases, e i t h e r from t h e small 6 - i n c h
15.2-cm) u n i t s , o r from t h e B&W 3- by 3 - f o o t
0.91- by 0.91-111) u n ~ t ; t h i s u n i t , h a s a low f r e e -
board and no recycle, so t h a t a h ~ g hcarry-over
r a t e and a higher-than-normal sorbent feed r a t e
woul d be expected.
F i g u r e 3 i s n o t intended as a r i g o r o u s con-
f i r m a t i o n o f t h e model, b u t r a t h e r i s meant t o
i l l u s t r a t e t h a t , i n general, t h e model p r o j e c -
t i o n s do n o t represent a rnajor divergence from
a v a l l a b l e data.
The data i n F i g u r e 3 suggest t h a t t h e p r o j e c -
t i o n i n F i g u r e 1 - - t h a t a Ca/S o f 7 would be nec-
essar f o r a 90 percent SO2 removal i n t h e b o i l e r
w i t h {over gas residence t i m e - - j s robably pessi-
m i s t i c . The t r e n d i n t h e data i n p l g u r e 3 sug-
gests t h a t a Ca/S much l o w e r than 7 would
probably be adequate.
The previous d i s c u s s i o n has considered o n l y
atmospheric f l u i d i z e d - b e d combustion. I n eneral,
t h e achievement o f 90 percent and g r e a t e r 302
 D. B. Henschel
removals i n pressurized f l uidized-bed combustion
has been p o s s i b l e w i t h r e l a t i v e 1 l o w sorbent
feed r a t e s c a l c i u m - t o - s u l f u r Inofe r a t i o s o f
1.25 t o 2 ) [References I and 16). One reason
f o r - t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f SO2 removal i n pres-
s u r i z e d systems might be t h a t p r e s s u r i z e d
systems r e q u i r e comparatively deep beds, i n
o r d e r t o accommodate t h e heat t r a n s f e r sur-
f a c e necessitated b t h e h i g h v o l u m e t r i c heat
r e l e a s e r a t e ; deep Ceds i n h e r e n t l y r e s u l t
i n as residence times ( g e n e r a l l y 1 second
o r 7 o n g e r ) s i n l f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r than those nor-
mal l y o b t a i n e l i n atmospheric combustors.
F i g u r e 4 presents expected d e s u l f u r i z a t i o n as a
f u n c t i o n o f sorbent feed r a t e f o r a 9 atm
(910 kPa) combustor being f e d w i t h 2000
mass mean P f i z e r dolomite, based u on r e s u l t s
from EPA's 500 l b c o a l / h r (227 kg/Rrl res-
s u r i z e d f l u i d i z e d - b e d comb~lstionM i n i p f a n t ,
and based u on a model developed by Exxon
(Reference f6). Cost p r o j e c t i o n s are pre-
sented i n F i u r e 5 . f o r a u t i l i t y - s c a l e pres-
s u r i z e d f l u i l i z e d - b e d combustor, based upon
I
Westinghouse estimates Reference lo), analo-
gous t o F i g u r e 1. As i l u s t r a t e d i n F i g u r e 5,
a pressurized f l u i d i z e d - b e d combustor i s
p r o j e c t e d t o have lower c o s t s o f e l e c t r i c i t y
t h a n a conventional b o i l e r w i t h a scrubber,
over t h e f u l l range o f f l u i d i z e d - b e d Ca/S
r a t i o s (1.25 t o 2.0) suggested i n F i g u r e 4 f o r
90 e r c e n t SO2 removal a t gas residence times
of f second and longer.
Comparing F i ures 1 and 5, i t i s apparent.
t h a t t h e need t o T u r t h e r increase gas residence
t i m e i n o r d e r t o reduce sorbent feed r a t e i n
p r e s s u r i z e d f l uidized-bed combustors, i s 1 ess
c r i t i c a l than i n t h e case o f atmospheric
u n i t s . I n F i g u r e 1, an increase i n gas residence
t i m e from 0.4 t o 0.67 seconds--an increase o f
0.27 seconds--had a s i g n i f i c a n t impact on
p r o j e c t e d sorbent feed requirements f o r atmos-
p h e r i c combostors, and c o u l d be t h e d e t e q i n i n g
f a c t o r r e g a r d i n g whether o r n o t atmospheric
fluidized-bed u n i t s are competitive w i t h
conventional b o i l e r s . However, as sug e s t e d
i n F i g u r e s 4 and 5 an increase, from
t o 3 seconds, i n t h e gas residence t i m e f o r
second f
pressurized u n i t s should have a comparatively
small impact.
The SO2 removal performance o f b o t h
atmospheric and p r e s s u r i z e d f l u i d i z e d - b e d
combustors may be improved by reducing t h e
mean sorbent a r t i c l e s i z e as discussed
previously. i s t h e s i z e i s reduced
t o s m a l l e r and s m a l l e r values, t h e p a r t i c l e s
w i l l have an increased tendency t o e l u t r i a t e
o u t o f t h e bed, depending upon t h e gas v e l o c i t y .
Even i n a f l u i d i z e d - b e d system where t h e
p a r t i c l e sizelgas v e l o c i t y r e l a t i o n s h i p i s
such as t o m a i n t a i n b a s i c a l l y t r a d i t i o n a l
dense-phase f l u i d i z a t i o n , t h e r e w i l l be some
carry-over o f f i n e a r t i c l e s , due t o f i n e
m a t e r i a l i n t h e sorgent feed and/or due t o
a t t r i t i o n . Recycle, back t o t h e bed, o f t h e
e l u t r i a t e d sorbent f i n e s should r e s u l t i n a
reduced mean a r t i c l e s i z e i n t h e bed, t h u s
i n p r o v i n in-ped capture; f i n e s r e c i r c u l a t i o n
shou!d ayso r e s u l t i n an increased c o n c e n t r a t i o n
o f f i n e sorbent i n t h e freeboard, p r o v i d i n
a d d i t i o n a l capture a f t e r t h e gases leave tRe
bed. As t h e sorbent feed becomes r e l a t i v e l y
f i n e r , t h e q u a n t i t y o f f i n e s being r e c i r c u l a t e d
w i l l , o f course, become. r e a t e r . As t h e
a r t i c l e s i z e l g a s v e l o c i q y r e l a t i o n s h i p moves
!award even f ingr. p a r t i c l es, t h e syste" "over
o u t o f t h e t r a d i t i o n a l dense-phase f l u i d i z a t i o n
mode and tfward more advanced f!uidi;atio!
concepts-- t u r b u l e n t " f l u i d i z a t i o n , f a s t
f l u i d i z a t i o n , and, i n t h e extreme, entrained-
phase operation. High-recycle operation, and
t h e advanced f l u i d i z a t i o n concepts may prove
t o be more e f f e c t i v e a t SO2 removaf t h a n i s
low carry;over, dense-phase operation. The
f i n e p a r t i c l e s i z e associated w i t h these o t h e r
o p e r a t i n g modes, combined w i t h adequate ( o r per-
haps even increased) a s / s o l i d s c o n t a c t time,
may r o v i d e s u p e r i o r !02 capture performance;
f u r t i e r o p e r a t i n g data a r e r e q u i r e d concernin
these o t h e r modes. It should be re-emphanze%
t h a t , f o r these o t h e r modes o f operation, t h e key
v a r i a b l e a f f e c t i n g SO removal--gas/solids c o n t a c t
time--no l o n e r t r a n s f a t e s i n t o gas residence
t i m e i n t h e zed? as i t does f p r t r a d i t i o n a l dense-
phase f l ' u i d i z a t i o n . The previous d i s c u s s i o n . i n
t h i s pa e r has been based upon t h e low carry-over,
dense-piase case.
Thus, h i g h l e v e l s o f sorbent a t t r i t i o n o r
c a r r y - o v e r a r e n o t n e c e s s a r i l y bad, so l o n g as t h e
carry-over i s r e c y c l e d and so l o n g as a s t a b l e
system can be maintained w i t h o u t excessive sorbent
feed rates. A t t r i t i o n and r e c y c l e mi h t r e s u l t
i n e f f e c t i v e sorbent u t i l i z a t i ? n and Righ SO2
removals. The capture o f SO2 i n t h e freeboard,
which may be achieved w i t h h i g h - r e c y c l e systems,
may be important f o r b o i l e r designs i n which coal
i s f e d above t h e bed- w i t h above-bed coal feed,
some o f t h e SO may be r e 1 eased above t h e bed,
and hence may f a v e no residence t i m e i n t h e bed
itself.
N i t r o g e n Oxides Emissions
N i t r o en oxides ernis i o n s a r e character-
i s t i c a l l y %elow 0.5 lb/10g B t u heat i n p u t
(210 ng/J) f o r l a r e atmos h e r i f l u i d i z e d - b e d
combustors, and besow 0.4 !b/106 B t u (170 ng J )
f o r p r e s s u r i z e d u n i t s . These emissions may e
reduced f u r t h e r through t h e use o f two-sta e com-
6
b u s t i o n and o t h e r NOx c o n t r o l o t i o n s whicR a r e
j u s t s t a r t i n g t o be explored. fhus b o t h atmos-
p h e r i c and p r e s s u r i z e d s stems appear capable
o f meetin t h e c u r r e n t E ~ ANew Source Perform-
ance ~ t a n i a r df o r NO emissions from u t i l i t y
b o i l e r s , o f 0.5 l b / l & B t u 21 n /J f o r sub
bituminous c o a l s and 0.6 1b)lOg B?U 1260 n g / ~ j
f o r o t h e r coals.
As discussed below, many NOx emission
measurements from ex e r i m e n t a l comb s t o r s a r e
below t h e values (0.g and 0.4 l b / 1 0 Btu) 8
i n d i c a t e d above. However, t h e d a t a a r e so
scattered, and our understanding o f t h e v a r i a b l e s
which control.NOx emissions i s so l i m i t e d , t h a t
i t would be d i f f i c u l t t o guarantee t h a t a given
f 1uidized-bed combustor would never exceed
those l e v e l s on a 30-day r o l l i n g average.
U n t i l r e c e n t l y , NO emissions from f l u i d i z e d -
bed combustors were o f f i m i t e d concern.
F l u i d i z e d combustor NOx emissions a r e i n h e r e n t l y
lower t h a n t h e EPA emission standard which i s
based upon emissions from conventi ona b o i l e r s ) ; 1
hence no major e f f o r t had p r e v i o u s l y been i n i t i -
ated t o reduce t h e f l u i d i z e d - b e d NOx emissions
f u r t h e r . However, a number o f combustion modi-
 0. B. Henschel
c e r n i n g t h e appl i c a b i l i t y o f comhustion modifi-
c a t i o n techniques f o r r e d u c i n NO emissions from
fluidized-bed combustors so t 8 a t f l u i d i z e d - b e d
combustion can continue t o be c o m p e t i t i v e w i t h
conventional b o i l e r s i n f u t u r e years, i f t h e low
NO emissions from conventional u n i t s are indeed
acfiieved, EPA has conducted some p r e l i m i n a r y
t e s t i n g i n t h i s regard.
A v a i l a b l e data from ex e r i m e n t a l atmospheric
f l u i d i z e d combustors, 6 incRes (15.2-cm) i n diam-
e t e r and l a r g e r , a r e shown i n F i g u r e 6. The
u n i t s represented i n F i g u r e 6 i n c l u d e most
o f t h e u n i t s represented i n F i u r e 3. The NOx
data from t h e Argonne 6-inch (75.2-cm) u ? ~ t
i n c l u d e o n l y those d a t a f o r which t h e u n i t was
o p e r a t i n g w i t h a sorbent bed.
The b u l k o f t h e emission data w i t h i n t h e
t pica1 expected o e r a t i n tem e r a t u r e ranae f o r
t f e primar): combusfion cefls--P500 t o 1600 F, 06
815 t o 871 C - - l i e between 0.2 and 0.6 l b NO (10
B t u (86 and 260 ng/J), expressed as NO ~fiis
emission i s no greate t h a n t h e c u r r e n f ' i m i s s i o n
S
standard o f 0.6 lb/10 B t u (260 ng/J). Many o f
t h e data p o i n t s on F i g u r e 6 which exceed t h e
c u r r e n t standard were obtained a t bed tempera-
t u r e s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f those which m i y h t be
expected i n a carbon burnup cell--2000 F (1094OC)
and above.
L a r e atmospheric f l uidized-bed combustors
1
e x h i b i t 7ower and l e s s v a r i a b l e ) NOx emissions
t h a n do s m a l l . aborator u n i t s . T h i s f a c t i s
3
demonstrated i n F ~ g u r e (Reference 14), where
t h e data from Figure 6 are r e - p l o t t e d as a func-
t i o n o f u n i t size. The bars i n F i g u r e 7 repre-
s e n t t h e range o f NO emission data from t h e
i n d i c a t e d u n i t s i n t f i e 1500-1600°F (815-871°C)
temperature r a n e. The range shown f o r t h e
Argonne 6-inch 715.2 cm) u n i t reaches l e v e l s
h i g h e r t h a n those shown i n F i u r e 6, s i n c e F j u r e
7 i n c l u d e s some r e s u l t s from 4rgonne t e s t s w i i h
non-sorbent beds n o t i n c l u d e d i n F i g u r e 6. As
i l l u s t r a t e d i n F i u r e 7, a l l o f t h e emission data
h i g h e r t h a n 0.6 18/106 B t u (260 ng/J) i n t h e
t y p i c a l p r i m a r y c e l l temperature range, r e s u l t e d
from t h e two s m a l l e s t experimental u n i t s . Most
o f t h e v a r i a b i l i t y , causing t h e data s c a t t e r i n
F i g u r e 6, a l s o r e s u l t s from t h e s m a l l e r u n i t s .
Emission data from t h e two l a r e s t atmospheric
b o i l e r s (the.EPRI/B&H 6- by 6-?oat, o r 1.8- by
1.8-meter u n i t , and t h e Renfrew u n i t ) h o l d con-
s i s t e n t l y w i t h i n t h e r a n e o f 0.15 t o 0.45 lb/106
B t u (65 t o 190 ng/J). T 8 i s range i s f e l t t o be
more r e r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e emission l e v e l s and
v a r i a b i P i t y t h a t might be.expected from commer-
c i a l - s c a l e atmospheric u n i t s .
As shown j n F i g u r e 6, emissions o f NOx
from atmospheric u n i t s are g e n e r a l l y above t h e
l e v e l t h a t would be p r e d i c t e d from thermodynamic
e q u i l i b r i u m considerations, based upon t h e reac-
t i o n o f atmospheric n i t r o g e n and oxy en. One
ex l a n a t i o n f o r t h i s f a c t i s t h a t , a! rimary
c e y l bed temperatures, probably 80 t o 60 percent
of t h e observed NO, r e s u l t s , n o t from f i x a t ~ o n
of t h e atmospheric n i t r o g e n and oxygen, b u t
from o x i d a t i o n o f a p o r t i o n o f t h e o r g a n i c
n i t r o g e n compounds i n t h e coal.
NO emissions from p r e s s u r i z e d . f l u i d i z e d -
bed comgustors are represented by F i g u r e 8 which
presents a l l o f t h e data t h a t have been c o l l e c -
t e d on t h e 500 l b c o a l l h r (227 k h r ) p r e s s u r i z e d
M i n i p l a n t combustor (Reference 18(
some o f t h e data a r e below 0.1 l b l i 0 6 B t u
As i n d i c a t e d ,
(43 ng/J), although a few measurements a r e as
h i g h as 0.4 lb/106 B t u (170 ng/J
so much o f t h e data are below 0. lb/106 B t u 1. The f a c t t h a t
(86 ng/J) i v e s r i s e t o a hope t h a t - - i f NOx
emissions %om pressurized u n i t s decrease w i t h
i n c r e a s i n g u n i t s i z e i n t h e same manner as shown
i n F i g u r e 7 f o r atmospheric combustors--
pressurized u n i t s 1arger.than t h e 1.8 W t M i n i -
!
p l a n t might . r e l i a b l y achieve 0.2 lb/10 B t u w i t h -
o u t combustion mod1 f i c a t i ons.
E f f o r t s have been made t o c o r r e l a t e NO,
emissions.against combustor v a r l a b l e s f o r b o t h
atmospheric and r e s s u r i z e d f l u i d i z e d - b e d combus-
t o r s (Reference P8). There does a pear t o be
some c o r r e l a t i o n suggesting t h a t
w i t h decreasing temperature, decreasing excess
NI, decreases
a i r , and i n c r e a s i n g gas residence time. However,
the correlation i s not s u f f i c i e n t l y stron t o
suggest t h a t these v a r i a b l e s might be u t i f i z e d
as an e f f e c t i v e means o f NOx c o n t r o l .
5 percent excess a i r ; t h e remaining a i r ( t o b r i n g
t h e t o t a l t o 20 percent excess) was i n j e c t e d
u s t above t h e bed. Tests on a 28 l b c o a l l h r
3 13 k g l h r pressurized combustor a t Exxon (Ref-
erence 161 i n d i c a t e d t h a t NOx emissions c o u l d
be reduced by about 50 percent through t h e use o f
two-sta e combustion, w i t h t h e primary a i r being
75 t o 98 percent p f ~ s t o i c h i o m e t r i c , and w i t h
I
secondary a i r r a i s i n g t h e t o t a l t o 15 t o 30
percent excess being i n j e c t e d i n t o t h e bed, near'
t h e top. Reductions i n NOx o f 30 t o 50 percent
were achieved on t h e Exxon combustor through amon-
i a i n j e c t i o n , when t h e ammonia was i n ' e c t e d
near t h e t o p o f t h e bed. s i m u l a t e d . f i u e gas
r e c i r c u l a t i o n t e s t s y i e l d e d no s i g n i f i c a n t NOx
reductions.
Thus p o t e n t i a l does appear t o e x i s t f o r
o b t a i n i n g reductions i n f l u i d i z e d - b e d combustor
NOx emissions through t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f combus-
t i o n mod1f i c a t i o n techniques. However, substan-
t i a l a d d i t i o n a l work i s necessary i n o r d e r t o
c o n f i r m and o p t i m i z e t h e i n i t i a l r e s u l t s .
Furthermore, a d d i t i o n a l s t u d i e s a r e necessary
i n order t o determine t h e e f f e c t o f combustion
m o d i f i c a t i o n s on o t h e r aspects o f t h e combustor
system (e.g., two-sta e combustion c o u l d increa.se
e ~ i s s i o n so f o t h e r poylutants, decrease combus-
t i o n e f f i c i e n c y , and c r e a t e c o r r o s i o n concerns).
P a r t i c u l a t e Emissions
P a r t i c u l a t e c o n t r o l , adequate t o r e l i a b l y
meet t h e c u r r e n t New Source P e r f o ance Standard
f o r u t i l i t y b o i l e r s o f 0.03 l b / l 0 ~ ~ (13 t u nglJ),
has y e t t o be demonstrated on b o t h atmospheric
and p r e s s u r i z e d f l u i d i z e d - b e d combustors. How-
ever, adequate c o n t r o l should be p o s s i b l e . a t
atmos h e r i c pressure through s u i t a b l e design and
operagion of conventional p a r t i c l e c o n t r o l tech-
no1 ogy.
For atmospheric f l u i d i z e d - b e d combustors,
c o n t r o l o f p a r t i c u l a t e em1 s s i ons should be .simi-
l a r t o c o n t r o l from conventional b o i l e r s burn-
i n g l o w - s u l f u r coal. Cyclones alone w i l l n o t be
 D. B. Henschel
adequate; c o n t r o l w i l l probably i n c l u d e one o r
more stages o f cyclones f o l l o w e d b an e l e c t r o -
s t a t j c p r e c j p j t a t o r 0r.a f a b r i c f i f t e r . Electro-
s t a t i c p r e c i p i t a t o r s w i l l . h a v e t o be designed and
o erated considerin the high r e s i s t i v i t y o f t h e
fyuidized-bed fl.yast (and low f l u e ps SO IS03
content). F a b r i c f i l t e r s may be s u t j e c t go such
problems as: bag b l i n d i n g ( t h e f l y a s h i n some
cases e x h i b i t s caking p r o p e r t i e s ) ; bag f i r e s ( i f
s u f f i c i e n t r e s i d u a l carbon remains i n t h e f l y a s h
e n t e r i n g t h e f i l t e r ) ; and base a t t a c k ( r e s u l t i n g
from t h e h i g h pH o f t h e l i m e - c o n t a i n i n g f l y a s h ) .
klowever, i t would be antScipated t h a t , by care-
f u l s e l e c t i o n o f design and o p e r a t i n c o n d i t i o n s
f o l l o w i n g f u r t h e r experie?ce on f l uisized-bed
combustors, these conventional p a r t i c l e c o n t r o l
devices should r o y i d e s u f f i c i e n t removal and
o p e r a t i n g , r e 1 iag.11ity.
Most experimental experience on atmospheric
u n i t s t o date has been w i t h cyclones, on r e l a -
t i v e l y small combustors. F a b r i c f i l t e r s (and, i n
t h e case o f . t h e 30.MW R i v e s v i l l e b o i l e r , an
e l e c t r o s t a t i c r e c i p i t a t o r ) have been i n s t a l l e d
as t h e f i n a l stage o f p a r t i c l e cleanup on t h e
l a r g e atmospheric combustors t h a t a r e now i n
o r near operation. However, extended t e s t data
from these f i n a l - s t a g e devices a r e n o t y e t
available.
P a r t i c l e c o n t r o l a t h i g h temperature and h i g h
pressure, capable o f meetin t h e emission standard
i n p r e s s u r i z e d f l uidized-be! combustio" systems,
i s s t i l l i n gi developments! stage. F a i r l y promis-
i n g r e s u l t s were observed i n t h e M i n i p l a n t where,
d u r i n extended . t e s t i n , t h r e e stages o f conven-
t i o n a q cyclones a t hig8 temperaturelpressure
reduced f l u e gas loadings t o as low as 0.03 l b l 1 0 6
B t u (13 ng/J) w i t h a mass mean p a r t i c l e s i z e
o f 1 . t o 2 um (Reference 16). Good r e s u l t s
were a l s o obtained on t h e M i n i l a n t w i t h an
experimental ceramic f i l t e r . E t h e r o p t i o n s con-
s i d e r e d by v a r i o u s i n v e s t i g a t o r s i n c l u d e
advanced cyclone designs, g r a n u l a r bed f i l t e r s ,
and h i g h temperature/pressure e l e c t r o s t a t i c
precipitators.
It i s conceivable t h a t p r e s s u r i z e d systems
might u t i l i z e p a r t i c l e c o n t r o l a t atmospheric
pressure, i n a d d i t i o n t o h i g h tem e r a t u r e l p r e s -
sure c o n t r o l s , i n o r d e r t o meet tRe p a r t i c u l a t e
emission standard. The high-pressure c o n t r o l s
w i l l have t o remove enou h o f t h e p a r t i c u l a t e t o
p r o t e c t t h e gas t u r b i n e Prom erosion. t h i s
requirement w l l l r o b a b l y t r a n s 1 a t e { n t o removing
1
v i r t u a l 1 a l l o f he p a r t i c u l a t e l a r g e r t h a n 5 t o
10 pm. nowever, even when a l l p a r t i c l e s above
5 m, a r e removed, t h e mass l o a d i n i n t h e es-
s u r i z e d o f f - as may s t i l l exceed 8.03 1b1166 B t u
(13 n g l J ) . !f , indeed, t h e environmental yequire-
ments a r e more s t r i n g e n t t h a n t h e gas t u r b i n e
e r o s i o n requirements, t h e n a d e c i s i o n wi 11 have
t o be made regarding whether t o achieve t h e
a d d i t i o n a l a r t i c l e removal, r e q u i r e d by environ-
mental r e g u l a t i o n s , u s i n g h i g h tem e r a t u r e l p r e s -
sure c o n t r o l s , o r whether t o i n s t a l l an atmos-
fherlc-pressure c o n t r o l d e v i c e f o l l o w i n g t h e gas
urbine. (The very h i g h l e v e l s o f h i g h tempera-
t u r e l p r e s s u r e p a r t i c l e c o n t r o l , once thought nec-
essary i n pressurized systems i n o r d e r t o pro-
t e c t t h e gas t u r b i n e from corrosion, may n o t be
required; r e c e n t t e s t s i n d i c a t e t h a t much o f t h e
corrosion-causing a l k a l i i s present i n t h e gas
phase a t t u r b i n e i n l e t temperatures, so t h a t
a l k a l i c o r r o s i o n ma have t o be.handled I n some
manner o t h e r t h a n txrough e f f i c i e n t p a r t i c l e
removal. )
Sol i d Residue
S o l i d r e s i d u e s from atmospheric and pres-
s u r i z e d f l u i d i z e d - b e d combustors w i l l r e q u i r e
some care i ? h a n d l i n and d i s osal. The r e s i -
dues w i l l , i n generag, probably n o t be con-
s i d e r e d "hazardous" under t h e Resource Conserva-
t i o n and Recovery A c t (RCRA). However, t h e char-
a c t e r . o f t h e leachates wj111 r e q u i r e s p e ~ i a ; ~a t t e n -
t i o n i n t h e d e s ~ g no f a s a n i t a r y l a n d f i l l
under RCRA f o r d i s p o s a l o f t h e residues as non-
hazardous m a t e r i a l s . ,
Extensive l a b o r a t o r y l e a c h i n g t e s t s have been
conducted on r e s i d u e s from a wide v a r i e t y o f
experimental f l u i d i zed-bed combustors (Refer-
ences 5, 8 and 19). F i e l d c e l l s t u d i e s are j u s t
beginning. When t h e residues are shaken i n a
. f l a s k c o n t a i n i n d i s t i l l e d , . d e - i o n i z e d water as
t h e l e a c h i n g ne%lum, t h e primary p o t e n t i a l prob-
lem areas appear t o be t h e f o l l o w i n g (Refer-
ences 5, 19 and 21).
" The pH o f t h e l e a c h a t e a t e q u i l i b r i u m i s i n
t h e r a n e o f 8 t o 13, .whjch i s above EPA1s
~ a t i o n a qSecondary D r i n k 1 n Water Regulation
(NSDWR) range o f 6.5 t o 8.q.
O T o t a l d i s s o l v e d s o l i d s (TDS) i n t h e leachate
a t e q u i l i b r i u m a r e i n t h e range 1000 t o 4000
mgle, above t h e NSDWR l e v e l o f 500 mgla..
O Sulfate concentrations a t equilibrium are
g e n e r a l l y i n t h e r a n e 1000 t o 2000 m g l l ,
above t h e NSDWR o f 20! mgla.
The above f a c t o r s r e s u l t p r i m a r i l y from t h e spent
sorbent which i s present i n t h e - r e s i d u e . Note
t h a t t h e e q u i l i b r i u m concentrations observed i n
l a b o r a t o r y "shake" t e s t s o f t h i s t y p e probably
represent t h e worst case t h a t . c o u l d be expected
i n an a c t u a l d i s p o s a l s i t e . Heat release, :
r e s u l t i n g from h y d r a t i o n o f t h e c a l c i u m ~ o x i d e
f r a c t i o n o f t h e spent sorbent upon i n i t i a l
exposure t o water, i s another p o t e n t i a l problem
area; t h i s heat r e l e a s e c o u l d n e c e s s i t a t e some
care i n h a n d l i n g t h e residue, b u t i s n o t expec-
t e d t o be a major environmental concern.
S u l f i d e and t o t a l .organic carbon a r e below detec-
t i o n l i m i t s i n t h e leachates, and a r e n o t expec-
t e d t o be problems. None o f t h e 15 t r a c e
m e t a l s - - f o r which some form o f d r i n k i n g water
s t a n d a r d l r e u l a t i o n l c r i t e r i o n e x i sts--exceeds
t h a t conceneation i n t h e leachate, when d i s t i l l e d
water i s t h e l e a c h i n g medium; t r a c e metals a r e d i s -
cussed i n g r e a t e r l e n g t h l a t e r .
The residues w i l l , i n general, probably
n o t be found t o be "hazardous" under RCRA,
according t o t h e RCRA procedures r e c e n t l y rom-
u l gated. Four c r i t e r i a have been e s t a b l isRed
t o determine whether a m a t e r i a l i s t o be con-
.h
s i d e r e d "hazardous : t o x i c i t y i g n i t a b i l i t
y e a c t i v i t y , and c o r r o s i v i t 1 aboyatory {iach-
i n t e s t , r e f e r r e d t o as t i e E x t r a c t i o n Pro-
ce%ure, has been proposed f o r determi n i n whether
a m a t e r i a l i s "hazardous" due t o t h e t o x y c i t y
c r i t e r i o n . The E x t r a c t i o n Procedure employs
an a c e t l c a c i d s o l u t i o n as t h e l e a c h i n g medium;
a m a t e r i a l i s considered "hazardous" due t o
t o x i c i t y i f t h e leachate c o n t a i n s any one o f
e i g h t t r a c e metals ( o r c e r t a i n o t h e r m a t e r i a l s )
a t a c o n c e n t r a t i o n g r e a t e r t h a n 100 times t h e
National I n t e r i m Primary D r i n k i n g Water Regu-
l a t i o n (NIPDWR). S i x f l u i d i z e d - b e d combustion
residues ( i n c l u d i n g , b o t h atmospheric and pres-
 D. B. Henschel
-
s u r i z e d spent bed' m a t e r i a l s and f l y a s h l c a r r
I
over m a t e r i a l s have been t e s t e d by ~ e s t i n g $ o u s e
according t o t e E x t r a c t i o n Procedure (Refer-
ence 22). None o f t h e e i g h t t r a c e metals
exceeded t h e t h r e s h o l d o f 100 times t h e NIPDWR
f o r any o f t h e residues; hence t h e residues
t e s t e d were n o t " h a z a r d o u s y u e t o t o x i c i t y .
The o t h e r t h r e e c r ! t e r i a ( i g n i t a b i l it?, reac-
tiyit
1
and c o r r o s ~ v i t y a r e n o t considered a t
t h i s !:me t o apply t o f uidized-bed combustion
resi,dues (Reference 21 ).
Although f l u i d i z e d c o m b p t i o n r e s i i u e s i n
general do n o t appear t o be hazardous, i t i s
p o s s i b l e t h a t , i n some l i m i t e d s p e c i f i c cases,
r e s i d u e s from an i n d i v i d u a l p l a n t may be found
t o be "hazardous" according t o t h e E x t r a c t i o n Pro-
cedure (depending u on t h e s e c l f i c coal burned .
o r t h e s p e c i f i c s o d e n t used!. However, i t
would be expected t h a t t h e number o f cases where
t h e residues might be "hazardous" would be small,
s i n c e i n t h e s i x residues t e s t e d w i t h t h e Extrac-
t i o n Procedure, t h e concentrations o f t h e e i g h t
t r a c e metals were, i n a l l cases more t h a n an
o r d e r o f magnitude l e s s than 106 t i m e s t h e
NIPDWR.
I f f l u i d i z ~ d - b e dcombusti on residues a r e
n o t "hazardous, they w i l l n o t have t o compl
w i t h t h e r e g u l a t i o n s being developed under
t o cover t h e generation and d i s p o s a l o f "hazard-
RFRA
:us" wastes. However, even i f they a r e n o t
hazardous," t h e residues w i l l i n eneral
!: e ending upon s t a t e r e q u i rementsy s t 1 1 have
ge discarded i n a " s a n i t a r y l a n d f i l l , i n
accordance w i t h RCRA provisions. One r e q u i r e -
ment proposed f o r " s a n i t a r y l a n d f i l l s " i s t h a t
t h e y should n o t degrade groundwater t o cause con-
taminant l e v e l s i n excess o f t h e NSDWR. The
f a c t t h a t f l u i d i z e d - b e d r e s i d u e leachate exceeds
t h e NSDWR f o r H, TDS and s u l f a t e does not, o f
course, i n d i c a e e t h a t a l a n d f i l l composed o f t h e
r e s i d u e would n e c e s s a r i l r a i s e groundwater con-
c e n t r a t i o n s above those f e v e l s. The a c t u a l
impact on t h e roundwater c o n c e n t r a t i o n s w i l l
depend upon a Yarge number o f s i t e - s e c i f i c
parameters. However, t h e f a c t t h a t !he leachate
exceeds t h e NSDWR does i n d i c a t e t h a t a p o t e n t i a l
groundwater contamination t h r e a t m i g h t e x i s t , and
t h i s p o s s i b i l i t y w i l l have t o be considered i n
t h e design and o p e r a t i o n o f t h e disposal f a c i l i t y .
Under t h e Clean Water A c t (CWA) , EPA i s
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r development o f e f f l u e n t l i m i -
t a t i o n u i d e l i n e s and new source performance
s t a n d a r l s f o r l i q u i d e f f l u e n t s from steam e l e c -
t r i c p l a n t s and o t h e r i n d u s t r i a l categories.
Runoff from a s o l i d r e s i d u e d i s osal s i t e would
g e n e r a l l y be covered by any s u c l e f f l u e n t stand-
ards which a r e developed. The c u r r e n t g u i d e l i n e s
and standards f o r conventional power 1 ants
s e c i f y , among o t h e r t h i n g s , t h a t e f f y u e n t s from
t ! e p l a n t s should be maintained i n t h e pH range
o f 6.0 t o 9.0. Since f l u ~ d i z e d - b e d r e s i d u e
leachates f r e q u e n t l y have pH l e v e l s h i g h e r t h a n
9, some e f f l u e n t c o n t r o l technology c o u l d be
necessary, depending upon t h e s e c i f i c circum-
stances. I n a d d i t i o n , under C W ~ , EPA i s consid-
e r i n g t h e need f o r e f f l u e n t standards c o v e r i n g
/29 substances common!y r e f e r r e d t o as t h e
r i o r i t p o l l u t a n t s , which were d e f i n e d as
t 6 e r e s u f t o f a j u d i c i a l consent decree. The
p r i o r i t y p o l l u t a n t s i n c l u d e p r i m a r i l complex
o r a n i c com ounds, b u t a l s o i n c l u d e f 3 t r a c e
mejals. E P i~ s screening a v a r i e t y o f e f f l u e n t s
f o r these p o l l u t a n t s ; t h e c u r r e n t minimum con-
c e n t r a t i o n being q u a n t i f i e d i s 10 p a r t s p e r
b i l l i o n (ppb). The 13 t r a c e metals are en-
era1 l y present i n f l uidized-bed r e s i d u e Peachate
i n concentrations o f 10 t o 100 ppb o r l e s s when
d i s t i l l e d water i s t h e l e a c h i n g medium. The
f a c t t h a t t h e metals are present above 10 ppb i n
some cases does n o t n e c e s s a r i l y mean t h a t
e f f l u e n t c o n t r o l s may be required.
Other P o t e n t i a l P o l l u t a n t s
The p r e v i o u s ~ d i s c u s s i o no f a i r p o l l u t a n t
emissions and s o l ~ dr e s i d u e focuses on those
p o l l u t a n t s f o r which standards o r r e g u l a t i o n s o f
some t y p e . a l r e a d y e x i s t o r a r e being considered.
However, I n a more a n t i c i p a t o r y r o l e , EPA i s
a l s o addressing p o t e n t i a l p o l l u t a n t s which may
become o f concern i n t h e f u t u r e . Comprehens~ve
a n a l y s e s - - i n c l u d i n chemical and b i o l o g i c a l t e s t -
~ n g - - a r e being c o n b c t e d , o r are planned, on t h e
l a r g e f l u i d i z e d - b e d combustion u n i t s which are
c u r r e n t l y i n o p e r a t i o n o r under construction.
These comprehensive analyses wi 11 consider up
t o 850 d i f f e r e n t p o t e n t i a l p o l l u t a n t s . T h i s
l i s t o f substances t o be considered a t t h i s stage
has been made d e l i b e r a t e l y l o n g I n an e f f o r t t o
ensure t h a t no p o t e n t i a l problem p o l l u t a n t i s
over1 ooked.
I n o r d e r t o assess t h e r e s u l t s from such
extensive comprehensive analyses, t h e observed.
emissions f o r t h e substances i d e n t i f i e d are
compared a g a i n s t conservative emission goals,
which have been developed independently f o r
each o f t h e 850 substances based u on f a i r 1 sim-
p l e appl i c a t i o n o f a v a i l a b l e h e a l t i and ecofo-
g i c a l e f f e c t s data. I f t h e observed emission
exceeds t h e independent goal l e v e l f o r a s p e c i f i c
substance, t h e n t h a t substance warrants f u r t h e r
c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t h e R&D e f f o r t .
Complete com rehensive a n a l y s i s r e s u l t s a r e
c u r r e n t l y a v a i l ab!e from o n l y one f l u i d i z e d -
bed combustion f a c i l i t y , t h e pressurized M i n i l a n t .
B r i e f l y , t h e key conclusions from t h i s compre%en-
s i v e a n a l y s i s are:
O The f r a c t i o n o f t h e f l y a s h l c a r r y - o v e r smaller
Ames t e s t f o r muta e n i c i t .
than 10 ,m, gave a p o s i t i v e r e s u l t on t h e
This r e s u l t
suggests t h a t t h e 70 urn f&ash i s muta enic,
and hence p o s s i b l y carcinogenic. ~ i m i q a r
p o s i t i v e Ames r e s u l t s have been observed
o n . f l y a s h from conventional b o i l e r s , so t h a t
t h i s e f f e c t may be associated w i t h coal com-
b u s t i o n i n general,.and thus n o t n e c e s s a r i l y
a r e f l e c t i o n on f l uidized-bed combustion i n
p a r t i c u l a r . EPA i s conducting f u r t h e r t e s t s
t o c o n f i r n i and e x p l a i n t h i s r e s u l t .
O C e r t a i n t r a c e inetals i n t h e bed m a t e r i a l ,
t h e f l y a s h and t h e leachate from t h e bed
m a t e r i a l and f l ash, exceeded t h e con-
s e r v a t i v e heal t ~ l e c o l o g i c a lemission goals
mentioned previously. This r e s u l t does
n o t n e c e s s a r i l y i n d i c a t e a problem, s i n c e
t h e goal l e v e l s are so conservative.
The r e s u l t s suggest o n l y t h a t f u r t h e r analy-
ses a r e r e q u i r e d as p a r t o f EPA1s R&D program.
For example, i f t h e element Se i s i d e n t i f i e d
i n t h e analyses ( b spark source tilass
spectrometry, whicx does n o t i n d i c a t e t h e
compound form o f Se), i t i s assumed i n apply-
i n g t h e goal l e v e l s t h a t a l l o f Se i s present
as t h e most t o x i c Se com ound t h a t i s
i n c l u d e d i n t h e l i s t o f 150 substances
Since t h e Se i s probably a c t u a l l y presGnt as
a much l e s s t o x i c species, t h i s method o f
data i n t e r p r e t a t i o n r e a l l y i n d i c a t e s o n l y
t h a t f u r t h e r analyses are necessary t o
d e f i n e t h e compound form o f t h e Se, so t h a t
t h e a c t u a l l e v e l o f environmental hazard can
 A
-
D. B. Henschel
be assessed more accurately.
" Organic substances d i d n o t exceed t h e
goal l e v e l s i n any streams.
Conclusions
Both atmospheric and r e s s u r i z e d f l u i d i z e d -
bed combustors should be a l l e t o meet t h e c u r r e n t
r e v i s e d NSPS f o r l a r g e u t i l i t y steam generators.
Specifically:
1. SO2 removals o f 90 percent and h i g h e r can
probably be achieved i n b o t h atmospheric
.. and pressurized combustors a t reasonable
sorbent feed r a t e s , and i n a manner eco-
nomically competitive w i t h the alterna-
t i v e o f a conventional b o i l e r w i t h f l u e
gas desul f u r i z a t i o n . However, i n o r d e r
t o achieve these removals, t h e combus-
t o r s ma have t o be designed and o e r a
t e d w i t $ s u f f i c i e n t 1 l o n g as/sorgent-
c o n t a c t t i m e and w i t $ s u i t a % l small sorb-
e n t p a r t i c l e size. I n generaf, pressur-
i z e d systems i n h e r e n t l y a r e designed w i t h
r e l a t i v e l y . l o n g gaslsorbent c o n t a c t time;
t h i s f a c t i s one major reason f o r t h e
improved Sop remova e f f i c i e n c i e s o f
pressurized systems.
2. NO emissions a e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y
6
betow 0.5 lb/10 B t u (210 ng/J) f o r
g
l a r g e atmos h e r i c f l u i d i z e -bed combustion
u n i t s , and below 0:4 lb/10 B t u (170 ng/J)
f o r r e s s u r i z e d u n i t s . These emissions
may ge reduced f u r t h e r through t h e use
o f two-stage combustion and o t h e r NOx
c o n t r o l options. Although these emis-
sions are below t h e c u r r e n t r e v i s e d
NSPS f o r u t i l i t y steam generators, t h e
are above t h e l e v e l s t h a t ma u l t i m a t e l y
be achievable i n conventionaf b o i l e r s
empl o y i ng combustion m o d i f i c a t i o n
techniques.
3. F l u e gas p a r t i c u l a t e c o n t r o l t o meet
environmental requirements must y e t be
demonstrated, b u t should be p o s s i b l e
a t atmospheric pressure t h r o u h s u i t a b l e
design o f conventional p a r t i c y e c o n t r o l tech-
nology. The t e c h n i c a l performance and c o s t s
o f h i g h temperature/pressure c o n t r o l s f o r
pressurized systems a r e u n c e r t a i n . however,
t h e high-pressure p a r t i c u l a t e c o n t r o l
r e q u i r e d t o p r o t e c t t h e gas t u r b i n e . ( f r o m
erosion) may be l e s s t h a n t h a t r e u i r e d t o
meet t h e r e v i s e d u t i l i t y NSPS o f 8.03 lb/106
B t u (13 ng/J), so t h a t some o f t h e a r t i c l e
c o n t r o l i n r e s s u r i z e d systems may ge accom-
p l ished a t Pow pressure, f o l l o w i n g t h e t u r b i n e .
The s o l i d r e s i d u e from f l u i d i z e d - b e d corn
bustors may r e q u i r e some care i n h a n d l i n and
disposal. The l e v e l s o f pH, t o t a l dissoyved
s o l i d s , and s u l f a t e . i n t h e leachate a r e t i-
c a l !y above d r i nki ng water r e g u l ations. f i e
residue should n o t normally be found t o be "haz-
ardous" under RCRA, a c c o r d i n t o t h e RCRA t e s t
rocedures r e c e n t l y promulga!ed. However, t h e
Peachate r o p e r t i e s wi 11 ,,necessitate some e t t e n -
t i o n i n t i e design o f a s a n i t a r y l a n d f i l l
f o r d i s osal o f t h e r e s i d u e as a non-hazardous
materiay.
, .
REFERENCES
I
1. Henschel, D. B., "The U. S. Environmental
P r o t e c t i o n Agency Program f o r Environ-
mental C h a r a c t e r i z a i i o n o f Fluidized-Bed
Combustion Systems, i n t h e Proceedings o f
t h e F o u r t h I n t e r n a t i o n a l Conference on
F l uidized-Bed Combustion, sponsored by
t h e U. S. Energy Research and Development
Administration, McLean, V i r g i n i a (December
9-11, 1975). . .
2. Henschel, D. B., "The EPA Fluid?#zed-Bed
Combustion Program: An U date, i n t h e
Proceedings o f t h e F i f t h e n t e r n a t i o n a l
Conference on Fluidized-Bed Combustion,
sponsored b t h e U. S. Department o f
Ener y, ~ a s t i n g t o n , D. C. (December
12-I$, 1977).
3. Newby, R. A., and D. L. Keairns, "Alterna-
t i v e s t o Calcium-Based SO2 Sorbents f o r
Fluidized-B?d Combustion: Conceptual
Evaluation, Westin house Research and
'
7-78-095 (NTIs No. L
. Develo ment Center Januar 1978) EPA-600/
278-832).
4: !ewby, R. A., S. Katta, and' D. L. Keairns,
Regeneration o f Calcium-Based S02.Sorbents
f o r F l u i d i z$d-Bed Combusti on: En In e e r i ng
Eva1 uation, Westin house ~ e s e a r c gand
Develo ment Center
7-78-059 (NTIS No.
5. Sun, C. C., e t a!., "Disposal o f S o l i d
Resldue from Fluidized-Bed Combusti~n:
Engineering and Laboratory S t u d i es, .West-
inghouse Research and Develo ment Center
(March 1978) EPA-600/7-78-04! (NTIS No.
PB 283-082).
6. A l v i n , M. A., E. P. O ' N e i l l , L. N.
Yannopoulos, and D. L. Keairns, E v a l u a t i o n
o f Trace E l ement'Re1 easf from F l u i d i z e d -
Bed Combustion Systems, Westinghouse
Research and Develo ment Center March 1978)
EPA-600/7-78-050 (NBIS No. PB 28 -321). I
7. Hoke, R, C., e t .a!. , "Mini l a n t Studies o f
Pressurized F l u ~ d i z e d - B e dFoal Combustion:
T h i r d Annual Report," Exxon Research and
En i n e e r i n Co. r i l 1978) EPA-600/7-78-069
(N?IS No. $B 284!884).
8. Stone Ralph and R. L. Kahle, "Environ-
mental Assessment o f S o l i d Residues from
F l u i d i z t d - B e d Fuel Processing: F i n a l
Re o r t , Ralph Stone and Co. (June 1978)
EPA)-600/7-78-107 (NTIS No. PB 282-940).
9. Crowe, J.L., and.S. K. .Scale, "Charac-
t e r i z a t i o n o f Solid R ~ s i d u e sfrom F l u i d i z e d -
Bed Combustion U n i t s Tennessee V a l l e y
A u t h o r i t y J u l 1978 EPA-600/7-78-135
(NTIS NO. SB 2g8-5841.
10. Newby, R. A., e t al,, " E f f e c t o f SO2 Emission
Requirements on Fluidized-Bed Combustion
. Systems: P ~ ei m
l i n a r Technical/Economic
Assessment, Westin t o u s e Research and
Development Center ~ A Uu s t 1978) EPA-(OD/
7-78-163 (NTIS No. PB g86-971).
 D. B. Henschel

11. Dehne, H. J. "Oesi n and C o n s t r u c t i o n o f

a ~luidized-Bed ~ o m % ~ s t i Sampl
o n i n g and
. Anal t i c a l Test Rig, Acurex Corp. (Au u s t
19787 EPA-60017-78-166 (NTIS No. PB 298-914).
12. Ryan, L. E.; R. G. Beimer, and R. F.
Maddalone. Level 2 Chemical A n a l v s i s o f
F l u i d i z e d i B e d Combustor Sam 1es "-TRw, Inc.
(February 1979 ~ ~ ~ - 6 0 0 / 7 - 7 9 - 0 6(NTIS
~b
No. PB 295-4621.
13. Vo e l , G. J., e t al., "Re e n e r a t i o n o f
~ " g f a t e dLimestone f r o ? F%c's and Corro;
sive Effects o f Sulfation Accelerators i n
FBC's: Annual Re o r t , " Ar onne N a t i o n a l Lab-
o r a t o r ( J u l 1979) EPA-60817-79-157
(NTIS 80. AN!-CEN-FE-78-13). . .
14. Youn C. W., J. M. Fobinson, C. B. Thunem,,'
and 8: F. Fennelly,
Reoort f o r IndustrialTi%%ol
Assessment
i c a t i ons:
Fluidized-Bed Combustion," ~ ~ A ) f e c h n o l o
O i v i s i o n (November 1979) ~ ~ ~ - 6 0 0 / 7 - 7 9 - 1 % e
(NTIS NO. PB 80-178288).
15. Johnson, I.,e t al., "upport Studies i n
F l u i d i z ~ d - B e d Combustion: 1978 Annual
Report, Ar onne N a t i o n a l Laboratory
LAugust 1978Q EPA-60011-79-203 NTIS No.
NL-CEN-FE-7 -10 o r PB 80-11275 ). A
16. Hoke, R. C., e t al., " M i n i p l a n t and Bench
Studies . o f Pressurized F l ~ ? ~ d i z e d - B eCoal
d
Combust!on: F i n a l Report, Exxon Research
and En i n e e r i n g Co. (January 1980) EPA-6001
7-80-093 ( i n press).
17. U l e r i c h , N. H., W. E. Vaux, R. A. Newby,
and D. L. Keairns, Ex erimental1Engineering
-. .. . voyume
Su p o r t I. f o Sr uEPA's
l f u r Oxide c o n t r o i ,"FWesting-
FBC brogram. inal Report--
' house Research and Oevelo ment Center
(January 1980) EPA-60017-10-015a ( i n press).
18. C i l i b e r t i , D. F., e t al., "Experimental1
, Engineering Support f o r EPA1s.FBC Program:
F i n a l Report--Volume 11. P a r t i c u l a t e ,
N i t r o q e n Oxide. and Trace Element C o n t r o l .I'
~ e s t i i i g h o u s e~ e s e a r c hand ~ e v e l o ~ m e nc te n t e r
(January 1980) EPA-60017-80-015b ( i n press).
19. ;un, C. C., C. H. Peterson, and 0. L. Keairns,
ExperimentalIEngineering Su p o r t f o r EPA's
FBC Program: F i n a l ~ e ~ o r t - - 1 o l u m e111. Sol i d
Residue Study, Westinghouse Research and
Devel o n e n t Center (January 1980) EPA-60017
-80-01Ec ( i n press).
20. Hamm, J. R., e t a l . "Ex erimental1Engineer-
i n g Support f o r EPA'S FB! Program: F i n e l
Report--Volume I V . Engineering Studies,
Westinghouse Research and Oevelopment Center
'. -(January 1980) EPA-60017-80-015d ( i n press) ..
21. Henschel, D. B., "Assessment o f F l u i d i z e d -
Bed Combustion Residues, unpublished paper
(October 1979).

22. Keairns, D. L., e t al., "Fluid-Bed Comkus-

t i o n and G a s i f i c a t i o n Sol i d s Disposal, i n
t h e Proceedin s o f t h e Workshop on S o l i d
Waste ~ e s e a r c Rand Oevelopment Needs f o r
Emer i n g Coal Technologies, sponsored by .
t h e !l e c t r i c Power Research I n s t i t u t e and
t h e American S o c i e t y o f C i v i l Engineers, San
Diego, CA ( A p r i l 23-25, 1979).
 . 100 I .
800 MW BOILER PLANT
EASTERN COAL ( 4 wt% SULFUR, 10 wt% ASH)
.
<.5
0..
'

-.
-:?..%.Y.~
/*#
I I

/
'90 - /:
1.: /'
/-
-
STACK REHEAT OF 790C 1;
': /.
60

.GAS RESIDENCE / v
/
no - /*
-
TIME: 0,4 SEC /
PARTICLE SIZE:/
1000 p m /
70 - -
Cats 7.01

- / 60- -
/ - B
/
/ - -
-
50

A- '
P
W
a
- 1 ern (101.3 kPa)

/
gN
U)
40 8 0 5 0 0 p m LIMESTONE PARTICLES
8EO HEIGHT 4 ft. (1.2ni)
-
0
0 GAS RESIDENCE - VELOCITY 6 W w 0.8 mtcec)
1 5 0 0 (~ 8~ 1 ~ ~ ~ )
-
0 ' 0 TIME: 0.67 SEC
PARTICLE SIZE: 500 p m
Ca/S = 2.9
30
-20% EXCESS AIR
---CARBON LIMESTONE
20 - ):I ---..
' GREER LIMESTONE -
.-.-LIMESTONE 1359 (GROVE) ..
$/metric ton

I
0 10
I
20 .30
I
' 4 0 50
I
60
$/U.S. ton
SORBENT COST
Ce/SMOLAR RATIO
Figure 1. Effect of gas residence time and sorbent particle size F~gure2 Pro~ecteddesulfurlzatlon performance of atmospheric fluld~zed-bed
on cost o f 800 MW atmospheric fluidized-bed boiler plant, for coal combustor, based upon model developed by Westlnghouse
90% SO2 removal (cost projections prepared by Westinghouse).
 100 r
- I
MODEL ~ROJECT~ON o
CARBON LluEsToNE* $ 8 I 0
3.0 SEC.
20 SEC.
m- -
O MODEL PROJECTION-
LIMESTONE 1359.
- 1.0 SEC. + -
-
I
0
0.5 SEC. f
-
70 - - GAS
E RESIDENCE
? TIME I N
era- - BED -
(*I CURVES PROJECTED
BASED UPON 0.67 SEC
- -
-
GAS RESIDENCE TIME,
MW) prn SORBENT
-
PARTICLE SIZE
0B&W-3~3ftUNlT
-
0 ANL 6 in i.d. UNlT PRESSURE:-9 atm (910 kPa)
-
APER-l.Bx6hUNlT - SORBENT PARTICLE SIZE: 2000
-
0 NCB 6 in 8.d. UNlT MASS MEAN
0 "AO NCB-1.5x3hUNlT
20-

10,
A

.?
"
A I
8
EPRllB&W-6x6ftUNIT7
AB&W,LTD-~QX~O~~UN~T
-
*FLUIDYNE 1.5 x 1.5 h AND
I
40 x 64 in UNITS
30 I
SORBENT: PFIZERDOLOMITE

1 I I I
11
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0.5 1.O 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0
CalS MOLAR RATIO
CaIS MOLAR RATIO
Figure 3. Comparison o f desulfurization performance projected F i g u r e 4. E x p e c t e d d e s u l f u r i z a t i o n p e r f o r m a n c e of
b y Westinghouse model, against measured performance o f pressurized fluidized-bed c o a l c o m b u s t o r , based upon
experimental atmospheric fluidized-bed combustors. M i n i p l a n t d a t a a n d m o d e l d e v e l o p e d by E x x o n .
 60 450

900 MW BOILER PLANT

EASTERN COAL I4 wt % SULFUR, 10 wt % ASH)
o ARGONNE - 6 in i.d. UNIT 400
P R E S S U R I Z E D FLUIDIZED-BED
BOILER PLANT
----CONVENTIONAL PLANT WITH LIME N C B - 1.5 x 3 ft UNlT
350
SLURRY SCRUBBING (CaIS = 1.1)
STACK REHEAT OF 7g°C rB&W,LTD-10xlOftUNlT A

c
K
L

$/m$ric ton ",

- .

0 10
I
20 l.30 .'40
I I
50 .eg
1
$/U.S. ton:
SORBENT COST-
Figure 5. [Effectof sorbent feed requirementson cost of 900 MW
pressurized fluidized-bed boiler plant, compared to conventionalboiler Figure 6. Nitrogen oxides emissions (exdressed,as N&) f&m
plant with scrubber (adapted from cost projection$ by Westinghouse). atmospheric f l u i d i z e d - b e d combustion units.'. - . - . .. .
 EXCESS AIR, percent

Figuie 8. Nitrogen oxides emissions from the pressurized fluidized-bed

combustion Miniplant.

0 i.d. I I I 1 1 1 0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
BOILER CAPACITY, MWt

. Figure 7. Nitrogen oxides emissions from atmospheric fluidized-bed

combustion units, as function of unit size.
 PLENARY - 2

FLUIDIZED BED COMBUSTION DEVELOPMENT

'\ AND
COMMERCIAL STATUS SUMMARY .
 PLENARY SESSION 2 -
FLUIDIZED BED COMBUSTION
DEVELOPMENT AND COMMERCIAL STATUS SUMMARY
Session Chairman:
Department of Energy
This conference had six technical sessions that
were occurring in parallel and we realize that it
was difficult to attend all the sessions that 'one
wished to attend. We do expect to have the proceed-
ings printed soon for distribution to all of you.
The purpose of the first panel this morning is
to present to the meeting as a whole, the results
of the conference as seen from people with varying
perspectives and we will get a comprehensive view
of what was going on in the various technical
sessions from an appropriate variety of viewpoints.
We have technologists, users, researchers and
people with international interests in the tech-
nology. With that, I will turn the microphone over
to Raymond Hoy, who has been the technologist in
fluidized bed combustion and he will let us know
what he knows now, on Friday, that he didn't know
on Tuesday.
H. Raymond Hoy -- The Technologist
National Coal Board
Leatherhead, United Kingdom
It has been an interesting session --our
eastern friends have caused us to rewrite the
history of atmospheric fluidized bed combustion --
but the most notable feature, however, is that we
are seeing the beginnings of commercialization of
the fluidized combustion system, at least those for
the industrial steam raising in plant sizes up to
about 100,OO pounds per hour of steam. The list of
commercial and field test units that are either on
order, in service or shortly to be in service is
impressive. We have people like Johnson Boiler
with orders for 15 boilers; Foster, Wheeler and
Babcock, who have their first commercial installa-
tions and their field test installations along with
Combustion Engineering and, on the other side of
the water, there will, by the end of this year, be
about 30 installations either in use or at an
advanced state of construction. In the Federal
Republic of Germany, there are some two major ones
now in use and another large one on its way. This
list seems rather small compared with the 2,000
they talk about in China. There are areas for
further development and this is particularly so for
the utility application and I don't think there is
any cause for complacency in relation to the other
applications either. I think the Tennessee Valley
Authority's 20 megawatt pilot plant will be a
significant contribution to developing the tech-
nology for the utility field. I would expect by
now, however, that in the industrial steam raising
Steven I. Freedman
field, application of the development of the
technology would proceed from experience gained
from the commercial and the field test units and,
from this point .of view, you see your sort of
technology analysis groups which include anything
from the people who actually monitor the results to
'those who create the mathematical models will have
an important part to play.
Turning now to the development of the areas for
the atmospheric pressure fluidized bed combustor,
the ,various detailed things that have cropped up
are roughly as follows. I think that in the. area
of coal distribution 'and feeding, the development
of the overbed system for large coal, and the
direct firing system for the crushed coal, there
have been very notable advances since our last
meeting, and these promise to go a long way to
overcoming some of the criticisms that are justi-
fiably leveled against the fluidized combustion. I
think it is important, however, to remember that a
system of firing can have an impact on the design
of the combuster and it is important, I think, to
consider the nature of the coal that is being
fired. Coal does vary. It must be a great problem
to those who are developing the mathematical models
to have a variable feed-stock. The coal ash varies
both in quantity and in its nature, and in our
endeavors to reduce the cost of coal feeding, we
can end up with projecting large pieces of stone
into the .bed and, therefore, it is very important
to take into account in the design of the bottom
end of the bed the means for removing oversized
material. There is always a great incentive to
improve the efficiency of the sulfur retention and,
du.ring the course of the meeting, we've had some
interesting developments in the way of using
additives and, at the same time, there seems to be
a plea for better methods of predicting the behav-
ior of the additives. In the endeavors to improve
combustion efficiency, we also have the scope, I
think, to improve the sulfur retention efficiency.
The Alliance plant in particular has demonstrated
that, by making better use of the freebuard and
recycling, there is significant scope for improving
both sulfur and retention efficiency and combustion
efficiency. We are faced with a greater challenge
it seems as far as NOx emission is concerned. I
think it is inevitable when a new technology comes
along that the protagonists of the old technology
will do their best to make life difficult. We hear
of these burners which can reduce the NOx emission,
thereby.increasing the target that we've got to
meet with fluidized combustion; and so we hear
 H. R. Hoy
about two-stage combustion. Indeed, i n order t o
achieve e f f i c i e n t two-stage combustion, t h i s can
possibly face us with some problems too. The other
technological issues t h a t crop up i n r e l a t i o n t o
atmospheric pressure f l u i d i z e d combustion concern
the removal o f t h e solid residues. What can we do
about t h a t t o make i t a s i m p l e r means and c o s t
l e s s ? Then the other side t h a t i s mentioned these
days i s t h e question o f design o f tube banks t o
minimize t h e s t r e s s e s .
As far as f l u i d i z e d combustion i s concerned, i t
i s a t i t l e covering a range o f systems --
there's
no unique system -- i n t h e similar applications and
many v e r s i o n s w i l l c o n t i n u e t o emerge t o meet
s p e c i f i c requirements. I think a feature o f t h i s
conference has been the s o l i d s c i r c u l a t i o n type o f
equipment. Wc have had an i n t e r e s t , ourselves, i n
that. At times t h i s , does seem t o o f f e r consider-
able advantages where there are a wide range o f
f u e l s t o he burned, particularly. from the point o f
view o f having a wide range o f ash c o n t e n t or
m o s t l y m o i s t u r e c o n t e n t , ash c o n t e n t and s i z e
consist. In t h e question o f materials, I t h i n k
since the l a s t conference, t h e amount o f operating
time for materlals tescing must be q u i t e consider-
able. I did a rough c h e c k ; I t h i n k we must b e
covered on the various r a t e s , something l i k e 15,000
hours between us on the point o f view o f obtaining
data on materials and I get t h e impression there i s
cause f o r cautious optimism. We were a b i t sur-
prised t o f i n d , a f t e r our i n t i a l t h o u g h t s on
fluidized combustion and a l l i t s b e n e f i t s , t h a t
there could be corrosion problems, and I t h i n k we
can s e e t h a t we do have t h e m a t e r i a l s t h a t a r e
l i k e l y t o give t h e s o r t s o f l i f e we want. But,
above a l l , t h i s needs t o be proved. I think there
i s s i g n i f i c a n t confidence t o proceed anyways a t t h e
moment and I hope t h e r e won't be any d e l a y i n
authorizing t h e beginning o f t h e longer term t e s t s
so that there are no excuses l a t e r on which would
reduce the rate o f t h e assimilation o f t h i s know-
ledge i n t o commercial plants.
Now I t u r n t o the pressurized f l u i d i z e d combus-
t i o n and I t h i n k as f a r as pressurized fludidized
combustion i s c o n c e r n e d , i t has been q u i t e a
notable year or so. I t h i n k t h a t t h e data obtained
on the r i g s has given us greater optimism as t o the
p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e combustion gases can b e
cleaned t o t h e extent t h a t i s necessary. Gas tur-
bines operate s a t i s f a c t o r i l y t h a t have reasonably
low i n l e t temperatures, say about 1400°F, perhaps
even 1500°F, and it should be possible t o get good
l i f e out o f t h e blades. But again, t h i s i s ' some-
thing' t h a t w i l l need t o be proved, and t h e sooner
we can have gas t u r b i n e s o f a reasonable s i z e
operating w i t h pressurized f l u i d i z e d beds, t h e
sooner we s h a l l know whether we can e x p l o i t t o t h e
f u l l , t h e combustion system. Now, a s f a r a s
p r e s s u r i z e d f l u i d i z e d combustion i s concerned,
&here i s a l o t o f work remaining i n making sure
that t h e cyclones perform s a t i s f a c t o r i l y and t o
t h e i r optimum conditions. I think i t i s one thing
to' have a t r a i n o f cyclones working under optimum
conditions on the t e s t r i g s and another thing t o
make sure t h a t they are going t o do t h i s i n the
f i e l d , particularly i f there are parallel groups
o f them. And t h e r e i s a , n e e d , o f c o u r s e , f o r '
$
development o f instrumentation which w i l l detect
when t h e cyclones are not functioning properly, so
t h a t t h e n e c e s s a r y c o r r e c t i o n s can b e adopted.
In t h e i n t e r e s t o f time, I w i l l not dwell a t
great ,lengths upon the various other aspects o f
development f o r pressurized f l u i d i z e d combustion.
I t i s a s y s t e m , o f c o u r s e , which a c h i e v e s h i g h
combustion e f f i c i e n c y and t h e s u l f u r r e t e n t i o n
e f f i c i e n c y and NOx emission l e v e l s are a s l i g h t
improvement over the non-pressurized. But. again,
there i s scope f o r improvement, just as there i s
scope f o r improvement i n the a b i l i t y t o use a wider
range o f c o a l , from the point o f view o f minimizing
coal preparation costs. I t h i n k we have obtained a
l o t o f data f o r operati.on under t h e steady s t a t e s
and t h e main means now i s t o obtain more informa-
t i o n on the ways t o improve start-up, load follow-
ing a b i l i t i e s , and 'data f o r the transient condi-
t ions.
I t has been a very worthwhile occasion and I'd
l i k e t o congratulate the organizers o f t h e confer-
. ence and thank them f o r i n v i t i n g me. Let me take .
t h i s opportunity t o remember some o f those who hove
contributed greatly t o the technology, but didn't
q u i t e f i n i s h t h e course, i n particular, t h e r e i s
Douglas E l l i o t t , who started i n t h e game b e f o r e
most o f u s , although he didn't know he had a t t h a t
time; and then across i n t h e United S t a t e s , t h e
pioneering team o f Pope, Evans and Robbins had John
Bishop, who was a great engineer; and I'd just l i k e
t o pay my respects t o them. Thank you f o r i n v i t i n g
me and c o n g r a t u l a t i o n s on a good c o n f e r e n c e .
Steven I . Freedman - Session Chairman 1
Our next speaker i s Manville Mayfield from t h e
Tennessee Valley Authority, who w i l l address us
from t h e perspective o f t h e group t h a t i s engaged
i n building a u t i l i t y scale plant. With expcecta-
t i o n s o f building t h e i r 200 and then, h o p e f u l l y , a t
a l a t e r d a t e , a f u l l 800 megawatt scale commercial
plant. He should have some very good i n s i g h t s as
t o what b e n e f i t s h i s group has obtained from t h i s
conference t o aid them i n t h e i r endeavor.
Manville Mayfield --The U t i l i t y User
Tennessee V a l l e y Authority
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Looking a t t h e viewpoint o f commercialization
and t h e development o f f l u i d i z e d bed combustion
from t h e u t i l i t y standpoint, it seems pretty clear
t h a t from a commercial s t a n d p o i n t , o b v i o u s l y ,
f u r t h e r development i s going t o be necessary. The
use o f t h e p i l o t plant demonstration concepts where
you're t a l k i n g about 10X scale-ups, seems t o be the
prudent route and the d i r e c t i o n t h a t w i l l probably
be followed by u t i l i t y industry. Obviously, from
t h e conference, there i s considerable i n t e r e s t i n
both pressurized f l u i d i z e d combustion. and atmos-
pheric f l u i d i z e d bed combustion. The atmospheric
f l u i d i z e d bed combustion o f f e r s the advantages o f
simplicity4 while the pressurized f l u i d i z e d bed
combustion o f f e r s cycle e f f i c i e n c y and s i z e reduc-
t i o n as some o f i t s major advantages. Nevertheless,
I t h i n k t h a t with t h e need i n t h e U.S. and i n t h e
world, t o burn coal more e f f i c i e n t l y , we need t o
 M. Mayfield
pursue the commercialization of fluidized bed
technology as rapidly as is practical and prudent.
We, representing at least one utility, has set this
as a goal, to provide our management with the
option of using fluidized bed combustion as an
alternative for future generating capacity.
When I look back at the progress that has been
made since the Fifth International Conference two
years ago, it is pretty obvious that some rather
major improvements and developments have taken
place. As Raymond Hoy mentioned, there have been
some considerable commitments on the part of indus-
tria1,and utility users for additional facilities,
pilot plants, industrial scale units and major
improvements in the R & D sector. Another obvious
point is the interest and activity that has been
evidenced by the people who have attended this con-
ference in the international sector, certainly in
the United Kingdom and Germany. In other parts of
the world, particularly in the Peoples Republic of
China, it was very obvious that there is a great
deal of work going on and that there is a lot of
international interest in this field. I'd like to
take just a moment and discuss what I view as the
major issues that apply to the utility application
of fluidized bed combustion. The first point that I
would like to make is that equipment performance
and long term reliability is an important need and
one that has got to be addressed in the operation
of pilot plant and test scale facilities. Kurt
Yeager, in the keynote address that he presented,
pointed out the importance of unit availability;
ahd certainly this is an important factor when you
consider the utility needs and the performance
requirements of a utility boiler. Design optimiza-
tion is another area of considerations such as use
of carbon burn-up cell vs. recycle, velocity, dust
loading, bed depth. These factors still have not
been completely optimized and need further work
towards their development. Methods of control is
another area -- load following, instrumentation,
the type of instrumentation, whether you use
bed-slumping or whether you go to multiple beds for
control -- seems to be' an area that has to be
addressed further. Raymond Hoy mentioned materials
of construction. I think certainly the results are
encouraging and promising, but I think we have to
keep this area in front of our attention and make
sure that we are developing the information needed
to properly select materials for this use. Then,
of course, the other multitude of information that
the engineering designer needs for such factors as
heat transfer, controlled emissions, combustion
efficiency, recycle rates, coal and limestone
particle size -- these are all important factors
that we need better informatio,n developed on.
I would like to take just a moment and mention
the subject of what I call the advanced atmospheric
fluidized bed combustion concept, basically the
fast circulating beds. Designs of such systems for
utility applications haven't been fully developed.
The approaches offer some rather important and in-
teresting possibilities for utility boiler designs.
The improved sulfur catcher, lower NOx emissions
possible with two-stage combustion, the ability to
turn down these units, improved combustion effi-
ciency -- all offer attractive possibilities and I
#
think should be pursued as rapidly and effectively
as possible. We need better information on the
economics of this approach, and there are studies
underway to help determine and get a better handle
on this factor.
I'd like to now just go through a series of
comments that various people from our group have
picked up and noted as being possible points of
interest that have come out of this conference.
Raymond Hoy mentioned sone of these, so I'll prob-
ably be repeating some of his comments. Certainly
the question of two-stage combustion to improve
NOx control that was noted by Battelle seems to
be a significant point. The fact that fluidized
bed spent sorbent will likely not be classified as
a hazardous waste material certainly is important
to the utility industry. Westinghouse reported
high corrosion rates on the pressurized fluidized
combustion rig, but on the other hand, Curtis-
Wright reported acceptable rates. So, I think the
jury is still out in this area, but there are very
encouraging results from the data that I have seen
on the performance and the applications of direct
fired turbines using a pressurized fluidized bed
combustor. Curtis-Wright reported that they
believed to have worked out an acceptable control
scheme for their PFBC system. This is certainly an
important area that needs careful review. The
concept for fast circulating,beds reported by
Battelle which has improved load following capa-
bilities is noteworthy. In the area of modeling,
the assupmtions are still being questioned and
debated in the technical papers. It seems very
obvious that additional experimental data is needed
to verify the results of these models. A good
example are things like coal devolitization, flue
models, bubble growth and similar type mathematical
calculations. The use of ceramic bag filters for
PFBC, apparently received a very good rating and
looks like it may be an acceptable route. It
certainly has had some encouraging results and
offers the possibility of an acceptable way of hot
gas clean-up. I think it was significant that some
of the speakers noted that atmospheric fluidized
bed combustion appears to meet all of the projected
emission standards that have been set forth and
that the ability to meet those that may be promul-
gated in the future by improved performance in
these units seems to be a particular matter. There
is some concern for the use of slumped beds as a
load following technique. .I think this needs
further consideration. The possibility of caking
or of a layer on the top of a slumped bed is going
to, I think, require some further technology devel-
opment or operating means to prevent this from hap-
pening if this technique is used. Fluidyne reported
that, depending on the coal type used, it may or
may not be necessary to use recycle as a means for
achieving high combustion efficiency. Apparently
the coal types -- some coals are very fast burning
and achieve high combustion efficiency, while'
others seem to be slower burning and require re-
cycle to get the sufficient combustion time -- vary
greatly. John Stringer indicated that he felt very
strongly that the test data on corrosion that we
have seen on the 2000-4500 hour time frame should
be extrapolated to longer times with considerable
caution. He was urging 10,000 hour or longer time
 M. Mayfield
frames f o r c o r r o s i o n t e s t i n g . B a t t e l l e work f o r
TVA showed t h a t t h e r e was . s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s
c o r r o s i o n from f l u i d i z e d bed combustion a s h t h e n
compared t o t h a t of a c o n v e n t i o n a l p u l v e r i z e d c o a l
f i r e d b o i l e r . It would c e r t a i n l y seem obvious t h a t
ASTM and ASME t e s t p r o c e d u r e s and s t a n d a r d s need t o
b e developed s o t h a t t h e c o n v e c t i o n p a s s c a n b e
p r o p e r l y d e s i g n e d t o w i t h s t a n d t h e e r o s i o n charac-
t e r i s t i c s of t h e h i g h e r d u s t l o a d i n g s t h a t we a r e
t a l k i n g about with recycled configurations. I e v e r y t y p e of c o n c e i v a b l e d e s i g n s t i l l i n opera-
thought a n o t h e r s i g n i f i c a n t p o i n t was t h e Fluidyne,
a n d t h i s h a s b e e n c o n f i r m e d by a c o n s i d e r a b l e
number of s o u r c e s , i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t one f e e d p o i n t
p e r 1 8 s q u a r e f e e t seems t o b e a d e q u a t e t o a c h i e v e
good d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e c o a l and s t i l l a c h i e v e a
minimum of c o a l f e e d p i p i n g . This could be very
s i g n i f i c n a t and i s c e r t a i n l y a n improvement o v e r
t h e 9 s q u a r e f e e t t h a t was r e p o r t e d i n p r e v i o u s
con£e r e n c e s .
S t e v e , I g u e s s I want t o s a y t h a t I t h i n k t h i s
h a s been a n e x c e l l e n t c o n f e r e n c e . . I t h i n k t h e r e
h a s been a l o t of work done and we're proud t o b e
p a r t of it.
S t e v e n I. Freedman - S e s s i o n Chairman
Thank y o u f o r y o u r k i n d r e m a r k s . The t h i r d
s p e a k e r i s Davic McKee from DuPont. The i n d u s t r i a l
s e c t o r i s one s e c t o r t h a t c o u l d v e r y w e l l b e t h e
t a k e - o f f i n t h e f l u i d i z e d bed m a r k e t a n d i t i s
worthwhile, on a p e r s o n a l and i n d u s t r i a l b a s i s , t o
h e a r t h e remarks from t h e I n d u s t r i a l o p e r a t o r .
David McKee --
The I n d u s t r i a l O p e r a t o r
E. I. DuPont Company
Wilmington, Delaware
I ' m w i t h t h e e n g i n e e r i n g d e p a r t m e n t o f E.I.
DuPont and p a r t of a group t h a t i s i n v o l v e d w i t h
t h e t e c h n i c a l a s s e s s m e n t of e v o l v i n g technology a s
i t a f f e c t s our business. I n t h i s r e s p e c t I have
been i n v o l v e d i n f l u i d i z e d bed t e c h n o l o g y f o r c l o s e
t o t e n years. We d o n o t h a v e any f l u i d i z e d bed
b o i l e r s w i t h i n o u r c o r p o r a t e l i m i t s ; however we
have been u s i n g f l u i d i z e d bed technology i n o u r
p r o c e s s r e a c t o r s f o r o v e r 25 y e a r s and have been
f o l l o w i n g t h e development of f l u i d i z e d bed tech-
nology, i n t h e U.S. and a b r o a d , o n a c o n t i n u i n g
b a s i s f o r many y e a r s . So I t h i n k we a r e i n a
p o s i t i o n t o s t a n d o f f a t a d i s t a n c e and o b s e r v e t h e
work t h a t you're d o i n g and h o p e f u l l y g i v e you some
i n t e l l i g e n t comments.
DuPont's i n t e r e s t i s b r o a d e r t h a n j u s t t h e
development of c o a l f i r e d f l u i d i z e d bed b o i l e r s . We
have i n t e r e s t i n u s i n g c o a l a s a f i r i n g mechanism
f o r p r o c e s s h e a t e r s a s w e l l , and i n a minor s e n s e ,
we a r e i n t e r e s t e d i n combined c y c l e co-generation.
Our primary i n t e r e s t i s i n a t m o s p h e r i c u n i t s a l -
though we a r e k e e p i n g a b r e a s t of your p r e s s u r i z e d
developments. To p u t t h i n g s i n p e r s p e c t i v e , we a t
DuPont, l a s t y e a r used about 33% c o a l t o g e n e r a t e
o u r s t e a m l o a d . I f t h e p r e s e n t world s i t u a t i o n and
e n e r g y s i t u a t i o n c o n t i n u e s , by t h e end of t h e
decade, we probably w i l l b e u s i n g c o a l t o g e n e r a t e
75% of o u r s t e a m load. So we've made a commitment
a s a c o r p o r a t i o n t h a t c o a l i s t h e f u e l of t h e
f u t u r e f o r r a i s i n g steam. As you're w e l l aware,
t h e chemical i n d u s t r y depends h e a v i l y on p e t r o l e u m
and n a t u r a l g a s a s a f e e d s t o c k . For many of o u r
p r o d u c t s depend on t h e carbon-hydrogen m o l e c u l e s
f o r t h e i r manufacture. A s a r e s u l t , we're s t r o n g l y
i n f a v o r of any technology t h a t p r o t e c t s t h o s e
p e t r o l e u m and n a t u r a l g a s r e s o u r c e s f o r t h e i r end
u s e a s a f e e d s t o c k as opposed t o a b o i l e r f u e l .
W i t h i n o u r p l a n t s ' i n t h i s c o u n t r y and a b r o a d , we
have a v e r y l a r g e b o i l e r o p e r a t i o n . We h a v e a b o u t
t i o n , from r i v e t e d drum, h a n d - f i r e d s t o k e r s , a l l
t h e way up t o v e r y l a r g e s i z e d p u l v e r i z e d c o a l
f i r e d u n i t s . Our s m a l l e r s i z e r a n g e i s p r o b a b l y i n
t h e 10,000 pound p e r hour r a n g e , o u r l a r g e s t i s i n
t h e m i l l i o n pound p e r hour range. So we h a v e q u i t e
an extensive population t o look a t . Our s t e a m
p r e s s u r e i s v a r i e d from a t m o s p h e r i c a t 2 1 2 ' ~ a l l
t h e way up t o 1500 pounds p e r s q u a r e i n c h a t 950°F.
So we a r e l o o k i n g p r i m a r i l y t o s a t i s f y t h e market
t h a t i s i n t h e 100,000 o r maybe a s low a s 80,000
pounds p e r hour up t o t h e 450,000 and 500,OO pounds
a n hour range. T h i s i s where a m a j o r i t y of o u r
s t e a m g e n e r a t i n g equipment i s s i z e d .
Z am s u r e you' a r e aware t h a t w i t h today's envi-
ronment, t h a t we're f a c e d w i t h a l o t of h a r d d e c i -
s i o n s i n i n d u s t r y , and when you add t h e complexi-
ties of i n c r e m e n t a l p r i c i n g of n a t u r a l g a s , t h e
F u e l Use Act, t h e emerging new s o u r c e performance
s t a n d a r d s f o r i n d u s t r i a l u n i t s , e v e r changing w a s t e
d i s p o s a l r e g u l a t i o n s and t h e e v e r changing i n v e s t -
ment t a x a n d money m a r k e t s i t u a t i o n s , i t i s n o
wonder t h a t we i n t h e i n d u s t r i a l community c l a i m t o
be conservative. At t i m e s , we've been s a i d t o b e
s l i g h t l y t o t h e r i g h t of A t t i l a t h e Hun. We're
s k e p t i c a l , we're slow t o r e a c t , when we make l a r g e
d e c i s i o n s f o r new s t e a m g e n e r a t , i n g f a c i l i t i e s . To
p u t o u r b u s i n e s s d e c i s i o n making p r o c e s s i n per-
s p e c t i v e , we d o n ' t t h i n k we make d e c i s i o n s a n y
d i f f e r e n t l y t h a n any o t h e r c o r p o r a t i o n . But f o r
t h e b e n e f i t of t h o s e of you who may n o t b e aware
of how we do i t , l e t me r u n through t h e c r i t e r i o n
we use. The bottom l i n e i s always economics, 'when
t h i n g s a r e economical and i n t h e b e s t i n t e r e s t of
t h e c o r p o r a t e p r o f i t s p o s i t i o n , t h e n we make a n
investment. You a l s o must r e a l i z e t h a t we a r e i n
t h e b u s i n e s s t o make c h e m i c a l p r o d u c t s and steam
r a i s i n g happens t o b e a n e s s e n t i a l s e r v i c e t h a t
e n a b l e s us t o r e a c h t h a t end g o a l . Many of o u r
p r o c e s s e s r u n 24 h o u r s a day, s e v e n days a week,
365 days a y e a r . We do n o t h a v e a l o t of i n s t a l l e d
spare capacity. W e c a n n o t a f f o r d a n unexpected
b o i l e r o u t a g e t h a t can b r i n g a whole p l a n t down.
J u s t one shutdown of some of o u r p r o c e s s l i n e s can
quickly destroy t h e p r o f i t p i c t u r e f o r t h a t l i n e
f o r t h e whole y e a r . So, o u r management i s r a t h e r
h a r d - n o s e d a b o u t how we e v a l u a t e t h e t e c h n i c a l
a s p e c t s o f power p r o d u c i n g e q u i p m e n t . We're
w i l l i n g t o t a k e r i s k s w i t h chemical p r o c e s s e s , t h a t
i s o u r b u s i n e s s ; b u t when i t comes t o i n v e s t m e n t i n
power f a c i l i t i e s , i t i s a n u n d e r s t o o d f a c t t h a t
t h o s e f a c i l i t i e s a r e r e l i a b l e and p r e d i c t a b l e . So
we a r e e v a l u a t i n g t h e technology t o l o o k a t t h e
d e s i g n , o p e r a t i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , a b i l i t y t o meet
t h e e n v i r o n i n e n t a l r e g u l a t i o n s and l o a d changing
characteristics. I n g e n e r a l , most of o u r power
p r o d u c i n g equipment e x p e r i e n c e s l o a d swings i n t h e
neighborhood' of 4 t o 1 o n many of o u r b a t c h t y p e
installations. We a r e l o o k i n g a t i t from a number
 D. McKee
of v i e w p o i n t s ; c e r t a i n l y o p e r a t i n g and maintenance
c o s t s a r e p a r t of t h e p i c t u r e . So f l u i d bed
b o i l e r s must compete on a n economic a s w e l l a s a n
o p e r a t i o n a l b a s i s w i t h c o n v e n t i o n a l technology. We
have a l o t of e x p e r i e n c e w i t h c o a l burning. We
know how c l i n k e r s a r e formed. We have e x p e r i e n c e d
f i r e s i n hoppers and have gone through a l l t h e
problems i n c o a l h a n d l i n g systems: c o l d c o a l , wet
coal, f i r s t i n transport lines, etc. W e hope t h e
d e s i g n s t h a t a r e evolving w i l l u s e t h e b e s t of
t h o s e t e c h n o l o g i e s t o minimize t h e i r impact on
f l u i d i z e d bed technology. It i s my a s s e s s m e n t of
t h e l i t e r a t u r e and t h e work r e p o r t e d today t h a t t h e
t e c h n i c a l power i s o u t t h e r e t o do t h e job. 1,have
no d o u b t t E a t you can b u i l d a r e l i a b l e b o i l e r t h a t
c a n make steam a s w e l l a s a c o n v e n t i o n a l c o a l f i r e d
unit. I d o n ' t t h i n k we a r e t h e r e y e t , we n e e d
proven r e l i a b l e s e r v i c e i n a n i n d u s t r i a l environ-
ment t o p u t u s i n t h e p o s i t i o n of b e i n g a buyer.
By t h a t , I mean 8300 h o u r s of c o n t i n u o u s o p e r a t i o n
w i t h l o a d swinging c a p a b i l i t y . I think i n the next
f i v e y e a r s , ' we a r e g o i n g t o b e t h e r e . By t h e n ,
t h e r e w i l l b e some u n i t s o n l i n e l o n g enough t h a t
we c a n make some e v a l u a t i o n s .
To summarize what I have h e a r d h e r e , I c a n s a y
t h a t I was s u r p r i s e d t o h e a r of t h e a c t i v i t y i n
China. I was s u r p r i s e d by t h e magnitude of t h e
effort. I t h i n k I need more i n f o r m a t i o n t o d e c i d e
what t h e 2000 u n i t s f i g u r e r e a l l y means. But, i t
was e n c o u r a g i n g t h a t t h e r e i s a l o n g term commit-
ment i n t h a t country. I t h i n k o u r second genera-
t i o n f l u i d bed u n i t s a r e s t a r t i n g t o appear. We
have gone through o u r f i r s t i t e r a t i o n s and have
l e a r n e d some t h i n g s . Now we a r e s t a r t i n g t o put
o u r t h o u g h t s t o g e t h e r and coming up w i t h a second
g e n e r a t i o n t h a t i s more r e l i a b l e . I am encouraged
by t h e work a b r o a d i n F i n l a n d , Denmark and England.
I t h i n k a meeting of t h i s s o r t i s e s s e n t i a l t o g e t
people together. I am s u r e t h a t t h e c o n v e r s a t i o n s
which o c c u r i n t h e h a l l s and o v e r t h e b a r s a r e a s
i m p o r t a n t and t h a t i s what we need t o make t h i s
t e c h n o l o g y go forward. The t r e n d s I see coming a r e
good. W e a r e e v o l v i n g toward u n i t s t h a t r e a l i z e
t h a t d e e p e r b e d s have c e r t a i n i n h e r e n t a d v a n t a g e s
s u c h a s lower v e l o c i t i e s . Improved c a r b o n u t i l i z a -
t i o n h a s b e e n k e y n o t e d a s a g o a l w h i c h must b e
achieved. The h i g h e r s u l f u r r e t e n t i o n s w i t h lower
cal.cium t o s u l f u r molar r a t i o s i s t o o u r advantage.
I t h i n k we a r e s e e i n g a merging of o u r e f f o r t s
and we a r e g e t t i n g a d i r e c t i o n . W e can s e e t h e
g o a l l i n e a l i t t l e more c l e a r l y t h a n f i v e y e a r s ago
and I t h i n k we a r e g o i n g t o b e i n t i m e t o meet t h e
market s i t u a t i o n . Our economics a r e d i f f i c u l t t o
a s s e s s a t t h i s time. We need b e t t e r economics from
t h e v e n d o r s t o make t h e h a r d - l i n e d e c i s i o n s which
we need t o make. The work t h a t Exxon and Westing-
house have done i n t h e p a s t i s q u i t e h e l p f u l i n
d e s c r i b i n g t h e economics a s we know them; b u t as i n
any e v o l v i n g t e c h n o l o g y , you n e v e r know what t h e
c o s t s w i l l b e u n t i l you g e t t h e m a n u f a c t u r i n g
f a c i l i t i e s s e t up and you a r e mass producing. I am
s u r e t h e c o s t s w i l l come down w i t h t i m e , b u t i t i s
e n c o u r a g i n g t h a t t h e e a r l y e s t i m a t e s make t h i s
t e c h n o l o g y c o m p e t i t i v e b o t h from a n i n v e s t m e n t and
an operating standpoint. I t s a d v a n t a g e s f a r out-
weigh i t s d i s a d v a n t a g e s . It i s r i p e f o r development
and I ' m h o p e f u l t h a t your e f f o r t s succeed.
Thank you.
Steven I. Freedman - S e s s i o n Chairman
Thank you, Dave. Our n e x t s p e a k e r i s D r . Vagn
K o l l e r u p f r o m B. W . Damp, who w i l l g i v e u s h i s
impressions from t h e Scandinavian viewpoint.
Vagn K o l l e r u p -- The Scandanavian Viewpoint
B. W. Damp
Virum, Denmark
I s h a l l t r y t o g i v e my i m p r e s s i o n a s s e e n from a
S c a n d i n a v i a n viewpoint. We have l e a r n e d a t t h i s
c o n f e r e n c e t h a t f l u i d i z e d bed c o m b u s t i o n i s a
system t h a t works. The main i n t e r e s t t h a t we h a v e
i n t h a t system is due t o t h e f a c t t h a t f o r t h e
i i r s t t i m e , we h a v e a s y s t e m t h a t c a n b u r n a l l
s o l i d f u e l s and t h i s i s of s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t t o
c o u n t r i e s where we have t o import most of o u r f u e l s
from v a r y i n g p a r t s of t h e world. W e g e t c o a l from
A u s t r a l i a , A f r i c a , Canada, Poland and R u s s i a and
t h i s f u e l i s of v a r y i n g q u a l i t i e s . I f you b u i l d
p l a n t s f o r c o a l burning, it i s d i f f i c u l t t o .find
one t h a t w i l l burn a l l t h e s e f u e l s . Here t h e
f l u i d i z e d bed w i l l win. W e have seen t h a t Finland
i s b u i l d i n g commercial p l a n t s u s i n g t h e FB system.
I t b u r n s wood w a s t e , b a r k w a s t e , and w i l l a l s o b u r n
coal. I n Sweden, t h e y h a v e b u i l t p l a n t s f o r
b u r n i n g household w a s t e and wood waste. I n Denmark,
p l a n t s h a v e been . b u i l t f o r b u r n i n g c o a l and wood
waste. Both of t h o s e p l a n t s are used f o r d i s t r i c t
h e a t i n g systems.
How d o e s t h e f u t u r e look? I would t e l l you how
t h e e n e r g y s i t u a t i o n i s i n our,. c o u n t r y . A l l our
energy consumption i s imported from o u t s i d e -- 99%.
The house h e a t i n g p o r t i o n i s about 40% of a l l o u r
energy. It i s produced i n o i l f i r e d p l a n t s . How
c a n we r e p l a c e o i l i n t h i s a r e a ? W e have a s o
c a l l e d h e a t i n g p l a n f o r t h e whole c o u n t r y ; i t shows
t h a t i n 15 y e a r s , t h e d i s t r i c t h e a t i n g system w i l l
b e r a i s e d 50%. I n Denmark, t h e r e a r e 400 of t h e s e
s t a t i o n s and t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n s a r e i n t h e f i v e t o
t e n megawatts r a n g e , some a l i t t l e l a r g e r . Here we
see a g r e a t o p p o r t u n i t y t o u s e t h e f l u i d i z e d bed
system. The f i r s t s t a t i o n we have b u i l t i s a f i v e
m e g a w a t t u n i t a n d we h a v e a n o r d e r f o r a t e n
megawatt u n i t . Those s t a t i o n s a r e b u i l t i n a
c o m p l e t e l y commercial way. There i s no o u t s i d e
s u p p o r t from anyone.
My c o n c l u s i o n i s t h a t development of a t m o s p h e r i c
f l u i d i z e d bed p l a n t s i n l a r g e s c a l e w i l l t a k e some
y e a r s and demand r i s k - w i l l i n g c a p i t a l . The s m a l l e r
s c a l e test and p i l o t p l a n t s make s c a l i n g p o s s i b l e
t o sites which a r e s u i t a b l e f o r d i s t r i c t h e a t i n g
p l a n t s and s m a l l e r power s t a t i o n s . The r e s u l t of
t h e system's low e m i s s i o n r a t e i s t h a t t h e y can b e
p l a c e d n e a r towns and a l l o w s t h e u s e of c o a l and
wood w a s t e w i t h o u t e n v i r o n m e n t a l problems.
Thank you.
S t e v e n I. Freedman - S e s s i o n Chairman
Continuing with our panel, Professor Shigekatsu
Mori from t h e Nagoya I n s t i t u t e of Technology w i l l
g i v e u s e t h e viewpoint from J a p a n and Asia.
 S. Mori
Shigekatsu Mori -- The Asian Viewpoint
Nagoya Institute of Technology
Nagoya, Japan
Every country in Asia has a different situation.
I would like to focus on the Japanese situation on
the development of fluidized bed combustion proj-
ects. There are probably many people looking at my
country as one of their best markets. In 1976 only
two million tons,of domestic coal were supplied in
Japan and about 60 million tons were imported.
About 96% of the imported fuel .was metalurgical
coal. . Just 2.5 million tons of steam coal were
imported. In 1990 more than 15 million tons of
coal will be used by power generation plants and
more coal will be used in industrial boilers. This
estimate may increase in the future. This is one
area of potential for the development of FBC.
Among our neighboring countries, we can find five
major coal producers: the U.S., U.S.S.R., China,
Australia, and India. Most of the steam coal will
be imported from these countries, however, it is
difficult to identify the types and amounts of coal
which will be imported in the future. New processes
which have the flexibility to use any type of coal
should be developed in Japan. The flexibility of
FBC is recognized as its greatest advantage.
The environmental regulations in Japan must be
the most restrictive in the world. The development
target for NOx emission control from fluidized
bed combustion is recognized to be just 50ppm in
Japan. Just a few years ago, this level seemed
impossible to achieve by FBC. In the last few
years, progress has been made and this target has
almost been reached. The next step is the SOx
control problem and the ash utilization problem
both originating from the waste disposal,problem.
This is the reason why the limestone once-thru
process was not available in Japan. We should
develop a regeneration process and also new sor-
bents will be required. These should be developed.
The problem for ash disposal is more critical. If
20 million tons of steam coal is imported, this
means at least 2 million tons of coal ash is also
imported into our limited country. The problem of
accumulation of ash is very critical. Utilization
of this ash is a problem for any industry using
coal fired technology in Japan.
Today we are under construction of a pilot plant
of five megawatts. Our program is a little behind
your country. We would like to exchange more
information with your country through meetings of
this type. I hope that at the next confernece,
more papers will be presented from Japan.
Thank you.
Steven I. Freedman - Session Chairman
It is good to know that not only is there an
energy crisis worldwide, but that the solutions to
this crisis are also worldwide. The next speaker
is Dr. Johann Batsch from KFA, wher.e he is involved
in the German fluidized bed combustion program. We
have heard about several of the operating units
and it would be valuable to hear the benefits he
has obtained from this conference.
Johann Batsch -- The Continental Viewpoint
Kernforschungsanlage
Julich, Federal Republic of Germany
I believe that I have to confine myself to the
German viewpoint. As I alredy mentioned in my
paper on Tuesday, it is the main intention of our
energy research program to promote the development
of technologies which can contribute to the future
supply of energy for our country in economically
favorable and environmentally acceptable ways.
Technologies which can reduce dependence on oil
and natural gas take high priority in this pro-
gram. In this respect technologies for increased
efficiency and utilization of coal are of special
importance. Coal is the only domestic energy
source which is available in large quantities
in Germany. The development of coal gasifica-
tion and liquification processes can make con-
tributions only on a long term basis. Improvements
and developments in the area of direct combustion
is necessary to make progress on a short term
basis. 8
A considerable amount of the primary energy
demand in our country is being consumed in the
generation of process heat and low temperature heat
for space heating. In this area, oil and gas are
being used at the present time. Atmospheric FBC
enables the increased use of coal for these pur-
poses because this technology enables one to burn
coal in small units and is environmentally accep-
table with automatic operation. It has been shown
during this conference that the commercial applica-
tion of AFBC is possible in the near future. At
least commercialization is anticipated for smaller
units used for heat generation. Some facilities
of this size are already in operation in this
country and in Europe. The difficulties encount-
ered in the operation of these plants are mainly
due to conventional parts. The fluidized bed
combustion itself works satisfactorily in these
plants. Increasing combustion efficiency seems
to be the only technical problem which must be
overcome for the FBC process. The successful work
in AFBC in China has to be mentioned at this
point.
The prior technology of circulating fluidized
bed combustion will gain special importance in the
future. The reasons for this are: 1) The advan-
tages of CFBC with respect to environmental protec-
tion are greater with this technology. 2) Some
problems in conventional FBC can be avoided with
the circulating FBC. 3 ) Combustion efficiency is
improved. 4) The bed area per megawatt is reduced.
5) Sensitive control of heat transfer is possible.
In these ways, the CFBC seems to have a wider range
of applications than does conventional FBC. Circu-
lating fluidized bed combustion can be developed in
a shorter time than pressurized fluidized bed
combustion because there are no problems with
feeding solids into a pressure vessel. There is
already a lot of experience with CFBC in large
chemical process plants. For combined heating and
power generation, CFBC seems to be an attractive
option, the added efficiency of PFBC is of minor
importance. There is a growing international
interest in this technology.
 J. Batsch

This conference h a s explored t h e use of pres- I t seems t h a t on f l u i d i z e d bed combustion, we

s u r i z e d f l u i d i z e d bed combustion i n power genera-
t i o n where t h e h i g h e r e f f i c i e n c y makes b e t t e r u s e
of c o a l where i t i s expensive. It h a s been shown
t h a t much work i s s t i l l t o b e d o n e b o t h o n t h e
combustion p r o c e s s i t s e l f a s w e l l as t h e a u x i l i a r y
equipment used i n t h i s system. We have h e a r d t h a t
, p r o g r e s s h a s b e e n made w i t h r e s p e c t t o h o t g a s
clean-up. There i s a l s o p r o g r e s s i n g a s t u r b i n e
development. Although t h e s e r e s u l t s a r e p r o m i s i n g ,
much remains t o b e done b e f o r e a s o l u t i o n t o t h e s e
problems c a n b e reached. It seems i m p o r t a n t t o
p u r s u e t h i s work a s e f f i c i e n c y w i l l b e v a l u a b l e i n
t h e f u t u r e when c o s t s o f , f u e l w i l l ,rise.
Thank your
S t e v e n I. Freedman - S e s s i o n Chairman
The l a s t s p e a k e r w i l l b e B i l l Reid. Bill
Reid h a s been a c t i v e i n t h e technology devel-
opment o f a l l of t h e c o a l combustion t e c h n o l o g i e s .
As t h e c o a l combustion d e v e l o p e r , h e can g i v e us
s o b e p e r s p e c t i v e on t h i s l a t e s t technology and how
development i s p r o g r e s s i n g .
a r e on t h e v e r y bottom of t h e l e a r n i n g curve. That
c u r v e s t a r t e d a b o u t a q u a r t e r m i l l i o n y e a r s ago
when Peking man found h e c o u l d g e t f i r e from wood.
We know t h a t i f we p u t a lump o f c o a l , i n w i t h
oxygen and r a i s e t h e t e m p e r a t u r e enough t h e s t u f f
burns. We don't u s e a l l t h e technology we s h o u l d
i n p u t t i n g t h a t i n t o some p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n .
The s t o k e r s of today were a l l i n v e n t e d i n t h e e a r l y
p a r t of t h e 1 9 t h c e n t u r y . It wasn't u n t i l t h e
1920's t h a t i t was r e a l i z e d how c o a l burned i n a
f u e l bed. About 1934 t h e d e f i n i t i v e work on how
carbon. and oxygen r e a c t was done a t MIT. There a r e
t h r e e s t e p s included. What w e don't know today i s
how f l u i d i z e d combustion r e a c t i o n s work i n t e r n a l l y .
W e have done a l l o u t development o n a n e m p i r i c a l
engineering basis. I n s i t t i n g i n on t h e combustion
phenomenon s e s s i o n s h e l d h e r e , I was u p s e t t o f i n d
o n l y two p a p e r s t h a t I h e a r d w i t h any r e a l know-
l e d g e of what t h e combustion s y s t e m s w e r e t h a t t h e y
were working with. I would s u g g e s t t o t h e develop-
m e n t a l p e o p l e t h a t you r e a d some o f t h e o l d e r .
l i t e r a t u r e , l i k e . t h e I n s t i t u t e o n F u e l o r t h e ASME
Transactions. You may see some glimmer of i d e a s
t h a t have n o t o c c u r r e d t o you a s y e t .

W. T. Reid --
The Coal Combustion Developer
Consultant
Columbus, Ohio
 PLENARY - 3

--THE CUSTOMER SPEAKS--

PANEL DISCUSSION
 PLENARY SESSION
"THE CUSTOMER SPEAKS"
PANEL DISCUSSION
Shelton Ehrlich
E l e c t r i c Power Research I n s t i t u t e
Pnlo Alto, C a l i f o r n i a
[Mr. E h r l i c h spoke u s i n g s l i d e s which a r e i n c l u d e d
here i n figures.]
When Arnold asked t h a t I s e r v e on t h i s p a n e l , I
s a i d , "Yes, b u t under one c o n d i t i o n -- t h a t you l e t
me make a f e w i n t r o d u c t o r y r e m a r k s b e c a u s e t h e
p a n e l , i n my view, r e p r e s e n t s t h r e e v e r y d i s t i n c t
i n t e r e s t a r e a s and I want t o h a v e a n o p p o r t u n i t y t o
d i s t i n g u i s h between t h o s e a r e a s . Hopefully t h e
audience, i n l i s t e n i n g t o the d i f f e r e n t user
v i e w p o i n t s w i l l a p p r e c i a t e t h a t some of t h e d i f f e r -
e n c e s e x p r e s s e d r e s u l t from d i f f e r e n c e s i n needs
and n o t n e c e s s a r i l y i n t e c h n o l o g i c a l viewpoints.
The f i r s t d i f f e r e n c e I'd l i k e t o i l l u s t r a t e i s
t h e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e i n d u s t r i a l u s e r , t h e
p e r s o n who - n e e d s s t e a m and some by-product power,
and t h e u t i l i t y u s e r ( F i g u r e 1). Obviously, a
l a r g e d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e ' u s e r s ' needs makes f o r a
d i f f e r e n t set of t e c h n i c a l s p e c i f i c a t i o n s f o r a
boiler. The profound d i f f e r e n c e i n s i z e between a
t y p i c a l i n d u s t r i a l f l u i d i z e d - b e d b o i l e r and even a
s m a l l u t i l i t y s c a l e FB b o i l e r can b e a d i f f e r e n c e
i n kind, n o t j u s t degree (Figure 2). The bottom
l i n e o n t h i s i s t h a t t h e i n d u s t r i a l steam u s e r p u t s
c a p i t a l c o s t s f i r s t and e f f i c i e n c y second i n h i s
p r i o r i t i e s . They a r e b o t h , of c o u r s e , v e r y import-
a n t . .On !he o t h e r hand a n e l e c t r i c u t i l i t y might
p u t e f f i c i e n c y ( f u e l c o s t s ) of t h e p l a n t a s t h e
f i r s t p r i o r i t y ; t h e c o s t of e l e c t r i c i t y b e i n g t h e
bottom l i n e f o r them. P r o b a b l y , t h i s a r i s e s from a
d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e method of f i n a n c i n g -- equity
c a p i t a l v s . borrowed money. So, I t h i n k t h e indus-
t r i a l u s e r and t h e u t i l i t y u s e r o f s t e a m g e n e r a t i n g
equipment w i l l r e q u i r e d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s from t h e
d e v e l o p e r of a new combustion technology.
Now, t h e r e i s a q u e s t i o n t h a t we're always asked
a t EPRI ,And I ' m s u r e everyone involved i n f l u i -
dized-be8 combustion h a s been asked --
( F i g u r e 3)
which i s b e t t e r , AFBC o r PFBC? I have one stock
answer: Both? (Figure 4) Again, t h e r e is a
3 -
, v e r y p r o f o u n d d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e two t e c h n i c a l
approaches. A c o n v e n t i o n a l p u l v e r i z e d c o a l power
p l a n t ( F i g u r e 5) simply c o n s i s t s of a b o i l e r p l a n t
and a t u r b i n e p l a n t . An a t m u s p l ~ e r i c f l u i d i z e d bed
would r e p l a c e ( F i g u r e 6 ) t h e b o i l e r p l a n t , g i v i n g ,
b a s i c a l l y , a conventional, Rankine c y c l e steam
. e l e c t r i c power p l a n t ( F i g u r e 7 ) i n which t h e steam
s u p p l y i s provided by a n AFBC and t h e a i r p o l l u t i o n
f u n c t i o n i s performed by t h e l i m e s t o n e i n t h e bed
i n s t e a d o f a n FGD u n i t . Now, n o m a t t e r w h a t
happens i n t h e development of combined c y c l e
generation -- no m a t t e r how e f f e c t i v e i t i s --
l a r g e s e c t o r s of t h e e l e c t r i c u t i l i t y i n d u s t r y , f o r
some l o n g time, w i l l i n s i s t on making t h e i r e l e c -
t r i c i t y w i t h t h e s t a n d a r d kind of e l e c t r i c power
p l a n t a n d t h a t w i l l b e t h e m a r k e t f o r AFBC's.
\
Now l e t ' s l o o k ( F i g u r e 8 ) a t t h e p r e s s u r i z e d
f l u i d i z e d bed combustion system. It i s somewhat
complicated because it's g o t a v e r y profound need '
t o c l e a n t h e g a s a n d i n t h e F i g u r e 8 we show
c y c l o n e s t o do t h i s c l e a n i n g .
F i r s t , a t t h e combustion o u t l e t , we s t a r t o f f
w i t h l o t s of d u s t and t h e f i r s t c y c l o n e t a k e s o u t
some and t h e n t h e n e x t one t a k e s o u t more d u s t , and
a s i t g e t s t o the turbine, hopefully, i t is not
e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e Arizona road d u s t test. (A
p h o t o g r a p h o f a n Army t a n k i n a d u s t c l o u d was
shown.) I n o r d e r t o make t h e t u r b i n e s u r v i v e , w e
have t o g e t a l l t h e way down t o p r a c t i c a l l y p u r e
gas. So, we have a system, i n combined c y c l e PFBC,
u n i q u e l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h e AFBC s y s t e m . The
second d i f f e r e n c e I want you t o u n d e r s t a n d i s t h a t
t h e e l e c t r i c u t i l i t y i n d u s t r y which w i l l u s e
s t e a m - e l e c t r i c i t y power p l a n t s f o r a l o n g time and
may u s e many c o m b i n e d c y c l e power p l a n t s w i l l
probably use both i f they a r e both developed.
T h e r e i s n ' t any need t o s a y which, AFBC o r PFBC, i s
better -- they both are.
Thank you.
 FLUIDIZED-BED COMBUSTION

DIFFERENCES IN USERS NEEDS

MAKE FOR DIFFERENCES IN
TECHNICAL "SPECIFICATIONS .

FIGUE 2:

! Industrial Steam User Difference Electric Utility I

is in ,
.. ,

Capital cost and method of Efficiency and

efficiency financing capital cost *8 I

FIGUA 4:
ANSWER
QUESTION:

Which is better
AFBC or PFBC?
I Boiler plant I 1 Turbine plant . 1

FIGURE 6: THE CONVENTIONAL P.C. BOILER POWER PLANT

FIGUfE 7: THE AFBC-BOILER POWER PUNT

I I I 1

I Boiler plant I I Turbine plant 1

FIGURE 3: THE PFBC COMBINED CYCLE

Air
 S. Freedman
S t e v e n I. Freedman
Department of Energy ' t i o n a r y n a t u r e o f FBC, e s p e c i a l l y AFBC, and w r o t e
Germantown, Maryland
The b i g q u e s t i o n t h a t I ' d l i k e t o p r e s e n t now,
from t h e government's v i e w p o i n t , i s -- How d o we
g e t t h i s n a t i o n and t h e e n t i r e world o f f of t h e
premium o i l and g a s f u e l s o n t o c o a l and o t h e r s o l i d
f u e l s and o t h e r a v a i l a b l e f u e l s ? A l l of t h e s e
fuel's t h a t a r e a v a i l a b l e are, i n some r e g a r d o r
a n o t h e r , a lower g r a d e t h a n o i l . and g a s and a r e
more d i f f i c u l t t o h a n d l e , b u r n and u s e . i n g e n e r a l ,
i n c l u d i n g concern f o r t h e environment. So t h e
energy c r i s i s , t o a l a r g e e x t e n t , i s a c a p i t a l
c r i s i s and I thank A r n i e f o r i n t r o d u c i n g i t w i t h
t h e "E.F. Hutton t a l k s " remark, b e c a u s e t h e key t o
e v e r y t h i n g i s b r i n g i n g t h e c o s t s down t o t h e l e v e l
where t h e u s e r s c a n u s e c o a l and t h e s e o t h e r
domestically a v a i l a b l e f u e l s without incurring an
economic p e n a l t y t h a t i s beyond what t h e system c a n
b a r e w i t h tole'rance. I t h i n k we s h o u l d - k e e p i n
mind t h a t t h e f l u i d bed technology d i d s t a r t a s a
low c o s t b o i l e r . I t h i n k i t is t h e e n t i r e s o l i d s
h a n d l i n g equipment f o r t h e c o a l f i r e d power p l a n t
which needs c o s t improvement. It i s my hope t h a t
we a r e a b l e t o manage t h i s t r a n s i t i o n from premium
f u e l s t o more d i f f i c u l t t o h a n d l e f u e l s s t i l l
w i t h i n t h e framework o f t h e h i g h s t a n d a r d of l i v i n g
t h a t we have due t o t h e consequences of o u r h i g h
energy u s e ' p e r c a p i t a , which i s t h e message t h a t
I'd l i k e t o end up on. We've shown t h a t t h i n g s are
t e c h n i c a l l y f e a s i b l e and we're o n t h e way t o prov-
i n g t h a t t h e t h i n g s which we can do a r e p r a c t i c a l
and r e l i a b l e . We've j u s t a b o u t f i n i s h e d proving
t h a t what we can d o i s c l e a n . The economic c h a l -
l e n g e is t h e r e a l one f o r market p e n e t r a t i o n . I p l y of f u e l c a u s e r a t h e r s i g n i f i c a n t d i s r u p t i o n s t o
b e l i e v e we h a v e t h e a b i l i t y t o d o i t , b u t i t
r e q u i r e s some good work, a t t e n t i o n t o d e t a i l and
knowing where t h e major l e v e r a g e s are and t h a t ' s i n
t h e c a p i t a l c o s t s of t h e b a l a n c e of p l a n t s .
Thank you.
Robert S t a t n i k
Environmental P r o t e c t i o n Agency
Washington, D.C.
When I was put o n a u s e r p a n e l , I was t r y i n g t o
f i g u r e o u t how t h e EPA was a u s e r , and f i n a l l y I
d e c i d e d t h a t we're a u s e r b e c a u s e of t h e SOx and
NOx r e d u c t i o n p o t e n t i a l t h a t i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h
f l u i d i z e d bed combustion. I agree with Steve i n
t h e s e n s e t h a t , w h e t h e r f l u i d i z e d bed combustion
makes a s i g n i f i c a n t market p e n e t r a t i o n o r n o t i s
v e r y much dependent upon t h e economic t r a d e - o f f s
between i t s competing t e c h n o l o g i e s , t h a t i s , SNG,
l i q u i d s d e r i v e d from c o a l , a s w e l l as c o n v e n t i o n a l
s t o k e r f i r e d b o i l e r s equipped w i t h v a r i o u s t y p e s of
flue gas desulfurization o r a i r pollution control
equipment. So, i n t h o s e l i n e s , t h e r e g u l a t i o n s
which EPA w r i t e s d o a l t e r t h e market economics and,
i n a s e n s e , may e i t h e r c r e a t e a window i n which
f l u i d combustion c a n make a market p e n e t r a t i o n o r ,
i f t h e EPA makes t h e r e g u l a t i o n s t o o s t r i n g e n t , can
s h u t t h e d o o r f o r PBC market p e n e t r a t i o n . Along
t h o s e l i n e s , t h e r e a r e two r e g u l a t i o n s , o n e which
EPA i s i n t h e p r o c e s s of w r i t i n g , and t h e o t h e r
which EPA h a s j u s t r e c e n t l y promulgated. t h a t a r e
going t o b e important. In the utility boiler
s t a n d a r d of performance, we r e c o g n i z e d t h e evolu-
a n exemption t o t h e 90% s u l f u r r e d u c t i o n p o t e n t i a l
component of t h a t r e g u l a t i o n which, w i t h t h e coop-
e r a t i o n o f t h e Department of Energy, w i l l apply t o
FPB, SRCI and s e v e r a l of t h e o t h e r advanced tech-
nologies. There i s a l i m i t e d amount of ' g e n e r a t i n g
c a p a c i t y t h a t c a n b e b u i l t which t h e s u l f u r reduc-
t i o n p e r c e n t a g e would n o t b e r e q u i r e d t o b e 90% --
I t h i n k 80% r e d u c t i o n would be r e q u i r e d , b u t t h e y
would s t i l l b e f o r c e d t o comply w i t h t h e 1.2 l b f m i l
BTU e m i s s i o n l i m i t .
I n t h e i n d u s t r i a l b o i l e r s e c t o r , we a r e c u r r e n t -
l y i n the process of evolving an i n d u s t r i a l b o i l e r
s t a n d a r d ' o f performance. From some of t h e p r e l i m i -
n a r y economic s t u d i e s we've done, depending a g a i n
o n which way w e w r i t e t h e r e g u l a t i o n , we can e i t h e r
c r e a t e a v e r y s i g n i f i c a n t impetus f o r t h e i n s t a l l a -
i o n of f l u i d i z e d bed systems o r we can l i m i t i t . I
t h i n k t h a t ' s t h e way I would p e r c e i v e myself a s a
u s e r of t h e FBC technology.
R.C. Read
I n t e r n a t i o n a l H a r v e s t e r Co.
Chicago, I l l i n o i s
Today I want t o s h a r e w i t h you my v i e w p o i n t w i t h
r e g a r d t o c o a l i n g e n e r a l and f l u i d i z e d bed combus-
tion i n articular. I n t e r n a t i o n a l H a r v e s t e r manufc-
t u r e s a wide r a n g e of i n d u s t r i a l c a p i t a l goods,
i n c l u d i n g t u r b o machinery, a g r i c u l t u r a l equipment,
c o n s t r u c t i o n e q u i p m e n t , , a n d t r u c k s . We a r e n o t a n
e n e r g y i n t e n s i v e company; h o w e v e r , w e a r e v e r y
energy dependent. Small i n t e r r u p t i o n s i n t h e sup-
o u r manufacturing o p e r a t i o n s . T h i s dependency h a s
reinforced our b e l i e f i n t h e n e c e s s i t y t o have a
r e l i a b l e s o u r c e of f u e l .
Our s t r a t e g y w i t h r e g a r d t o management of e n e r g y
r e s o u r c e s i s t o c o n c e n t r a t e v e r y h e a v i l y on u s i n g
energy prudently. T h i s emphasis on c o n s e r v a t i o n i s
augmented by o u r b e l i e f t h a t d e r e g u l a t i o n i s t h e
most e f f i c i e n t way t o i n c r e a s e f u e l s u p p l i e s .
Notwithstanding t h e above emphasis o n c o n s e r v a t i o n
a n d p o l i c y , we b e l i e v e a n d o u r i n t e r n a l e n e r g y
f o r e c a s t model shows t h a t c o a l i s t h e most f a v o r e d
f u e l NOW. Our i n d e x of t h e r e l a t i v e a v a i l a b i l i t y
versus cost supports t h i s belief.
I f c o a l i s t h e most d e s i r a b l e f u e l , why a r e we
n o t r e t r o f i t t i n g o u r p r e s e n t f a c i l i t i e s ? The rea-
son is q u i t e clear. I n our view, t h e c o s t t o
r e t r o f i t i s p r o h i b i t i v e . Our e s t i m a t e f o r r e t r o f i t
of e x i s t i n g f a c i l i t i e s i s i n e x c e s s of $100 m i l -
lion. T h i s i n v e s t m e n t w i l l n o t p r o v i d e one addi-
t i o n a l pound o f s t e a m i n g c a p a c i t y o r 1% more
e f f i c i e n t u s e of energy. The $100 m i l l i o n i s a
l o t of c a p i t a l and would b e e q u i v a l e n t t o about
$4.5 b i l l i o n a d d i t i o n a l s a l e s o r a n i n c r e a s e of 54%
a b o v e . o u r r e c o r d 1979 performance. The d i f f i c u l t y
t o r e c o v e r t h a t c a p i t a l by t h e o f f s e t t i n g b e n e f i t
i n t h e c o s t of c o a l v e r s u s t h e c o s t of imported o i l
i s such t h a t r e t = o f i t t i n g i s n o t p r a c t i c a l .
The problem t h a t we have i n embracing f l u i d i z e d
bed t e c h n o l o g y t o t h e p o i n t of i m p l e m e n t a t i o n
c e n t e r s on our perception of t h e m a t e r i a l handling
 system being the weak link. Just Wednesday we
visited Georgetown, and while it appears that all
of the parts of that system work much better than
they did at Rivesville, I still am concerned that
the pneumatic conveying systems and the bucket hop-
pers are sources of unreliability and in general a
maintenance headache. The material handling system
needs to be simplified. I am not sure how you go
about transporting all that coal and limestone to
and from the fluidized bed combustor; however, the
transportation of natural gas or even No. 6 fuel
oil to the boiler, is not going to present anywhere
near,the kind of maintenance problems you are
likely to experience with the fluidized bed com-
bustor. The point is this: IH is not an energy
intensive industry. We prefer to manufacture
capital goods and not steam. We are disluayed at
this point that FBC as a technology has received
lip service and favorable nods, but it has very few
hours of running time. I look at Georgetown as the
only example of something that works, albeit
partially. They claim to have 800 hours of running
time- This is not representative of expected indus-
trial operating conditions. I am not sure that even
0,760 hours of Georgetown would be representative
of industrial requirements; notwithstanding their
demand of 100,000 lbs. per hour of steam.
How do we get there? In my view, there are
several impediments that should be addressed. I intensive industry and use large quantities of
believe the country has no energy policy. We have
laws that talk about deregulation, use of coal, and
conservation. We talk about conservation, yet we
have no conservation goal f o r each sector of the
economy. We talk about d,eregulation and have
incremental pricing. It appears that our national
leaders do not really believe we have an energy
crisis. If indeed there were an energy crisis and
. if indeed we had an abundant supply of coal, then
coal ought to be the policy that we put forward and
make other things accommodate it. The impediments
to the development of the use of coal are environ-
mental concerns 'and economics. The use of demon-
stration projects to illustrate the benefits of
emerging coal use technologies are only a partial
answer to stimulating the increased use of coal. A
more efficient stimulus would .be via tax credits
for use of abundant fuels and development of
emerging technologies coupled with accelerated
depreciation.
The last point that I have to make i,s this:
If we believe that the development of coal is the
cornerstone of the energy policy in the United
States, 'then we should insist upon and work to
develop the environmental laws and regulations that
are not a hindrance but rather an encouragement to
the further use of this abundant resource. Thank
you very much.
David McKee
E.I. DuPont de Nemours, Inc.
Wilmington, Delaware
I'll try not to repeat what I said earlier, but
I think all of us in the user comunity have a lot
of questions and we don't have a lot of good
answers. There are a number of issues that the
vendors have to pay close attention to as far as
the industrial user is concerned and one of these
issues is maintenance of the equipment. We're firm
believers in Murphy's Law, that if it can break, it
will. Looking at the designs of the tube bundles,
I have some nightmares .about how we're going to
replace those tubes if necessary in service.
Certainly the mechnanical handling equipment that
Ron just mentioned has been a nemesis of coal since
the first day it was shoveled. into the furnace.
So, I have the feeling that the vendor should tend
toward simplicity rather ,than complexity, minimze
the transfer points, minimze the number of times
you have to pick it up and lay it down and collect
it. But, in general, pay close attention to the
maintenance and the operability characteristics of
the equipment. It is important to us.
Paul Bobo
Mead Corporation
Dayton, Ohio
I .am actually with the Mead Corporation,, how-
ever, part of my activities relate to Mead Chemical
Systems which is a part of the Corporation. A
significant portion of our business is the manufac-
ture of pulp and paper and related forrest industry
products, however, we also have substantial busi-
nesses in other areas. We are a highly capital
energy. We utilize fuels of many types; coal,
natural gas, oil, wood wastes and chemicals which
are converted in the process of burning.
There is an expression that reminds me of the
hesitancy of most of us to utilize new technology;
"Never on Sunday." However, in this case it is
extended to "or Monday, or Tuesday, or Wednesday,
or etc." Never be the first to use new major
equipment technology,seems to be the posture; and
continuing: not very likely to be second, maybe
third, probably fourth, etc.
While I realize this is a bit exaggerated, I
believe it highlights an attitude that all of you,
in one form or another, have experienced in the
past and will experience in the future in the
development and marketing of fluidized bed combus-
t.ion. As a user and as a participant in the
international marketing of new technology, I am
aware of the frustrations of .the vendor and the
needs of the user.
The preceding is based upon valid concerns of a
potential user of fluidized bed combustion sys-
tems. I would like to be more specific and identi-
fy some areas that are important to our industry
and require "actual practice validation.'' It must
be remembered that we are not in business to
produce steam or electric power, we are in business
to produce other products. Our primary focus from
the standpoint of capital investment, management,
equipment union negotiations, training, mainten-
ance, etc. is on the end products and not on steam
and electric power.
1. A wide operating load range capability.
This is very important.
 Fast response to load change. We have many
things that occur in our production pro-
cesses that necessitate this capability.
High reliability. While this could be iden-
tified as "another motherhood item" I would
like to relate to it in further detail, if
we have the opportunity to do so later in
these discussions.
4. Low maintenance requirements and low number
and length of periodic overhauls. We are a
continuously operating industry with very
fer non-operating days per year-
5. Simplicity of maintenance. Our maintenance
people are primary maintenance people fpr
' that there may be no need or justification for fur-
the pulp and paper equipment and maintain
little expertise in the power areas.
6. Simplicity of operation. Our power depart-
ment people are basically pulp and paper
people who have moved thru, seniority
provisions, from and to the production
departments. . -
7. Capabiltiy of multi-fuel firing. Our in-
dustry is utilizing more wood waste in
combination with coal or gas or oil for
economic reasons. .
If we have more time during this session, I would
like to expand on some of the points that were
covered during this short period.
Thank you.
Bruno Brodfeld
Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation
Boston, Massachusetts
As an architect engineer, Stone and Webster is,
in a sense, an.organization in the middle --
inter-
acting with the users, with the vendors, with the
regulators, with the Department of Energy and its
funding programs. We have had the opportunity to
understand some of the barriers that have been
discussed, and I think if we had to reduce to a
single most important reason why the users hesitate
to adopt on a commercial basis fluidized bed com-
bustion, it is the hesitation to be the "first."
The indusry practice is to count on reliability
and the only way to determine reliability is to
look at pieces of hardware that are already in
operation. So, how do we cross this bridge? One
thing to consider is that we have a technology that
not only the vendors, but a lot of well informed
people, believe has reached the standard of early
commercialization. On the other hand, we have the
large user community that is hesitant to apply it.
To overcome this hesitation, more government
support through well-conceived industrial demon-
stration programs is needed. I think a great dis-
service was done to the commercialization process
by emphasizing the fact that AFB is a commercial
technology at this time and that commercial war-
ranties are being offered to vendors. In our view,
even if commercial warranties are offered, and
indeed they are offered by some vendors, the weight
that they carry is considerably less than the
weight carried by warranties for proven commerical
equipment. In the latter case, the war~antieshave
behind them long-term experience and background.
In the former case, there is very little experi-
ence, if any, and very little background, if any,
to support the warranties.
How can we call them both commercial warranties
when they are so different? This is more than a
semantics matter; it has to do with the support
that is still needed from the Department of Energy
and the government. By calling this technology
commercial at this time, in effect DOE has decided
ther support of this technology. We think that this
is a basic mistake. In our view, this technology
still needs support. We're all convinced that it
has potentially great merits for this reason.
We think that support is needed in two ways:
first, regulatory support, as Bob was saying
before, EPA can create windows for this technology.
Second, DOE support through the PON Program for
commercial development and demonstration should be
resurrected as soon as possible with one additional
provision: In discussing cost-sharing with indus-
trial users, emphasis must be placed not only on
the cost of the AFB facility itself, but also on
the cost of possible retrofits, should they become
necessary. This is a realistic consideration in
any prudent management approach. We have seen more
than one case where a major industrial user had
determined that they believed in this technology
and their projections for the economics of the
system were favorable.. They wanted to participate
in the program, but a stumbling block, in their
view, was that the cost sharing should have been
applied not only to the cost of the facility
itself, but also to possible retrofits, if any.
This would have given them the assurance that the
risks had been minimized as much as possible.
So, to summarize my comments, if, as a country,
we believe that this technology is good, and that
it will enhance the utilization of coal, we have to
continue to support it, through our regulators and
through the Department of Energy., It is only
through such continued support that we will find
those few industrial organizations that will build
the first major AFB plants in the range of 100,000
to 500,000 lb steam/hour, which will be the con-
vincing place of evidence that the rest o f the
industry needs to move forward.
Andrew L. Jacob
American Electric Power Service Corporation
New York, New York
Coal Utilization is nothing new to AEP. Last
year almost 84% of our total 100 billion kilowatts
of generation was from coal. In fact, AEP mined
almost one-third of our total coal burn of 38 mil-
lion tons last year. Utilizing our coal resources
most efficiently, with a reasonably minimal envi-
ronmental impact, is of prime importance at AEP.
Developing technology to meet this task is 'also
 A. L. J a c o b
n o t h i n g new t o AEP. S i n c e ,the e a r l y 1920's AEP h a s
been a p i o n e e r of new technology f o r t h e u t i l i t y
industry. When f i r s t e v a l u a t i n g FBC s y s t e m s i n
1976, we d e c i d e d t h a t PFBC o f f e r e d t h e p o t e n t i a l t o
meet o u r c o a l u t i l i z a t i o n g o a l s .
I n e v a l u a t i n g a n y new t e c h n o l o g y , we a s a
u t i l i t y l o o k a t a number of a s p e c t s . These i n c l u d e :
c u r r e n t s t a t e of t h e technology, f l e x i b i l i t y w i t h
r e s p e c t t o c o a l t y p e , e n v i r o n m e n t a l a s p e c t s , system
complexity, o p e r a b i l i t y , p o t e n t i a l r e l i a b i l i t y and
economic p r o j e c t i o n s . A t e c h n o l o g y t h a t u s e s a
maximum amount of commercially a v a i l a b l e hardware
is favored. T h i s i s b e c a u s e o p e r a b i l i t y and main-
t a i n a b i l i t y a r e extremely important t o an e l e c t r i c
utility. O p e r a b i l i t y r e q u i r e s t h a t a technology
h a v e a f a i r l y w i d e l o a d c o n t r o l r a n g e , a t good
e f f i c i e n c y , i n o r d e r t o meet t h e d a i l y r e q u i r e m e n t s
of t h e e l e c t r i c l o a d . Systems t h a t a r e f a m i l i a r t o
o u r o p e r a t o r s and maintenance p e o p l e s i m p l i f y p l a n t
o p e r a t i o n which l e a d s t o g r e a t e r r e l i a b i l i t y . New
technology s h o u l d have a h i g h e r e f f i c i e n c y t h a n
c u r r e n t technology. T h i s i s most e a s i l y accom-
p l i s h e d by t h e d i r e c t combustion of c o a l . F u r t h e r -
more, p r o j e c t e d c a p i t a l and o p e r a t i n g c o s t s f o r new
technologies should b e l e s s i n order t o provide a
b u f f e r which may b e used up i n t r y i n g t o develop
t h e technology. Of c o u r s e , t h e new t e c h n o l o g y
s h o u l d be e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y s u i t a b l e .
We b e l i e v e t h a t t h e AEP-STAL-Level PFBC Program
considers a l l these aspects. The s t a t e o f t h e
technology h a s been s i g n i f i c a n t l y advanced by t h e
e x c e l l e n t r e s u l t s from o u r e x p e r i m e n t s a t t h e DOE
sponsored L e a t h e r h e a d 1000 hour t e s t . A s we l e a r n e d
t h i s week, b o t h GE and C u r t i s Wright e x p e r i m e n t s
yielded similar results. Our c o m m e r c i a l p l a n t
d e s i g n u t i l i z e s a maximum amount of commercially
a v a i l a b l e hardware. Key components such a s t h e
c y c l o n e h o t g a s clean-up system and GT-120 g a s t u r -
b i n e a r e commercial hardware. The combustor d e s i g n
h a s gone through t h r e e y e a r s of i t e r a t i o n and
h a s had t h e b e n e f i t of f o u r independent companies
review. A u x i l i a r y s y s t e m s a r e a key c o n s i d e r a t i o n
a t t h i s p o i n t i n time. Systems s u c h a s c o a l feed-
i n g and a s h removal show promise of good p e r f o r -
mance; b u t i n o u r program, we w i l l b e b u i l d i n g a
Component T e s t F a c i l i t y (CTF) t o e v a l u a t e t h e i r
performance i n a t o t a l l y i n t e g r a t e d f a c i l i t y .
AEP a n d o u r p a r t n e r s a r e l o o k i n g f o r w a r d t o
commercialize t h i s technology by 1986 by h a v i n g i n
o p e r a t i o n a t t h a t t i m e a 170 MW commercial s i z e
PFBC p l a n t . Our t e s t r e s u l t s and t h o s e of o t h e r s
p r e s e n t e d d u r i n g t h i s c o n f e r e n c e seem t o b e f a v o r -
a b l e towards t h i s end. I was p a r t i c u l a r l y p l e a s e d
t o l e a r n of t h e good r e s u l t s from t h e EPRI spon-
s o r e d bag f i l t e r tests. These d e v i c e s w i l l be
i m p o r t a n t f o r second g e n e r a t i o n PFBC's when we w i l l
p u r s u e even h i g h e r e f f i c i e n c i e s .
While we h a v e gone v e r y f a r i n t h e development
of a n e f f i c i e n t and economical PFBC p l a n t t h e r e a r e
t h o s e who would l i k e t o t u r n t h e c l o c k back. I am
r e f e r r i n g t o one c o n c e p t which p r o p o s e s t o u s e a
much l o w e r g a s t u r b i n e i n l e t t e m p e r a t u r e , w e l l
below t h a t a t which t h e e x c e l l e n t t e s t r e s u l t s were
achieved. C l e a r l y , t h e r e i s no t e c h n i c a l r e a s o n t o
t a k e such a s t e p backward a t t h i s , time. The c o s t
and e f f i e n c y a d v a n t a g e s of PFBC w i t h a moderate g a s
t u r b i n e i n l e t t e m p e r a t u r e would n o t b e r e a l i z e d
and f u t u r e t e c h n o l o g i c a l advances would b e s u b s t a n -
t i a l l y d e l a y e d . .An e v a l u a t i o n of s u c h a c o n c e p t ,
b a s e d on e a c h of t h e a s p e c t s I mentioned e a r l i e r ,
would n o t s u p p o r t g o i n g forward. We, as a u t i l i t y ,
would n o t b e i n t e r e s t e d i n t h i s concept.
I n summary, we b e l i e v e t h e technology h a s made a
quantum jump t h i s p a s t y e a r towards t h e g o a l of
c o m m e r c i a l i z a t i o n of PFBC by t h e mid-80's and AEP
i s proud of i t s r o l e . With t h e c o n t i n u e d e f f o r t s
and a i d of i n d u s t r y , and government a commercial
s i z e PFBC p l a n t w i t h a moderate, i n l e t t e m p e r a t u r e
w i l l b e r e a l i z e d by t h e mid-1980's.
hank you.
J a c k Ape1
Columbus a n d Southern Ohio Electric Company
Columbus, Ohio
J u s t a few. I t h i n k we're behind s c h e d u l e . From
my own p e r s o n a l p e r s p e c t i v e , l e t me s a y t h a t , on a
p r i o r i t y b a s i s , f i r s t of a l l we e x p e c t t o u s e c o a l
a s we a l r e a d y do. On a p r i o r i t y b a s i s , I would l o o k
t o c o a l c l e a n i n g a s my f i r s t p r i o r i t y , p r i o r t o
combustion. The second p r i o r i t y i s d u r i n g combus-
t i o n and t h i r d p r i o r i t y i s a f t e r . So, f l u i d i z e d
bed i s i n t h e " d u r i n g combustion" and t h a t i s
second i n my p r i o r i t i e s . Kowever, c u r r e n t l y a v a i l -
a b l e t e c h n o l o g y does n o t go f a r enough on t h e c o a l
c l e a n i n g s i d e , s o combustion r a p i d l y moves t o t h e
f r o n t i n t h a t s t a n d p o i n t - I ' d r a t h e r n o t spend t o o
much t i m e from a u t i l i t y p e r s p e c t i v e f u r t h e r t h a n
t h a t , b e c a u s e b o t h Bob and Andy w i l l have view-
p o i n t s s i m i l a r t o mine, I'm s u r e , a s f a r a s u t i l i t y
u s e i s concerned. But I t h o u g h t t h a t you might b e
i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e program t h a t t h e S t a t e of Ohio
h a s on f l u i d i z e d bed and how t h a t came about. The
Governor o f t h e S t a t e of Ohio, i n t h e s p r i n g of
1977, was f a c e d w i t h q u i t e a few problems: losing
coal markets, t h a t i s coal production, losing
industries t o other states. He formed a committee '
of a number of p e o p l e from a wide c r o s s s e c t i o n of
a r e a s of i n t e r e s t and charged t h a t committee w i t h
s e e k i n g o u t a l l of t h e a v a i l a b l e t e c h n o l o g i e s and
recommending t o him what Ohio s h o u l d do. In that
p r o c e s s , t h e committee looked a t a wide number of
t e c h n o l o g i e s a n d i t d i d recommend t o him, i n I
t h i n k a b o u t t h e f a l l of 1977, t h a t a d e m o n s t r a t i o n
of f l u i d i z e d bed combustion would b e t h e n e a r e s t
a v a i l a b l e o p t i o n t o t h e S t a t e of Ohio. I t h i n k by '
J a n u a r y o f 1978, t h e y had e n t e r e d i n t o a c o n t r a c t
w i t h Babcock C o n t r a c t o r s and t h e y began c o n s t r u c -
t i o n of a r e t r o f i t 60,000 l b / h r b o i l e r a t t h e
C e n t r a l Ohio P s y c h i a t r i c H o s p i t a l . That u n i t i s
i n i t s f i n a l c o n s t r u c t i o n s t a g e s and i n i t i a l s t a r t -
up s t a g e s r i g h t now. That doesn't mean t h a t i t i s
t h e answer, b u t t h e Governor f e l t compelled t o show
i n d u s t r y and p u t s t a t e d o l l a r s i n t o i t . From t h e
s t a n d p o i n t of where o r how t o d o i t , i t p r o b a b l y i s
n o t i n e x a c t l y a n i d e a l l o c a t i o n . It i s a r e t r o f i t
and w h i l e t h e economics may n o t b e v e r y good, i t
d o e s p r o v e t h a t you c a n do a r e t r o f i t . I can't
t h i n k of any more d i f f i c u l t a p l a c e t o t r y t o p u t a
b o i l e r i n than t h a t particular installation. It i s
v e r y c o n s t r a i n e d a s f a r a s a c c e s s , o l d equipment
and a c t i v e l y o p e r a t i n g equipment r i g h t b e s i d e i t .
Nevertheless, I've followed t h a t very c l o s e l y
throuah t h e construction stages. When you s t a n d
back and l o o k a t i t through and compare i t w i t h
some o f t h e o t h e r t e c h n o l o g i e s -- s u r e you h a v e t h e
FB t h e r e , , b u t almost a l l of t h e components from a
power g e n e r a t i n g s t a n d p o i n t a r e f a m i l i a r , t h e y a r e
n o t t h a t d i f f e r e n t , and I don't t h i n k t h a t r e l i a -
b i l i t y i s g o i n g t o b e such a t e r r i b l e problem. It
is g o i n g t o b e a problem -- I s e e i t everyplace I
have'looked -- g e t t i n g t h e necessary operator l e v e l
of s k i l l s . How t o do t h a t ? I ' v e heard s e v e r a l
o t h e r s p e a k e r s s a y t h e y want t o do i t w i t h t h e i r
e x i s t i n g o p e r a t o r s and I ' m n o t s u r e t h a t t h i s
technology w i l l t o l e r a t e t h a t . I t h i n k we're g o i n g
t o h a v e t o h a v e a whole g e n e r a t i o n w i t h a whole
d i f f e r e n t a t t i t u d e toward o p e r a t i o n and t h e main-
t e n a n c e from t h e former t y p e of p l a n t o p e r a t i o n and
t h a t ' s g o i n g t o t a k e time. That's g o i n g t o b e a
hindrance. I'll l e a v e i t a t t h a t .
Robert E. Uhrig
Advanced Systems and Technology
F l o r i d a Power and L i g h t Company
Miami, F l o r i d a
T h e r e i s a r e c e n t book o u t e n t i t l e d , Q u a l i t y i s
-
Free. The t h e s i s of t h i s book i s t h a t t h e c o s t of
f a i l u r e , i s s o h i g h i n terms of customer d i s s a t i s -
f a c t i o n , c o n s e q u e n t i a l damages, i n c r e a s e d c o s t o r
h e a l t h and s a f e t y e f f e c t s o r even t h e s u r v i v a l of
t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n , t h a t you simply c a n ' t a f f o r d a
d e f e c t i v e product. Now w i t h o u t a r g u i n g t h e p o i n t ,
I would i n d i c a t e t h a t some of t h e p u b l i c s e r v i c e
commissions a r e now p e n a l i z i n g u t i l i t i e s who have
e x p e n s i v e , high-performance systems s u c h a s n u c l e a r
and c o a l p l a n t s , t h a t have low a v a i l a b i l i t y and low
r e l i a b i l i t y performance. I would submit t o you
t h a t f l u i d i z e d bed s y s t e m s w i l l f a l l i n t o t h a t
same c a t e g o r y once t h e y a r e commercialized, and
t h a t q u a l i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y w i l l b e a n e q u a l l y
important consideration there. So I ' d l i k e t o
spend my remaining t i m e t a l k i n g about t h e q u a l i t y
programs.
Q u a l i t y p r o g r a m s b e g a n b e f o r e World War I1
s i m p l y a s a means of meeting customer s a t i s f a c t i o n .
During t h e war, we had ' s h i p s t h a t b r o k e i n h a l f ,
t o r p e d o e s t h a t went under t h e s h i p o r sometimes
o v e r them, guns t h a t d i d n ' t f i r e . So we began what
i s c a l l e d today " f a i l u r e a n a l y s i s " --
finding out
what went wrong. We began t o i d e n t i f y t h o s e com-
p o n e n t s t h a t f a i l e d and c o n c e n t r a t e on improving
t h e r e l i a b i l i t y of t h o s e u n i t s . We c o n t i n u e d
through t h e m i l i t a r y and s p a c e programs w i t h s u c h
i d e a s a s "zero d e f e c t s " and " e r r o r - f r e e perform-
ance," w i t h a s p e c i a l a p p l i c a t i o n , of c o u r s e , t o
t h e A p o l l o and S a t u r n programs, where we had s o few
s u c h u n i t s t h a t we c o u l d n ' t t e s t o u t enough of them
b e f o r e we had t o p u t them i n t o s e r v i c e . The u l t i -
mate a p p l i c a t i o n was t h e n u c l e a r power p l a n t s , t h e
n u c l e a r n a v y , a n d now t h e c o m m e r c i a l n u c l e a r
program.
We r e a l l y h a v e two k i n d s o f p r o g r a m s i n t h e
q u a l i t y a r e a . T h e r e i s a commercial program, which
i s j u s t i f i e d p r i m a r i l y b e c a u s e of t h e c o s t reduc-
t i o n s . Then t h e r e i s t h e r e g u l a t o r y program, where
t h e h e a l t h , s a f e t y and w e l f a r e of t h e p u b l i c i s a t
stake. I ' d l i k e t o c h a r a c t e r i z e t h e s e two v e r y
quickly. I n t h e commercial program, a d e f e c t o r a
non-performance may b e all o p t i o n . I n t h e rcgula-
t o r y program, i t i s n o t a n optj.nn. I n t h e commer-
c i a l program, t h e emphasis i s p r i m a r i l y on t h e
p r e v e n t i o n of f a i l u r e w i t h l e s s emphasis o n t e s t i n g
and i n s p e c t i o n . I n t h e c a s e of t h e r e g u l a t o r y
program, i n s p e c t i o n and t e s t i n g i s a v e r y c r i t i c a l
p a r t of t h e program. I n t h e commercial program,
you h a v e no independent t h i r d p a r t y a u d i t u n l e s s
you s p e c i f i c a l l y r e q u e s t i t a s a means of i d e n t i f y -
ing failure. I n t h e c a s e of a r e g u l a t o r y program,
t h e r e is an extensive t h i r d party a u d i t with a
r i g o r o u s q u a l i t y a s s u r a n c e and q u a l i t y c o n t r o l
program developed w i t h i n t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n . I n the
c a s e of a commercial program, proof of t h e program
simply r e l i e s upon t h e performance of t h e equip-
ment. I n t h e r e g u l a t o r y program, e x t e n s i v e d e t a i l e d
documentation i s needed -- b a s i c a l l y , a paper t r a i l
on a l l a s p e c t s of t h e program. Finally, the
p6nalty f o r non-performance i n a commercial program
i s u s u a l l y i n c r e a s e d c o s t s o r customer unhappiness.
I n a r e g u l a t o r y program, t h e r e a r e f i n e s , t h e
r e g u l a t o r y o r g a n i z a t i o n c a n s h u t down your p l a n t ,
i n a d d i t i o n t o your p r o b a b l e i n c r e a s e i n c o s t s and
unhappy customers. The d i f f e r e n c e i s u s u a l l y a
f a c t o r of two o r , more o f t e n , t h r e e i n t h e c o s t s of
t h e programs.
I n c o n c l u s i o n , I would simply s a y t h a t t h e FBS
a r e h i g h performance systems; t h e y a r e complex and
t h e y a r e e x p e n s i v e and you're g o i n g t o have t o h a v e
a n a d e q u a t e q u a l i t y program t h a t i n c o r p o r a t e s t h e
p e r t i n e n t a s p e c t s of b o t h of t h e s e systems, what I
would c a l l an augmented commercial q u a l i t y program,
i n o r d e r t o commercialize f l u i d i z e d beds.
Thank you.
Q: Jack Warden, TRW
I've got a question for Jack Apel. What is the
current status of your Pickway demonstration
and of the Ohio Coal Tax?
A. Jack Apel
Well, that was part of the overall program that
the governor had. The Ohio Coal Tax originally
was passed with a sliding scale on the sulfur
content of the fuel and the low sulfur coals
were penalized. That was taken to court and it
was defeated as a tax. The motleys from that
would have supported several other demonstra-
tions and they still will. There is a new coal
tax in the legislature. Its passage is eminent.
There are one or two legislators -who have
questions. The tax is put down as a research
and development tax hnd the legislature ques-
tions the research part of it, because they
don't think there is more research necessary
and nobody has really defined for them what
development or demonstration means. But that's
really what the State of Ohio and the Ohio
Department of Energy means, is to put on
demonstrations. The Pickway demonstration was
one of four projects that were initially
proposed. Here we have an old power plant.
We've agreed to shut down two old units that
are about 35MG size in June of 1980 with EPA
because of lack of controls, and they are at
the end of their economic life as far as the
boiler is concerned. However, the turbine
generators are not in bad shape. There were
six previous units that were in this building
and they are gone. The boilers have been
removed, so there is very wide open space. The
coal handling system is still there; it uses
Ohio coal and the remaining unit has an emis-
sion limit that would not restrict the coal.
So, it would have a ready supply. In other
words, it's a Reesville without the problems of
Reesville.
Q: (Name inaudible)
I have a comment and it may be interpreted as a
question. Many of the panelists here mentioned
that the basic problem in the commercialization
of fluidized bed combustion technology is
reliability. The reliability can be obtained
on any engineering plant in two different ways.
One way which is very well known, just operate
it, when it goes wrong, correct it and start
operating again without worrying about how the
'wrong occurred or what caused it. The second
aspect of this is to understand, and actually
this was expressed in the morning session, what
goes on in the fluidized bed from the mechanism
point of view, from the scientific point of
view. A large community of university profes-
sors agree with me, and I'm sure I am speaking
for them, that not only the Department of
Energy, but also the industry gives very
little cooperation other than lip service, in
supporting the research. I am sure I am
speaking for a large number of professors
sitting here that in order to accomplish this
concern of reliabilities in marketing, we
should be given due support, something similar
to what we had when the space industry began.
A: Shelton Ehrlich
I think that EPRI will answer the question
because it does support and so does the Depart-
ment of Energy, but I'm in charge of the
university research nn fluidized bed combustion
at EPRI. We do as much as we need. Our
problem today is that we don't know how the
systeni is going to be configured; we're waiting
for the empiricists, if you want to call them
that, to decide whether FB 5s round or square.
When we figure that out, then there's something
to be modeled. I think that Bill Reid, who
spoke to that issue in the first panel, would
agree with that perspective. In fact, he
outlined the fact that both stokers and pulver-
ized coal combustion were derived by empirical
means and then people grew to understand them.
Q: John Caukle, Bud Com?any, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania
I have a question for Mr. Brodfeld. You assert
that we're not at the commercial stage yet in
fluid bed technology. Given the rate of
advancement that we've seen, how far down the
road do you see this?
A: Bruno ~rodfeld
I think the comment was made this morning by
Dave McKee which I fully subscribe to that it
would take something like five years, maybe a
few years more to see the plants in operation
in order .to be fully commercialized. But let
me make one point clear, when I say it's not
commercial yet, it shouldn't be taken liter-
ally. It may be in a stage of early commer-
cialization, which means that it's on the
threshold of commercialization. It requires
now, verification, and this is the issue at
hand. How do you convince industry to get
involved with this process of verification so
that then the free forces of the market take
over?
Q: Doug Willis, National Coal Board
I would like to make one comment. I think that
the present stability of the industrialized
society depends upon the knife edge and that
the knife edge is the energy situation. The
question that I want to ask.the hard-nosed
industrialist is -- well I have two questions
and I'm really concerned about the conversion
from oil to coal, not from one technology to
another -- What do you regard as a reasonable
payback time, in the light of your corporate
strategy, for the different industrialists?
 Secondly, if you had a retrofit situation where
the:capital costs were, say 70% of the cost of
a new installation, would you regard that as a
better commercial venture than going for a new
plant?
A: David McKee
I'll try to give you one answer. In our
corporation, we're looking at paybacks a little
differently these days than we used to. I'm
sure there are many people in the audience who
are used to looking at paybacks in two, three
of four year paybacks for product investment.
With the changing money market and the infla-
tion rate, we've gone away from looking at
NROI's on the third year basis as a prime
consideration, and we're starting to look more
at investors' methods of return, which involve
discounting cash flows, accelerated deprecia-
tion and the real value of money with time.
We're finding that everybody has a cost of
capital and that differs from company to
company depending on how you do your financing.
But certainly when the investors' method of
return is greater than the cost of capital, you
have something you might look at very seri-
ously, whereas that same project might have
a net return on the third year basis that
is unacceptable from standard criteria that
you've used in the past. So, we're changing the
way we look at things because of the market
situation. The predictions that you saw in one
of the paybacks -- again, this depends on a
couple of things that are very sensitive. One
is the ever widening split in price differen-
tial between oil and coal and whether that is
really going to happen or not, your crystal
ball is as good as mine, I have the feeling in
the bottom of my stomach though, that the price
of coal is going to start creeping up and that
split may not be as wide as we all think it
might be. There's a lot of speculative infor-
mation you have to rely on to make these long
term commitments for big capital. It's a tough
job today and I'm not making light of it. We
have retrofitted coal fired installations more
times than we wish to admit; we've had coal
untts go to oil then to gas, back to oil, then
back to coal again. So.we8ve gone the full
circle. That is a site specific question that
depends somewhat on the usable life of the
equipment. If we are retrofitting a relatively
new installation which has another 20 years of
life in it as far as we're concerned with
minimum maintenance, we'll look at that one
pretty hard. Where at the 25 year point on a
unit, we're going to look at that very hard
because probably the combustion controls'are
outdated, the material handling equipment is
probably ,in need of great investment. It's
hard to give a good number for that. I think
it needs to be a site specific evaluation.
Paul Bobo
With regard to the financing of projects in the
company, they necessarily compete with each
other and therefore use of criteria of internal
rate of return which takes into account the
cost of money, the effect of taxes, and depre-
ciation is important. If, indeed, you are only
recovering your capital, by mitigating the
taxes and accelerating the depreciation and the
difference in the price of the fuel and you're
competing against the development of a new
product which is a revenue generator and not a
cost avoider --
you can see where the diffi-
culty comes in. Typically, however, there is
some insurance you need to buy. In our indus-
try, projects seem to get funded when the
internal rate of return is above 30% and I'm
not sure where that relates to payback. But
that is considerably over the cost of oil.
Q: Earl Oliver, SRI, International
I have a question for the industrial partici-
pants. It's been stated that there is a
reluctance to go into investment in the new
technologies until they have been well proven.
In this case, I note that the large water tube
boilers are not being built of the conventional
kind either, at this time. It seems there is a
great slump in the market. The question would
be -- When the market resumes, will this be
before the FBC is ready? Will it be more
competitive at that time? Also, the regulatory
incentives that have been given by EPA, do you
think they are of any'significance compared to
other technologies?
A: David McKee
As far as the regulatory incentives, we don't
see any market change in the regulations '
affecting fluidized bed vs. other technologies.
Certainly, the least attention has been paid to
NOx regulations in the past. They will probably
be the ones that will get the most attention
for coal combustion. I've been involved in
stage combustion of coal and pulverized firing
and other applications and that doesn't come
without some operating penalties and headaches.
It can be done and it can be done fairly reli-
ably but it changes your method of operation.
You have people that understand what's going on
a little better than a fellow that came tn off
the street and was made a power operator
yesterday. I don't think I can really respond
to the first part of your question adquately.
I think the market is highly fluid and whether
this technology will hit the right window or
not, your guess is as good as mine. I think it
has the best chance of any in the near future.
But we do appreciate the position the boiler
vendors are in. They're out there raising
capital too. It's a tough market place.
Arnold Kossar
I'd like to make a response. I think the first
part of the question is -- Why don't industrial
users buy coal fired boilers of any kind?
Maybe I can answer the question this way. We
had an opportunity to buy a boiler and did buy
a boiler recently. It was' an 80,000 lb/hr
boiler. We could have used coal. Coal was
 used at this site at one time. And here's how
the scenario works. To buy the 80,000 lb/hr
gas-oil boiler cost slightly under $1 million.
To put the coal boiler in and to retrofit the
attendant equipment, it would have been
slightly over $5.5 million.
David McKee
I might comment on one other thing. In our
company, our energy conservation efforts have
been tremendous in the last eight years. We've
looked at saving a pound of steam and how much
investment we can afford to save that pound of
steam, and it was closely, if not more closely,
'
than what it would cost to go out and buy,a new
pound of steam with coal. But I. think you
heard numbers like $100, $125/lb in our instal-
led cost. They are generally in the range that
we feel are realistic. If you look at your
IMR's and your discounted .cash flows and how
much you can afford to-spend to save that pound
of steam, you might be amazed at how much money
you really can spend to do good solid energy
conservation work. I think we're seeing that
in our company. Our energy requirements per
pound of product have continually dropped over
the last eight years, whereas our productivity
is continuing to climb, and that puts money in
the bank. This is a tremendous incentive for
evaluating all your processes and the way you
do things, and we had little increase in our
steam demand. If you look at our future
picture, we've looked so hard at some processes
that we're find'ing out we are gofng the other
way -- our steamloads are going down. So
that's why we haven't been buying some boilers.
Q: Sven Jansson, STAL-LAVAL
I'd like to make a general comment and then a
technical comment. Steve Freedman started out
with this discussion by saying that he wanted
the panel to serve as the wise men looking at
the elephant and I think a lot of what's been
said here has illustrated that he reached his
goal very admirably. What I hear are lots of
views given by people who have a small part of
the picture, but not necessarily the full
picture. What I would like to say is that I
think fluidized bed combustion is here, gentle-
men; it is coming, AFBC and PFBC are here and
they are coming; there is no way that can be
stopped. Therefore, ,the real big question here
comes to the following: It is, how quickly do
we want this to evolve and that depends on the
need,that we see and that is a national type of
consideration, but it's also a corporate type
of consideration. Now, when you look at that
question -- how quickly do we want it to happen
-- then you've got to ask, how can we make this
come about quickly. Well, the least effective
of all ways is to start university programs.
I'm an R6D man myself, but I have to say this,
because then you only look.at the little leg or
the little toe of the elephant. What has to be
done is to get some figures in rather quickly
to identify those important problems, not those
that we necessarily are thinking of today.
There is a little book which I'd like to recom-
mend to everyone which is called Murphy's Law
and Other Reasons whq Things go Wrong, and you
can pick it up at airports. In it is purist
law, and it says, the solution to a problem
changes the nature of the problem, and this is
exactly what we are up against. We've got to
find out, therefore, what the problems are.
Arnold Kossar, Session Co-Chairman
I aprpeciate the reference to the book. I don't
think your comment requires any answer. To try to
summarize rather briefly, we have bad a rather
consistent emphasis by the panelists on what the
Defense Department calls the "ilities" -- rel'ia-
bility, maintainability, availability. This is the
key, especially to the industrial people who say,
I'm out there to build products 'not steam, and I
can't afford to have that thing back there in the'
corner screw me up either, in terms of coal supply
or operation on line or from a maintenance point of
view because I can't afford to be down very long
before my profit plan for the year has been shot in
the head. The utility people haven't said it quite
in those crass terms, but they get at it too,
because they're controlled. They can't sell the
product in quite the free market concept that the
industrial people can. So what I find here, though,
is some difference. The industrial people who
tend to be less coal dependent are expressing the
'concerns in rather stronger terms, I would say,
than the utility people, especially since the
utility people have some familiarity with coal to
begin with and have learned to live with its prob-
lems of today. I think one point that was made that
was quite keyed to the bulk of us as technologists,
was that you've got to consider the kind of main-
tenance crew that is normally available in the
industrial environment -- and I could say -- also
in the utility environment. The fluidized bed
processes are somewhat complicated. Now the answer
that, I'll automate that system for you, just ain't
enough because, as you know, we had an experience
at Three Mile that showed us that hardware errs
also. We had a session on instrumentation and con-
trol here that was, I think, the first one at one
of these conferences. I'll be frank, I pressed for
it, but I was disappointed in the number of papers
that showed, up and even more disappointed in the
number of participants in the audience. But, the
manageability of any system, by people, is a key
part of any of these technologies. Now, I won't get
into the argument of whether the equipment is or
isn't commercial yet. I agree with the last point
made that the technology is at a point where you
need large scale demonstration in order to develop
the confidence, that will take,' perhaps, several
levels of demonstration. That's what worries me a
bit, how many times will it have to be done before
the customer feels comfortable with it? I won't try
to expand on that one, but I can see a long time
going on if the process is indeed sequential. The
other point made, that if the government sees a
role in stimulating this move toward less depend-
ence on imported fuels, it's going to have to put
its thinking cap on in a more collected manner
perhaps than has been done today.
I thank you all for coming.
 PARTICIPANT LIST

SIXTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON

FLUIDIZED BED COMBUSTION

ATLANTA HILTON HOTEL

ATLANTA, GEORGIA
APRIL 9-11, 1980

ABEL, Will iam A. APEL, John P.

Chemical Engineer Vice President
Morgantown Energy Technology Columbus 6 Southern Ohio Electric Co.
Center 215 North Front Street
U.S. Department of Energy Columbus, Ohio 43215
P. 0. Box 880 6141464-7340 '

Morgantown, West Virginia 26505

3041599-7163 ARORA, B. S.
Riley Stoker Corporation
ADAMS, Roger L. 9 Neponset Street
Manager, Energy Planning' Worcester, Massachusetts 01606
and Development 6171852-7100
Kimberly Clark Corporation
401 North Lake Street ARTHURSSON, David-A. A.
Neenan, Wisconsin 54956 Arthurssonlaboratoriet ALAB
4141735-2049 P. 0. Box 315
S - 199 03 ENKOEPING
ALBANESE, Anthony S. Sweden
Process Engineer +46 171 21122
Brookhaven Natonal Laboratory
Building 526 AYERS, William J., Jr.
Upton, New York 11973 Scientist '
.5161345-2958 EG&G, Incorporated
P. 0. Box 880
ALDRICH, R. J. Morgantown, West Virginia 26505
Fuller Company 3041599-7585
P. 0. Box 2040
. Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18001 BACH, Thomas G.
2151264-6506 Business Planning
Catalytic Incorporated
ANDREWS, Clarence K. 1500 Market Street
Mechanical Engineer Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19102
Tennessee Valley Authority 2151864-8442
1020 Chestnut Street, Tower I1
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37377 BAGLEY, W. D.
6151755-3571 Airesearch Manufacturing Company
of Arizona
ANSON, Don 1111 South 34th Street
Research Leader Phoenix, Arizona 85034
Battelle Columbus Laboratory
505 King Avenue BALCOMB, Philip E.
Columbus, Ohio 43201 Manager
6141424-5823 Mulzer Crushed Stone Company
P. 0. Box 248
APA, Robert P. Tell City, Indiana 47586 .
Research Engineer 8121547-7922
Babcock 6 Wilcox Company
P. 0. Box 1562
Alliance, Ohio 44601
2161821-9110
BALESTRINO, Frank BEER, Janos M.
Senior Engineer Professor
Babcock 6 Wilcox Company Massachusetts Institute of
1562 Beeson Street Technology
Alliance, Ohio 44601 70 Massachusetts Avenue ,

2161821-9110 Cambridge, Massachusetts ,021.39

6171253-6661
BALFANZ, Wayne
Manager, Energy Technology BEITH, R.
Stauffer Chemical Company Director, RLD
.Watport, Connecticut 06880 Foster Wheeler UK
2031222-3317 Greater London House
P. 0. Box 160, Hampstead Road
BALL, Carroll E. London NW17QN England
~echanical,Engineer (U.K.) 01-388-1212
Tennessee Valley Authority
1020 Chestnut Street Tower I1 BEKOFSKE, K. L.
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37377 Research Engineer
6151755-3571 . General Electric Company
Research 6 Development Center
BALL, Marc P. 0. Box 8
Kee ler . Company Schenectady, New York 12301
Box 968 5181385-8004
Norcross; Georgia 30091 .
4041447-5660 BENNETT, Orus L.
, Research Soil Scientist
BALL, Myron USDA-SEA-AR
Keeler Company Plant Science Division
Box 968 West Virginia University
Norcross, Georgia .30091 Morgantown, West Virginia 26506
4041447-5660 3041293-2795

BARON, Robert E. BERGMANS, H.

Manager of Process Design Chief Design Office
Energy and Environmental Energieonderzoek Centrum Nederland :
Engineering, Inc. P. 0. Box 1, 1755 ZG Petten
675 Mass Avenue The Netherlands
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
6171491-3157 BERKOWITZ, David A.
Manager, Process Control
BARTELDS, H. JAYCOR
Research Engineering Heat 6 300 Unicorn Park Drive
Refrigeration Woburn, Massachusetts 01801
Engineering Division 6171933-6805
P. 0. Box 342, 7300 AH Apeldoorn
The Nether lands BERMAN, Paul A.
Manager, Systems Engineering
BATSCH, Johann . . Westinghouse Electric Corporation
Kernforschungsanlage P. 0. Box 251, Lab 100
Julich, GmbH Concordville, Pennsylvania 19331 ' ,
Postfach 19 13, D-5170 . , .215/3584635
Julich, West Germany
BERNSTEIN, Samuel
BEARDEN, Mark D. Scientist
Senior Research Engineer Flow Research Company
Dow Chemical USA 21414 68th Avenue South
A-2303 Building Kent, Washington 98031
Freeport, Texas 77541 2061854-1 370
71 31238-0393
BERTRAND, Rene R.
BECKER, Henry A. Contract eve lopme& Manager
Department of Chemical Engineering Exxon Research 6 Engineering
Queen's University P. 0. Box 101 '

Kilrgstuu, ear~ada K7L 3NB Florham Park, New Jersey 07932

6131547-3045 20117654762
. .-
BIASCA, Frank BONK, Donald L.
Senior Staff Engineer Dcvclopment Engineer
Shell Development Company Babcock h Wilcox
P. 0. Box 1380 22 South Van Buren
Houston, Texas 77001 Barberton, Ohio 44203
7131493-7815 2161753-4511

BILLIG, Joseph A. BONN, B .

Sales Engineer Dr. rer.nat.
F. B. Feed Systems Bergbau-Forschung GmbH
Fuller Company Franz-Fischer-Weg 61
Box 2040 4300 ~ s s e n13
Bethl.ehem,Pennsylvania 18001 Federal ~ e ~ u b l iof
c Germany
2151264-6592 201/105-9542

BLAND, Alan E. BOORSMA, R.H.

Senior ~eologist/~eochemist Manager Cor~s~ruc
tion and
Institute for Mifling & Development
Minerals Research Stork KAB
P. 0. Box 13015 Industriestraat 1
Lexington, Kentucky 40583 P. 0. Box 20, 7550 GM
6061252-5535 Hengelo, The Netherlands

BOBO, Paul BOOTH, A.W.

Senior Consultant, Corporate
Engineering
Mead Corporation
Courthouse Plaza Northeast
Dayton, Ohio 45463
BOERICKE, Ralph R.
Manager, Gas Cleanup Programs
General Electric Company
One River Road
~chenectad~, New York 12302
5181385-3308
BOGARDUS', B. Paul
Manager, Coal Quality Assurance
Ashland Coal, Incorporated
P. 0. Box 391
Ashland, Kentucky 41101
6061329-4788
BOGGS, Bruce E.
Environmental Engineer
Engineering-Science
57 Executive Park South
Atlanta, Georgia 30329
4041325-0770
BOGGS , Dennie
Mechanical Engineer
Department of Energy
Oak Ridge Operations
Post Office Box E
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
6151576-1801
BOLAND, John
Senior Research Engineer
Trane Company
3600 Pammel Creek Road
Lacrosse, Wisconsin 54601
6081787-2528
Manager of Technology
Shawinigan Engineering
. Consultants, Ltd.
808 Fourth Avenue, S.W.
Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2POK4
4031283-8335
BORGNE, Kurt G.
Program Manager
National Swedish Board
for Energy Source Development
Box 1103 .
S-163 12 SPANGA
08-7520360
BOYD, Ronald P.
Engineering Supervisor
Bechtel Power Corporation
15740 Shady Grove Road
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20760
3011258-'3847,
BRADLEY, R .A.I
Program Manager
Fossil Energy Materials
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
P. 0. Box'X ,
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
6151574-6094
BRADLEY, William J.
Senior,Supervisor .
Mechanical Engineering
Burns & Roe, Incorporated
550 Kinderkamack Road
Oradell, New Jersey 07649
2011255-2000
BRAYDEN, James K. BUNN, Richard
Chief Engineer Research Engineer
U.S. Marines C-E Natco
Elliott Street P. 0. Box 1710
Beverly, Massachusetts 01923 Tulsa, Oklahoma 74101
6171927-4200 9181663-9100

BRINK, K. E. BURNS, Roger L.

Project Engineer Construction Manager
Maskinaffaren Generator, A.B. Alden E. Stilson Associates
Box 95 170 North High Street
S-433-01 Partille, Sweden Columbus, Ohio 43215
6141228-4385
BRITTON, Michael W.
Supervising Project Engineer BUSHNELL, Dwight
Conoco Incorporated Professor
P. 0. Box 2226 Department of ~echanicalEngineering
Corpus Christi, Texas 78403 Oregon State University
5121884-0421 Corvallis, Oregon 97331
5031754-2575
BRODFELD, Bruno
Vice President BUTLER, Bill
Stone & Webster Engineering Research Scientist
Corporation. Flow Research
P. 0. Box 2325 214 14-68th Avenue, Souch
Bvston, Massachusetts 02107 Kent, Washington 98031
6171973-2767 2061854-1370

BROOKS, Robert D. BYAM, John W. Jr.

Manager, Fossil Energy Program Branch Chief, Fluid Bed Projects
General Electric Company - Morgantown Energy Technology
One River Road U.S. Department of Energy
Schenectady, New York 12345 P. 0. Box 880
5181385-2210 Morgantown, West Virginia 26505
3041599-7533
BROWN, R.J.
Engineering Services Manager BYRD, James
Imperial Chemical Industries, Ltd. Chemical Engineer
Organics Division, Hexagon House Tennessee Valley Authority
Backley Manchester M93DA England 1020 Chestnut Street, To+r I1
'44-61-740-1460 Chattanooga, Tennessee 37377
6151755-3571
BUBENICK, David V.
Principal Engineer . BYWATER,
Ronald J.
GCA/Technology Division Aerospace Corporation
213 Burlington Road P. 0. Box 92957
Bedford, Massachusetts 01730 Los Angeles, California 90009
6171275-5444 2131648-6103

BUCK, Victor CALLSEN, Donnelly E.

Vice President Mechanical Engineer
Pope, Evans and Robbins, Inc. U.S. Air Force
1133 Avenue of Americas AFESCIDEE
New York, New York 10036 Tyndall AFB, Florida
2121730-5269 9041283-6230

BUCK, Warren L. CAMPBELL, John, Jr .

Physicist Project Engineer
Argonne National Laboratory Rocketdyne Division
Building 308 Rockwell International Corp.
9700 South Cass Avenue 6633 Canoga Avenue, M.S. AA69
Argonne, Illinois 60439 Canoga Park, California 91304
3121972-3740 2131884-3374
CANNON, Joseph N.
Professor, Chemical Engineering
School of ~ n ~ i n e e y i n ~
Howard University
2300 Sixth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20059
2021636-6626
CARINO, Maurice E.
Energy Program Development
Engineer
General Electric Company
777 14th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005
2021637-4331
CARLS, E. L.
Experi.menta1Programme Manager
N.C.B. (1.E.A'. Grimethorpe) itd.
Grimethorpe, Nr. Barnsley
South Yorkshire 572 7AB
B.713486
CARPENTER, Robert L.
Senior Staff
Lovelace ITRI
Box 5890
Albuquerque, New. Mexico 87115
CARLTON, Herbert
Research Engineer
Battelle-Columbus
505 King Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43201
6141424-5132
CARROLL, Mike
Environmental Engineer . Chemical Engineer
U.S . Air Force
2851 - CESIDEEX
McClellan AFB, California 95652
9161643-3336
CARSON, W. R.
Mechanical Engineer
1020 Chestnut Street
Tennessee Valley Authority
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37377
6151755-3011
CASAZZA, John A.
President
Ranson 6 Casazza
1000 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
2021466-2036
CATONE, D. L.
Project Manager
New Business Development
Engelhard Minerals 6 Chemicals Div.
Menlo Park ..
Edison, New Jersey 08817 . 2 857100
2011321-5192
CHALLIS, J. Anthony
Director, U.K. Operations
METREK
3 Dene Street
Dorking
Surrey RH4 2DR
DORKING 87000
CHANDRASEKHAR, Ram
Program Manager
Foster-Miller Associates
350 Second Avenue
Waltham, Massachuse'tts 02154
6171890-3200 .
CHAUDHURI, Anand
Staff Engineer
BEhK Incorporated
1900 28th Avenue South
Birmingham, Alabama 35223
2051870-8000
/
CHIONCHIO, John A.
Engineer
The Budd Company
375 Commerce Drive
Fort Washington, Pennsylvania
2151643-2950
CHIPLEY, Kenneth K.
Design Engineer
Union Carbide Corporation
P. 0. Box X, Building 1000
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
6151574-6411
CHITESTER, Douglas C.
Coal Conversion Engineering
Department of Energy, PETC
P. 0. Box 10940
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15236
CHOKSEY, Pankaj J.
Process Development Engineer
Dorr-Oliver Incorporation
- 77 Havemeyer Lane
Stamford, Connecticut 06904
2031358-3821
CHOPRA, Omesh K.
Metallurgist
Argonne National Laboratory
9700 South Cass Avenue
Argonne, Illinois 60439
3121972-5117
CHRISTIANSEN, Finn Normann
Chief Design Engineer
Burmeister h Wain Energy
23, Teknikerbyen, 2830 Virum
Copenhagen, Denmark .
CHRONOWSKI, Robert COLEMAN, John
Manager, Research Engineering . Engineer
Cleaver-Brooks Universal Leaf Tobacco .Co., Inc.
P. 0. 421 P. 0. Box 25099
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53201 Richmond, Virginia 23260
414/961-2791 8041359-9311

CHROSTOWKI, James COLMAN, Richard

Energy Resources Company, Inc. Program'Manager
185 Alewife Brook Parkway Technology Programs
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138 Aerojet Energy Conversion Company
P. 0. Box 13222
CHU, James C. H. Sacramento, California 95813
Senior Process Engineering 9161355-2757
Dorr-Oliver Canada Ltd.
174 West Street South COMER, Lewis W.
OriLlia, Ontario, Canada Partner
7051325-6181 Kramer, Comer, Passe & Racher
145 North High Street
CIANELA, Ken Columbus, Ohio 43215
Product Engineer 6141224-6273
Fuller Company
P. 0. Box 2040 COMPARATO, Joseph R.
Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18001 Combustion Engineering, Inc
215/264-6407 1000 Prospect Hill Road
Windsor, Connecticut 06095
CILIBERTI, Dave 2031688-1911
Senior Engineer
Westinghouse R6D CONGALIDIS, John P.
1310 Beulah Road Research Assistant
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15235 Massachusetts Institute of
4121256-3112 Technology
550 Memorial Drive, #12A
CLAMSER, C. J. Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
Foster Wheeler Boiler Corporation 6171253-6550
110 South Orange Avenue
Livingston, New Jersey 07039 COOPER, R. H.
2011533-1100 Metallurgist
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
CLAYPOOLE, George T. P. 0. Box X
General Manager Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
Pope, Evans & Robbins, Inc. 615/574-4470
P. 0. Box 546
Fairmont, West Virginia 26554 COOPER, Roy
\
304/366-1112 Engineer
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
CLINTON, Bruce P. P. 0. X
Engineering Specialist Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
Hercules Incorporated 6151574-4470
910 Market Street
Wilmington, Delaware 19899 COPELAND, G. G.
Chairman
CODE, R. K. Copeland Associates, Inc.
Associate Professor 125 Windsor'Drive, Suite 113
Queen's University Oak Brook, Illinois 60521
Dupuis Hall 3121986-8564
Kingston, Ontario
Canada K7L3N6 COPPOLECCHIA, Vincent D.
6131547-2751 Senior Engineer
Gibbs 6 Hill, Incorporated
COLE, Rossa W. 393 Seventh Avenue
Manager, Analysis New York, New York 10001
Curtiss-Wright Corporation 2121760-4000
One Passaic Street
Wood-Ridge, New Jersey 07075
201/777-2900
COTTS, Ronald F. DAUZVARDIS, Peter A.
Principle Process Engineer Assistant Environmental Engineer
CertainTeed Corporation Argonne National Laboratory
P. 0. Box 1100 9700 South Cass Avenue
Blue Bell, Pennsylvania 19422 ' Argonne, Illinois 60439
2151542-0500 3121972-3762

COUTURIER, Michel F. DAW, C. Stuart

Graduate Student Engineer
Chemical Engineering Department . Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Queen's University P. 0. Box Y
Kingston, Ontario K7L 3N6 Canada Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
6131547-5579 6151574-0373

CRANE, Steve DAWSON, William F.

Project Manager Program Manager
Department of Chemical Engineering Wormser Engineering Incorporated
Oregon State University 212 South Main Street
Corvallis, Oregon 97331 Middleton, MassachuseLts 01949
5031754-2091 6171777-3060

CREAMER, Patrick J. DECKER, Norman

Attorney Research Assistant .
969 Riverbend Road Massachusetts Institute of
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23452 Technology
8041468-4414 77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
CRESS, William R. 6171253-7080
Manager, Engineering Studies
Allegheny Power Service Corp. DeCOURSIN, D.G.
800 Cabin Hill Drive Vice President
Greensburg, Pennsylvania 15601 . - Fluidyne Engineering Corporation
4121837-3000 5900 Olson Highway
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55422'
CRISWELL, Robert L. 6121544-2721
Supervisor, I6C Equipment Div.
Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation DELL, Bill
9 Peach Tree Hill Road Consultant
Livingston, New Jersey 07039 William C. Dell
2011.533-3559 1211 Connecticut Avenue
Washington, D.C. 20036
CUTLER, Robert R. 2021452-1313
Chief Mechanical Engineer .
Synergo, Incorporated DeMICHELE, G.
400 Market ~trket Combustion Engineer
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106 ENEL-DSR-CRTN
2151923-3941 Via C. Battisti. 69
Pisa, Italy 65100
DAMAN, Ernest L. 050145218
Vice President
Foster Wheeler Corporation DIAMOND, Dale A.
110 South Orange Avenue Mechanical Engineer
Westfield, New Jersey 07039 USAF HQ AFLC~DEEE
2011533-3653 Wright-Patterson Air Force Base
Ohio 45433
DANIEL, Kenneth J. 5131257-4563
Systems Engineer
General Electric DICK, John L.
P. 0. Box 43 Assistant Sales Manager
Schenectady, New York 12065 Detroit Stoker-Company
518/385-9451 1510 East First Street
Monroe, Michigan 48161
3131241-9500
 DIEHL, Erle K. DRIGGS, C.L.
Manager, Utilization ~e'search Acres American ..
Bituminous Coal Research, Inc. The Clark Building, Suite 329
'350 Hochberg Road Little Pautexant Parkway
Monroeville; Pennsylvania 15146 Columbia, Maryland .21044
, 4121327-1600
DUDEK, Robert F. .
DINOTO, F.G. Senior Process Engineer
Sales Manager Babcock 6 Wilcox I6M Division
HS Power Systems, Inc. P. 0. Box 2423
8550.Katy Freeway North Canton, Ohio 44720
Houston, Texas 77024 2161494-7610
7131464-5200
DUIJVES, K. A.
DINOVO, S.T. Chief, Energy Study Centre .
' Associate ~ a n a ~ e r Energieonderzoek Centrum
Chemical Proc,essDevelopment P. .O..Box 1, 1755 &G Petten,
Section The Netherlands .
Battelle Columbus Laboratories
505 King Aven'ue DUNE, ~ a u i
Columbus, Ohio 43201 . -. Chemical Engineer
. 6141424-5042 Pope, Evans and Robbins, Inc.
320 King Street
DIVILIO, Robert J. Alexandria, Virginia 2231k
Chemical Engineer 7031549-2884
Pope, Evans and Robbins, Inc.
320 King Street DURFEE, Norman
Alexandria, Virginia 22314 Project Engineer
7031549-2884 Union Carbide - ORNL
Building 9301-3, M.S. 7
DODDS , James W . Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
Operations Supervisor 6151574-3945
Pope, Evans 6 Robbins
Box 533 Rivesville DUSSORA, Tules L.
Rivesville, West Virginia 26554 Assistant Director
'3041278-5315 Ingersou Rand Research
Box 301 .
DOWDY, Thomas E. Princeton, New Jersey 08540
Supervisor, Process ~ n a i ~ s iGroup
s 6091921-9103
UT Energy Conversion Division
Tullahoma, Tennessee 37388 EDWARDS, Richard
6151455-0631 Manager, Washington Concepts
Babcock 6 Wilcox Company
DOWNING, D. C. 1735 Eye Street, N.W.
Manager, Production ~esearch, Washington, D.C. .20006
Gulf Canada Resources, Inc. 2021296-0390
Box 130
Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P2H7 EHRLICH, Shelton
40312~33-3868 Program Manager
EPRI .
DRAKE, Kevin 3412 Hillview Drive
Supervisor, Testing Palo Alto, California 94303 .
FLUIDYNE 4151855-2444
5000 Olson Memorial Highway
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55422 ELOFSON, Per Anders
6121544-2721 Department of Inorganic Chemistry
Chalmer University of Technology
DREITLEIN, Kenneth C. S-412 96 Goteborg Sweden
Senior Marketing Specialist
Babcock 6 Wilcox Company
P. 0. Box 835
Alliance, Ohio 44601 ..
2161821-9110
 EMPIE, H.L. FENNELLY, Paul F.
Research Scientist Manager, Fluidized Bed Program
International Paper Company GCA Corporation
Corporate Research Center. Bur lington Road
Tuxedo Park, New York 10987 Bedford, Massachusetts 01730
9141351-2101 6171275-5444

EMSPERGER, Werner FIALA, L.

, Kraftwerk Union AG Director General
Hammerbacher Str. 12 + 14 CKD DUKLA n.p.
Erlangen, West Germany 8520 Thamova 1.1
09131-32430 Praha 8 Czechoslovakia 18606
226005
ENGLESSON, G. A.
Technical Director FINSON, Michael
Advanced Engineering Physical Sciences, Incorporated
United Engineers & Constructors, Inc. 30 Commerce Way
30 South 17th Street Woburn, Massachusetts 01801
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 6171933-8500
2151422-3887
FISHER, Charles F., Jr.
EUSTIS, John N. Associate Professor, Research
U.S. Department of Energy University of Tennessee
Forrestal Building, Room 2H085 101 Perkins Hall
1000 Independence Avenue, S.W. Knoxville, Tennessee 37916
Washington, D.C. 20585 6151974-8191
2021252-2084
FITZGERALD, Thomas J.
EVANS, .Robert H. Professor
Deputy Director Dept. of Chemical Engineering
Washington Operations Orego11 State U~~iversit~
Burns and Roe, Incorporated Corvallis, Oregon 97331
1850 K Street, N.W. 5031754-3546
Washington, D.C. 20006
2021659-2690 FLEISCHMAN, William H.
Engineering Specialist
FAN, Liang-Shih Nuclear Division
Assistant Professor Union Carbide Corporation
Department of Chemical Engineering P. 0. Box X
Ohio State University Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
140 West 19th Avenue 6151574-6585
Columbus, Ohio 43210
6141422-7907 FLEMING, Pat
Head, Energy Development Departmer
FANARITIS, John P. Institute for Industrial Research
Executive Vice President and Standards .
Struthers Wells Corporation, Ballymun Road
P. 0. Box 8 Dublin 9 Irel-and
Warten, Pennsylvania 16365 01-370101 '
8141726-1000
FOLEY, Bob
FARRELL, Don J. Supervisor, Design Drafting
Program Manager Riley Stoker Corporation
Davy McKee Corporation 9 Neponset Street
6200 Oak Tree Boulevard Worchester, Massachusetts 01658
Cleveland, Ohio 44116 6171852-7100
2161524-9300
FOLKE, Engstrom
FEE. Darrell Research Manager
Chemist A. ANLSTROM OSAKEYHTIO
Argonne National Laboratory 48600 Karhvla
9700 South Cass Avenue Finland
Argonne, Illinois 60439 521.63100
3121972-4389
 FOLLAYTTAR, J . S . GALE, George G.
Manager Chief Process Engineer
Corporate Business Development Occidental Engineering Company
The Continental Group, Inc. 2100 S.E. Main Street
1 Harbor Plaza Irvine, California 92714
Stamford, Connecticut 06902 7141957-7721
2031964-6126
GALLI, Alfred F.
FORTUIN, G.M. Professor
Staff Engineer Department of Chemical Engineering
NeraToom West Virginia university
The Hague Morgantown, West Virginia 26506
Holland 3041293-3619

FOURROUX, Jerry D. GAMBLE, Robert L.

Mechanical Engineer
Tennessee Valley Authority
1020 Chestnut Street, Tower I1
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401
6151755-3571
Manager, Development Engineer
Foster Wheeler
110 South Orange Avenue
Livingston, New Jersey 07039
2011533-2789

FOWLER, F. B. GANESAN, P.
United Coal'Company Senior Metallurgist
' I
Box 919 Kentucky Center for Energy
Grundy, Virginia 24614 Research Laboratory
7031935-7521 P. 0. Box 13015
Lexington, Kentucky 40583
. FRANK, Sidney 6061252-5535
Project Engineer
Stone & Webster Company GANGARAM, G.
245 Summer Street Battelle Memorial Institute
Boston, Massachusetts 02107 505 King Avenue
6171973-8375 Columbus, Ohio 43201 '

6141424-4235
FREEDMAN, StevewI.
Office of Coal Utilization
U.S. Department of Energy
. GARBETT, Eric S;
Senior Research Assistant
Mail Stop E-178, GTN Coal Technology Unit
Washington, D.C. 20545 Sheffield University
3011353-2800 Sheffield 3 England

FRUH, Herbert J. GARTSIDE, Charles

Foster Wheeler Boiler Corporation Mechanical Engineer
110 South Orange Avenue Argonne National Laboratory
Livingston, New Jersey 07039 9700 South Cass Avenue
2011533-1100 Argonne, Illinoi's 60540
3121972-3975
FUJIOKA, Y.
Research Engineer . GASNER, Larry L.
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd. Professor
1-1 Akunoura-Machi Department of Chemical Engineering
Nagasaki 850-91 Japan University of Maryland
0958161-2111 College Park, Maryland 20742
3011454-4593
FURLONG, Dale A.
senior Scientist GEFFKEN, John F .
Buell Division of Envirotech Program Manager
200 North Seventh Street U.S. Department of Energy
Lebanon, Pennsylvania 17042 Washington, D.C. 20545
7171272-2001 3011353-2806
GEHL, S. M.
Metallurgist
Materials Science Division
Argonne National Laboratory
9700 South Cass Avenue
Argotine, Illinois 60439
3121972-5172 .
GENTILE, Eugene .
Sales Engineer
Hayward Tyler Incorporated
25 Harbor Avenue
Norwalk, Connecticut 06850
203/853-1300
GEORGAKIS, Christos
Professor
Massachusetts Institute of
Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
GEORGE, David R.
Maintenance Superintendent
Mechanical
Pope, Evans 6 Robbins
P. 0. Box 533
Rivesville, West Virginia 26588
3041278-5315
GEVELBER, Michael A.
Analyst
U. S. Department of Energy
Room C-125
Washington, D.C. 20545
3011353-2611
GILLIGAN, Martin E., Jr.
Vice President, Operations
York-Shipley, Incorporated
P. 0. Box 349
York, Pennsylvania 17405
7171755-1081
GIRAMONTI, Albert J.
Senior Project Engineer
United Technologies Research Ctr.
Silver Lane
East Hartford, Connecticut 06108
2031727-7361
GLADBACH, ~dward'G:
Senior Engineer
System Development
LA Department of Water 6 Power
P. 0. Box 111
Los Angeles, California 90051
2131481-5503
GLEUHILL, P.R.
Business Development Manager
Foster Wheeler P.P.
Greater London.House
Hampstead Road
London NW 1
01-388-1212
GLENN, Roland D.
President
Combustion Processes, Incorporated
50 East 41st Street
New York, New York 10017
2121889-0255
GLICKSMAN, Leon R.
Senior Research Scientist
Massachusetts Institute of
Technology
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
6171253-2233
. GMEINDL, Frank D.
Project Manager
U.S. Department of Energy
P. 0. Box 88O, METC
Morgantown, West Virginia 26505
3041599-7751
GOBLIRSCH, Gerald M.
Mechanical Engineer .
Grand Forks Energy Tech. Center
U. S. Department of'Energy
Grand Forks, North Dakota 58202
7011795-8169
GOINS, Will iam D .
Engineer
U.S. Department of Energy
2000 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20461
2021653-3802
GODFREY, T. G.
Engineer
Oak Ridge National Laboratories
P.O. Box X
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
6151574-4455
GOLAN, Lawrence P.
Senior Staff Engineer .
Exxon Research and Engineering Co.
Florham Park, New Jersey 07932
..:. 2011765-1112
GORDON, John S .
TRW Energy Systems
8301 Greensboro Drive
McLean, Virginia 22102
7031734-6480
GOUSE, S. William
Vice President
The MITRE Corporation
1820 Dolley Madison Blvd.
McLean, Virginia 22102
7031827-6976
 GRANT, Andrew J. HALL, Robert R. '
Manager, FBC Task Force .>. Staff Engineer
Babcock Contractors Incorporated GCAITechnology Division
921 Penn Avenue 213 Burlington Road
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222 Bedford, Massachusetts 01730
4121471-5348 6171275-5444 ' .

GREGORY, hrthur H. . HALLEY, G. M.

Project ~ngineer .Vice President
Brown Boveri Technical Director
711 Anderson Avenue Kewanee Boiler Corporation -
North St. Cloud, Minnesota 56301 101 Franklin Street
6121255-5200 Kewanee, Illinois 61443
3091883-3541
GREY, D.A.
Materials Engineer HAMILTON, Stuart
~eneralElectric Company .' . Project Engineer
Irwer Road United ~echnologies
Schenectady, New York 12345 P. 0. Box 109
5181385-3621 South Windsor, Connecticut 06074
203/727-2273
GRIFFIN, John J.
Vice President HANISCH, Harold
Petro-Chem Development Co., Inc. Dipl. Ing.
122 East 42nd Street Simmering-Graz-Pauker AG
New York, New York 10017 ~ariahilferstr.32
212/697-7442 Vienna, Austria

GRIGGS, K. E. HANSON, Henry A.

~echanicalEngineer Project Engineer
Fluor Power Services, Incorporated ' Fluidyne Engineering Company
200 West Monroe Street 5,900 Olson Memorial Highway
Chicago, Illinois 60606 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55422
3121368-6777 6121544-2721

GRIMSHAW, Thomas W. HARTMAN, William A.

Senior Geologist Engineer
Radian Corporation ??ion Carbide
P. 0. Box 9948 . Building 9201-3, P.O. Box Y
' ust tin, Texas 78758 Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
5121454-4797 6151574-0294

GUSTAFSSON, ~ e r n t HASHIMOTO, Takeo

Managing Director Engineer of No. 1 Land Use '

AB Fjarrvarme, Box 12 Boiler Designing Section

S-150 13 TROSA, Sweden Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd.
0156/16550 1-1 Akunoura-machi, Nagasaki
Japan 850-91
HALL, Arthur W. 0958161-2111
Project Manager
U.S. Department of Energy HEDIN, John G.
P. 0. Box 880 Senior Advisor
Morgantown, West Virginia 26505 Exxon ~nter~ris'es,Incorporated
3041599-7185 224 Park Avenue
Florham Park, New Jersey 07932
HALL, Dennis 201/765-4305
Engineer
Universal Leaf Tobacco Co., Inc HELT, James E.
P. 0. Box 25099 Assistant Chemical Engineer
Richmond, Virginia 23260 ,Argonne National Laboratory
8041359-9311 9700 South Cass Avenue
Argonne, Illinois 60439
3121972-4379
 HENCEY, Stephen D. HILL, Duane L.
Director, Fuel Technology Chief Results Engineer
Program Pope, Evans 6 Robbins, Inc.
Missouri Division of Energy P. 0. Box 533
Box 176 Rivesville, West Virginia 26588
,Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 3041278-5315
3141751-4000
HILL, V. L.
HENRY, .I.W. Senior Research Advisor
Director, Development IIT Research Institute
Combustion Engineering, Incorporated Chicago, Illinois 60616
1000 Prospect Hill Road 3121567-4177
Windsor, Connecticut 06070
2031688-1911 HINES, John
Senior Engineer Associate
HENRY, Richard F. Union Oil Company
Chemical Engineer P. 0. Box 76
Argonne National Laboratory Brea, California 92621
Building 205 T6-4 7141528-7201
Argonne, Illinois 60439
3121972-7546 HOBBS, Charles H.
Assistant Director
HENSCHEL, D. Bruce Lovelace ITRI
Industrial Environment P. 0. Box 5890
Research Laboratory (MD-61) Albuquerque, New Mexico 87115
U.S. Environmental Protection 5051844-2435
Agency
Research Triangle Park, HOKE, R. C.
North Carolina 27711 Senior Engineering Associate
9191541-2825 Exxon Research & Engineering Co.
P. 0. Box 8
HERLIHY, Joe Linden, New Jersey 07036
Manager, Maintenance Operations 2011474-2939
Burns & Roe Services Corporation
496 Kinderkamack Road HOLCOMB, Robert S.
Oradell, New Jersey 07649 Program Manager '

2011265-2000 Oak Ridge National Laboratories

P. 0. Box Y
HEWITT, D.R. Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
Project Engineer 6151574-0273
U.S. Department of Energy . .
P'. 0. Box 880 HOLT, Burgess,J.
Morgantown, West Virginia 26505 General Manager
304/599-7535 National Boiler Works, Inc.
3947 Jennings Road
HIGH, Michael D. Cleveland, Ohio 44109
Acting Director 2161749-5747
Energy Demonstrations
and Technology HOLT, Charles F.
Tennessee Valley Authority Section Manager
1000 Chestnut Street, Tower I1 Battelle Columbus Laboratories
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401 505 King Avenue
6151755-3571 Columbus, Ohio 43201
6141424-5026
HIGHLEY, John
Deputy Head, Combustion HORGAN, John J .
Research Project Engineer
UK National Coal Board Power Systems Division of UTC
Coal Research Establishment Mail Stop 19, P. 0. Box 109
Stoke Orchard, Cheltenham, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074
Gloucestershire, UK 2031727-2272
02426713361
t
HOUSE, Orman F. HUTCHINSON, Bruce
Chemical Engineer Vice President '

7304 Harding Road Development Engineering

Vineland, New Jersey 08360 Johnston Boiler Company
609/692-6977 Ferrysburg, Michigan
49409
HOUSTON, Robert J. 6161842-5050
Environmental Projects Director
GAI Consultants, Inc. HYLKEMA, R.
570 Beatty Road Boiler Design Engineer
PIonroeville, Pennsylvania 15146 Verolme Machinefabriek
412/242-6530 Ijsselmonde BV
P. 0. Box 5079
HOWES, James E., Jr. 3008AB Rotterdam, The
Senior Researcher Netherlands
Battelle-Columbus Laboratories
505 King Avenue IKEDA, S.
Columbus, Ohio 43201 Assistant Manager
6141424-5269 Kawasaki Heavy Industries
1-35, Shimaya, Konohanaku,
HOY, H. Raymond Osaka-shi, Japan 554
Director, Leatherhead Laboratory 06/461-8001-533
NCB Coal Utilisation- Research Lab.
c/o BCURA Ltd., Randalls Road JACK, A. R.
Leatherhead, Surrey Project Director
KT22 7RZ England NCB (IEA ~rimethorpe)Limited
Grimethorpe, Barnsley South Yorks
HSIAO, Ching-Jen England 713486
Mechanical Engineering Development
Pullman Kellogg JACKSON, William M.
16200 Park Row Professor
Houston, Texas 77084 Chemisty Department
7131492-2500 Howard University
Washington, D.C. 20059
HSIEH, Benjamin C. B. 2021636-6883
Consultant-Fossil Energy Technology
General Electric Company JACOB, Andrew J.
One River Road, Building 2 Assistant Head, Analytical
Schenectady, New York 12345 and Research 6 Development
518/385-3017 American Electric Power
Two Broadway .
HUMMELL, John D . New York, New York 10004
Partner 2121440-8208
Stilson 6 Associates
170 North High Street JAIN, Mohan L.
Columbus, Ohio 43215 Technical Staff
6141228-4385 Argonne National Laboratory
9700 South Cass Avenue
HURT, James Argonne, Illinois 60439
Project Manager 312/972-5636
Kidde Consultants
1018 Cromwell Bridge Road JAIN, Suresh C.
Towson, Maryland 21204 Manager, Process Engineering
301/321-5588 Section
Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation
HUSCHAUER, Helmuth 110 South Orange Avenue
Vereinigte Kesselwerke AG Livingston, New Jersey 07039
WerdenerStrasse 3 201/533-2792
D-4000 Dusseldorf, Germany
0211/7814582

JANSSON, Sven A.
Manager, Research Laboratories
Stal-Lava1 Turbin AB
S-612 20 Finspong Sweden
0122/81000
JASSOWSKI, Donald
Project Engineer
Aerojet Liquid Rocket Company
P. 0. Box 13222
Sacramento, California 95813
9161355-2849
JOHNSON, Bruce C.
. . Senior Development Engineer
C-E Natco
P. 0. Box 1710 . Combustion Engineering, Inc.
Tulsa, Okalahoma 74101
9181663-9100 .
. JOHNSON, Irving
Argonne National Laboratory
9700 South Cass Avenue
. . Argonne, Illinois 60439
3121972-4384
JOHNSON, Robert M.
Maintenance Superintendant
Pope Evans 6 Robbins
P. 0. Box 533
Rivesville, West Virginia 26588
3041278-5315
JOHNSON, W . ene edict
Consultant . Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15235
Stone 6 Webster Engineering Corp.
P. 0. Box 2325, 245111
Boston, Massachusetts 02107
. .
6171973-2235
JONES, John E., Jr.
Fossil Energy Technology Section
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
P.O. Box Y
Oak Ridge, ~ennessee 37830
6151574-0358
, JONKE, Albert A.
Director of Fossil Energy Program
Argonne National Laboratory
9700 South Cass Avenue
Argonne, Illinois 60439
3121972-4321
JUKKOLA, Walfred W.
System Development Engineer
Dorr-Oliver Incorporated , -
. . . 77 Havemeyer Lane
; Stamford, Connecticut 06904
2031358-3376
. . .
KAKU, Hiroyuki
Researcher
Kure Research Laboratory
Babcock-Hitschi K.K. No. 3-36
Takaramuchi Kure
Hiroshima Pref., Japan
KALLIO,. Gregory A.
Electrical E~gineer
General Electric Company
P.O. Box 43
Schenectady, New York 12301
5181385-0948
KANTESARIA, P.P.
Senior Engineer
1000 Prospect Hill Road
Department 9014-2228
Windsor, Connecticut 06095 ,
2031688-1911 .
KAPP, Gary S. ' .
Manager; coal Combustion
Davy McKee Corporation
6200 Oaktree Boulevard
.Independence,Ohio 44131
2161524-9300
KEAIRNS, Dale'L. '
Manager Fossil Fuel 6 Fluidized
Bed Processes
Westinghouse R6D Center
1310 Beulah Road
4121256-7345
KELLEY, Carl, 111
Environmental Engineer
Mittel Hauser Corporation
2600-B Lambert Street
El Toro, California 92637
7141951-6162
KELLY, Andrew J.
Manager, Program Development
Process Energy
General Atomic Company
P .O. Box 81608
San Diego, California 92138
7141455-3746
KELLY, William R.
Foster Wheeler.Boiler Corp.
110 South Orange Avenue
Livingston, New Jersey 07039
2011533-1100
KENNEDY, Jeffrey M.
Project Engineer . President
Acurex Corporation
Route 1, Box 423
Morrisville, Connecticut 27709
9191761-9704
KEOLANUI, Gus L.
Manager
Industrial 6 Energy Systems
CH2M Hill, 555 Capital Mall
Sacramento, California 95814
9161441-3955
KEZIOS, S. Peter
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, Georgia
4041894-3200
KHAN, Ashfaq
Engineer
Union Carbide Nuclear Division
P.O. Box X , Building 1000
Oak Ridge, Tennessee. 37830
6151574-6518
KITZLER, E .B .
Vice president-~n~ineering
National Lime 6 Stone Company
P.O. Box 120
Findlay, Ohio 45840
4191396-7671
KLEIN, Lawrence T.
Manager, S.W. Environmental
Center
NVS Corporation
14011 Ventura Boulevard
Shennon.Oaks, California 91423
2131783-0254
KLEINAU, J.H.
Manager, Boiler Systems
Dorr-Oliver Incorporated
77 Havemeyer Lane
Stamford, Connecticut 06904
2031358-3526
KLEY, H.V.D.
Chief Mechanical Department
Energieonderzoek Centrum Nederland
P.O. 1, 1755 ZG Petten
The Netherlands
KNOWLTON, .Ted M.
Assistant Director Fluidization Research
Institute of Gas Technology
4201 W. 36th Street
Chicago, Illinois 60632
,3121542-7088
KOLLERUP, Vagn
. .
Burmeister 6 Wain Energy
23, Teknikerbyen, 2830 Virum
Copenhagen, Denmark
2 857100
KORENBERG, Jakob .
Director, R6D
York-Shipley, Incorporated
P.O. Box 349
York, Pennsylvania 17405
7171755-1081
KOSSAR, Arnold F.
.Vice President, ~ n ~ i n e e r i n ~
Curtiss-Wright Corporation
One Passaic Street '
Wood-Ridge, New Jersey 07075
,
2011777-2900 . .
KOSV IC, Thomas
KVB, Incorporated . .
6176 Olson Memorial Highway . .
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55422
6121545-2142 I
, %.
KRANKER, Richard L. . . i
'-.
Coordinator for Asia Reimburseable
DeveiopmentP o g r a m
AIDIRDP
Washington, D.C. 20523
KRCIL, Chester
, Research Group
Conoco Coal Development Co.
Library, Pennsylvania 15129 .,
4121831-6666
KREKELS, J. Th. C.
Project Manager
N.E.O.M. BV
P.O. Box 17 6130 AA Sittard
The Netherlands
KRISCHKE, Hermann G.
Dipl. -Iug., Project Manager. '
. Ruhrkohle Oel Und Gas GmbH
Gleiwitzer Platz 3
Bottrop FRG 4250
02047112-1-0417
KRISHNAN, Radha P.
Development Staff Member
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Bldg. 9201-3, MS-2, P.O. Box Y
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37803
6151574-0361
KU, Anthony C: LaPIERRE , John L .
Engineer Patent Attorney
General Electric Company J. Ray McDermott & Company, Inc.
P.O. Box 43 Patent Department, Room 1460
Schenectady, New York 12301 1010 Common Street
5181385-0640 P.O. Box 60035
New Orleans, Louisiana 70160
KULLENDORFF, Anders 5041587-5719
Doctor
Stal-lava1 Turbin AB LAPPLE, Walter C.
S-612 20 Finspang Sweden Research Specialist
Babcock & Wilcox Company
KUWATA, Masayoshi Alliance Research Center
Dr.-Engineer 1562 Breson Street
General Electric Company Alliance, Ohio 44601
P. 0. Box 43 216/821-9110
Schenectady, New York 12301
5161385-3193 LARGE, J.F.
Professor '
LACKEY, M.E. Universite de Compiegne
Engineer B. P ; 233
Oak Ridge National Laboratory 60206 Compiegne France
P.O. Box Y
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37803 LAUGHLIN, Robert D.
6151574-0274 Director, Bureau of Scientific and
Technological Development
LaMARCHE, Normand R. Pennsylvania Department of Commerce
Project Engineer 402 South Office Building
General Electric Company Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17120
1 River Road 23-352 7171787-4147
Schenectady, New York 12345
5181385-7454 LEE, sheidon H.D.
Chemical Engineer
LAMBECK, Klaus Argonne National Laboratory
Researcher I11 9700 S. ass Avenue
Ohio Department of Energy Argonne, Illinois . 60439
30 East Broad Street, 34th Floor 3121972-439s
Columbus, Ohio 43215
6141466-8277 LEE, Yam Yee
Doctoral Candidate, Department
LAND, Malcolm L. of Chemical Engineer
Consulting Engineer Massachusetts Institute of Technology
5400 North Ocean Boulevard Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33308 6171253-4547
3051785-1584
LeGASSIE, Roger W. A.
LANDON, T.S. U.S. Department of Energy
Project Engineer Room 68065
Wheeling-Pittsburgh Stccl Corp. Wasl~it~gton,
D.C. 20585
1134 Market Street
Wheeling, West Virginia 26003 LEIBRECHT, Robert J.
Senior Engineer
LANE, G.J. Conoco, Incorporated
Process Engineer P.O. Box 2197
Fluidised Combustion Contractors Ltd. Houston, Texas 77001
Sussex House, London Road 7131965-1069
East Grinstead, Sussex
RH19 1UM England (0342) 27144
LENCIONI, Frank LIONETTI, Thomas A.
Product Development.Engineer Process Design Engineer
Vapor Corporation TEXACO
6420 West Howard Street Box 52332
Chicago, Illinois 60648 Houston, Texas 77052
312/NE-1-9200 713/225-2233

LEON, Albert M. LIPARI, Peter F.

Director, Thermal Products Head Advisor, Power Techn. Section
Technology . Stone 6 Webster Engineering Corp:
Dorr-Oliver Incorporated 245 Summer Street
77 Havemeyer Lane Boston, Massachusetts
Stamford, Connecticut 06904 6171973-5536.
203/358-3834
LIPPERT, Thomas
LEOPOLDO, Massirnilla Engineer, R6D
Professor Westinghouse
University of Naples 1310 Beulah Road
Piazzale Tecchio, Naples, Italy Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15235
018-667225 4121256-3985

LETHBRIDGE, G .D . LIU, Ke-Tien . :

Manager, Thermal Engineering Dept. Senior Research Engineer
Nova Scotia Power Corporation ' . Gulf Research 6 Development
Box 910 Company
Halifax Nova Scotia B3J 2W5 P. 0. Drawer 2038 .
902/424-7890 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230
4121665-6590
LEWIS, James A.
Senior Engineer LOCKLIN, David W.
Babcock and Wilcox Company Projects Manager
P.O. Box 835 Battelle-Columbus
Alliance, Ohio 44601 505 King Avenue
2161821-9110 ' Columbus, Ohio 43201
6141424-4875
LIANG, David T.
Project Engineer LOOP, ~ichard
Department of Chemical Engineering Program Specialist
Queen's University EGSG Idaho, Incorporated
Kingston, Ontario P.O. Box 1625
Canada K7L 3N6 Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415
6131547-6978 2081526-0350

LINDQUIST, Stephen 'LOUDIN, Kyle

Engineer
Riley Stoker Corporation
P.O. Box 543
Worcester, Massachusetts 00613
6171852-7100 .
LINDQVIST, Oliver
Chalmers University of Technology
Department of Inorganic Chemistry
S-412 96 Goteborg Sweden
LIEM, Altert J.
Research Scientist
DOMTAR Incorporated .
Trans Canada Highway 40
Senneville, Quebec, Canada
514/457-6810
Senior Technologist
Babcock 6 Wilcox Company
Research Division
1562 Beeson Street
Alliance, Ohio 44601
2161821-9110
LOUZADA, Emile G.
Scientific Office .
Netherlands Embassy
4200 Linnean Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20008
202/966-0720
 LOVELL, Barry J. McCOY, Daniel E.
Advanced Projects Engineer Chief Engineer
Brown Boveri Turbomachinery E. Keeler Company
711 Anderson Avenue North 238 West Street
Saint Cloud, Minnesota 56301 Williamsport, Pennsylvania 17701
6121255-5305 7171326-3361

LOWELL, Elbert F. McDONALD, D.B.

General Manager, ESPD
General Electric Company
One River Road
Schenectady, New York 12345
5181385-5263
Deputy Project Manager
Rust Engineeering Company
P. 0. Box 587
Oak Ridge, Tennessee- 37830
6151576-7511

LUTES, Ian G. McKEE, David E.

Foster Wheeler Boiler Corp.
110 South Orange Avenue
Livingston, New Jersey 07039
2011533-1100
LYNCH, Joseph R.
Manager, Power Engineering
Aluminum Company of America
1501 Alcoa Building
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15317
4121553-3624
LYONS, Carl J.
Associate Director
Consultant Supervisor
E.I. du Pont de Nemours 6 Company
Engineering Department
Wilmington, Delaware 19898
302/366-4816
McNEESE, L.E.
Fossil Energy Program Director
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Post Office Box X
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
6151574-7456
MACIEJEWSKI, Edward T. '

Battelle Memorial Institute Mechanical Engineer

505 King Avenue Kennedy Van Saun Corporation
Columbus, Ohio 43201 . Railroad Street
6141424-7368 . Danville, Pennsylvania 17821
7171275-3050
MacKAY, G. David
Director, Centre for Energy MAIMONI, Arturo
Studies, N.S.T.C. Lawrence Livermore Laboratories
P.O. Box 1000 P. 0. Box 808
Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 2x4 Livermore, California 94550
9021429-8300 415/422-8575
MacLEAN, Jack MALLIAH, K.T.U.
Vice President, Operations Manager Engineering 6 Development Manager
Wyandot Dolomite, Incorporated Fossil Energy Development Dept.
P.O. Box 126 County Road 99 Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd.
Carey, Ohio 43316 Tiruchirapalli, India
4191396-7641
MANAKER, Arnold M.
MacNETT,ld, J .M. Project Manager
Senior Power Engineer AFBC Demo Plant and Technical Support
Stone 6 Webster Engineering Corp. Tennessee Valley Authority
P.O. Box 533 1020 Chestnut Street, Tower 11
Rivesville, West Virginia 26588 Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401
304/278-7117 615/755-3571
MCCLUNG, James D . MARKOWSKY, James J .
Assistant Project Manager Section Head, Analytical
PFBC, M.E.T.C. Research 6 Development
U.S. Department of Energy American Electxic Power
P. 0. Box 880 Service Corporation
Morgantown, West Virginia 26505 Two Broadway
3041599-7249 New York, New York 10004
MARTENS, H.J.F.A.
Research Engineering,
Technische Hogeschool
P.O. Box 5055, 2600 GB Delft
The Netherlands
MASON, Clark A.
Staff Engineer Energy Group
The Rust Engineering Company
P. 0. Box 101
Burmingham, Alabama 35201
2051254-4108
MATHERS, W. G.
Manager, Design ~n~ineering
Turbo Products Division
Ingersoll-Rand Company
Phillipsburg, New Jersey 08865
2011859-7902 1
'MATHISEN, Ratner
Swedish State Power Board
MATTHEWS. Frank
Section Manager
Combustion Engineering Inc.
1000 Prospect Hill Road
Windsor, Connecticut 06095
2031688-1911
MATULEVICHUS, Edward
Engineering Associate
Exxon Research 6 Engineering
P. 0. Box'8
Linden, New Jersey 07026
2011474-2443
MAYFIELD, Manville J.
Projects Manager, FBC
Tennessee Valley Authority
1020 Chestnut Street, Tower I1
Chattanoog, Tennessee 37401
6151755-3571
MEI, Joseph S.
Mechanical Engineer
Morgantown Energy Technology Ctr.
U.S. Department of Energy
P. 0. Box 880
Morgantown, West Virginia 26505
3041599-7409
MELTON, Joe B.
Mining Division Engineer
Reynolds Metals Company
6601 West Broad Street
Richmond, Virginia 23261
8041281-4744
MEYER, Willy
Project Manager
Saarberg ERG
Saarberg, Triererstr. 1
D 66 Saarbrucken FRG
.FRG 681-4053698
MICHAUD, Gene
Section Manager, Chemical Engineering
Babcock 6 Wilcox Company
P.O. Box 835
Alliance, Ohio 44601
2161821-9110
MILLER, Edward
General Manager
Foster-Miller Associates
795 Oak Ridge Turnpike
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
6151482-5000
,
MILLER, Gabriel
Associates Professor
New York University . . '
Washington Square'
New York, New York 10012
2121598-2471
MILLER, Richard H.
President
Valley Forge ~aboratories
6 Berkeley Road
Devon, Pennsylvania 19333
2151688-8517
MILLER, Shelby A.
Senior Chemical Engineer
Argonne National Laboratory
Chemical Engineering Division 205
Argonne, Illinois 60439
3121972-7552
'MINNER, Gene L.
Technical Staff
Energy Incorporated
P. 0. Box 736
Idaho Falls, Idaho 83401
20815'24-1000
MINNICK, L. John
Consultant
Box 271
Plymouth Meeting, PA 19462
2151687-1167
MIX, Thomas
Consultant
Wormser Engineering, ~ncor~orated
212 South Main Street
Middleton, Massachusetts 01949
6171777-3060
-.
 MODRAK, T.M.
Group Supervisor
-Dabcock & Wilcox Company
1562 Beeson Street
Alliance, Ohio 44601
216/821-9110
MOGUL, J .
' Director, Materials and
Process Engineering
Curtiss-Wright Corporation
One Passaic Street
Wood-Ridge. New Jersey 07075
2011777-2900
MOL, S. G. J.
She11-The Hague
Y. 0 . Box 162
2501AN, The Hague
The Netherlands
MONTAGNA, John C,.
Senior Research Engineer
Gulf Research 6 Development Co.
P. 0. Drawer 2038
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230
4121665-5876
MOODY, Jack R.
Associate Geologist
Kentucky Geological Survey
311 Breckenridge Hall
University of Kentucky
Lexington, Kentucky 40506
6061258-5863
MOORE, Shuman R.
Service Engineer
Foster Wheeler Corporation
110 South Orange Avenue
Livingston, New Jersey 07039
2011533-3455
MORHOUS, Ralph C.
Principal Fossil Engineer
Power Authority New York State
10 Columbus Circle
New York, New York 10019 .
2121397-2959
MORI, Shigekatsu
Associate Professor
Nagoya Institute of Technology
hkiso, Showa, Nagoya
Japan
0521732-2111
MORROW, A.J.
Associate Partner
Preece Cardew 6 Rider
Paston House
165 Preston Road
Brighton, Sussex,
United Kingdom BNl 6AF
507-131
MOSKOWITZ, Selmour
.Director, Energy Systems
Curtiss Wright Corporation
One Passaic Street
Wood-Ridge, New Jersey 07075
2011777-2900
MOZZU, Martin A., Jr.
Manager, Energy Engineering
American Standard Incorporated
40 West 40th Street
New York, New York 10018
212/840-5459
MUCHUNAS, Peter J .
PFBC Program Manager
U.S. Department of Energy
12th 6 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, D.C.
202/633-9101
MUELLER, Klaus W.
Principal Engineering Associate
Stauffer Chemical Company
Livingstone Avenue
Dobbs Ferry, New York 10522
9141693-1200
MUKHERJEE, D.K.
Manager, Gas Turbine
and Development TC-E
BBC Brown, Boveri & Company Ltd.
CH 5401 Baden, Switzerland
MULLEN, John F.
Manager, Market Planning
Curtiss-Wright Corporation
, 1 Passaic Street
Wood-Ridge , New Jersey 07075
2011777-2900
MURPHY, Andrew J.
Project Manager
Acurex Corporation
Route 1, Box 423
Morrisville, North Carolina 27709
919/781-9704
MUSTANS IR, Ali
Struthers Thermo-Flood Corporation
P.O. Box 753
Winfield, Kansas 67156 .
3161221-4050
MYCOCK, John
Manager of Source Testing and
Pilot Studies'
ETS, Incorporated
3140 Cl~aparralDrive, S.W. '
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
7031774-8999
MYLES, K.M.
Argonne National Laboratory
9700 South Cass Avenue
Argonne, Illinois 60439
3121972-4329
NACK, Herman
Program Manager . . . :'-
Battelle Columbus ~aboratories
505 King Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43201
6141424-4998
NAGARAJAN, V .
Research Scientist
Battelle-Columbus
505 King Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43224
6141424-4446
NAKAZAWA, M.
Manager
Sumitomo Corporation of AMR
345 Park Avenue
New York, New York ,10022
2121935-4192
NAMIKI, T.
Senior Engineer
Marunouchi 2-Chome
Chiyoda-ku Tokyo 100 Japan
031455-5711
NEAL, John
U.S. Department of Energy
Washington, D.C. 26505
NEWBERRY, T. Warren
Mechanical Engineer
Tennessee Valley Authority
1020 Chestnut Street, Tower I1
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401
6151755-3571
NEWBY, Richard A.
Principal Engineer
Westinghouse Electric
1310 Beulah Road
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15235
4121256-5084
NEWTON, George J.
Lovelace - ITAI
P. 0. Box 5890
Albuquerque, New Mexico 87115
5051844-2409
NGUYEN, Xuan T.
Research Engineer
Domtar, Incorporated
Trans Canada Highway 40
Senneville, Quebec, Canada
4161457-6810
NILSSON, Mats
Stal-lava1 Turb,in,AB
S-612 20 Finspong Sweden
0122/81000
NORCROSS, William R.
Program Manager
Combustion Engineering, Incorporated
1000 Prospect Hill Road
Windsor, Connecticut 06095
2031688-1911
NORDH, L .
Project Engineer
Maskinaffaren Generator, A.B.
Box 95
S-433-01 Partille, Sweden
NORTON, Richard C .
Assistant Manager, Corp. Development
Stone 6 Webster Engineering Corp.
245 Summer Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02107
6171973-5460
NUYT, Gary M.
Mechanical Engineer
Tennessee Valley Authority
400 Commerce Avenue, WlOB91
Knoxvi'lle, Tennessee 37902
6151532-4384
O'CONNELL, Lawrence
Project Engineer
American Electric Power
Two Broadway
New York, New York 10004 , .
2121440-9063
O'CONNOR, Francis J.
Regional Manager
CE-Air Preheater 6.
3 Corporate Square
Atlanta, Georgia 30329
4041636-5953
O'DONOVAN, William C.
District Sales Manager
Riley Stoker Corporation
11750 Chesterdale Road
Cincinnati, Ohio 45246 . ,
5131771-9522
0' HANLON, David
Electricity Supply Board
Stevens Court
18 to 21 Stevens Green
Dublin 2, Ireland
OLIVER, Earl D.
Program Manager, Flue Gas Treating
SRI International
333 Ravenswood Avenue
Menlo Park, California 94025
4151326-6260
OLOFSSON, Jan
Department of Steam Engineering
Chalmers University of Technology
S-421 96 Goteborg, Sweden ;
: Box 910
. . ,
OLSSON, Erik - 9 '
Doc tor
Stal-Lava1 ~urgin'AB
S-612 20,Finspong, Sweden
0122/81000 ,
OSTERMANN, Lawrence G.
Manager, Energy Project Development
General Electric Company
777 14th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005
20216374295
PACKER, Charles M.
Staff Scientist
Lockheed Palo Alto
Research Laboratory
3251 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, California 94304
415/493-4411
PANICO, Salvatore
Mechnical Engineer Specialist
Burns 8 Roe Services Corporation
Ford Plant, Building 13
Franklin & Union Streets
Alexandria, Virginia 22314
7031546-1729
. .
PAPA, P.A.
Principal Energy Conservation Engr.
American Cyanamid Company
Berdan Avenue
Wayne, New Jersey 07470
2011831-3924 . 6200 Oaktree Boulevard
PAPIC, M.M.
Planning Engineer
British Columbia Hydro
555 West Hastings Street
British Columbia.
6041663-2761
PARADIS, Steve ' 9161440-3375
Senior Pioposal ~ n ~ i n e e r .
Riley Stoker Corporation .
P.O. Box 547
Worcester, Massachusetts 01613
6171852-7100
PARK, Dalkeun
Graduate Student
Oregon'State University
Corvallis, Oregon 97331
PARKER, J.A.
Manager Thermal Production
Nova Scotia Power Corporation
Halifax, Nova ~ c d t i a833 2W5
9021424-5650
PARKER, Richard
Research Manager .
Air Pollution ~ e c h n o l o ~ y.Inc.
,
4901 Morena Boulevard, Bldg. 400
San Diego, California 92117
7141272-0050
PATEL, J. G.
Associate Director .
Institute of Gas Technology
3424 South State Street
Ghicegn, Illinois 60616
3121567-3759
PATERSON, A.H.J.
Research Associate
University of British Columbia
c/o Chemical Engineering Dept.
2075 Wesbrook Mall
Vancouver, B.C. V6T 1W5
6041228-5767
PATTERSON, James G. Jr.
Chemical Engineer
Tennessee Valley ~ u t h o r i t ~
1120 CST2
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401
6151755-6531
PATTERSON, Robert M.
Process Engineer
Davy McKee Corporation
Independence, Ohio 44131
2161524-9300
PENG, Kingston F.
Mechanical Engineer
Corps of Engineers
650 Capitol Mall, SPKPO-T
Sacramento, California 95814
PERLSWEIG, Michael
Engineer
U.S. Department of Energy
Mail Stop E-178
Washington, D.C. 20022
3011353-2843
,
 PORTER, James H: . . .
PETERSEN, Volker ,.
Lurgi Chemie & Huettentechnik President ... . . .
,Gervinusstrasse 17-19 Energy and Environmental Engrg.
6000 Frankfurt 1 675 Massachusetts Avenue
West Germany ' Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
6171491-3157
PETERSON, Charles H.
Senior Engineer POTTERSON,. S .T.
Westinghouse Electric Company , Senior Technical Consultant
Beulah Road, Building 501 ' . Babcock & Wilcox Company
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15235 . P.O. Box 2423 .
,

4121256-5178 - N. Canton, Ohio 44720

,2161494-7610
'

PHILLIPS, Henry
President '.POWER, A. E. . . ,

Foster Wheeler Development Corp. District Sales Manager

110 South Orange Avenue Riley Stoker Corporation
. . 932 .Park Square Building
Livingston, New.Jersey 08840
2011533-3652 Boston, Massachusetts 02116
,6171542-0861
PILI;AI, .Krishna K.
Fluidisation Engineer
NCB; Coal Utilisation Research Lab,
PRETO, Fernando
.Graduate Student
. I .
. .
Randalls Road, Letherhead . Chemical Engineer , .
. .
Surrey, England Queen's .University Kingston, Ontario,
Canada

. .
PISTONE, Luigi
Combustion Engineer
Assoreni-PropICar ' ..
K7L .3N6
6131547-5579 , . ..
I

,
.

.
via Fabiani . . PREUIT, Lyn
S.Donato Mil, Italy 20097 Project Scientist . ,I.,

021535-3816 . . Combustion Power Company : ;aL.

1346 Willow Road

: PODOLSKI, Walter F. . . Menlo Park,.California 94025 . . . . . :c!.
Argonne.Nationa1 Laboratory 41513244744 . ..
4':

!I

9700 South Cass Avenue > .-

. . Argonne, 111.inois 60439 . RAFAEL, Aruth .
3121972-7558 ' Manager
Deutsche Babcock AG
POERSCH, ~ e r n e r P..O. Box 100347-48
. Dipl'.-1ng. 4200 Oberhsusen 1
Abteilungsleiter Ent. Versuch West Germany
Babcock-BSH AG 2081833-3684
Parkstr. 29; Postfach 4+6
4150 Krefeld ,11 West Germany RAGLAND, Kenneth W. .
021511448-292 .Department of Mechanical
. .
Engineering
POLAGYE, Michael E. University of Wisconsin
Foster Wheeler Boiler Corp. Madison, Wisconsin 53706 . . . .
110 South Orange Avenue '6081263-5963 .
Livingston, New Jersey 07039 . . .
2011533-1100 RAJAN, ~ u r i
Assistant Professor
POPE, Michael . Dept. of Thermal & ~nvironmental ~ n ~ r ~ .
Chief Executive 0f.ficer . Coal '~esearchCenter .
Pope, Evans and Robbins, Inc. Southern Illinois University . .
1133 Avenue of the Americas . . .Carbondale, Illinois 62901
New York, New' York 10036 6181536-2396
2121730-5888
 RASMUSSEN, George RICHARDS, Thomas J .
Program D i r e c t o r . P r o j e c t Engineer
Energy Incorporated C a t e r p i l l e r T r a c t o r Company
P. 0 . Box 736 Research Department TC-E
Idaho F a l l s ; Idaho 93401 P e o r i a , I l l i n o i s 61629
7081524-1000 3091578-6816

RASOR, J . B. RICKMAN, W.S.

C h i e f , M i l i t a r y Const. Division Manager
USAF Regional C i v i l Engineer Head-End Operations Branch
526 T i t l e B u i l d i n g General Atomic Company'
30 Pryor S t r e e t , S.W. P.O. Box 81608
A t l a n t a , Georgia 30303 San Diego, C a l i f o r n i a 92138
4041221-6037 71'11455-3860

READ, Ronald C. RIDDINGTON, John W.

Manager, F a c i l i t i e s Energy
Management
I n t e r n a t i o n a l Harvester
401 North Michigan Avenue
Chicago, I l l i n o i s 60611
S e n i o r S u p e r v i s i n g Engineer
Burns & Roe, Incorporated
496 Kinder Kamack Road'
O r a d e l l , New J e r s e y 07649
2011265-2000

REDING, John T. ROBERTS, Alan G .

Research Engineer S e n i o r P r o j e c t Manager
Dow Chemical NCB Coal U t i l i s a t i o n Research Lab.
Building A-2303 c / o BCURA L t d .
F r e e p o r t , Texas 77541 Randall 's Road
7131238-0305 Leatherhead, England

REED, Kenneth A. ROBERTS, Richard

P r o j e c t Manager Manager, PFB Programs
F o s t e r Wheeler Energy Corp. General E l e c t r i c Company
110 South Orange Avenue One River Road
Livingston, New J e r s e y 07039 Schanectady, New York 12345
2011533-3008 5181385-5713

REED, Robert R . ROBERTSON, Archie

Manager Research A s s o c i a t e .
Pope, Evans and Robbins, Inc F o s t e r Wheeler Development Corp.
320 King S t r e e t 12 Peach Tree H i l l Road
Alexandria, V i r g i n i a 22314 L i v i n g s t o n , New J e r s e y 07039
7031549-2884 2011533-3647

REH, Lothar ROBISIN, Deborah J .

D r . -1ng. Chemical Engineer
Lurgi-Gesell-schaften General Motors Corporation
G e r v i n u s s t r . 17/19 General Motors Technical Center
D 6000 Frankfurt(Main12, Germany Warren, Michigan 48090
0611/157(1) 3131575-1040

REID, William T. ROBL, Thomas L.

Consultant S e n i o r Geologist
2470 Dorset Road I n s t i t u t e f o r Mining Minerals
Columbus, Ohio 43221 Research
6141488-2055 U n i v e r s i t y of Kentucky
Lexington, Kentucky 40506
RICE, Richard L. 6061252-5535
P r o j e c t Engineer
U.S. Department of Energy RODGERS, James E .
P. 0 . Box 880 . Manager, Engineering
Morgantown, West V i r g i n i a 26505 Monsanto Company
3041599-7164 ' 800 N . Lindbergh Boulevard
S t . Louis, Missouri 63166
3141694-6650
RODGERS, Larry .;.:. , RUKES, Bert
KVB, Incorporated Dr.-1ng. .. .
776 Bush Court Kraftwerk Union AG, ..
Columbus, Ohio 43229 Hammerbacher Str. 12+14
6141436-7060 8520 Erlangen, West Ggrmany
09131/183108
ROLLBUHLER, R. James
Combustion Research Project Engineer RUSH, Thomas, 111
Lewis Research Center - NASA Graduate Student
M.S. 60-6 Chemistry Department
Cleveland, Ohio 44135 Howard University
2161433-4000 Washington, D.C. 20059
2021636-6863
ROONEY, John
Electricity Supply Board SADDY, M.
Stevens Court Senior Engineer
18-22 Stevens Green Centro de Tecl~nuloyiaPromon-CTP
Dublin 2, Ireland Praia do Flamengo, 154-120 Floor
Rio de Janeiro, RJ-Brazil 22210
ROONEY, Michael S. 0211205-0112
Production Engineer
Conoco, Inc. SADLER, Cynthia K.
P.O. Box 2226 Mechanical Engineer . ,

Corpus Christi, Texas 78403 Tennessee Valley Authority

5121884-0421 1020 Chestnut Street, Tower If
Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401
ROSE, Jerry G. 6151755-3571.
Associate Professor
Department of Civil Engineering SADOWSKI, Dick
University of Kentucky Industrial Sales Manager -
Lexington, Kentucky 40506 Riley Stoker Corporation
6061258-4977 Box 547
Worcester, Massachusetts 01613
ROSS, Carl F. 6171852-7100
Senior Training Specialist
Combustion Engineer, Incorporated SAGE, Warnie L .
9538-6BB Chief Equipment Engineer
1000 Prospect Hill Road Stearns-Roger
Windsor, Connecticut 06095 . 4500 Cherry Creek Drive
2031688-1911 Box 5888
Denver, Colorado 80217
ROTHROCK, Ron 303/692-4138
Marketing Analyst
Catalytic, Incorporated SALA, Chuck
1500 Market Street Construction Supervisor
Centre Square Pope Evans 6 Robbins
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19038 1133 Avenue of Americas
2151864-8793 New York, New York 10036
2121730-5888
RUBOW, Lynn N.
Senior Engineer SARGENT, William S.
Gilbert Associates, Incorporated Manager, Market Research
Box 1498 Lodge-Cottrell/Dresser
Reading, Pennsylvania 19603 601 Jefferson
2151775-2600 Houston, Texas 77002
7131972-2153
RUHL, M. John
Engineering Manager ' SAROFIM, Adel F.
Thermal Processing, Inc. Professor of Chemical Engineering
507 Willow Springs Road Massachusetts Institute of Technology
LaGrange, Illinois 60525 77 Massachusetts Avenue
3121354-8771 Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139
6171253-4566
 SAXENA, S.C. SEVCIK, VACLAV, J.
Professor Manager, Energy Conversion Project
University of Illitlois at Chicago Argonne National Laboratory
Box 4348 9760 South Cass Avenue, ~ l d ~
10.
Chicago, Illinois 60680 Argonne, Illinois 60439
3121996-2341 3121972-3058
. .
SCHAFEN, John B . SHACKLETON, Mike
Director Business Development Section Leader
Dresser Industries Incorporated Acruex Corporation
Power Systems Group 485 Clyde .Avenue
601 Jefferson Mt . ,View, California 94042
Houston, Texas 77002 '4151964-3200
7131972-3917
SHANG, Jer Yu
SCHMIDT, Linda .C. .. . Deputy Director
Foster Wheeler.Boiler Corp. . U.S. Department of Energy
: 110 South Orange Avenue .' ' ; P. 0. Box 880, Collins Ferry Road
Livingston, New Jersey 07039 . . ' , ., Morgantown, West Virginia 26506
2011533-1100 ' . . 3041599-7134
. .
. .
' SCHRECKENBERG, H. . . SHEARER, John A.
Gelsenberg AG Assistant Chemist
Uberseering 2 Argonne National Laboratory
Hamburg 60 2000 - . . ' 9700 South Cass Avenue
West Gergtany . Argonne, Illinois 60439
. ,
3121972-4378
SCHROPPE, .T.
Foster Wheeler Boiler 'core. SHERMAN, Arthur
110 South,Orange Avenue. Vice President, Research
Livingston, New Jersey 07039 ' . combustion Power Company
2011533-1100 ,. . . 1346 Willow Road
Menlo Park, California 94025
SCHULZ, Robert B: 4151324-4744
Research Engineer
, Chevron Research Company SHEVLIN, Thomas S.
576 Standard Avenue Specialist - .
Richmond, California 94802 . 3M '

4151237-4411 St. Paul, Minnesota 55101

. . 6121733-3884
SEBER, Ernest . .
Special Projects SHILLING, Norman
Struthers Wells corporation' . ' . Engineering Consultant
P.O. Box'8 Buell ECD, Envirotech
Warren, Pennsylvania 16365 . . 200 North 7th Street
8141726-1000 Lebanon, Pennsylvania 17042
717/272-2001
SECKINGTON, Blair R.
Process Studies Engineer SHIMODA, Elwyn
Ontario Hydro Research Associate
700 University Avenue Conoco Incorporated
Toronto, Ontario, Canada P. 0. Box 1267
M5G 1x6 Ponca City, Oklahoma 74601
4161592-5193 4051767-3195

SESHAMANI, V. SHORT, James C .

Manager, Boiler Development Sales Product Manager
Foster Wheeler Boiler Corp. Fuller Company
110 South Orange Avcnuc 2040 Avenue C
Livingston, New Jersey 07933 Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18032
2011533-2716 2151264-6561
 . .
S IMAN-TOV, Moshe SPAZIANI, John
Engineer Specialist, Sec. Head Contract Manager
ORNL, VCC-ND 20MW AFBC Pilot
Box X, Building 1000 Babcock 6 Wilcox Company
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 20 So. Van Buren Avenue
6151574-6515 Barberton, Ohio 44203
2161753-4511
SISKIND, William
Program Manager SPENGLER, Charles J.
U.S. Department of Energy Fellow Engineer
Germantown, Maryland Westinghouse Electric Corporation
3011353-2800 R6D Center, 1310 Beulah Road
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15235
SITTHIPHONG, Norkun 4121256-3622
Graduate Student
Oregon State University SQUIRES, Arthur M.
Corvallis, Oregon 97331 Vilbrantd Prof. Chemical Engineer
Department Chemical Engineer
SLAUGHTER, Bill Virginia Tech
Manager, FBC Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
EPRI 7031961-5972 .
3412 Hilview Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94306 STATNICK, Robert M.
4151855-2424 Senior Staff Engineer
U.S. Environmental Protection, .
SMITH, Carl B. : Agency
Department Head Washington, D.C. 20460
Union Carbide Corporation-ORNL 2021755-0206
P.O. Box X, Building 1000
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 STARKWEATHER, James
'6151574-6408 Manager, Energy ~echnology
St. Regis Paper Company
SMITH, M. Richard W. Nyack, New York 10994 . '

.>
'

Engineering Supervisor 9141624-3000'

Bechtel National, Incorporated
50 Beale Street STELMAN, David
San Francisco, California 94941 Energy Systems Group
4151768-1053 Rockwell International
8900 DeSoto Avenue
SODERBERG, C. Richard Canoga, California 91304
Assistant Group Director 2131341-1000
Foster-Miller Associates
350 Second Avenue STEPHENS, Leonard
'Wattham, Massachusetts 02154 Mechanical Engineer
6171890-3200 PSAF
HQ AFESCIDEMM
SOETERBROEK, John C. Tyndall AFB, Florida 32403 '

Staff Manager Utilities 9041283-6361

DSM
Kerenshofweg 100 STEWART, James F.
6167 A Geleen Staff Engineer
The Netherlands . . Conoco Incorporated
P. O..Box 2197
SOLLISH, David B. Houston, Texas 77001
Customer Training Specialist 7131965-1252
Combustion Engineering
9538-6BB
1000 Prospect Hill Road
Windsor, Connecticut 06095
2031688-1911
STEWART, Robert D.
Senior Development Engineer
Foster Wheeler:!Energy Corp.
110 South Orange Avenue
Livingston, New Jersey 07044
2011533-2422
SULZBERGER, Virginia C.
Advisor
Exxor~Enterprises Incorporated
224 Park Avenue
Florham Park, New Jersey 07932
2011765-4304

STEYNIS, B. Th. SUMARIA, Veni

Manager Research Scientist
Stork KAB VAYCOR
Industriestraat 1 300 Unicorn Park Drive
P. 0. Box 20, 7550 GB Woburn, Massachusetts 01801
Hengelo, The Netherlands 6171933-6805

STIL, J.H. SUN, Colette C.

She11-The Hague Senior Engineer .
P.O. Box 162 Research 6 Development Center
2.501 AN The Hague Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15235
The Netherlands 4121256-7309

STONG, Jack V. .SVENSSON, G.

Chief of Project Engineering Chief Engineer
Brown Bowers Turbomachinery Maskinaffaren Generator, A.B.
711 Anderson Avenue Box 95
St. Cloud, Minnesota 56301 S-433-01 Partille, Sweden
6121255-5474
SWANSON, Morris A.
STOUT, W. L. Supervising Engineer
Research Soil Scientist 'Caterpillar Tractor Company
USDAISEA 100 N.E. Adams, Tech Center
PLT Science Division-WVU Peoria, Ellinois 61629
Morgantown, West Virginia 26506 3091578-6960
3041293-2795
SWIFT, William M.
STRICKLAND, Larry D. Chemical Engineer
Project Manager Argonne National Laboratory
U.S. Department of Energy 9700 S. Cass Avenue, Building 205
P. 0 . Box 880 Argonne, Illinois 60439
Morgantown, West Virginia 26505 3121972-4384
3041599-7494
TADDEI, Otto
STRINGER, John Director of Marketing
Program Manager Lurgi Corporation
EPRI 377 Route 17
3612 Hillview Avenue Hasbrouck Heights, NJ 07604
Palo Alto, California 94303 2011288-6450
6151855-2672
TANG, John T .Y .
STKINGFELLOW, Thouas E : Senior Research Engineer
Operations Manager Babcock 6 Wilcox Company
Pope, Evans 6 Robbins, Inc. P.O. Box 835
P.O. Box 533 Alliance, Ohio 44601
Rivesville, West Virginia 26588 2161821-9110
3041278-5315
TAYLOR,' T. E.
STROMBERG, Lars Senior Engineer
Technical Director Foster Wheeler Development Corp
Studsvik Energiteknik AB 12 Peach Tree Hill Road
S-61182 Nykoping L-ivingston,New Jersey 07039
Sweden . f 2011533-3675
0155/80000. ..
, -
THAU, Albert UHRIG, Robert E.
R6D Engineer Vice President
Power Authority of New York State Florida Power 6 Light
10 Columbus Circle, 17th Floor P. 0. Box 529100 . .
New York, New York 10019 Miami, Florida 33152
2121397-7632 3051552-3601

THOENNES , Clemens M. ..
UNDERKOFFLER, V S
Manager, Atmospheric Fluidized Senior Program Manager
Bed Programs Gilbert Associates
General Electric Company P. 0. Box 1498
2-519 Reading, Pennsylvania 19607
1 River Road 2151777-2600
Schenectady, New York 12345
5181385-5828 -URUG, H.
Chief Engineer
TTGNAC, Ln1.1;s L. Foster Wheeler Fra~lcaibir
Member of Technical Staff ,31 Rue Des Bourdonnais
Rocketdyne-Rockwell International Paris, France 75021
6633 Canoga Avenue 0112334432
Canoga Park, California 91304
2131884-2540 VAN BEEK, T.
~ a n a g e rMechanical
TOMITA, Minoru Engineering 6 Purchasing .
Chief of 3rd Scction, 3rd Division DSM Nieuwbouw
Government Industrial Development P.O. Box 10, 6160 . .
Laboratory, Hokkaido McGeleen, The Netherlands
2-17, ~sukisamu-~igashi, Toyohira-Ku
Sapporo, Japan 061-01 VAN BERCKELAER, D F..
001/851-0151 Energy Project Leader
Heineken Technisch Beheer
TRIVETT, Gordon S. Burgemeester Smeetsweg 1
Director, Environmental Assessment Zoe terwoude
N.S. Department of Environment The Netherlands
P.O. Box 2107,
Halifax, Nova Scotia B35 2x4 . VAN DEN BERG, D.J. ,

9021424-8600 Sales Manager

Ijs se lmonde BV
Verolme pchinefabriek
TROPER, James 3008 AB Rotterdam
Research Scientist P.O. Box 5079
Valley Forge Laboratories The Nethei-lands
6 Berkeley Road
Devon, Pennsy1vani.a 19333 VAN DER LINDEN, S.
2151688-8517 Director, Marketing
Curtiss Wright Power' Systems
TUNG, Shaoe a
Manager, Energy Conversion
Massachusetts Institute of
- One Passaic Street
Wood-Ridge, New Jersey 07078
2011777-2900
Technology
77 Massachusetts Avenue VANDERMOLEN, Robert
Cambridge, Massachusetts Marketing Manager, Research
Combustion Power Company
TUREK, David G. 1346 Willow Road
Chemical Engineer Menlo Park, California 94025
Science Applications, Inc . 4151304-4744
Chestnut Ridge Professional Bldg.
Morgantown, West Virginia 26505 VAN GASSELT, M.L.G.
3041599-7527 Manager Project Group Coal Technology
TNO Apeldoorn
P.O. Box 342, 7300 AH Apeldoorn
The Netherlands
 . VANMEURS, H.C.A. von KLEIN SMIA, William
Chief Co-Process Acknowledger Supervisor, Research Engineer
Shcll Internstionale Petroelum Sonthern California Edison Co.
P.O. Box 162, 2501,ANThe Hague P. 0. Box 800
. The Netherlands Rosemead, California 91770
2131572-2536
VEDAMURTHY, V. N.
Assistant Professor of VOSS, Kenneth E.
Mechanical Engineering Senior Research Chemist
~erarignarAnna Englehard Minerals 6 Chemicals Corp.
University of Technology Menlo Park
Madras-25, India Edison, New Jersey 08817
2011321-5146
VERHOEFF, F.
FBC Development Engineer VROOM, Henry
. . Stork KAB . . Service Engineer.
Industriestraat 1 Combustion Engineering, Inc.
' P.O. BOX 20, 7550 GB 1000fProspcct Hi.11 Road
Hcngclo,.The Netherlands Windsor, Connecticut 06095
2031688-1911
. . VAN 'T V E R W T , P.J.
Research Engineering Project WACHTLER, Frederick C.
Group Coal Technology . Foster Wheeler Boiler Corp.
. , TNO Apeldoorn 110 South Orange Avenue
'P'.O.Box 342, 7300 AH Apeldoorn Livingston, New Jersey 07039
" The Netherlands . 2011533-1100

VERSTEEGH, A.M. WALL, Clarence J.

'

Chief Coal Technology Manager, Technical Marketing

Project Department Support .
Energieonderzoek Centrum Nederland Dorr Oliver
P.O. Box 1, 1755 ZG Petten 77 Halemeger Lane
The Netherlands. Stamford, Connecticut 06904
2031358-3619
VILIAMAS, Virgil K.
Senior Engineer WANDREY, Robert E.
Babocks & Wilcox Company Project Engineer
1562 Beeson Street General Electric Company
Alliance, Ohio 44601 ICSE, Building 231352
2161821-9110 Schenectady, New York 12'345
. . 5181385-0820
VINES, S.N.
Associate Professor WAPNER, Phillip
University of Virginia Senior.Project Engineer
Thorton Hall . Gulf.Oi1 Company '
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 , 1720 South Bellaire Avenue
8041924-7779 Denver, Colorado -80222
3031758-1700
VIRR, Michael J.
Managing Director WARD, ~ l o y d
Stone Platt Fluidfire Manager, Washington Office
56 Second Avenue Curtiss-Wright Corporation
Pensnett Trading Estate . 905 Sixteenth Street, N.W.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, .UK Washington, D.C. ,20006
03841278566 2021638-2926

VOGEL, G. John WAREING, John J.

President Area Manager
' G.J:V. Corporation Air Preheater Company
. . 168 Chandler Avenue ' ' 10 High Street
Elmhurst, Illinois 60126
' Boston, ~assachusetts 02110
:. 3121834-9291 6171542-2001
 . .. . . ...
WATKINS, Nat WESLEY, David . '
Manager Senior Chemist : ,

3M Company Kentucky Center for. Energy ~esearchLab

3M Center 219-1 . P.O. Box 13015
St. Paul, Minnesota 5514U Lexington, Kentucky 40583
6121733'-2759 6061252-5535

WEAVER, Robert , ' WEST, Patricia B.

Project Engineer
Gilbert Associates
P. 0. Box 1498
Reading, Pennsylvania
2151775-2600
Environmental Engineer
Tennessee Valley Authority'
1000 Chestnut Street;Tower #2
19603 . Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401
6151755-6511
. .. j .

WEBB, Holmes A., Jr. WIECHULA, B. A.

Mechanical Engineer Engineering Associate
U.S. Department of Energy Imperial Oil Limited .
P. 0. Box 880, METC P. 0. Box 3004
Morgantown, West Virginia 26505 ,Sarnia, Ontario N7T7H5
3041599-7260 Canada
5191339-2275
WELLS, David
Senior Consultant . WIEMER, William
DuPont Staff Engineer ' "
I.-1369 NeraToom
Wilmington, Delaware 19898 The Hague
3021366-2180 'Holland

WELLS, J.W. ' WIENER, Stephen

Research Engineer Mechanical Engineer
Oak Ridge National ~ a b o r a t o r ~ Port Authority'of New Yorkl
Box X New Jersey
Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 One World Trade Center
6151574-6522 New York, New.York 10048
2121466-7099
WELLS, T.J., Jr.
Project Engineer WILKERSON, H. Joe
Stone 6 Webster Engineering Corp. Professor
P.O. Box 2325 .. University of Tennessee
Boston, Massachusetts 02107 , Mechanical 6 Aerospace Engineering,
Knoxville, Tennessee 37916 "

WELSHIMER, Jim 6151974-5139

Technical Sales Representative
National Lime 6 Stone Company
P.O. Box 120
Findlay, Ohio ,45840
4191422-4314
WEN, C. Y.
Professor 6 Chairman
Department of Chemical .
Engineering
West Virginia University . Chief, Industrial Development
Morgantown, West Virginia 26505
3041293-2111
WENGLARZ, Richard A.
Senior Engineer
Westinghouse R6D Center .
1310 Beulah Road
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania i5235
4121256-3253
WILIS, Paul ,
Project Engineer
British Columbia Hydro .
555 Wcst Hastings Street
Vancouver, British Columbia
V6B 4T6 ~ a n a d a - .
6041663-2194
WILLIS, D.. M.
Technology
National Coal Board .
Coal Research Establishment
Stoke Orchard, England
- 024267 3361
.
WILSON, Gary F.
Manager, Facilities Services
Chemical Group
The BF Goodrich Company
6100 Oak Tree Duuluvard
Cleveland, Ohio 44131
2161524-0200
 WILSON, John P. WORMSER, Alex
Director, Allied Products- President
Engineering and Construction Wormser Engineering Inc.
Anheuser-Bush Companies 212 South Main Street
721 Pestalozzi Street Middleton, Massachusetts 01949
St. Louis, Missouri 63118 6171777-3060
3141577-2137
WUNDER, Gregory E.
WILSON, Keith Sales Engineer
Project Engineer Foster Wheeler
Combustion Power Perimeter Center East
1346 Willow Road Atlanta, Georgia
Menlo Park, California 94025 4041393-1820
4151324-4744
WYKF, E. J.
WILSON, Mike Manager-Facilities
S/Manager Cumins Engine Company, Inc .
In-0-Ven Corporation 1000 Fifth Street
190 Sound Beach Avenue, Columbus, Indiana 47201
Old Greenwich, Connecticut 06878 8121379-5774
2031637-5931
YAN, T. Y.
WINBERG, steven E. Senior Research Associate
Field Service Engineer Mobil' Research and Development Corp.
Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation P. 0. Box 10L5
110 South Orange Avenue Princeton, New Jersey 08540
Livingston, New Jersey 07039 6091737-3000
2011533-1100
YANG, Ralph T.
WITHERS, Henry W. Associate Professor
Chemical Engineer State Univ. of New York at Buffalo
Tennessee Valley Authority . Department of Chemical Engineering
1020 Chestnut Street, Tower I1 Amherst, New York 14260
'

Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401 7161636-2331

6151755-3571
YANO, Y.
WOHLSTEIN, Michael S. Assistant Manager
. Sales Contract Manager Kawasaki Heavy Industries
Allen-Sherman-Hoff 1-35 Shimaya, Konohanaku
One Country View Road Osaka, Japan
Malvern, Pennsylvania 19355 Osaka-shi, Japan 554
2151647-9900 061461-8001

WOLOWODIUK, Walter YEAGER, Kurt E.

Manager, Applied Thermodynamics
Foster Wheeler Development Corp.
12 Peach Tree Hill Road
Livingston, New Jersey 07039
2011533-3639
WONG, Henry K.
Senior Service Engineer
Foster Wheeler Energy Corp.
110 South Orange Avenue
Livingston, New Jersey 07039
2011533-2448
WOOD, Ralph T.
Director
General Electric Company
1 River Road, P.O. Box 43
Schenectady, New York 12301
5181385-5122
Director, Coal Combustion Sys. Div
Electric Power Research Institute
3412 Hillview Avenue
Palo Alto, California 94303
4151855-2456
YIP, Harry H.
Senior Engineer
Head-End Operations Branch
General Atomic Company
P.O. Box 81608
San Diego, California 92138
7141455-3860
YT,VTSAKER, Ivar
General Engineer
Resource Applications
U.S. Department of Energy
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W
Washington, D.C. 20461
2021633-8366
YOUNG, Charles W. ZMOLA, Paul .C. !
Environmental Engineer ,
Director, Technical Liaison '
GUAITechnology Division Combustion ~n~ineeking :
Burlington Road 1101 15th Streeb; N.w..
Bedford, Massachusetts 01.730. Washington, D.C. 20005 .
6171275-5444 2021296-1240
YOUNG, William W. ZOLL, August H.
Struthers Thermo-Flood Corporation Manager, Inst. 6 Controls
P.O. Box 753 Curtiss-Wright Corporation
Winfield, Kansas 67156 One Passaic Street
3161221-4050 Wood-Ridge, New Jersey 07075 .
2011777-2900
ZAKKAY, Victor
Professor ZYLKOWSKI, Jerome R. '

New York University Project Manager

Washington Square Northern States.Power Company
New York, New York 10003 414 Nicollet Mall
212/598-2471 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401
612/330-6583
ZIELINSKI, Edward A.
Supervisor
Combustion Engineering, Inc.
1000 Prospect Hill Road
Windsor, Connecticut 06095
2031688-1911