Powermag200907 2 DL

BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY FOR THE GLOBAL GENERATION INDUSTRY
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
9

V
o
l
.

1
5
3

N
o
.

7
Vol. 153 No. 7 July 2009 www.powermag.com
Advanced Digital Control
Architectures Save Time
and Money
Designing an Ultrasupercritical
Steam Turbine
The Odd Couple:
Renewables & Transmission
Biomass Cofiring
Cleans Your Coal Plant
ELECTRIC POWER
Conference Reports
www.rentechboilers.com
This built-in engineering and production muscle will save you time and costs in
both installation and long term maintenance. Why not get boilers that are tough
enough to always make you look good? Take our factory tour and see for yourself
(and while in Abilene, well treat you to the best steak youve ever eaten!).
Our focus on quality produces RENTECH
boilers tough enough for any specs.
Fired Package Boilers / Wasteheat Boilers / Heat Recovery Steam Generators
Maintenance & Service Strategies / Boiler Repair Services / SCR and CO Systems
BOILERS, TEXAS TOUGH
CIRCLE 1 ON READER SERVICE CARD
July 2009
|
POWER www.powermag.com 1
www.powermag.com
TK
Established 1882 Vol. 153 No. 7 July 2009
On the cover
Image courtesy iStockphoto.com
COVER STORY: PLANT CONTROLS
28 Digital Networks Prove Reliable, Reduce Costs
Digital bus communications are a no-brainer: They save time, materials, and money
during construction and plant operation. This case study of Newmont Gold Minings
200-MW TS Power Plant provides details of the control architecture, equipment and
communication protocols selection, and many of the lessons learned during design,
construction, and commissioning.
SPECIAL REPORT
STEAM TURBINES
34 Designing an Ultrasupercritical Steam Turbine
One proven way to reduce carbon emissions today is to use the most efficient equip-
ment available. Coal-fired steam generation equipment operating at ultrasupercritical
steam conditions can deliver a net plant thermal efficiency of over 44%; efficiencies at
or above 48% are expected within the next decade.
FEATURES
ELECTRIC POWER 2009: WHERE THE GENCOS MEET
40 Power Industry Needs to Do a Better Job of Educating and Messaging
Heres what this years ELECTRIC POWER Conference keynote speaker and Power
Industry Executive Roundtable panelists said about cap and trade, NERC standards
compliance, the publics poor understanding of the industry, and more.
46 The Growing Role of Waste-to-Energy in the U.S.
ELECTRIC POWER included a preconference workshop on biomass fundamentals and
applications plus a conference session on biomass. As you can tell from the story in
this issue on biomass cofiring and another cofiring story online in COAL POWER (see
sidebar, next page), burning waste is a trend thats gaining momentum.
48 Carbon Control: The Long Road Ahead
At this years ELECTRIC POWER Conference, three sessions tackled issues related to
CO
2
policy and capture and sequestration technologies. Heres a look at some of the
challenges ahead.
52 Technology Could Deliver 90% Hg Reduction from Coal
Whereas CO
2
control technology is in its infancy, mercury control is poised for an ado-
lescent growth spurt. Removal percentages are headed higher than most might have
imagined was possible. Achieving them, however, wont be cheap or easy.
WELDING PROCESSES
58 Improved Filler Metal Enables Higher-Temperature Dissimilar Metal Welds
EPRI recently developed and sponsored the commercialization of a new filler metal.
Its first application is the fabrication of boiler tubes for American Electric Powers
ultrasupercritical John J. Turk, Jr. Power Plant.
TK
www.powermag.com POWER
|
July 2009 2
More than an oil. A business tool.
If you think of oil as a line item, or
simply an operating cost, perhaps its
time to think of it as something more:
an opportunity. Better lubricants can
smooth the way to maximized
productivity, reduced expenses and
less down time.
Which brings us to Mobil SHC. A full
family of scientically engineered
supreme-performance lubricants
designed to stay on the job 6 to 8
times longer than mineral oils in
severe conditions. Developed to
provide better protection of your
capital investment; extend machine
life; and reduce energy consumption.
All of which adds up to one thing:
increased productivity.
Mobil SHC products are endorsed
for use in over 5,800 applications by
more than 1,100 major equipment
builders around the world. Theyre
backed by state-of-the-art services
and technical support. And theyre
reason enough to rethink the role
lubricants play in your operation.
Dont just make it run. Make it y.
For more information on Mobil SHC,
go to mobilindustrial.com.
2
0
0
9

E
x
x
o
n

M
o
b
i
l

C
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
i
o
n
.

T
h
e

M
o
b
i
l

l
o
g
o
t
y
p
e
,

M
o
b
i
l

S
H
C

a
n
d

t
h
e

P
e
g
a
s
u
s

d
e
s
i
g
n

a
r
e

r
e
g
i
s
t
e
r
e
d

t
r
a
d
e
m
a
r
k
s

o
f

E
x
x
o
n

M
o
b
i
l

C
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
i
o
n

o
r

o
n
e

o
f

i
t
s

s
u
b
s
i
d
i
a
r
i
e
s
.

SHC
TRANSMISSION PLANNING
62 The Odd Couple: Renewables and Transmission
An industry analyst argues that a revolutionary approach to the generation and
transmission planning systemincluding new system operation policies and proce-
dureswill be required if the U.S. is to reach its ambitious renewable goals.
COFIRING BIOMASS
68 Biomass Cofiring: Another Way to Clean Your Coal
Biomass can contribute from 2% to 30% of the total heat input needed for generation,
thereby replacing a sizable portion of the typical coal supply. For that reason alone,
cofiring should be viewed as a serious strategy for reducing carbon emissions and
meeting a renewable portfolio standard.
MORE POWER STORIES ONLINE
Visit our online sister publicationsCOAL POWER (www.coalpowermag.com)
and MANAGING POWER (www.managingpowermag.com)for more industry
news, feature stories, and opinion. In the May/June COAL POWER:
Commercial Experience with Concrete-Friendly Mercury Sorbents
Better Combustion Airflow Monitoring at the Hunan Yiyang Power Plant
A New Era in Power Plant Control Performance
FirstEnergy Retools Coal Plant to Burn Biomass
and more
DEPARTMENTS
6 SPEAKING OF POWER
Our Integrity Is Not for Sale
8 GLOBAL MONITOR
8 Mitsubishi Wraps Up Development of J-Class Mega Turbine
8 Sweden Selects Site of First Permanent Spent Nuclear Fuel Repository
10 Ethiopia Completes Construction of Africas Tallest Dam
11 Qatar Starts Construction on Middle Easts Largest Power and Water Plant
13 Smart Turbine Blades to Improve Wind Power
14 Energy Storage Efforts Making Progress
15 PG&E Makes a Deal for Space-Based Power
16 POWER Digest
18 FOCUS ON O&M
18 How Company Size Affects NERC Compliance
18 Optimize Gas Turbine Performance Using Acoustic Simulation Software
23 Extreme Oil Changes
26 LEGAL & REGULATORY
Too Many Fingers in the Smart Grid Pie?
72 NEW PRODUCTS
80 COMMENTARY
Managing Solars Revenue Impact on Utilities
By Mike Taylor, director of research and education for the Solar Electric Power
Association.
13
Power plant turbines are built to run. But what if they could y?
New turbines are placing increased demands on oil. Productivity is at stake. And Mobil Industrial Lubricants has responded.
With Mobil DTE 700 and Mobil DTE 800. Both are specially formulated for demanding gas and steam turbine applications. And
designed to help the latest generation of high efciency turbines not just run, but y. Visit www.mobilindustrial.com for more.
2009 Exxon Mobil Corporation. The Mobil logotype and the Pegasus design are trademarks of Exxon Mobil Corporation or one of its subsidiaries.
|
July 2009 4
Now incorporating and
EDITORIAL & PRODUCTION
Editor-in-Chief: Dr. Robert Peltier, PE
480-820-7855, editor@powermag.com
Managing Editor: Gail Reitenbach, PhD
Senior Editor: Angela Neville, JD
Contributing Editors: Mark Axford; David Daniels; Bill Ellison, PE; Steven F. Greenwald;
Tim Hurst; Jim Hylko; Kennedy Maize; Douglas Smith; Dick Storm;
Dr. Justin Zachary
Senior Writer: Sonal Patel
Senior Designer: Leslie Claire
Senior Production Manager: Tracey Lilly, tlilly@accessintel.com
Marketing Manager: Jamie Reesby
ADVERTISING SALES
North American Offices
Southern & Eastern U.S./Eastern Canada/
Latin America: Matthew Grant, 713-343-1882, mattg@powermag.com
Central & Western U.S./Western Canada: Dan Gentile, 512-918-8075, dang@powermag.com
International Offices
UK/France/Benelux/Scandinavia: Peter Gilmore, +44 (0) 20 7834 5559, pgilmores@aol.com
Germany/Switzerland/Austria/Eastern Europe: Gerd Strasmann, +49 (0) 2191 931 497, info@strasmann-media.de
Italy: Ferruccio Silvera, +39 (0) 2 284 6716, ferruccio@silvera.it
Spain/Portugal: Vibeke Gilland, +34 91 553 42 06, vibeke.gilland@publistar-es.com
Japan: Katsuhiro Ishii, +81 3 5691 3335, amskatsu@dream.com
Thailand: Nartnittha Jirarayapong, +66 (0) 2 237-9471, +66 (0) 2 237 9478
India: Faredoon B. Kuka, 91 22 5570 3081/82, kuka@rmamedia.com
South Korea: Peter Kwon, +82 2 416 2876, +82 2 2202 9351, gulfk@unitel.co.kr
Malaysia: Tony Tan, +60 3 706 4176, +60 3 706 4177, nmedia@tm.net.my
Classified Advertising
Diane Hammes, 713-343-1885, dianeh@tradefairgroup.com
POWER Buyers Guide Sales
Diane Hammes, 713-343-1885, dianeh@tradefairgroup.com
AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT
Audience Development Manager: Terry Best
Fulfillment Manager: George Severine
CUSTOMER SERVICE
For subscriber service: powermag@halldata.com, 800-542-2823 or 847-763-9509
Electronic and Paper Reprints: lyndsay.bahn@theYGSgroup.com, 717-666-3052
List Sales: Statlistics, Jen Felling, j.felling@statlistics.com, 203-778-8700
All Other Customer Service: 713-343-1887
BUSINESS OFFICE
TradeFair Group Publications, 11000 Richmond Avenue, Suite 500, Houston, TX 77042
Publisher: Brian K. Nessen, 713-343-1887, briann@tradefairgroup.com
President: Sean Guerre
ACCESS INTELLIGENCE, LLC
4 Choke Cherry Road, 2nd Floor, Rockville, MD 20850
301-354-2000 www.accessintel.com
Chief Executive Officer: Donald A. Pazour
Exec. Vice President & Chief Financial Officer: Ed Pinedo
Exec. Vice President, Human Resources & Administration: Macy L. Fecto
Divisional President, Business Information Group: Heather Farley
Senior Vice President, Corporate Audience Development: Sylvia Sierra
Senior Vice President & Chief Information Officer: Robert Paciorek
Vice President, Production & Manufacturing: Michael Kraus
Vice President, Financial Planning & Internal Audit: Steve Barber
BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY FOR THE GLOBAL GENERATION INDUSTRY
Visit POWER on the web: www.powermag.com
Subscribe online at: www.submag.com/sub/pw
POWER (ISSN 0032-5929) is published monthly by Access
Intelligence, LLC, 4 Choke Cherry Road, Second Floor,
Rockville, MD 20850. Periodicals Postage Paid at Rockville,
MD 20850-4024 and at additional mailing offices.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to POWER, P.O. Box
2182, Skokie, IL 60076. Email: power@halldata.com.
Canadian Post PM40063731. Return Undeliverable Canadian
Addresses to: Station A, P.O. Box 54, Windsor, ON N9A 6J5.
Subscriptions: Available at no charge only for qualified
executives and engineering and supervisory personnel
in electric utilities, independent generating companies,
consulting engineering firms, process industries, and other
manufacturing industries. All others in the U.S. and U.S.
possessions: $59 for one year, $99 for two years. In Canada:
US$64 for one year, US$104 for two years. Outside U.S. and
Canada: US$159 for one year, US$269 for two years (includes
air mail delivery). Payment in full or credit card information is
required to process your order. Subscription request must
include subscriber name, title, and company name. For new
or renewal orders, call 847-763-9509. Single copy price: $25.
The publisher reserves the right to accept or reject any order.
Allow four to twelve weeks for shipment of the first issue on
subscriptions. Missing issues must be claimed within three
months for the U.S. or within six months outside U.S.
For customer service and address changes, call 847-763-
9509 or fax 832-242-1971 or e-mail powermag@halldata
.com or write to POWER, P.O. Box 2182, Skokie, IL 60076.
Please include account number, which appears above name
on magazine mailing label or send entire label.
Photocopy Permission: Where necessary, permission is
granted by the copyright owner for those registered with
the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive,
Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400, www.copyright.com,
to photocopy any article herein, for commercial use for the
flat fee of $2.50 per copy of each article, or for classroom
use for the flat fee of $1.00 per copy of each article. Send
payment to the CCC. Copying for other than personal or
internal reference use without the express permission of
TradeFair Group Publications is prohibited. Requests for
special permission or bulk orders should be addressed to the
publisher at 11000 Richmond Avenue, Suite 500, Houston, TX
77042. ISSN 0032-5929.
Executive Offices of TradeFair Group Publications: 11000
Richmond Avenue, Suite 500, Houston, TX 77042. Copyright
2009 by TradeFair Group Publications. All rights reserved.
Chemical Phamaceutical Group
Solvay Chemicals, Inc.
1.800.SOLVAY C (800.765.8292)
www.solvair.us
Copyright 2009, Solvay Chemicals, Inc. All Rights Reserved
PRODUCTS
The SOLVAir Group
At the forefront of air pollution control.
Leading the feld!
SOLVAir Products, at the forefront of air pollution control.
For more than 20 years, SOLVAir Products have focused on cleaning SO
X
, NO
X
, HCl and Hg from stack emissions
at coal-fred power plants. Whether its products are used in wet or dry scrubbers or Dry Sorbent Injection (DSI)
systems, the SOLVAir Group continues to remain at the forefront of air pollution control by ofering the most
efective solutions for the treatment of stack emissions.
Abatement of SO
2
is the primary aim of SOLVAir Select 300, a new sodium bicarbonate-based product specifcally
designed for air pollution control. Produced at our Green River, Wyoming plant, its use can help power plants
achieve compliance with SO
2
reduction regulations. Using DSI and Select 300 can provide results that are truly
amazing.
SOLVAir Select 200 trona is the product of choice for DSI systems. As the only producer of SOLVAir Select 200 refned
trona in the U.S, Solvay Chemicals, Inc. can provide product when and where needed, now and into the future.
At Solvay Chemicals SOLVAir group, we pay close attention to the needs of the marketplace. For more detailed
information on the properties and applications of these and other SOLVAir products, go to www.solvair.us or call us
at 800-SOLVAY-C.
|
July 2009 6
SPEAKING OF POWER
Our Integrity Is Not for Sale
I
was putting the finishing touches on this months editorial
when I received an email from a reader who owns a company
that serves the power industry. He was very complimentary
of an article I recently wrote. Goes without saying, I was
thinking to myself. However, actually saying it goes a long way
in my book, and I enjoy hearing from readersat least most
of the time.
Wide-Ranging Reader Responses
I especially appreciate readers who take the time to send me an
email about something they learned from reading POWER that
helped solve a nagging problem, or about some new insight into
the future of the power industry they gained. I also enjoy the
sometimes spirited interactions with readers (although the pe-
riodic death threats less so). Even messages identifying an error
(thankfully, few) or offering the readers unique opinions of the
power industry are always read and enjoyed. Ive even had read-
ers ask me to retract an editorial I wrote, although its a mystery
how I go about disavowing an opinion I still hold. I also freely
admit that many of the most critical letters often plant the seeds
for future POWER articles.
The second half of this particular readers email included a
question that Ive never been asked before: How much did it
cost company X to have that article published in POWER?
My first reaction to the question isnt fit to print. The implica-
tion is that the POWER editors run a monthly auction for edito-
rial space in the magazine and that the high bidders will find
their articles in the next issue. Nothing could be further from the
truth. Yet, this inquiry, made in all seriousness, indicates to me
that we havent done a very good job of explaining our editorial
rules of the road.
Integrity and Independence
POWER, now in its 127th year of continuous publication, remains
the longest-running industry magazine in the U.S., and perhaps
the world. From its early issues, POWERs stated editorial poli-
cy was one of integrity and independence. In 1924, James H.
McGraw, then president of the McGraw-Hill Co., unambiguously
stated his editorial expectations for this magazine: Industrial
and technical journals must be something more than publica-
tions run solely for profit. They must, if they are to fill their
legitimate place, have their own ideals . . . and adhere unflinch-
ingly to them. First among such ideals is independence . . . to
have no other guides for its opinions and policies but truth and
the sound interests of the field it serves.
We serve the power industry by publishing a mixture of indus-
try-contributed and staff-researched and -written articles each
month. Contributed articles undergo a rigorous review process
followed by multiple rounds of editing to ensure that they meet
our very high quality standards for content and readability. I
filter out the majority of article proposals submitted because
theyre either a weak case study, they dont present validated
results, or there isnt a member of the power plant staff willing
to go on the record verifying the results.
The good news is that you dont have to be a professional
writer to have your article selected for publication. If you have
the bones of a good story, well help you put the meat on those
bones, even if it means a staff editor must visit your plant and
write the entire article for you (though it has to be a really
fresh and meaty story to merit the time and resources to go that
far). My sole interest is publishing the best possible collection
of articles each month. (For more information on submitting a
story or a story idea, download our editorial guidelines from the
About Us page. Youll find the About Us link at the bottom of the
powermag.com home page.)
The Great Divide
Finally, we believe that quality journalism requires a wide sepa-
ration between those who sell and those who write. I have had
the privilege of being POWERs editor-in-chief for more than six
years, and Im only the ninth to hold that position since the
magazines inception. Im proud to say that I have never been
asked to compromise my journalistic integrity by publishing an
article in return for advertising or any other form of revenue. The
entire sales and editorial staff remains committed to conducting
our business in conformance with this bedrock principal. Unfor-
tunately, pay to play is a common practice elsewhere in this
industry.
I believe the secret to the success of POWER over the years
is the magazines entire staff remaining true to these principals
and practices. Without our editorial integrity and independent
coverage of the industry, we would not enjoy the trust and re-
spect of the industry, as we have for 127 years. The editorial
content of POWER, and that of its sister publications, is not for
sale at any price.
Dr. Robert Peltier, PE, Editor-in-Chief
First among such ideals
is independence . . . to have
no other guides for its opinions
and policies but truth and the
sound interests of the field
it serves.
GE Energy
Cleaner burning coal technology is here, and innovation from GE Energy
is playing a leading role. IGCC offers a power solution that taps the globes
abundant coal supply, while reducing emissions and enabling carbon capture
retrot. The largest cleaner coal facility in the world, Duke Energys 630MW
IGCC Edwardsport, Indiana, power plant ( now under construction), is
advancing the evolution of proven IGCC technology to the next stage.
GE Energys commitment to sustainable solutions is helping
to transform coal into a star attraction. Visit
us at ge-energy.com/gasication
to nd out more.
NOW SHOWING
|
July 2009 8
GLOBAL MONITOR
GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR GLOBAL MONI TOR
Mitsubishi Wraps Up
Development of J-Class
Mega Turbine
This March, Japans Mitsubishi Heavy In-
dustries Ltd. (MHI) quietly completed de-
velopment of the J-series gas turbinea
machine that has been extolled in the
turbo-machinery world for its ability to
produce one of the worlds largest power
generation capacities and highest thermal
efficiencies. When commercial production
begins in 2011as MHI expectsthe J-
series will be the latest in a new genera-
tion of gas turbines, contending for global
sales against heavyweights from General
Electric, Siemens, and Alstom.
The J-series is already being consid-
ered the best in MHIs fleet (Figure 1).
Designed to operate at blistering tem-
peratures of up to 1,600C at the tur-
bine inlet, the 60-hertz J-series turbine
achieves a rated power output of about
320 MW (ISO basis) and 460 MW com-
bined-cycle power generation. According
to the company, it is able to withstand
temperatures 100 degrees higher than
the companys existing 1,500 C-class G-
series gas turbine because of a low-ther-
mal-conductivity thermal barrier coating
technology and improvements in cooling
efficiency. The adoption of an enhanced
three-dimensional design contributes to
improved aerodynamics. In the J-series
gas turbine, moreover, the compressor is
designed to provide a higher compression
ratio, while the combustor carries on the
steam-cooled technology originally de-
veloped for the G-series turbine.
But the J-series also adopts new tech-
nologies derived from an ongoing Japanese
project that seeks to develop core tech-
nologies for a 1,700 C-class gas turbine,
MHI says. Gas turbine combined-cycle
(GTCC) systems featuring the resulting tur-
bine are expected to achieve well above
60% power generation thermal efficiency
and generate 1.2 times more power than a
GTCC using a G-series gas turbinewhich,
as MHI points out, is the largest gas tur-
bine commercially available.
So how will it compare with mega
turbines from Europe and the U.S.? The
J-series could go head-to-head with
Siemens H-class SGT5-8000H, a 340-MW
mega turbine and 530-MW combined-
cycle power plant whose thermal ef-
ficiency exceeds 60%, as Siemens
claims on its website. But the 50-hertz
turbine, based on a combined Siemens
and Westinghouse gas design, has the
advantage of time: Already installed at
the Irsching 4 gas power plant in Ba-
varia, Germany, the prototype turbine
has been fired and synchronized to the
grid, with full-load testing starting in
April 2008. The validation program will
continue until mid-2009. Then, exten-
sion of the simple-cycle test plant to
a high-efficiency combined-cycle plant
begins in phase two of the program,
with transfer to the plant operator,
E.ON, expected in 2011.
Meanwhile, GEs advanced combined-
cycle system capable of breaking the 60%
efficiency barrierthe H Systemcon-
tinues making headway around the world.
Following a prototype test, the first 50-
hertz system began operating in 2003 at
Baglan Bay in South Wales, UK. Last July,
the second system began service at Tokyo
Electric Power Co.s (TEPCO) Futtsu-4 plant.
TEPCO is in the process of installing a sec-
ond system at that plant and this January
received its third system. Meanwhile, the
first two 60-hertz H systemswith a net
rated output of 775 MWare being in-
stalled at the Inland Empire Energy Center
in Southern California.
Sweden Selects Site of
First Permanent Spent
Nuclear Fuel Repository
In early June, as U.S. Energy Secretary
Steven Chu confirmed to a House Sub-
committee that Yucca Mountain reposi-
tory was, without doubt, off the table
and that a blue ribbon panel would fur-
ther advise the government on what it
should do with its high-level nuclear
waste, Sweden announced the site of
what could be the worlds first permanent
spent fuel repository.
The Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste
Management Co. (SKB)an independent
company owned by nuclear plant opera-
torsselected Forsmark in the municipal-
ity of sthammar as the site where nuclear
waste from Swedens 10 nuclear plants
will be permanently stored. The selection
of the site culminates almost 20 years of
work during which SKB conducted surveys
throughout Sweden and feasibility studies
in eight municipalities.
The repository relies on three protective
barriers to keep radioactive substances
from spreading into the environment. The
spent nuclear fuel is first encapsulated in
copper canisters that are nearly 5 meters
(m) long and over 1 m in diameter. The
outer casing is a 5-cm-thick layer of cop-
per to protect against corrosion, and inside
is a nodular cast iron insert for strength.
When filled with the spent fuel, these are
expected to weigh between 25 metric tons
1. Monster showdown. Mitsubishi
Heavy Industries earlier this year completed
development of a 320-MW J-series gas tur-
bine (shown here) whose thermal efficiency is
expected to be well above 60%. The J-series
is expected to be commercially operational by
2011around the same time Siemens will
have completed both phases of the H-class
turbines testing program. Courtesy: MHI
Subscribe now to get your
free subscription to the
electronic newsletter from
POWER magazine.
Just visit our web site
www.powermag.comto
subscribe.
delivers headline news for
power generators weekly
Start your free
subscription today!
WANT POWER INDUSTRY
NEWS MORE OFTEN?
PENNGUARD
Block Lining System

Phone: 412 204 0028
sales@hadek.com
www.hadek.com
PROTECTING POWER
PLANT CHIMNEYS
An FGD plant fire could destroy your chimney.
Pennguard
linings protect chimneys from fire.

So why take unnecessary risks?
The Pennguard
Block Lining System is an innovative

chimney lining with proven performance. Made of acid-
resistant borosilicate glass, this lightweight and highly
insulating lining is applied directly to flue interiors.
And it makes FGD chimneys safer.
Fire tests by Hadek show that Pennguard
linings
protect chimneys in case of fire. At temperatures
of over 500C (932F), alloy-clad flues are at risk
of collapse, and FRP flues are likely to catch fire,
even with fire retardants.
In 1996, an FGD fire at one US power station caused
1,000C (1,832F) temperatures inside a steel chimney.
The Pennguard
lining successfully protected the

chimney from collapse.
Pennguard
linings could save your chimney from

fire. Contact Hadek for your copy of the Test Report:
412 204 0028, sales@hadek.com.
Pennguard is a registered trademark of Henkel KGaA and is used
with their permission. This advertisement is not to be considered
a warranty concerning product performance.
Pennguard
linings protect
chimneys against fire. Why
take unnecessary risks?
Hadek is the expert on power plant
chimney and ductwork protection,
and a global distributor of the
Pennguard
Block Lining System.

We deliver:
Research and feasibility studies
Detail engineering
Installation supervision
Lifetime Performance
Monitoring System
10 year limited warranty
|
July 2009 10
GLOBAL MONITOR
and 27 metric tons. The copper canister
will then be placed in crystalline basement
rock at a depth of about 500 m, embedded
in bentonite clay (Figure 2). When all the
spent nuclear fuel has been deposited in
the crystalline basement, the tunnels and
shafts will be filled in with swelling clay
or a mixture of crushed rock and clay. The
system will also rely on the Clab facility in
Oskarshamn for interim storage of nuclear
waste. The fuel will lie there in large cool-
ing water basins for 30 to 40 years.
SKB President Claes Thegerstrm said
the site offered rock at the repository lev-
el that was dry and had few fractures. The
Forsmark site also won over the second-
choice site at Laxemar, in the municipality
of Oskarshamn, because it would require
less space compared to a repository in
Laxemar. This means that less rock needs
to be excavated and less material will be
needed for backfilling, Thegerstrm said.
SKB said it will now begin building sur-
face facilities in the existing industrial area
and proceed to complete applications for
permits that will be reviewed by the Swed-
ish Radiation Safety Authority and the En-
vironmental Court. The applications will be
submitted in 2010 and include the envi-
ronmental impact assessment and a safety
analysis for the Forsmark repository. If all
goes as planned, construction could begin
in 2016 and the first canister could be de-
posited in the repository in 2022 or 2024.
Ethiopia Completes
Construction of Africas
Tallest Dam
Ethiopia, the landlocked nation in East Af-
rica from which key tributaries to the Nile
River originate, completed construction of
the continents highest dam, the 188-meter
Tekez Arch Dam (Figure 3) in February. Lo-
cated in the Northern Tigre region of Ethio-
pia on the Tekez Riverwhich has carved
one of the worlds deepest canyonsthe
dam eclipses the previous record height
of 185 m for an African dam, held by the
Katse Arch Dam in Lesotho.
The dam is part of the Ethiopian gov-
ernmentfunded $365 million Tekez hy-
droelectric power project that is being
built by state-owned Ethiopian Electric
Power Corp. (EEPCo) and the Chinese Na-
tional Water Resources and Hydropower
Engineering Corp. It entails, along with
construction of the arch dam, construc-
tion of two river diversion tunnels, power
waterways, an underground powerhouse
containing four 75-MW Francis turbines,
a 230-kV substation, and a 105-km trans-
mission line to connect the project to
the national grid at Mekele. The project
is expected to begin generating 300 MW
from the start of the East African monsoon
season this July, bringing Ethiopias total
generating capacity to 1,170 MW.
The Tekez dam has been dubbed the
Three Gorges of Africa, but it is 10 m
taller than the Chinese damand much
more controversial. Nonprofit group In-
ternational Rivers says that not only will
it cause many of the same environmental
problems associated with the Three Gorges
and other large dams, but the depth of the
canyon in which the dam lies will also
likely contribute to major sedimentation
at the dam site once the region is flooded.
Since the start of construction in 2002,
a massive landslide has already occurred
near the dam site in April 2008, forcing
developers to spend an additional $42
million on retaining walls to keep slopes
from eroding.
Ethiopians, meanwhile, have voiced
frustration at their governments determi-
nation to construct 10 hydro power plants
worth more than $13 billion within the
next 10 years. The countrys media say the
nation is suffering a chronic power deficit
of up to 120 MW that is putting a 1% dent
in its gross domestic product. The govern-
ment reasons that hydroelectric potential
in Ethiopiaa mountainous country, but
one that is also periodically stricken by
severe droughtis estimated to exceed
40,000 MW. Hurrying to alleviate shortag-
es and possibly supply power to the rest of
power-starved East Africa, it plans to com-
2. Spent and buried in Sweden.
Sweden may house the worlds first permanent
nuclear waste repository if regulators approve
the Forsmark site selected in early June by the
Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management
Co. Final disposal of the spent nuclear fuel will
entail using three protective barriers. The spent
fuel will first be encapsulated in copper. The im-
permeable copper canisters will then be placed
in crystalline basement rock at a depth of about
500 meters, embedded in bentonite clay. After
disposal, the tunnels and rock caverns will be
sealed. Courtesy: SKB
3. Dammed if you do. In February, the Ethiopian Electric Power Corp. (EEPCo) com-
pleted construction of Africas highest concrete arch dam on the Tekez River, a Nile tributary
that flows through one of the deepest canyons in the world. The 188-m Tekez Arch Dam is
part of a $365 million hydropower project that will add 300 MW to Ethiopias grid. The nation is
reportedly suffering chronic power shortages. The government plans to meet future needs with
the construction of several mega-dams within the next 10 years, hoping to put threeincluding
the Tekez hydropower projectonline by 2010. Courtesy: EEPCo
July 2009
|
GLOBAL MONITOR
plete (along with the 300-MW Tekez proj-
ect) the 420-MW Gilgel-Gibe II project and
the unique 460-MW Beles project, which
taps water from Lake Tana, by 2010.
Qatar Starts Construction
on Middle Easts Largest
Power and Water Plant
The gas-rich Persian Gulf state of Qatar
in May commenced construction of the
regions largest power and water plant,
a massive project comprising eight gas
turbine generators, eight heat-recovery
steam generators, four steam turbine gen-
erators, and 10 desalination units. When
the first phase wraps up next year and
the second is completed as anticipated
in April 2011, the $3.9 billion Ras Girtas
Power and Water project in the Ras Laffan
industrial zone will produce 2,730 MWh as
well as 63 million gallons of desalinated
water a day.
Qatar is in the midst of a construction
frenzy despite the global economic down-
turn. And it is planning ahead, making
the Ras Girtas Power and Water projecta
joint effort between the Qatar Electricity
and Water Co. (QWEC), a consortium of
Japans Mitsui and Frances Suez Energy
International, and Qatar Petroleumone
4. Gas and a glowing future. Gas-rich Qatar, whose economy is booming despite the
global downturn, is planning ahead to meet its anticipated power needsand those of neigh-
boring Gulf states, which are struggling to meet power demand. It recently began construction
of the $3.9 billion Ras Girtas Power and Water project, which will produce 2,730 MWh as well
as 63 million gallons of desalinated water a day. Also in the works is the Ras Abu Fontas project
(shown here), which has a production capacity of 45 million gallons of water per day. That proj-
ect will be completed this December. Courtesy: Qatar Electricity and Water Co.
ht t p: //www. appl i edbol t i ng. com email: info@appliedbolting.com
1413 Rockingham Rd. Bellows Falls, VT 05101 USA
1 800 552 1999 1 802 460 3100
T E CHNOL OGY
applied
bolting
the best way to bolt!
TRAI NI NG FI ELD SUPPORT TECHNI CAL EXPERTI SE
Squirter DTIs
Constructability Starts Here

38th Turbomachinery
Symposium
September 14-17, 2009
George R. Brown Convention Center Houston, Texas
U
n
p
a
ra
lle
le
d

O
p
p
o
rtu
n
itie
s

EARN CEU CREDITS
In-depth Short Courses
Solutions-based Case Studies
Innovative Discussion Groups
Hands-on Tutorials
Pioneering Lectures
Outstanding Exhibit Floor
For more information
or to join our mail list
email or call now.
Sponsored by The Turbomach|nery Laboratory Texas A&N Un|vers|ty
3254 TANU 0o||ege Stat|on, TX 77843-3254
Ph: 979-845-7417 Fx: 979-845-1835
|nqu|ry@turbo-|ab.tamu.edu http://turbo|ab.tamu.edu
Co-located with
Exhibits Open Free
to the Public:
Tuesday & Wednesday
3:30 p.m. - 7:00 p.m.
Thursday
9:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
July 2009
|
GLOBAL MONITOR
in a string of planned projects. Notable among these projects
will be the Ras Abu Fontas project (Figure 4), a desalination
plant that will produce 45 million gallons of water per day, when
completed this December.
There is no shortage of water or electricity supply and we
do not have any problem meeting the demand, QWEC General
Manager Fahad Hamad Al Mohannadi told reporters recently. Ac-
tually, we are ahead of schedule. The water project we are devel-
oping now is mainly intended to meet future demand in the next
three to four years with real estate and industrial development
moving fast.
But experts suggest that Qatar is positioning itself to pro-
vide bulk power in the Middle East. Business Monitor Interna-
tional expects the state, whose current installed capacity sits
at about 9,000 MW, will increase power generation by an as-
tounding 193.5% before 2018almost at the top of the range
for the Middle East/North Africa region. The Middle East has a
current installed capacity of 152 GW97% of which is thermal
generationaccounting for 3.5% of global electricity genera-
tion. According to Nomura Middle East Energy and Power, the
regionand in particular Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates
is already struggling to meet its power needs, and overall demand
increases are expected to average 6% from 2009 to 2020. Making
matters more complex, the Gulf Cooperation Councila European
Unionlike trade bloc created by the six Arab states in the Per-
sian Gulfkeeps power costs in the region artificially low with
subsidies that vary, on average, from 60% to 70%.
Finally, the regionwith the exception of Qatarexperiences
crippling fuel shortages, even though it holds 43% of global crude
oil reserves and 23% of the worlds gas reserves, according to Dr.
Adnan Shihab-Eldin, former OPEC secretary general. The reason for
this, he told Emirates Business on the sidelines of a recent utility
summit, is that the bulk of the Gulfs reserves is associated gas,
which is fully committed until after 2020. Non-associated gas is
found in few placeslike Qatar, which is still restricted by a gas
moratorium. The dilemma will force governments to break their
existing export contracts or find new fuel sources, he said.
Smart Turbine Blades
to Improve Wind Power
Engineers at Purdue University and Sandia National Laborato-
ries have developed a technique that uses sensors and compu-
tational software to constantly monitor forces exerted on wind
turbine blades. Their achievement could one day improve the
efficiency of wind turbines by providing the blades smart
structure with necessary data to adjust to rapidly changing
wind conditions.
The ultimate goal is to feed information from sensors into
an active control system that precisely adjusts components to
optimize efficiency, said Purdue doctoral student Jonathan
White, who is leading the research with Douglas Adams, a pro-
fessor of mechanical engineering and director of Purdues Center
for Systems Integrity. The system also could help improve wind
turbine reliability by providing critical real-time information to
the control system to prevent catastrophic turbine damage from
high winds.
The engineers embedded sensors called uniaxial and triaxial
accelerometers inside a wind turbine blade as the blade was be-
ing built. Their findings show that using a trio of sensors and
estimator model software developed by White accurately re-
veals how much force is being exerted on the blades. Purdue and
Sandia have applied for a provisional patent on the technique.
The blade is now being tested on a research wind turbine at the
U.S. Department of Agricultures (USDAs) Agriculture Research
Service laboratory in Bushland, Texas. Personnel from Sandia and
the USDA operate the research wind turbines at the Texas site.
Such sensors could be instrumental in future turbine blades
that have control surfaces and simple flaps like those on an
airplanes wings to change the aerodynamic characteristics
5. A smart curve. Purdue doctoral student Jonathan White holds
a cross section of a wind turbine blade like the one used in research to
improve the efficiency of turbines and prevent damage to blades from
high winds. An engineering team has developed a technique that uses
sensors and computational software to constantly monitor forces exert-
ed on wind turbine blades. Such sensors could be instrumental in future
turbine blades that have control surfaces and flaps like those on an air-
planes wings to change the aerodynamic characteristics of the blades
for better control. Courtesy: Purdue University/Andrew Hancock
|
July 2009 14
GLOBAL MONITOR
of the blades for better control, the re-
searchers said. Because these flaps would
be changed in real time to respond to
changing winds, constant sensor data
would be critical.
The aim is to operate the generator
and the turbine in the most efficient way,
but this is difficult because wind speeds
fluctuate, Adams said. You want to be
able to control the generator or the pitch
of the blades to optimize energy capture
by reducing forces on the components in
the wind turbine during excessively high
winds and increase the loads during low
winds. In addition to improving efficiency,
this should help improve reliability. The
wind turbine towers can be 200 feet tall
or more, so it is very expensive to service
and repair damaged components.
Sensor data in a smart system might
also be used to better control the tur-
bine speed by automatically adjusting
the blade pitch while also commanding
the generator to take corrective steps, he
said. Or, it could be used to design more
resilient blades because they are capable
of measuring acceleration occurring in
various directions, which is necessary to
accurately characterize the blades bend-
ing and twisting and small vibrations near
the tip that eventually cause fatigue and
possible failure.
The sensors also measure two types
of acceleration. One type, dynamic ac-
celeration, results from gusting winds,
while the other, called static accel-
eration, results from gravity and steady
background winds. It is essential to accu-
rately measure both forms of acceleration
to estimate forces exerted on the blades.
Research is ongoing, and the engineers
are now pursuing the application of their
system to advanced, next-generation tur-
bine blades that are more curved than
conventional blades (Figure 5). This more
complex shape makes it more challenging
to apply the technique.
Energy Storage Efforts
Making Progress
The intensifying spotlight on renewable
energy seems to be casting a brighter
light on the energy storage problem, with
lawmakers, researchers, and investors
scrambling to seek out the most feasible
solution to bridge the intermittent nature
of renewable power sources. This June,
U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) introduced
the Storage Technology of Renewable and
Green Energy Act of 2009, a bill that would
issue a 20% tax credit for investments in
energy storage systems. If passed, the pro-
posed legislation will also provide credits
to storage technologies such as water res-
ervoirs, flywheels, hydrogen production,
or grid-connected batteries.
The bill would certainly boost growth in
the U.S. energy storage market. But even
without government incentivesdriven
primarily by venture capital investment
the global market is poised to grow from
$329 million in 2008 to a stunning $4.1
billion by 2018, Pike Research says in a
recent report. About a dozen technolo-
gies that are vying for a piece of the
utility-scale energy storage market will
be favored, especially advanced battery
technologies such as lithium ion and so-
dium sulfur batteries, pumped hydro, and
compressed air energy storage, the group
concludes.
Researchers around the world, mean-
while, are reporting breakthroughs on
existing and novel technologies. The
University of St. Andrews in the UK, col-
laborating with colleges from Strathclyde
and Newcastle, in May claimed to have
designed a new type of air-fueled battery
that can provide up to 10 times the energy
storage when compared with designs cur-
rently available.
The STAIR (St. Andrews Air) cell capac-
ity is based on rechargeable lithium bat-
teries, which are currently composed of a
graphite negative electrode, an organic
electrolyte, and lithium cobalt oxide as
the positive electrode. Instead of lithium
from the layered intercalation compound
(lithium cobalt oxide), the STAIR uses
a porous carbon electrode. The oxygen,
which will be drawn in through a surface
of the battery exposed to air, reacts within
the pores of the carbon to discharge the
battery. The university has discovered
in the course of its four-year study that
the carbon components interaction with
air can be repeated, creating a cycle of
charge and discharge (Figure 6).
Initial results from the project found
a capacity to weight ratio of 1,000 mil-
liamp-hours per gram of carbon (mAh/g),
while recent work has obtained results of
up to 4,000 mAh/g, the researchers said.
The researchers expect that the battery
is about five years away from commercial
availability, however.
In May, a Canadian research team at
the University of Waterloo reported it had
laid the groundwork for a lithium-sulfur
battery that could store and deliver more
than three times the power of convention-
al lithium ion batteries. As reported in the
online issue of Nature Materials, the team
overcame the challenge of keeping the
electrically active sulfur in contact with
a conductor, such as carbon. The team
choseat a nanoscale levela member
of a highly structured and porous carbon
family called mesoporous carbon.
Filling the tiny voids then proved sim-
ple: Sulfur was heated and melted. Once
it came into contact with the carbon, it
was drawn or imbibed into the channels
by capillary forces, where it solidified and
shrunk to form sulfur nanofibers. Scanning
6. Air-fueled battery. Researchers from the University of St. Andrews in the UK have
designed an air-fueled battery that they claim could last 10 times longer than designs currently
available. As the diagram of the lithium-air STAIR (St. Andrews Air) cell shows here, oxygen is
drawn from the air and reacts within the porous carbon to release the electrical charge. Courtesy:
University of St. Andrews
Electron ow
Negative
electrode
Electrolyte
Positive electrode
Li+
Oxygen
Oxygen
Lithium oxygen
compound
Lithium ion
Carbon
Maganese oxide
(the catalyst)
July 2009
|
GLOBAL MONITOR
electron microscope sections revealed
that all the spaces were uniformly filled
with sulfur, exposing an enormous surface
area of the active element to carbon and
driving the exceptional test results of the
new battery. The research team continues
to study the material to work out remain-
ing challenges and refine the cathodes
architecture and performance.
PG&E Makes a Deal for
Space-Based Power
Just as reports emerged earlier this year
that NASA had abandoned, for lack of fi-
nancial resources, its research into space-
based solar power that would be harnessed
via orbiting solar arrays beaming micro-
waves to earthly receivers (Figure 7), Cali-
fornias Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (PG&E)
wrote the California Public Utilities Com-
mission (PUC) requesting its approval of a
power purchase agreement from a similar
technology.
The utility requested that the PUC
consider the 200 MW of power purchased
from Solarens new space solar power
project, anticipated for completion by
2016, as eligible for its Renewables Port-
folio Standard (RPS). It said Solarens
breakthrough technology could pro-
vide baseload power from a space-based
technology that collects solar energy as
it travels in a geosynchronous orbit. The
energy would then be converted into ra-
dio frequency power via a high-efficiency
generator such as a magnetron or solid
state power amplifier, and then be trans-
mitted from the satellites antenna to a
receiving station in Fresno County, Calif.
The primary obstacle would be the en-
gineering challengenot the technol-
ogyof building the space-based plant
and the space solar power (SSP) satel-
lites, which are much larger than current
kW-class communications satellites.
The only fuel-type hindrances the proj-
ect would experience are brief blockages
of sunlight (from a few minutes to an hour
around midnight) on its solar arrays by
Earth during the spring and fall equinox
periods, PG&E told the PUC.
It also said the technology was fairly
mature, owing to 40 years of research in
the U.S. by NASA and the Deapartment of
Defense. Space solar technology is based
on components that are in use today or
being developed for use with satellite
communications, radar systems, and other
applications, the utility wrote. Consis-
tent with its designation as an emerging
technology, these components must be
engineered, tested, manufactured and in-
tegrated into large-scale SSP satellite and
ground system architectures.
The only aspect that PG&E did not
chronicle in its letter to the state regula-
7. Reaching for the stars. Pacific Gas & Electric asked the California Public Utilities
Commission this April to approve a 200-MW baseload power purchase agreement it made with
Solaren for space-based solar power. Solarens technology proposes to collect solar energy via
a satellite in space, convert it into radio waves, and beam it to Earth. The idea is not new: The
Department of Defense and NASA have been studying it for years. Both have said at some point
that it is not economically feasible. Source: NASA
ITS 3:00 A.M.
Do You
Really
Know Where
Your
is
?
Bottom Ash
Ash Tracker
www.entechdesign.com
Bottom Ash Level
Measurement
Minimize Overfill Risk
Eliminate Excessive
Conveying
Reduce Dangerous Visual
Inspections
Protect Hopper Refractory
entech@entechdesign.com
PH: 940-898-1173
?
?
?
|
July 2009 16
GLOBAL MONITOR
tor were the costs involved, though it noted that the RPS statute
required utilities to procure the least cost, best fit eligible
renewable resources.
So how much could space power cost, and has it become more
economically feasible since NASA first studied it in the 1970s?
NASA had then estimated it would cost $300 billion to $1 trillion
to deliver the first kilowatt-hours to the ground. In 2007, when
the Pentagon laid out a roadmap for a 10-MW space-based power
demonstration, it suggested the project could be tested as soon
as 2012. It concluded that significant technological progress had
been achieved, making the approach more straightforwardbut
it would cost up to $10 billion, it said.
POWER Digest
News items of interest to power industry professionals.
CEZ to Build Czech Republics First Gas-Fired Plant. Czech
power utility CEZ plans to build an 800-MW steam/gas power
plant in the Melnk, in the Czech Republics Central Bohemia
region. The project will replace the output of three coal-fired
units in the region, two with an output of 110 MW and one with
an output of 500 MW. All three plants will reach the end of their
life by 2015.
GE Hitachi Signs Agreement with L&T for Indian Nukes. GE
Hitachi (GEH) and Indian engineering and construction company
Larsen & Toubro (L&T) signed a nuclear power plant development
agreement on May 19. GEH expects the agreement to help it estab-
lish an extensive network of local suppliers to help build a future
Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) in India. The agreement
was one of the first preliminary nuclear technology trade agree-
ments to be announced by a U.S. majorityowned company since
the U.S. and India adopted a civilian nuclear energy accord in Oc-
tober 2008. GEH had in March 2009 announced an ABWR develop-
ment agreement with state-owned Nuclear Power Corp. of India.
Vattenfall Withdraws Interests from UK Nuclear New Builds.
Swedish state-owned power company Vattenfall announced on
June 1 that it had decided to put any decisions about participat-
ing in the UKs nuclear new build program on hold for the next 12
to 18 months because of the economic recession and market situ-
ation. The company said that it would retain a significant inter-
est in the UK energy market and monitor developments in nuclear
new builds, however. The companys plans to develop the UKs
wind asset portfolio are not affected by this decision, it said.
Masdar Connects 10-MW PV Plant to Abu Dhabi Grid. Abu
Dhabibased solar integrator Enviromena Power System on
June 1 announced the completion of the Masdar 10-MW Solar
Power Plant, the largest grid-connected solar system in the Mid-
dle East and North Africa. The 212,000square meter (55-acre)
solar system consists of 87,777 photovoltaic modules and will
produce 17,500 MWh of clean energy each year, offsetting ap-
proximately 15,000 tons of carbon emissions annually. The plant
will produce energy to power the initial construction activities of
Masdar City. The AED 185 million project was completed on time
and on budget. Enviromena added that it is also one of the most
quickly constructed and cost-efficient photovoltaic installations
in the world in terms of projected power output.
Brazilian Bank Covers GDF SUEZ for 68.5% of 3.3 Billion
Jirau Hydro Project. The Brazilian development bank BNDES
(Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econmico e Social) has
approved a 20-year loan of BRL7.2 billion (approximately 2.44
billion) for GDF SUEZ to finance the Jirau project, a 3,300-MW
greenfield hydroelectric power station. The loan is the largest
ever granted by the Brazilian development bank and covers 68.5%
of the total 3.3 billion investment in the Jirau plant. Jirau will
help address the growing demand for electricity in Brazil (about
4,500 MW per year) and is currently the largest energy infrastruc-
ture project in the country.
Wrtsil Successfully Test Runs Engines on Renewable
Fuels. Wrtsil, a supplier of flexible power plants for the de-
centralized power generation market, has successfully performed
a number of tests that demonstrate the ability of its engines
to run on a range of vegetable and animal-based oils. In the
tests, conducted between February and April of this year at the
VTT technical research center in Espoo, Finland, a Wrtsil Vasa
4R32 engine successfully operated on jatropha oil, fish oil, and
chicken oil.
The first tests with engines running on a liquid biofuel were
carried out in 1995, when Wrtsil began testing with rape-
seed oil. Since 2003, Wrtsil engine power plants have been in
commercial operation using palm oil as the fuel source. Wrtsil
has, as an example, a market share of more than 95% in Italy for
power generation from liquid biofuels. The aim of these recent
tests has been to assess the capability of engines to operate on
renewable fuels that do not compete with agricultural uses.
Alstom to Build Geothermal Plant in Mexico. Alstom in May said
it had won a 45 million turnkey contract with Mexicos Comisin
Federal de Electricidad (CFE) to supply a geothermal power plant,
including key equipment, in Mexico. When completed in October
2011, the 25-MW Los Humeros II geothermal power plant will pow-
er Mexicos eastern Puebla state. Mexico is the fourth-largest geo-
thermal energy producer worldwide, after the U.S., the Philippines,
and Indonesia. Alstom will be the engineering, procurement, and
construction contractor for the project.
Sonal Patel is POWERs senior writer.
Oh yeah? Yeah.
Custom built to your tough
standards, SOR
mechanical
level switches will stand up
reliably to whatever your
process dishes out.
C
m
o
n . . .
po
ur o
n the
pressure.
I can take
it.
913-888-2630 www.sorinc.com
Rough Made Easy.
Power plants are among the largest and most complex engineering and construction
projects in the world. Thats why customers turn to Bechtel when they need more power.
For over 60 years, weve been providing governments and utilities with power facilities
delivered on time and within budget. Weve led the industry in every major sector, from
fossil fuels to nuclear. We set the pace for clean and efcient power generation, exploring
renewable energy like carbon capture, solar, geothermal and biomass, so our customers
can meet their goals for a sustainable future. Competing in a world hungry for power can
be rough. Bechtel helps make it easy.
BECHTEL POWER
Frederick, Maryland, USA
1-301-228-8609
www.bechtel.com
San Francisco
Houston
London
New Delhi
Shanghai
|
July 2009 18
FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M FOCUS ON O&M
FOCUS ON O&M
SYSTEM RELIABILITY
How Company Size
Affects NERC Compliance
In the world of North American Reliabil-
ity Council (NERC) Reliability Standards,
each company (entity) that must comply
with the standards determines for itself
the scope and size of its compliance pro-
gram, based on the scope and size of its
operations. NERC Standards make no ac-
commodation for or distinction between
the scope of compliance programs for a
large, vertically integrated utility and a
small municipality, independent power
producer, or wind generator. This single
standard is particularly apparent in the
Generator Owner and Generator Operator
sections of the standards and the features
of their internal compliance programs.
Today, registered entities must have a
compliance program in placeits no lon-
ger a matter of if but how big. The
standards may be quiet about how the
size and scope of an entity determine the
size and scope of its compliance program,
but policy statements from regulators do
make reference to ways different-size en-
tities can comply with the standards.
An example of a policy statement that
may mean different standards apply to
different-size entities is this passage from
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC) Policy Statement on Compliance
(Docket PL09-1-000 at paragraph 10):
The Commission expects companies
to invest appropriate time and ef-
fort in the creation, monitoring, and
growth of strong internal compliance
programs. Depending on a companys
size and organizational structure, the
nature and complexity of the compa-
nys involvement in activities subject
to Commission regulation, and the
range of compliance risks resulting
from those activities, a comprehen-
sive and effective compliance program
may be time and resource intensive.
The needs and circumstances of each
company are unique, and we recog-
nize that a company may meet its
compliance obligation with internal
resources, outside assistance, or a
combination of the two.
The desired components of a well-
designed compliance program are well
known and are also listed in the FERC
Policy Statement on Compliance, p. 4:
Provide sufficient funding for the ad-
ministration of compliance programs by
the Compliance Officer
Promote compliance by identifying
measurable performance targets
Tie regulatory compliance to personnel
assessments and compensation, includ-
ing compensation of management
Provide for disciplinary consequences
for infractions of Commission require-
ments
Provide frequent mandatory train-
ing programs, including relevant real
world examples and a list of prohib-
ited activities
Implement an internal Hotline through
which personnel may anonymously re-
port suspected compliance issues
Implement a comprehensive compliance
audit program, including the tracking
and review of any incidents of noncom-
pliance, with submission of the results
to senior management and the Board
A large utility could easily conclude
that it must assemble a large, comprehen-
sive compliance team with representation
across the company to carry out the spe-
cific items on the list, draft an internal
compliance procedure document, estab-
lish or modify training programs across
the company to address reliability respon-
sibilities, initiate and develop periodic
monitoring mechanisms with its internal
audit group, and draft more procedures
by which the compliance team will review
and manage all components of the com-
pliance effort by the company.
Alternatively, for a small independent
generator or municipality, these policy state-
ments provide a different, less-cumbersome
path to reach the same results. The smaller
entity will assemble a compliance team
ideally made up of operations, legal, regu-
latory, and senior management representa-
tives. In some cases for the smaller entity,
this would be a team of one person. Simi-
lar flexibility is given for the design and
implementation of training programs, ongo-
ing methods of tracking the latest versions
of applicable standards, and internal audit/
monitoring activities.
These FERC policy statements also give
smaller entities the latitude to use a com-
bination of internal resources and outside
assistance as perhaps the shortest and
most cost-effective road to reach the goal
of implementing a robust compliance pro-
gram while avoiding the substantial costs
of additional staff devoted primarily to
compliance issues.
In the coming months, expect to see
products emerge in the marketplace de-
signed specifically to assist small to
mid-size responsible entities achieve com-
pliance with the NERC Reliability Standards.
The new products will help smaller entities
adhere to the same programmatic require-
ments as their larger counterparts, but
with a more cost-effective and structured
approach designed specifically for them.
By James Stanton (jamesstanton
@att.net), POWER contributing editor and
executive director of SPS ENERGY, a divi-
sion of SPS Consulting Group Inc.
GAS TURBINES
Optimize Gas Turbine Per-
formance Using Acoustic
Simulation Software
Increasingly fierce competition driven by
deregulation and privatization is putting
downward pressure on power plant op-
erations and maintenance (O&M) budgets.
Recently, lower natural gas prices have
pushed natural gasfired combined-cycle
plants higher up in many utilities dispatch
order in some regions, a welcome change
from the twice-a-day cycling experienced
by some plants during the past few years.
However, with more operating hours comes
more interest in plant operating availabil-
ity, and that means increased emphasis on
reliable gas turbine operation (Figure 1).
A phenomenon that potentially in-
1. Keep costs low. Increasingly fierce
competition in the worldwide power gen-
eration business keeps the pressure on plant
owners to find ways to keep O&M costs low
and plant reliability high. Courtesy: Siemens
We look at power plant maintenance
from a different angle.
We build customer-centered
solutions from the ground up
In the power value chain, the breadth of
services, experience, industry knowledge,
strategic vision, and project execution
delivered by Day & Zimmermann is
unmatched.
Our innovative solutions for nuclear,
fossil and hydroelectric power generation
facilities include plant maintenance
and modications, major construction,
fabrication and machining, professional
stafng, as well as valve, condenser, and
radiological services.
This offering enables our suite of
Managed Maintenance Solutions
SM
to
truly be a one-stop shop for all of your
power generation needs.
Safety, Integrity, Diversity, Success
www.dayzim.com
|
July 2009 20
FOCUS ON O&M
fluences the reliability of gas turbine
operation, and therefore the entire
combined-cycle plant, is the presence of
thermo-acoustic oscillations in the com-
bustion chamber. A can annular com-
bustion system arrangement, for example,
typically has 16 (more or less) separate
can-shaped combustion chambers dis-
tributed on a circle perpendicular to the
symmetry axis of the engine. In each of
these combustors, a burner continuously
injects a mixture of fuel gas that is mixed
with compressed air to deliver combus-
tion products at a design temperature,
pressure, and flow rate to the turbine
section to generate the requested electri-
cal power (Figure 2).
The combustor oscillations are deter-
mined by a feedback cycle that combines
the effects of fluid flow, heat transfer,
thermal expansion, and acoustic oscilla-
tionsa cocktail of effects potentially
causing severe engine malfunction and
component damage. Some combustion
turbine manufacturers have constructed
test rigs where prototype combustors
are tested and evaluated against a long
list of operating regimes and conditions.
The disadvantage of prototype testing is
that it requires a significant investment
of capital and does not provide sufficient
flexibility to test alternative designs
under additional operating conditions,
especially those conditions that cause
damaging acoustic oscillations in the
combustion system.
Preventing Thermo-acoustic
Instability
Siemens engineers have analyzed the compli-
cated relationship and interaction between
acoustic performance and thermal heat re-
lease and have developed specific measures
to prevent thermo-acoustic instability. Sven
Bethke, engineer at Siemens Combustion
Technology, explains, Since eigenfrequen-
cies and mode shapes of acoustic pressure
are strongly coupled to the stability analy-
sis, the finite-element (FE) mode analysis
and the subsequent stability analysis are the
main tasks in the thermo-acoustic prediction
and evaluation process.
Siemens Power Generation selected LMS
Acoustics Simulation Software as the key
application for acoustic modeling and sim-
ulation because of its widespread use and
extensive acoustic simulation capabilities.
In the combustion optimization process
followed at Siemens, engineers take the
output of computational fluid dynamics
(CFD) simulations, including steady-state
flow velocity, temperature, and fluid prop-
erties, as input for acoustic simulations
in LMS Acoustics Simulation Software.
For these simulations, several different
acoustic models are used: an FE model of a
single-can combustor configuration; an ex-
tended FE model that includes the incom-
ing flow path upstream the burner, turbine
vanes, and exhaust passage; and a com-
plete multi-can annular combustor setup.
An important and inherent part of the
acoustic FE modeling is the definition of
specific boundary conditions, which are
determined mathematically or experi-
mentally. Siemens engineers validate the
results from acoustic simulation using ap-
propriate tests performed on specifically
designed single-can test rigs.
Advances in Combustor Acoustic
FE Modeling
The implications of defining boundaries
on the FE analysis of a single-can con-
figuration were investigated using LMS
Acoustics Simulation Software. The FE
model includes the whole combustion
chamber, starting at the head end plate
and ending at the exit of the transition
piece upstream the turbine inlet. The cru-
cial regions through the burner as well as
through the termination at the exit of the
combustion chamber are characterized by
absorbent boundary conditions.
The acoustic boundary condition at the
exit of the burnerat the inlet into the
combustion chamberis represented by
a specific impedance, which is quantified
experimentally using an atmospheric test
rig without combustion. At the exit of the
combustion chamber, the guide vanes of
the turbineor a vane simulation section
(VSS) in the case of test rigsdefine the
acoustic boundary condition.
Sophisticated mathematical approaches
are used to describe the flow field down-
stream obstacles within the combustor.
Compared to the fluid flow behind the
vanes, cylinders generate many more vor-
tices, which affect the reflection of the
exit boundary condition. The FE model
obtained is suitable for analyzing the ef-
fects of different impedances, for exam-
ple, from different types of burners and
varying Mach numbers (steady-state flow
velocities). The acoustic simulations show
that the burner type has a significant im-
pact, while flow velocity in the combus-
tion chamber affects the mode shapes of
the acoustic pressure only marginally.
When extending the FE model of a com-
bustor test rig with a VSSwhich replac-
es the vanes of the turbine stagesand
a downstream exhaust discharge tube, it
became clear that the Mach number can-
not be neglected. The presence of narrow
passages causes the geometrys acoustic
properties to be influenced by the speed
of the flow. Siemens engineers determined
the reflection coefficient of the VSS on the
basis of the acoustic pressure distribution,
obtained by FE simulations performed in
LMS Acoustics Simulation Software. The
extended FE model is particularly suited to
determining the impedance of the bound-
ary upstream of the VSS and its dependency
2. Oscillation reaction. The combination of fluid flow, heat transfer, thermal expansion,
and acoustic radiation causes combustor oscillations, which may impact operational range and
cause internal damage to the turbine. This turbine cutaway is of a Siemens SGT6-6000G, formally
known as a W501G, nominally rated at approximately 260 MW. The computational fluid dynamics
(CFD) analysis of the combinations of fluid flow, heat transfer, thermal expansion, and acoustic
radiation can identify situations where combustion oscillation may cause severe damage. The
CFD results illustrate, by the change in colors, azimuthal as well as mixed axial/azimuthal oscilla-
tion modes, for which no experimental test setups are possible. Courtesy: Siemens
July 2009
|
FOCUS ON O&M
on the Mach number through this section.
The results showed a strong dependency on
the Mach number through the VSS.
Acoustic Modes of a Can Annular
Combustor Setup
To study can-to-can interactions, an FE
analysis of a complete multi-can annular
combustor configuration was performed.
The annular manifold upstream of the
turbine inlet interconnects combustion
chambers with adjacent units. The absor-
bent acoustic boundary conditions used
to describe the burner and chamber exit
areas were defined in the same way as for
a single-can model. Simulations in LMS
Acoustics Simulation Software show that,
besides the axial modes along each single-
can combustion chamber, the complete
can annular combustor configuration trig-
gers a range of additional acoustic modes.
It concerns pure azimuthal and mixed
axial/azimuthal modes.
Because there are no test rigs available
for measuring the complete can annular
combustor configuration, these modes are
only predictable by performing acoustic
simulations in LMS Acoustics Simulation
Software (see Figure 2).
The main reason why Siemens performs
these acoustic evaluations is to make sure
all potentially hindering or obstructing
eigenfrequencies and acoustic velocities
are known early on in the design and de-
velopment process. This enables Siemens
engineers to implement specific counter-
measures to disturbing eigenfrequencies,
for example by developing and installing
particular burner outlet extensions and
acoustic resonators.
The length of the extensions mounted
on burner outlets defines the frequency
that can excite the feedback cycle and,
hence, affect the risk for combustion in-
stabilities. The installation of these exten-
sion units is a quite affordable solution
that is particularly useful for suppressing
oscillations in the intermediate range of
frequencies, typically between 50 and 500
hertz. The sensitivity of these extensions
makes this type of countermeasure some-
what harder to tune.
The use of acoustic resonators, which
are part of the standard engine design, is
another way to influence acoustic eigen-
frequencies. This approach is applied very
efficiently to delete acoustic signals with
shorter wavelengths, such as high fre-
quencies between 1,000 and 3,000 hertz.
The geometry of these resonators can
be designed in LMS Acoustics Simulation
Software, but a practical way to avoid re-
current FE meshing is by estimating the
Activated Carbon
Complying with the increasingly stringent regulations on mercury emissions is not something to
take chances with. Norit Americas DARCO

Hg and DARCO

Hg-LH powdered activated carbons
lead the power industry in market share and have been tested at more power plants than any other
carbon. With more than 85 years of experience, Norit Americas Inc. pioneered the use of sorbent
injection in the North American market for mercury control, and has earned the trust of our valued
customers. For a permanent and cost-effective mercury control solution, contact Norit Americas Inc.
No following. Norit. Just leading.
mercury emissions
Norit Americas Inc.
T 800.641.9245
E info@norit-americas.com
I www.norit-americas.com/mercury
If you process it,
load it, unload it,
stack it, stockpile it,
reclaim it, crush it,
blend it or convey it
Roberts & Schaefer can handle it.
From feasibility studies to turnkey projects, Roberts &
Schaefer is recognized around the world as the industry
innovator of bulk material, coal preparation and fuel
handling/blending systems. We provide total solutions for a
wide range of fuels, including PRB, bituminous, lignite and
anthracite coal; woodchips and petroleum coke; as well as
limestone and gypsum handling; and limestone grinding and
transport systems. For complete system development,
upgrades or modifications, we can handle it.
Roberts & Schaefer Company
222 South Riverside Plaza
Chicago, Illinois 60606
312/236-7292
www.r-s.com
Offices also in Australia, Indonesia,
Poland and Salt Lake City
Limestone/gypsum handling and
gypsum barge load out system
Barge unloading, conveying,
stack out and reclaim facility
Coal and woodchip
handling
Coal, limestone
and ash handling
Coal handling and
storage facility
Stacker/Reclaimer Coal preparation
and material handling
Coal blending for
Illinois Basin and PRB coal
Gypsum conveying and
barge load out facility
Conveying, screening and
crushing system
Rapid car unloading,
fuel blending
(Eastern or PRB coal)
Fuel and limestone handling
for CFB boiler
Coal handling for fuel
switch to PRB coal
Pet coke handling facility
July 2009
|
FOCUS ON O&M
geometry analytically and, finally, validating the design using
LMS Acoustics Simulation Software. The cooling of these resona-
tors prevents hot air from accessing the resonator. Resonators
are a very effective means of addressing the problem, although
they add complexity and cost while reducing efficiency of the gas
turbine as a result of the resonators cooling air requirements.
Although the optimization of fluid flow, combustion, and
heat transfer remain primary objectives in gas turbine develop-
ment, more attention is being paid to the interrelations between
acoustic performance and operation reliability and efficiency.
Sven Bethke concludes, The combination of virtual prototype
simulations with LMS Acoustics Simulation Software and ade-
quate experimental testing allows Siemens to efficiently simu-
late the impact of specific design modifications and operating
conditions on the acoustic performance of gas turbines. The
predicted acoustic eigenfrequencies and mode shapes of single-
combustion chambers and can-annular combustion systems are
essential in optimizing combustor designs and increasing the
competitive position of Siemens power generation systems.
Contributed by LMS (www.lmsintl.com).
LUBRICATION
Extreme Oil Changes
Performing regular oil changes on remote generators is far from
simple or cost-effective. Heres how one firm harnessed technolo-
gy to extend oil change intervals from one week to two months.
For most people, an oil change means dropping into the lo-
cal Jiffy Lube or repair shop and driving away 15 minutes later.
For Dennis Fleming, manager of the Valleyview branch of Tarpon
Energy Services Ltd. of Calgary, Alberta, that isnt an option.
Tarpon provides diesel generator sets, primarily to companies
working in the Canadian oil patch, and maintains units up to 700
kilometers away from his headquarters.
It is not uncommon to drive for hours to do a 20-minute oil
change, then hop in the truck and drive back, said Fleming. There
is no way of getting around that when dealing with these remote
locations.
To make matters worse, some locations cant even be reached
by truck. We have even had a couple jobs in northern Alberta
where we were helicoptered in and out for one whole summer
just to change the oil in the unit, he continued. Our guys were
pretty excited about the helicopter rides.
Raising Reliability
Tarpon leases more than 200 Cummins diesel generator sets in
sizes ranging from 20 kW up to 1 MW. The units are mostly used
by oil companies to get a well site up and running until line
power is brought out to the site, though some locations are too
remote to ever connect to the grid. Fleming says that most well
sites use the 100-kW generators to power the surface pumps
or the down-hole submersible electric pumps. The smaller units
might run lights, heaters, and electronics at a site, while the
megawatt-scale generators would be used at new batteries fa-
cilities where the liquids obtained from one or more wells are
stored for initial processing before being sent to the refinery.
The oil producers rely on the generators to always be available.
Even a momentary power glitch will cause the electronic systems
running the down-hole pumps to shut down, requiring a manual
restart. If that happens during dinner or overnight, the wells can
fill with sand. At that point, they will have to bring a service
rig in and pull the pump, clean out the well, put the pump back
Conveying Loading Palletizing Packaging
BEUMER conveying
technology that has
every process nicely
under control.
www.beumer.com
High temperatures. Long distances. Great
heights. Efcient solutions. BEUMER convey-
ing technology always offers you the right
systems and equipment for the transport of
bulk materials like cement, lime, gypsum or
clinker. See for yourself. You can nd more
information about the BEUMER company
and its products on the Internet.
F
P
1
.
B
.
G
B
|
July 2009 24
FOCUS ON O&M
down, and hope it works, said Fleming.
It is quite a costly venture for them.
For most applications the staff works on
improving the reliability of the diesel en-
gines. Many locations have a backup gen-
erator, in case one goes down, which also
makes it easier to schedule maintenance.
They have also doubled up on fuel filters
and installed more inline fuel filters. De-
signing buildings with better airflow is
another option, so that bugs, dirt, dust,
and pollen dont clog the radiators.
The biggest area for improvement,
though, is with engine oil. As built, the
generators required a weekly oil change.
Adding additional oil filtration equipment
extended the oil life to 350 hours, about
two weeks. This was better, but still not
good enough or cost-effective for those
servicing the engines. It was also difficult
to schedule changes that frequently. Tarpon
would have to coordinate with the techni-
cians and the oil company representatives
at the locations, and due to schedule con-
flicts, the oil changes would usually end up
going over that 350-hour margin.
It is simply too often to be shutting
down their system, especially if they have
trouble starting them up again, said Flem-
ing. So I asked the people in my division
to start looking for a way to manage the
short time frame maintenance issue.
Device Enables Less-Frequent
Oil Changes
The answer Fleming found was the OilMate
product from Engineered Machined Prod-
ucts Inc. (EMP) of Escanaba, Mich. OilMate
has an interesting development history.
A large yacht owner had white carpeting
in his yacht, and whenever the engine oil
was changed, some would wind up on the
carpet, which upset the owners wife. The
owner asked for a system that would nev-
er need another oil change. The engines
original equipment manufacturer (OEM) ap-
proached EMP, which designed the OilMate
to address this specific problem (Figure 3).
The OilMate concept is elegant in its
simplicity. With the OilMate, a small por-
tion of the used engine oil is continually
removed from the engine and burned in
the fuel as productive energy. The OilMate
then adds a little bit of fresh oil back into
the sump to replace what was burned.
That way the engine is continually
running on fresh oil, the additives pack-
age is continually refreshed, and you
never have to remove and dispose of the
old oil, explained Bob Vardigan, EMPs
director of sales. A traditional oil bypass
filtration unit does extend the oils life,
though not as much as the OilMate, and
when it reaches the end of life, the oil
is old and dirty, the additive package has
been depleted, and you still have to get
rid of the oil.
The OilMate initially was utilized for
marine diesels and then began being used
as an OEM and aftermarket product for
over-the-road trucks, especially in North
America and Australia. From there the
product expanded to off-road vehicles, in-
cluding the U.S. Armys eight-wheel-drive
Stryker armored combat vehicles. Finally,
it started being deployed for remote gen-
erator sets. With all markets combined,
there are now about 40,000 OilMates in
use worldwide (Figure 4).
Because OilMate had already been tested
by Cummins on the engines run by Tarpon,
Fleming decided to try it out. The system
is capable of going 2,000 hours without
any filter changes whatsoever, and if you
change the filters at that time, the oil in
the reservoirs can last 4,000 hours, he
says. It also extends the service life of the
equipment, so we got a nice bonus.
Contributed by Drew Robb,
a Los Angelesbased writer specializing
in engineering and technology issues.
3. Reduce the oil change interval.
Biweekly oil changes are neither practical nor
efficient for remote gen-sets. That frequency
changed about a year ago, when Tarpon En-
ergy Services Ltd. of Calgary, Alberta, a diesel
engine rental company, started using OilMate
from Engineered Machined Products Inc. Oil
changes are now done once every 2,000 hours
(12 weeks) rather than every two weeks. Cour-
tesy: Engineered Machined Products Inc.
4. OilMate in operation. Here the
OilMate provides protection on a diesel gen-
erator in a mining operation (top), on a diesel
generator used for powering surveillance
equipment (second), on a diesel engine in an
Army vehicle (third), and on a remote-mount-
ed oil filter on an engine used in a remote tele-
communications station (bottom). Courtesy:
Engineered Machined Products Inc.
On schedule for 2013
Westinghouse AP1000
TM
W
E
S
T
I
N
G
H
O
U
S
E

E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C

C
O
M
P
A
N
Y

L
L
C
With the on-time completion of the frst pour of basemat
structural concrete, the frst of four Westinghouse Electric
Company AP1000
TM
nuclear power plants is on schedule to
be completed by 2013 in China.
Westinghouse, the nuclear industry technology leader,
provides an unparalleled range of nuclear technology and
services for customers in China and around the world.
Te AP1000 has passed all the steps for compliance with
European Utility Requirements. And, the AP1000 is the only
Generation III+ plant to receive design certifcation by the
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Westinghouse nuclear technology will help provide future
generations with safe, clean and reliable electricity.
Check us out at www.westinghousenuclear.com
|
July 2009 26
LEGAL & REGULATORY
Brian R. Gish
Too Many Fingers
in the Smart Grid Pie?
T
here has been much excitement about the advent of the
smart grid recently, especially because of the strong push by
the Obama administration. Despite the simple-sounding term,
the smart grid is not a simple concept. It encompasses numerous
complex elements. The smart grid has been touted as the means
of, among other desirable objectives, reducing electricity demand
and costs by giving consumers accurate price and usage signals,
integrating renewable and distributed resources, improving the ro-
bustness of the system in the event of outages, and providing the
infrastructure for the widespread use of electric vehicles.
Because the smart grid promises to address so many compo-
nents across the industry, smart grid initiatives are being over-
seen by manyperhaps too manydifferent organizations and
agencies, as I outline below. This raises the question of whether
the smart grid effort could be advanced more efficiently by using
a more centralized approach.
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), ex-
panding on 2005 legislation, provides the statutory framework
for much of the national smart grid effort. The EISA gave the DOE
the responsibility to:
Establish a Smart Grid Task Force made up of members of mul-
tiple federal agencies to coordinate federal efforts and make
recommendations to Congress.
Establish a Smart Grid Advisory Committee to include private
and nonfederal governmental entities to advise relevant fed-
eral officials on matters involving smart grid development.
Facilitate research on smart grid technologies.
Establish smart grid demonstration projects.
Study and report on infrastructure security aspects of the
smart grid.
The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)
appropriated funds for smart grid grants, for which the DOE has
issued solicitations of nearly $4 billion. ARRA also instructed the
DOE to establish a Smart Grid Clearinghouse for the sharing of
demonstration results and research.
National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST)
The EISA instructed NIST (within the Department of Commerce)
to develop standards and protocols for the interoperability of
smart grid devices and systems. NIST is directed to seek input
and cooperation from a number of federal agencies and private
organizations, including the Gridwise Architecture Council,
the International Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and the
National Electrical Manufacturers Association. NIST has been
working on this complex standards development task for some
time, and a considerable amount of additional work will be
necessary to complete it.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
The EISA gives FERC a consultation role in many of the DOEs
smart grid activities. In addition, FERC is charged with institut-
ing a rulemaking, after NIST achieves sufficient consensus on
interoperability standards, to approve those standards. The FERC
interoperability rulemaking is expected to commence later this
year. Additionally, FERC will have responsibilities for oversight
of system reliability and security issues associated with trans-
mission aspects of the smart grid and will have to consider rate
recovery for smart grid investments within its jurisdiction.
FERC issued a proposed policy statement in March to begin
sorting out these issues and to advise NIST of criteria for ac-
ceptable standards. A Smart Grid Collaborative has been created
between FERC and the National Association of Regulatory Utility
Commissioners, and this group has made recommendations to
the DOE on criteria for smart grid demonstration grants.
State Public Utility Commissions (PUCs)
Many smart grid technologies will be deployed at the local dis-
tribution level, which is subject to state PUC jurisdiction. The
EISA instructed states to consider smart grid issues. The PUCs
have made clear that they do not intend to relinquish their
jurisdiction over advanced meters, rate recovery, pricing struc-
tures, and other issues affecting utilities and retail customers
under their domain. State-federal turf battles are possible.
Other Players
The Federal Communications Commission will likely play a role
in issues of wireless data transmission, broadband infrastruc-
ture expansion, and the potential for radio frequency interfer-
ence. The EISA also designates the Department of Homeland
Security as a consultation agency for grid security issues. The
recently announced White House coordinator on cybersecurity
issues may have responsibilities to address cyber vulnerabili-
ties of smart grid equipment. And the North American Electric
Reliability Corp. will necessarily be involved in reliability as-
pects of the transmission system.
Team Captain Needed
This quick overview of the disparate players involved in regu-
lating the development of the smart grid clearly demonstrates
the potential for balkanization of responsibilities with the pos-
sibility of overlapping and conflicting efforts. The relationships
become much more complicated when the numerous hardware
and software suppliers and consultants vying for a piece of the
action are added to the mix.
While ensuring technology interoperability, perhaps we should
also enable organizational interoperability by naming a single
smart grid czar with implementation authority over all smart
grid activities.
Brian R. Gish (briangish@dwt.com) is of counsel
in Davis Wright Tremaines Energy Practice Group.
MAGENTA (MI) - ITALY
via Robecco, 20
Tel. +39 02 972091
Fax +39 02 9794977
e-mail: stf@stf.it
www.stf.it
BURMEISTER & WAIN ENERGY A/S
DK - 2820 Gentofte.Denmark
jaegersborg Alle 164
Tel. +45 39 45 20 00
Fax +45 39 45 20 05
e-mail: info@bwe.dk
www.bwe.dk
|
July 2009 28
PLANT CONTROLS
Digital Networks Prove Reliable,
Reduce Costs
The debate over the benefits of using digital bus networks as the communi-
cations backbone of new power plants is all but settled. The technology
is maturing, and the reliability of digital hardware is superior to that of
hardwired systems. Newmont Gold Minings 200-MW TS Power Plant is
perhaps the power industrys best example of how a plantwide digital
controls architecture can provide exceptional reliability and be signifi-
cantly less costly to install.
By Ali Abdallah, PE and James H. Brown, PE, PMP, Fluor Corp.
N
ewmont Gold Minings 200-MW
TS Power Plant (TSPP) (Figure 1)
was a POWER 2008 Top Plant, and
a complete description of the plants design
features can be found in the October 2008
issue. However, that article only devoted a
single paragraph to describe what we be-
lieve is the most advanced digital bus archi-
tecture ever installed on a coal-fired power
plant. This article provides details of the
TSPP control architecture, equipment se-
lection, and many of the lessons we learned
during this project. It also demonstrates the
cost and potential schedule improvement
opportunities of using advanced digital ar-
chitectures in future plants.
Fluor Power was selected as the engi-
neering, procurement, construction, and
commissioning (EPCC) contractor to com-
plete TSPP in July 2004. Newmont selected
DTE Energy as the owners engineer to
work with Fluor in developing the plant
design specifications and for consultation
in reviewing Fluors designs. DTE Energy
was also contracted by Newmont to provide
construction oversight services and began
providing Newmont O&M services when
the plant was commissioned in early 2008.
Digital Bus Networking Saves
Time and Money
The traditional power plant distributed con-
trol system (DCS) architecture provides de-
vice control and monitoring via hardwired
signals over a shielded twisted pair of wires
and has been the standard in new plant de-
sign for decades. Electronic signals are sent
to devices (transmitters, control valves, elec-
tric motoroperated valves, and the like) by
varying the current through the circuit with
a signal that ranges from 4-20 mA. This de-
sign requires each individual device signal
wire to either home run back to the central
plant DCS server room or a field-located
DCS input/output (I/O) cabinet. A single
plant may have thousands of these devices.
Sometimes there are multiple signal and
control cables from each device, with many
devices even needing a separate power feed
that further adds to the number of wires that
must be individually installed.
Digital bus networking uses a similar
means of signal transport over a shielded
twisted pair of wires. In a digital burst, the
signal is transmitted by varying the voltage
on the two wires as opposed to an analog
current signal, and multiple devices are al-
lowed to share the same wires. This single
cable is typically referred to as a trunk
or segment. The devices connected to the
segments are called drops or spurs. Seg-
ment protectors are located along the trunk
or segment as a point of connection for mul-
tiple instruments located on separate spurs.
The segment protectors sustain the network
should there be a loss of an instrument along
the trunk line. The devices connected to the
segments can communicate integrally, with-
out requiring a DCS controller in between.
In addition to transmitting signals, power to
some devices is handled through the same
shielded twisted pair of wires.
The major benefits of digital bus net-
works are the cable purchase savings and
the follow-on material and labor savings as-
sociated with their installation, either in un-
derground conduit or overhead tray (Figure
2). The potential savings can be significant:
One control system supplier has suggested
that life-cycle savings up to $20 million
over conventional hardwired analog con-
trols is possible on a greenfield 800-MW
coal-fired power plant.
Critical Design Decisions
Delays in receiving TSPPs air permit re-
stricted Newmonts advanced material
1. Out of sight. TSPP, located in Eureka Country, Nevada, gives new meaning to the
words remote I/O. Courtesy: Fluor
Answers Ior energy.8
;Zg8A8Z\abô^8\r[^k8l^\nkbmr
pbmahnm8blheZmbg`8fr8ieZgml8Zll^ml
WIIh SIemens` sIaIe-oI-Ihe-arI SPPA-T3000 conIroI sysIem, sIayIng compeIIIIve
and NLRC-CIP compIIanI go hand-In-hand.88
During lhese challenging limes, you shouldn'l have lo worry aboul whelher your conlrol syslem meels all ol your
cyber securily requiremenls. The SPPA-T3000 conlrol syslem is "NLPC-ClP-ready, and ils innovalive Lmbedded
Componenl Services" lechnology provides a simpliled and inlegraled conlrol plallorm lhal is lasl becoming lhe
new slandard lor lhe power generalion induslry. ln addilion, lhe SPPA-T3000 can be securely operaled remolely,
giving you lhe level ol securily, accessibilily and lexibilily lhal you lruly need. To learn more, visil us al
ppplb^f^gl\hf^g^k`r\r[^kl^\nkbmr
|
July 2009 30
PLANT CONTROLS
purchases to critical path equipment only,
such as the steam turbine and boilernot
the plant DCS. Based on prior traditional
power projects, there was no incentive to
select the DCS supplier too early in the
project because the I/O count and the plan
for the distributed network was far from be-
ing finalized. The old assumption that early
DCS supplier selection isnt critical is not
necessarily true with the new digital ar-
chitectureat least not until there is more
widespread acceptance within the power
industry, equipment supplier capabilities
improve, and communications interface de-
velopment mature.
Although many equipment and instru-
ment suppliers say that they support com-
munications on digital bus networks, even
with the establishment of the Fieldbus
Foundation, Profibus protocols, and Devi-
ceNet standards, you must be very specific
about the design approach used for the in-
terface (down to software revision, master/
slave definition, and the like). The earlier
you select the DCS supplier, the sooner
these requirements can be strictly specified
in major and minor equipment specification
requirements, thus reducing future supplier
change requests. As more digital architec-
ture power plants are constructed, supplier
familiarity and support of advanced plant
controls will certainly reduce lead times
to those of the more conventional analog
schemes.
The later purchase of the DCS, and
therefore the bus interface, required a few
exceptions to the goal of using a compre-
hensive digital bus architecture at TSPP.
For example, the TSPP project team deter-
mined that the boiler burner management
system would be hardwired in accordance
with traditional DCS power plant architec-
ture. Additionally, the steam turbine gen-
erators control system would be purchased
with the turbine and would be hardwired;
however, the control system would commu-
nicate to the plant DCS via a digital com-
munications platform.
All other process controls and monitor-
ing were eligible for consideration as part
of the digital bus network. Evaluation was
based on suitability of the data transferred
with an available bus protocol, potential
cable savings, and complexity of the inter-
faces required.
Many Competing Protocols
Multiple technologies are available for
digital communication in the plant environ-
ment network, including Foundation Field-
bus, Profibus, and DeviceNet (Figure 3).
Each has its own limitations, implementa-
tion requirements, and capabilities. Selec-
tion of the correct approach must be made
by an experienced control systems engineer
familiar with the scalability and robustness
of each protocol.
Consultation with DCS suppliers and
major equipment suppliers is vital to en-
sure that an appropriate protocol selection
is made and that optimum, reliable, and
cost-effective performance is achieved. The
final selection of the architecture should be
made in collaboration with the DCS sup-
plier to minimize interface issues down the
road and ensure the bus interface require-
ments are well defined in all equipment
purchase specification.
All equipment specifications must have
a well-defined scope of work that includes
a clear definition of the interface handoff at
the purchase boundaries. For TSPP, defini-
tion of the interfaces was made; however,
complications arose in some applications
due to compatibility with varying revisions,
master/slave drivers, and late supplier soft-
ware changes.
We also made a conscious effort to
standardize our device supplier and com-
munications protocols where possible.
Communications protocols should be de-
fined in advance and be limited to certain
particular protocols that are supported by
the DCS supplier in order to minimize the
use of protocol converters and commission-
ing interface issues that will inevitably ap-
pear later in the project.
If a certain supplier cannot support the
defined communications protocols, then a
traditional hardwired installation may be
more practical than trying to implement
an additional, new protocol. For exam-
ple, at TSPP the design team recognized
that there would be multiple applications
where variable frequency drives (VFD)
3. One-wire communications. Typical Foundation Fieldbus devices used at TSPP.
Courtesy: Fluor
Traditional 420 mA architecture
Controller
Controller
I/O
subsystem
I/O
subsystem
MCCs/switchgear TT PT CV MCCs/switchgear
Control
net
Digital bus architecture
Probus V1
H1 (Foundation Fieldbus)
TT PT CV
HSE
2. Old and new. This diagram compares a traditional analog architecture with the new
digital bus architecture for power plant controls. Source: Fluor
July 2009
|
PLANT CONTROLS
would be employedsome VFDs pur-
chased direct by Fluor and some provided
through subsuppliers of major equipment
packages. Standardizing on a single sup-
plier reduced the number of communica-
tion interface types and simplified factory
acceptance testing.
Next, we made sure the project had a
well-defined tagging convention as part of
the system architecture design. Assignment
of tags to devices needs to be established
for automated devices, and the tag-naming
convention needs to be compatible with the
constraints imposed by the DCS system. For
instance, the tag names on Fluor piping and
instrumentation drawings drawings were
consistent with regard to the number of sub-
fields and the number of characters in the
subfields of the tag name, but the electrical
single lines with equipment with DCS inter-
faces did not include a loop number, which
made it difficult to define the interface of
these devices with the DCS.
One design approach we used at TSPP
was to provide more than the typical num-
ber of spares in remote I/O cabinets. This
extra space served as an insurance policy
against some digital devices dropping back
to a hardwired configuration should a digi-
tal communications approach not be fea-
sible. As it turns out, the additional space
was only needed in a couple of instances,
but this preplanning saved much time and
money later in the project.
Table 1 summarizes the various types of
communication protocols used at TSPP by
type. Table 2 illustrates the shift from the
traditional control system structure hard
I/O to the more advanced soft I/O system
architecture in terms of their percentage use
at TSPP.
DCS Selection Criteria
ABBs 800xA series equipment was se-
lected as the DCS for TSPP in August 2005.
One of the key selection criteria was ABBs
open system design, which is well-suited
for this project given the numerous types of
communications employed at this plant.
The criteria for selecting a DCS suppli-
er on a large-scale digital project must be
heavily weighted on the experience the par-
ticular supplier will bring to the project. The
value added in working with a supplier that
has significant experience interfacing with
a broad range of devices through various
communication protocols was paramount
to our success with this complicated digital
bus network project.
Additionally, the field support structure
the DCS supplier has in place, and the sup-
pliers experience in commissioning these
systems, is very important in the evaluation.
Given the multitude of communications pro-
tocols, the skill level of the suppliers DCS
technicians and engineers must be part of the
evaluation criteria. In the past, many control
system suppliers provided many general-
ists supporting the traditional analog DCS.
Today, multiple highly qualified technicians
familiar with the base control system plat-
form language itself and the communica-
tions protocols may be necessary.
Ethernet control A level below the servers, ties the ABB DCS controllers together in
a common network. The redundant AC800M connectivity servers
bridge data ow between the Ethernet control network and
the Ethernet data network.
FF H1 Foundation Fieldbus H1 segments for connecting to the Foundation
Fieldbus gateways to the Foundation Fieldbus eld devices.
RIO PB cluster Communications between the ABB DCS controllers and the
ABB remote I/O racks via Probus-DP technology that incorporates
ABBs dual redundant Probus-DP architecture.
PB-DP device Probus-DP segments for direct connection to eld device.
PB-DP to DN
converters
Probus-DP segments for connection to DeviceNet networks
via AnyBus PB/DN.
MB serial RS-232 and RS-485 serial connections to devices utilizing
the Modbus protocol.
OPC/PLC Ethernet connection utilizing OPC for sharing data
with PLC controllers.
OPC/DNP Ethernet connection utilizing OPC for sharing data with devices that
utilize the DNP protocol (SEL-2032 and the Generator Protection Panel).
SEL RS-232 Serial communications between the SEL-2032 Communications
Processors and the medium-voltage protective relays that ultimately
utilize DNP via OPC to the DCS.
OPC/MB Ethernet connection utilizing OPC for sharing data with devices
that utilize Modbus over Ethernet.
D-EHC=digital electro hydraulic control
OPC/D-EHC Ethernet connection utilizing OPC for sharing data with
the Toshiba D-EHC DCS system.
OPC
Ethernet data The highest level of communications in the ABB DCS architecture,
tying together the HMI equipment (operator and engineering) to the
various servers and printers and to the plant LAN.
Primary DCS
networks
FF HSE Foundation Fieldbus high-speed Ethernet communication that links
each Foundation Fieldbus gateway (4 H1 ports) to the host DCS
control processor and also links all Foundation Fieldbus gateways
to the Foundation Fieldbus connectivity server that allows for
higher-level Foundation Fieldbus device data collection independent
of control data ow.
Foundation
Fieldbus
RIO FM cluster Communications between the ABB DCS controllers and the ABB
remote I/O racks via proprietary ABB Fiberoptic ModuleBus
technology (on this project this applies only to the Burner
Management System controllers and I/O racks).
Control I/O
segments
PB-DP RIO Probus-DP segments for remote third-party I/O interface. Probus-DP
architecture
I/O
category
Bus
code
Bus node
type
Bus code description
Percent
total I/O
FF Device Foundation Fieldbus to eld instrument 11.7
FM RIO Fiber optic ModuleBus to I/O modules cluster 11.0
MB NIC Modbus: DCS E-Net link with foreign controller 1.6
MB Serial Modbus: Serial link with DCS controller 0.5
OP NIC OPC: DCS communications with foreign controller 33.2
V1 RIO Probus-DPV1 to I/O modules cluster hardwired to devices 30.6
100.0% Total I/O
DN Device DeviceNet to eld device 11.1 Soft I/O
69.1% Subtotal soft I/O:
V1 Device Probus-DPV1 to eld remote I/O device
hardwired to components
0.3 Hard I/O
30.9% Subtotal hard I/O:
Table 1. Communication protocols used at TSPP. Source: Fluor
Table 2. Percentages of I/O bus architecture type at TSPP. Source: Fluor
|
July 2009 32
PLANT CONTROLS
DCS supplier training, with a key em-
phasis on interfaces, should also be part of
the DCS supplier evaluation.
Beyond the DCS
There are multiple approaches to designing
and implementating the segment definition
and device assignment. Finding the best ap-
proach for this digital bus project depended
largely on the project schedule, availability
of supplier information, definition of device
locations, the number and skill of the field
engineering staff, and complexity of the
network. DCS supplier controller process-
ing speed, loading, and critical loop defini-
tion can also be used to evaluate segment
assignments.
Unfortunately, most new power projects
dont have the luxury of a completed de-
sign prior to the start of construction. The
potential schedule gains and early project
completion opportunity associated with
fast-tracking projects typically outweighs
the additional risk of field rework due to
late supplier information and design com-
pletion. Newmonts TSPP was no excep-
tion: Construction was mobilized when
engineering was just over 50% complete.
Where final design information was
unavailable, instrument location drawings
were developed based on preliminary data
or good engineering judgment given the
processes and plant general arrangement.
Instruments were located in the plant 3-D
model and plan cuts made to produce con-
struction drawings. The instruments direct-
ly purchased by Fluor (typically installed
on Fluor-supplied pipe and equipment)
were much easier to locate in the plant 3-D
model than equipment supplierprovided
instruments.
After development of these instrument
location drawings, a first-pass Fieldbus
segment assignment was made. The power
draw for devices on the segment and the
length of the segment will impact seg-
ment topology, and these factors were also
considered in the design. Fieldbus wiring
guidelines typically limit the number of de-
vices on each Fieldbus segment to 32, but
this number is derated to 16 devices if pow-
ered by the segment, and further reduced to
just six devices if they are in intrinsically
safe applications. The Fieldbus Foundation
further recommends that spur lengths be
limited to 120 meters (393 feet).
There is one downside of the digital bus
architecture: If a single trunk cable fails,
there are potentially more devices in jeop-
ardy than if you lose a wire to a single 4-20
mA hardwired device (Figure 4). This is
another consideration in segment assign-
ments, as multiple critical instruments
may be segregated to ensure that failure of
any single segment does not cause a cata-
strophic failure or a plant forced outage.
Factory Acceptance Testing
Unlike the traditional straightforward 4-20
mA interfacing between the control sys-
tem and monitoring equipment and instru-
ments, digital bus projects must deal with
the communication interfaces necessary for
an open control system design. Proponents
have suggested that one of each like-kind of
instruments or devices be sent to the DCS
manufacturers shop for functional testing
and to ensure that the communications in-
terface is verified. For like-kind devices, we
believe it is critical that the exact software
and appropriate revision used for factory
acceptance testing is the same as what will
be deployed on the project. We believe this
approach was well worth the additional co-
ordination expense incurred.
Construction and Commissioning
One of the greatest benefits of digital bus
architecture is the reduced need for expen-
sive analog system cables. Fluor evaluated
the cable savings potential at project ini-
tiation versus a similar-size reference plant
that had traditional control system architec-
4. Safe and secure. This segment protector installation at TSPP serves as the com-
munications hub for multiple digital bus devices. Courtesy: Fluor
5. Plan ahead. A typical level transmitter is shown with excess prefabricated cable
coil. The excess cable is due to using precut lengths with shop-installed connectors to ease
installation. Courtesy: Fluor
July 2009
|
PLANT CONTROLS
ture with the majority of the I/O hardwired.
Beyond the direct cable savings, benefits
were realized in fewer cable trays, smaller
cabling corridors/rooms, less physical con-
gestion, and lower labor density in work
areas. All of these benefits contributed to
greater construction productivity. For TSPP,
the projected cable savings was approxi-
mately 30% of the total cable footage.
In the event that an instrument is located
too far from the assigned segment protector,
construction can add an additional segment
protector daisy-chained to take full advan-
tage of the Foundation Fieldbus available
trunk line length limits rather than change
the way the instruments are assigned in the
DCS (Figure 5).
The typical commissioning process
includes a point-to-point check or loop
check of each control and signal wire from
the control room DCS to the field device.
Loop checks using traditional 4-20 mA
hardwire communications serving as the
primary means of data transfer always seem
to eventually become the critical path tasks
to complete construction and to begin the
commissioning tasks.
The digital bus architecture used at TSPP
streamlined much of the traditional loop
checking, thereby significantly accelerating
the wire-checking process. The traditional
loop check metrics are often based on the
number of loops completed per day in a giv-
en shift. Though the rate of loops completed
per shift can be improved on a digital bus
project with more field device technicians,
control room density for the other end of
the loop usually limits the number of checks
possible at any particular time (Figure 6).
Another advantage of the streamlining
that the DCS enabled concerned labor. The
remote, high-desert area around TSPP made
it difficult to attract and retain experienced
electricians. Any design planning or ad-
vanced technology that could help reduce
the need for onsite labor was especially
beneficial at TSPP given the plants remote
location.
Future Digital Networks
Newmonts TS Power Plant project provid-
ed Fluor the unique opportunity to broaden
its experience using digital bus communica-
tions in the power industry. Since entering
commercial operation in June 2008, TSPP
has operated with an annual availabil-
ity greater than 95% and an availability of
100% thus far for 2009 going into its first
planned annual outage in May, demonstrat-
ing that the digital bus architecture is here
to stay.
We have built on the lessons learned
at TSPP and further broadened the use of
digital communications on a more recent
power project, a 2 x 800-MW supercritical
coal-fired facility that is currently being
constructed and commissioned. As with
any new technology advancement, experi-
ences gained will benefit future project ex-
ecutions and the way engineers approach
implementation.
The authors wish to acknowledge
the technical expertise and support of
Patrick Wilhelm, an electrical design
engineer at Fluor. His contributions to
this article and to the successfully im-
plementation of the digital bus network
at TSPP are greatly appreciated.
Ali Abdallah, PE is electrical and
controls supervisor and James H. Brown,
PE, PMP (james.brown@fluor.com) is di-
rector of design engineeringsolid fueled
projects for Fluor Corp.
6. Digital domain. The control room operators oversee the network of device commu-
nications at Newmonts TSPP. Courtesy: Fluor
1-800-345-BOLT (USA)
1-412-279-1149 (International)
BOLTING PROBLEMS?
Meet the solution:
Our products save time and increase worker safety.
To learn more, request your FREE DVD or catalog at:
www.superbolt.com
Patented Multi-
Jackbolt Tensioners
only require hand/
air tools to install
or remove. This
eliminates unsafe
and time consuming
bolting methods!
|
July 2009 34
STEAM TURBINES
Designing an Ultrasupercritical
Steam Turbine
Carbon emissions produced by the combustion of coal may be collected and
stored in the future, but a better approach (in the near term at least) is to
reduce the carbon produced through efficient combustion technologies.
Increasing the efficiency of new plants using ultrasupercritical technology
will net less carbon released per megawatt-hour using the worlds abun-
dant coal reserves while producing electricity at the lowest possible cost.
By Heinrich Klotz, Alstom, Germany; Ken Davis, AEP; and Eric Pickering, Alstom, USA
P
ushing the technology envelope to si-
multaneously minimize pollutants and
fuel consumption through improved
plant efficiency is the goal of every util-
ity with an environmental conscience. One
approach to achieving these goals is select-
ing coal-fired steam generation equipment
operating at ultrasupercritical (USC) steam
conditions. At these extremely high pres-
sures and temperatures, a coal-fired power
plant can operate with a net plant thermal ef-
ficiency over 44% based on the higher heat-
ing value of coal. Future development efforts
target net plant efficiencies at or above 48%
within the next decade.
In this article, we show the effects of in-
creasing the steam turbine operating condi-
tions for a new USC project in the U.S. and
quantify the potential CO
2
reductions this
advanced design makes possible.
Coal Conundrum
Coal is a very attractive resource in the
U.S. for power generation due both to its
availability and the estimated 250 years
of reserves still in the ground. As utilities
strive to keep up with rising demand for
electricity, coal-fired generation remains
exceedingly economical and the preferred
fuel source for 50% of the U.S. electricity
consumed.
The bad news is that coal-fired power
plants are under heavy scrutiny, and there is
strong political pressure to further limit pol-
lutant emissions and begin regulating green-
house gasses. Currently, 30% of worldwide
CO
2
emissions come from power plants,
and most U.S. plants average more than 30
years of age. Alstom estimates that if all ex-
isting plants in the world were replaced by
the latest, most-efficient plants, two gigatons
of CO
2
emissions would be avoided every
year. If all coal-fired units in the U.S. were
replaced by state-of-the-art coal combus-
tion technology, the coal power sectors CO
2

emissions could drop by 25%, or almost 500
million metric tons annually.
First U.S. Ultrasupercritical Project
American Electric Power (AEP), one of the
largest electric utility power producers and
distributors in the U.S., recognizes the need
to continue to develop new coal-fired gen-
eration to meet projected load growth in its
service territories, including west Arkansas
and east Texas. To that end, construction on
the John W. Turk, Jr. Power Plant (TPP), a
600-MW net coal-fired project that will in-
troduce USC technology into the U.S., be-
gan in November 2008 (Figure 1). Integrated
gasification combined-cycle (IGCC) was
also explored as an alternative, although the
supplier guarantees were stronger from the
vendor supplying the USC plant. Table 1 il-
lustrates the slight difference in CO
2
emis-
1. One of a kind. AEPs John W. Turk, Jr. Power Plant will be the only ultrasupercritical
power plant in the U.S. when the $1.5 billion project enters commercial service in 2012. Shown
is an artists concept of the project at completion. Courtesy: AEP
Emission Ultrasupercritical Subcritical Integrated gasication combined cycle
CO
2
0.97 tons/MWh 1.06 tons/MWh 0.99 tons/MWh
Table 1. CO
2
from various technology options. AEPs evaluation of John W.
Turk, Jr. Power Plant emissions for different combustion technologies. The fuel used in the
evaluation is subbituminous coal. Source: AEP
|
July 2009 36
STEAM TURBINES
sions from IGCC, subcritical, and USC plant
designs considered by AEP.
Another key metric that persuaded AEP
to adopt USC technology is its efficiency.
A USC plant operates with steam condi-
tions above 3,500 psia and 1,100F (593C).
For comparison, a conventional supercriti-
cal unit operates at steam temperatures of
1,000F to1,050F (538C to 566C) and pres-
sure typically up to 3,500 psia, levels that
require careful equipment configuration
decisions.
The design for TPPs steam turbine effi-
ciently optimizes steam cycle and operating
parameters, uses the best advanced materials
to operate reliably under these pressures and
temperatures, uses a welded rotor design to
match materials with the extreme operating
environment, and includes new high-pressure
(HP) and intermediate-pressure (IP) turbine
design. Also, an Alstom Gigatop generator
with direct hydrogen-cooled rotor and stator
core and water-cooled stator windings, rated
at 840 MVA, was selected.
Compact and Reliable
Configuration
The resulting USC steam turbine con-
figuration for TPP is a condensing tandem
compound single-reheat, 3,600-rpm steam
turbine generator set. The proven Alstom
STF60 design includes a four-casing steam
turbine with a single-flow HP turbine, a
double-flow IP turbine, and two double-
flow downward exhaust low-pressure (LP)
turbines. The IP turbine is connected to the
LP turbines through crossover pipes. The
complete turbine configuration is illustrated
in Figure 2.
HP and IP turbine casings are separate
in Alstoms standard design. This compact
design is not prone to self-excited vibra-
tion, which may occur in some combined
HP/IP turbines. Unbalanced axial thrust
forces experienced in some combined HP/
IP designs cannot occur because the axial
thrust of each cylinder is balanced under all
operating conditions, including load rejec-
tion and bypass operation. Furthermore, the
long-term efficiency of the separate HP and
IP casing design is superior because steam
cannot leak through the seal between the HP
and IP sections.
The compact casings, together with the
single-bearing design, lead to a short over-
all shaft length and thus a shorter turbine.
All turbine and generator bearings are in-
dependent of the casing structure and are
directly supported on the foundation. This
principle makes shaft alignment easy, short-
ens overall unit erection time, and ensures
long-term, stable running behavior of the
steam turbine generator set. Inlet valves are
directly flanged to the HP and IP casings
in the design used at TPP. This eliminates
turbine inlet loop or connection piping and
yields higher efficiency, better accessibility,
and ease of maintenance.
Optimized Steam Cycle
There are rules of thumb we use to quickly
determine the benefits of USC operating con-
ditions versus subcritical steam turbine con-
ditions that we would like to share:
Raising the main pressure by 100 psia im-
proves the plant net efficiency by about
0.16%.
Increasing the main steam temperature by
10F improves plant efficiency by 0.16%.
Increasing reheat steam temperature by
10F improves plant efficiency by approxi-
mately 0.13%.
A 10F increase of the final feedwater tem-
perature improves plant net efficiency by
about 0.1%.
These rules do have application limita-
tions. For example, increasing steam con-
ditions to improve efficiency is limited by
available metallurgy and cost. Nevertheless,
the key to improved cycle efficiency is to
raise steam temperatures as high as possible.
The final optimized steam conditions select-
ed for TPP are shown in Table 2.
TPP was designed with eight heaters to
raise the final feedwater temperature to im-
prove efficiency as compared with a tradi-
tional subcritical unit utilizing six to seven
heaters (Figure 3). Also, a heater above the
reheat pressure (HARP cycle) is used. Down-
stream, four stages of low-pressure conden-
sate heaters, one deaerator, and three stages
of high-pressure feedwater heaters are used.
An extraction from the HP turbine steam path
feeds the top heater.
The HARP cycle has one big advantage:
Its design allows optimization of the final
feedwater temperature independent of the
reheater pressure while reducing moisture
at the LP exhaust. At TPP, a final feedwater
temperature of 570F was chosen to optimize
performance while maintaining boiler oper-
ating constraints.
TPPs optimized steam cycle heat rate
570F
3,515 psia/1,110F
750 psia/1,125F
HP IP 2x LP34B
672 MW
1.23 psia
(2.5 in Hg)
378F
4,390 psia
388F
Pmech
20.8 MW
Measurement
Boiler
outlet
Turbine
inlet
Main steam pressure 3,625 psia 3,515 psia
Main steam temperature 1,115F 1,110F
Reheat steam temperature 1,130F 1,125F
2. Compact and reliable arrange-
ment. The TPP steam turbine is a condens-
ing tandem compound single-reheat design.
It includes a four-casing steam turbine with a
single-flow high-pressure turbine, a double-
flow intermediate-pressure turbine, and two
double-flow downward exhaust low-pressure
turbines. The turbine operates at 3,600 rpm.
Courtesy: Alstom
Table 2. Steam conditions for
AEPs John W. Turk, Jr. Power
Plant. Source: Alstom
3. Eight is enough. The TPP steam cycle uses eight feedwater heaters in a HARP con-
figuration. The optimized steam cycle is shown with data taken from the average conditions for
the heat rate guarantee. Source: Alstom
July 2009
|
STEAM TURBINES
guarantee is based on 20% summer, 20%
winter, and 60% annual average operating
conditions. The condenser pressure on the
cycle diagram (Figure 2) represents the aver-
age condition for the heat rate guarantee. In
addition, the TPP cycle uses a 100% single-
flow boiler feed pump turbine that is fully in-
tegrated into the main steam turbine systems.
The entire steam turbine system is controlled
by an Alstom digital control system.
Due to the elevated steam parameters and
increased final feedwater temperature, the
672-MW gross TPP plant will be about 6.2%
higher in efficiency than a new-build sub-
critical unit of comparable power rating. This
increased efficiency equates to a reduction of
more than 300,000 metric tons of CO
2
per
year and about 10 million metric tons of CO
2

over a 30-year lifetime compared to a new-
build subcritical steam turbine unit. A com-
parison of various cycle parameters based
on Alstom cycle calculations is illustrated in
Figure 4.
Alstom has been in the business of supply-
ing supercritical steam turbines since 1957.
Alstoms supercritical fleet now numbers
66 units with a total capacity of 44 GW. In-
cluded in that total are AEP and Tennessee
Valley Authority cross-compound units rated
at 1,300 MW each. The two units in the Lip-
pendorf power plant in Germany (930 MW
each) are Alstoms largest single-shaft units.
They have been in operation since 1999. An
1,100-MW single-shaft unit is under con-
struction today with main steam temperature
of 1,112F and reheat up to 1,148F.
Major Material Advances
Realizing a robust steam turbine design op-
erating at USC steam conditions is all about
selecting the right materials of construction.
Alstom and its partners completed extensive
studies of forgings, castings, and piping on
high creep rupture strength, resistance to
embrittlement, metallurgical stability, low
oxidation velocity, oxidation layer strength,
and ease of manufacture. Inside the turbine,
advanced materials in the HP and IP rotor, in-
ner casings, valve casings, and inlet blading
stages were selected. In particular 9% to12%
Cr ferritic steels are used in order to maintain
operational flexibility. Table 3 shows the spe-
cific materials used in the TPP steam turbine
design. The CB2 materials for castings and
the FB2 materials for forgings were devel-
oped in the COST 522 program.
Figure 5 shows the progression of mate-
rial selection from X20 steel used in a con-
ventional subcritical design to the active
European development program COST 536,
which is developing suitable steam turbine
materials for the next generation of USC
steam turbines. Materials from the COST
501 program for applications up to 1,130F
(610C) have been in operation for almost
10 years. New materials with higher creep
strength and higher oxidation resistance are
available from the COST 522 program for
operation up to 1,165F (630C) and will be
applied to many Alstom USC steam turbine
projects under construction in Europe (up to
1,148F/620C for reheat) as well as the TPP
steam turbine.
Turbine Design Features
Constructing rotors from several smaller
forged disks allows the use of different ma-
terials for each section of the rotor, to match
the optimum material for the exact opera-
0
3
6
9
8
7
5
4
2
1
12
100
14
13
11
10
E
f
c
i
e
n
c
y

i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t

(
%
)
P
S
= 2,400 psia
T
S
= 1,000F
T
RH
= 1,000F
T
FFW
= 490F
Notes: P
S
= steam pressure, T
S
= steam temperature, T
RH
= reheat steam temperature,
T
FFW
= nal feedwater temperature.
0.0%
P
S
= 3,515 psia
T
S
= 1,000F
T
RH
= 1,050F
T
FFW
= 545F
3.2%
P
S
= 3,515 psia
T
S
= 1,110F
T
RH
= 1,125F
T
FFW
= 570F
6.2%
P
S
= 4,135 psia
T
S
= 1,112F
T
RH
= 1,150F
T
FFW
= 590F
7.3%
P
S
= 5,075 psia
T
S
= 1,290F
T
RH
= 1,330F
T
FFW
= 625F
Subcritical Supercritical USC Turk USC max today USC tomorrow
1,300F+
14.0%
High-pressure turbine
Intermediate-pressure turbine
Components for 1,110F main
and 1,125F reheat steam conditions Alstom material specication
COST 522 designation: CB2
EN designation: GX13CrMoCoVNbNB9-2-1
Turbine main steam piping N/A attached to casing
Outer shell EN designation: G17CrMo5-5
EN designation: GX12CrMoVNbN9-1
COST 522 designation: FB2
EN designation: X13CrMoCoVNbNB9-2-1
Rotating bladinginlet stages Nimonic (Ni80TiAL)
Turbine reheat inlet piping N/A attached to casing
Outer shell EN designation: G 20 Mo 5
COST 522 designation: FB2
EN designation: X13CrMoCoVNbNB9-2-1
Rotating bladinginlet stages EN designation: X12CrNiWTi17-14
Note: EN = European Normal code.
9 Cr Main steam valve casings
9 Cr Inner shell
9 Cr Rotor inlet section
9 Cr Rotor inlet section
9 Cr Reheat inlet valve casings
9 Cr Inner shell
4. Reducing CO
2
emissions. Ultrasupercritical steam conditions will increase the TPP
plants efficiency by approximately 6.2% and reduce CO
2
emissions by more than 300,000
metric tons per year over a conventional subcritical steam plant design. Source: Alstom
Table 3. Steam turbine material specifications for AEPs John W. Turk,
Jr. Power Plant. Source: Alstom
|
July 2009 38
STEAM TURBINES
tional conditions with a specific stage on a
rotor. The high and intermediate inlet rotor
selection for TPP is an FB2 material that has
been developed for improved creep proper-
ties. Stress levels of welded rotors during
thermal transients can be up to 40% lower
compared to monoblock rotors operating
under the same conditions. Alstoms welded
rotors, therefore, have an additional benefit
of allowing faster start-ups and/or lower-
ing the life consumption rate compared to
monoblock rotors. Examples of forged disk
materials and welding were photographed in
the Alstom manufacturing plant (Figure 6).
Radial symmetry is a big concern, in
particular at higher temperatures. The HP
turbine shrink ring design, utilized by Al-
stom successfully since the 1960s, elimi-
nates inner casing bolt flanges and therefore
maximizes radial symmetry. Lower inner
casing stresses reduce creep and distortion,
thus extending unit life and outage intervals.
Because the inner casing is in symmetrical
compression, ovalization, as known from
flange designs, does not occur. The benefits
of this design are long-term stable clear-
ances and sustained efficiencies. In regard
to USC applications, the benefits extend
to long-term reliability and excellent op-
erational flexibility. Figure 7 shows an HP
inner casing with rotor before and after as-
sembly into the lower outer casing.
The basic double-shell IP turbine design
with horizontal split outer and inner casings
is common but was adapted to higher-tem-
perature USC conditions through judicious
selection of materials. In addition, the IP
turbine inner casing was modified with a
more-harmonic mass distribution in the in-
ner shell to minimize distortions at elevated
temperatures in the inlet section. The ben-
efit is long-term sustained clearances and
efficiencies.
Many Efficiency Improvements
The Alstom principle of using separate cyl-
inders for the HP and IP turbines gives the
steam path designer full freedom to optimize
the number of turbine stages given the long
expansion line of an USC unit compared to a
subcritical unit. The number of stages in the
HP turbine, as well as in the IP turbine, were
increased by about 25%, compared to a typi-
cal subcritical application.
Other design parameters were considered
when maximizing performance of the TPP
steam turbine design for USC steam condi-
tions. Full arc inlet scrolls improve efficiency
and minimize component thermal fatigue
damage. In this design the control valves typ-
ically operate wide open with flow control
through the boiler feed pump. Overpressure
operation provides the turbine flow margin
to produce additional electrical output when
required.
The TPP steam turbine will also be
equipped with Alstoms latest steam path and
sealing technology. Alstom has continuously
improved the airfoil design and optimized
the complete steam path by reducing gap and
leakage flow interactions with the main flow.
Brush seals and abrasive coating seals will be
considered to further improve efficiency.
The exhaust area plays a critical role in
steam cycle efficiency; therefore, optimiz-
ing the performance of the last stage blade is
critical. The TPP exhaust area of 4 feet x 72.1
feet ideally covers the operating range at the
various design ambient conditions.
Heinrich Klotz (heinrich.klotz@power
.alstom.com) is a senior product specialist
for Alstom Turbomachines Group, Alstom
Power Systems GmbH, Germany.
Ken Davis (kedavis@aep.com) is manager
for New Generation Design & Engineering
for AEP. Eric Pickering (eric.pickering
@alstom.power.com) is regional
sales development manager for
Alstom Power Inc., USA.
X20 steel
(11% to 12% Cr) for:
Rotors
Casings
Blades
Pipes
Introduction:~1960
COST 501 materials
up to 1,130F
Forging and casting alloys
Addition of 1.5% Mo
Reduction of Cr to 9%
Pipe steels 9% Cr
+0W (P91)
+1W (E911)
+2W (P92)
1994
COST 522 materials
up to 1,165F
Materials with Co (to 3%)
and B (to 0.01%)
(CB2/FB2 for turbines)
Creep strength
Increased Cr (to 11%)
(VM12 for boilers)
Oxidation resistance
2005
COST 536 (20042009)
up to 1,200F
Materials without Co or
W but increased B
Creep strength
C free with nitrides
Optimized Cr (~10.5%)
Possible need for
coatings
after 2010
C
r
e
e
p

s
t
r
e
n
g
t
h
(
1
0
5

h
)

i
n

p
s
i
a
29,000
14,500
0
932F 1,022F 1,112F 1,210F
Notes: B = boron, C = carbon, Co = cobalt, Cr = chromium, Mo = molybdenum, W = tungsten.
5. Steel history. The development history of steel alloys for steam turbine components.
Source: Alstom
6. Forged steel. Rotor sections are queued for their next machining operation (L). First-step
rotor welding begins (R) for the TPP steam turbine in the Alstom factory. Courtesy: Alstom
7. Close tolerances. A high-pressure inner casing with rotor before (L) and after (R) as-
sembly into the lower outer casing. Courtesy: Alstom
With global experience in fossil, wind, solar and nuclear projects,
we dont just believe in our ability to build a sustainable future. We prove it.
www.bakerconcrete.com
Place the concrete.
Fire the turbines.
Drive the generators.
Split the atoms.
Ridicule the obstacles.
|
July 2009 40
(Pho
A
s youd expect, this years keynote
speaker and roundtable panelists ad-
dressed issues of carbon legislation,
renewables, and financing. Those were the
subjects of the stated questions. But woven
into the answers was a strong thread of what
one conference delegate perceived as frus-
tration. Power industry frustration with the
ways of Washington is nothing new, but this
year the speakers also expressed frustration
with the public.
Energy Education
Gets a Failing Grade
A major subtext of the ELECTRIC POWER
2009 opening plenary session was the in-
dustrys need to better-manage the message
about the tradeoffs required for achieving a
lower-carbon electricity portfolio.
Keynote speaker Jason Makansi (Figure 1)
said, Weve been defined by our discharge
not our product. Makansi, president of Pearl
Street Inc. and executive director of the Ener-
gy Storage Council, observed that everyone
wants to know how to stop global warming.
His answer: renewables plus energy storage,
nuclear with fuel reprocessing, coal with se-
questration, and electric vehicles. Note the
multipart answer. Note that no single genera-
tion type can stand alone, without modifica-
tion and without partnering.
Industry doesnt do a good job of edu-
cating the public about the power value
chain, Makansi said. Theres a need for better
public understanding of everything from the
difference between kilowatts and kilowatt-
hours to the smart grid, because even discus-
sions of the smart grid tend to be one-sided.
Public focus is on the smart element: the
software and end-user devices; as for the
grid componentthe hardwareits the
stuff nobody wants.
Makansi noted that the industry is in part to
blame for the publics poor understanding of
its business. Nobody puts a coal plant on the
home page, he observed, though many now
feature wind turbines, so the public gets a false
impression of where their electricity comes
from. And, while acknowledging that nuclear
is absolutely necessary, as is coal, the coal in-
dustry needs a wakeup call, he said.
Makansi sounded another cautionary
note when predicting that carbon trading
could be the next Wall Street debaclethe
new financial engineering platformand
his penultimate slide urged the power indus-
try to Invest in infrastructure engineering,
not financial engineering.
From Makansis perspective, the indus-
try is at a pivot point at which its favoring
demand-side management over new supply.
Nevertheless, this industry is fortunate, he
said, because its the centerpiece of economic
recovery.
Power Industry Needs
to Do a Better Job of Educating
and Messaging
At the opening ELECTRIC POWER 2009 plenary session, both the keynote
speaker and the Power Industry Executive Roundtable participants kept
circling back to the problems created by a public and lawmakers who
seem to be promoting policies without an adequate understanding of en-
ergy realities. Most of the speakers acknowledged that the industry itself
is partly to blame, but nobody offered a way forward.
By Gail Reitenbach
1. Keynote speaker Jason Makansi. Source: POWER
Since 1967,
More Nuclear Plants Have Chosen Plymouth Tubing
Than Any Other Brand...
...For Good Reason
Corporate Headquarters:
29W150 Warrenville Road
Warrenville, IL 60555 USA
Phone: 1-800-323-9506
1-630-393-3550
Fax: 1-630-393-3551
E-mail: energy@plymouth.com
Plymouth Tube Co. offers the most comprehensive,
high-quality and high-technology selection of stainless
steel tubing in the industry. Its no surprise, then that for
more than 40 years, nuclear plants worldwide have
made us their preferred tubing choice.
XtraLowStress
processed feedwater heater tubing

features the lowest residual stress in the industry
making it less susceptible to stress corrosion cracking.
XtraLowStress
is available in wall thicknesses up to

0.134 (3.4mm) for super critical applications.
Plymouth'sType 439 tubing is not susceptable to
stress corrosion cracking and offers the best thermal
conductivity of stainless steel making it a reliable choice
for feedwater heater applications.
SEA-CURE
, our exclusive alternative to titanium and

Cu-Ni, features exceptional corrosion and vibration
resistance. Select from a range of wall thicknesses from
0.016-0.083 (0.4-2.1mm).
No matter your plant requirement, Plymouth Tube Co.
has a proven tubing solution for you. Call us to find out
how we can help you run more efficiently, safer, cleaner
and with less downtime.
Get more information at www.plymouth.com
(Photo courtesy of Hydrodyne Inc.) (Photo courtesy of Retubeco)
|
July 2009 42
Though neither Makansi nor the execu-
tives offered a multistep plan for addressing
the problem, at least the industry has taken the
first step in admitting that there is a problem.
Energy Education Deficit
In his introduction of the Power Industry
Executive Roundtable panelists (Figure 2),
POWERs editor-in-chief, Dr. Robert Peltier,
PE, noted that different utilities and power
generators have different problems, and the
executives comments proved that point. But
some common themes, including the cost of
the energy education deficit, emerged that tran-
scended regional and fuel type differences.
Michael Morris, the first of the panel to
offer opening remarks, set the theme by stat-
ing that the industry needs to educate Capital
Hill about CO
2
. Morris, chairman, president,
and CEO of American Electric Power (AEP),
noted that Congress doesnt understand that
customers pay for the costs of production.
In the Q&A segment, Bruce Williamson
chairman, president, and CEO of Dynegy
commented that theres a big difference
between old and new pollutantsSO
x

and NO
x
vs. CO
2
. The press, he said,
doesnt want to deal with the fact that indus-
try doesnt know yet how to use CO
2
. We need
to make sure CO
2
will stay underground.
Later, when asked about their response
to recent comments by new Federal En-
ergy Regulatory Commission Chairman Jon
Wellinghoff and Secretary of the Interior Ken
Salazar about the potential for renewables to
supplant fossil fuel and nuclear generation,
Williamson hit the education theme again
by addressing the need to educate the public
about everything related to electricity, includ-
ing the fact that power moves at the speed
of lightfaster than FedEx (which garnered
one of the rare audience laughs).
Morris added later that such comments by
officials (even if theyre intended to set a vi-
sion for 30 or 40 years down the road) give
the general public the impression that achiev-
ing grand goals is simple.
Ron Litzinger, chairman, president, and
CEO of Edison Mission Group (EMG), said
hes still amazed how few people [outside of
the industry] realize that you cant store elec-
tricity. And thats a very basic, fundamental
principle that needs to be well-understood.
Cap-and-Trade Stances
Most of the roundtable panelists generally
expressed support for the Edison Electric In-
stitutes position on cap and trade (which rec-
ommends that 50% of the initial allowances
be allocated free and that the power sector
should be given 40% of the allowances) but
said that the initial allocation of carbon al-
lowances should be completely free. They
also offered some individual thoughts about
carbon regulation.
To some extent, these executives seem to
welcome a decision on climate change leg-
islation for its ability to remove at least one
layer of uncertainty. By taking on climate
change, you do get some clarity, said Litz-
inger. Exelons president and COO, Chris
Crane, added that we lack clarity on a na-
tional energy policy. Weve never looked at
it holistically in terms of what the country
needs.
Morris, whose company is undertaking
a test of carbon capture and sequestration
(CCS) at its Mountaineer Plant in West Vir-
ginia, said, I respect Congressman Waxman
and Congressman Markey. Theyre tackling a
very difficult issue. Yet he called for greater
honesty in defining the terms of the issue. Of
cap and trade, Morris said, if you auction off
carbon allowances, its a carbon tax. So dont
call it cap and trade; call it a carbon tax.
Williamson took up the baton by address-
ing the question of who would benefit from
2. The 2009 Power Industry Executive Roundtable panelists. From left to right: American Electric Power Chairman, President,
and CEO Michael Morris; Dynegy Chairman, President, and CEO Bruce Williamson; Edison Mission Group Chairman, President, and CEO Ron
Litzinger; Exelon Corp. President and COO Chris Crane; Sempra Generation VP of Asset Management Michael P. Gallagher; Moderator Dr. Robert
Peltier, PE, editor-in-chief of POWER. Source: POWER
July 2009
|
the revenue generated by carbon allowances:
Lets do it for the climate and the environ-
mentnot for revenue generation [for some
unrelated purpose].
Michael P. Gallagher, VP of asset man-
agement for Sempra Generation, concurred
and called for any cap-and-trade revenues
to be reinvested in energy infrastructure and
renewables.
Although these executives back the notion
of cap and trade, they made note of the dev-
ilish details to be worked out in any carbon
mitigation program.
Litzinger believes cost will be the big
driver, and Williamson expressed the hope
that any carbon regulatory system would be
transparent so that theres not an Enron of
carbon cap and trade.
Litzinger said he thinks there should be
free allowances, as there were under the
SO
2
program, especially because there is no
proven removal technology for CO
2
now
as there was for SO
2
when that program was
initiated.
In the Q&A session, when asked what
would be the most important issue for CCS
by 2025, Morris said, we know capture
works, but he said hes worried about para-
sitic impacts, and the systems need to be
demonstrated on a large enough scale. He
also hopes well find a use for CO
2
that could
avoid the need to sequester it underground.
Williamson mentioned a company in Cali-
fornia (Calera, funded by venture capitalist
Vinod Khosla) thats using CO
2
in cement,
though that process has significant hurdles to
overcome before the product is commercially
accepted.
With its only visible action consisting of
the hyperbolic efforts of the coal lobby to
promote undefined clean coal as a cur-
rently available option for counteracting the
climate effects of CO
2
, the power generation
industry has essentially ceded the rhetorical
battle to those pushing for more renewables
and swifter action on carbon controls. Mor-
ris mentioned a company (ecoAmerica)
that, in the companys words, uses psycho-
graphic research, strategic partnerships, and
engagement marketing to shift personal and
civic choices of environmentally agnostic
Americans.
If its a scam, its a scam. Lets have an
honest debate about [CO
2
and credit auc-
tions], Morris concluded.
The Future of the Power Industry
Williamsons refrain (picked up by others)
was that we need to promote the future rath-
er than punish the past. (In later iterations of
this sound bite, he called for not punishing
the present.) Though he never specified what
lawmakers might want to punish, it seemed
clear that he hoped Washington would assist
utilities and other power generators in meet-
ing whatever new climate change regulations
are ahead rather than making fossil fuel
burning generators and their customers bear
the brunt of the impact. (Dynegys fleet is
powered by gas, coal, and oil.)
Theres no quick fix for the industry,
he said, because its taken 100 years to get
the infrastructure we have now. Renewables
will increase, but change isnt going to hap-
pen overnight. Hitting the education theme
again, he emphasized that the industry needs
the public and Washington to understand
that we need it all. Furthermore, because
development is pretty much at a standstill,
existing plants of all types will have to run
hard in the future.
Morris alluded to the potential danger of
ceasing construction of new baseload capac-
ity with a reference to the devastating effect
that running out of power (in January 2008)
had on South Africas economy when it had
to shut down industry and commerce.
Although each executive mentioned some-
thing his company is doing to address climate
change concerns, those Gallagher mentioned
had the largest numbers attached: a thin-film
photovoltaic plant in Boulder City, Nev., that
could become the largest in the world and a
wind project in Baja, Calif., that could reach
300 MW. Clearly, Sempra (mainly a gas-fired
generator, with most of its 2,600 MW located
outside California) is affected by Californias
aggressive renewables goals.
To Peltiers question, Whats the next
plant your company is bring on? the execu-
tives answered:
Morris: the 600-MW ultrasupercritical
coal-fired Turk Power Plant in Arkansas
(the first plant of this type to be built in the
U.S.). (See page 34 for more information
on this plant.)
Williamson: a solar pilot plant next to an
existing gas plant.
Litzinger: a wind plant.
Crane: 400 MW of additional nuclear capac-
ity via turbine changeouts and efficiencies.
Gallagher: additions to the Boulder City
solar plant.
Dealing with the Credit Crunch
Tight management of existing resources was
the theme when panelists addressed the fi-
nancial crisis. Dynegys current focus is on
liquidity, costs, and operating well. But
Williamson expressed confidence that, as
the economy comes back, energy demand
will come back.
Edison Mission Group, a primarily coal-
fired independent power producer, is in a
cash preservation mode, yet it is looking
to diversify into renewables and integrating
biomass into coal plants as well as pursuing
demand-side management, Litzinger said.
His company faces very high investments
in environmental controls and uncertainty
about the price of carbon. EMGs approach
to this challenge is technical innovation
and changing mindsets, which includes
exploring selective noncatalytic reduction
for larger, older coal plants that remain eco-
nomic to run.
Exelons nuclear fleet used to be inef-
ficient, Crane noted, but now fleetwide
capacity factor is over 93%. His company
is also looking at transmission system effi-
ciencies. Looking forward, we need to con-
tinue to find growth opportunities, he said,
but noted that new nuclear development is
very difficult because of liquidity problems
and gas markets.
Policy Uncertainty
In addition to the usual hoops that nukes have
to jump through (including financial viability
and public acceptance of a proposed site),
Crane noted that today there are new uncer-
tainties:
Regulatory uncertainty: The industry is
getting mixed signals from various admin-
istration officials about nuclear power.
Leadership uncertainty: The industry is
waiting to see who the new Nuclear Regu-
latory Commission chief will be.
Waste disposition uncertainty: The indus-
try needs to know what path the federal
government will take with regard to spent
fuel, especially now that the Yucca Moun-
tain repository is officially dead.
Multiple panelists hoped that the country
would soon see a comprehensive, sensible
energy policy. When an audience member
asked if there were anything that the U.S.
could learn from energy policy models in
other countries, the answer was nowith
various explanations appended.
Morris pointed to France choosing nuclear
in the middle of the previous century because
its next best option was sourcing coal from
Germany, and to the EU, which is leaning to-
ward liquefied natural gas because Russian
natural gas supplies are unreliable. Japan
marries nuclear power and energy conser-
vation, but these models dont work in the
U.S., he said. Americans react to financial
incentives almost exclusively. (Coal pro-
vides 73% of AEPs generation capacity.)
Based on his familiarity with power proj-
ects in Asia and Europe that his company
previously operated, Litzinger concluded
that power policy is easier to do in smaller
countries.
|
July 2009 44
Who Will Win the Fuel Fight?
When Peltier asked the panel about a pro-
posed national renewable portfolio standard
(RPS), Gallagher voiced approval for such a
standard but added that there also needs to be
a price for carbon.
Crane wants to see a federal RPS thats
reasonable and takes into consideration
that the Southeast is at a great disadvantage.
Earlier, Crane had observed that in the 70s
and 80s, the U.S. developed mainly nuclear
resources. In the 90s it was gas plants. Today
the policy focus is disproportionately on re-
newables. Whats needed instead, is a blended
generation portfolio for the nation as a way to
protect prices for consumers, he said.
Morris, who is not in favor of one standard
for all states, offered the notion of different
low-carbon resources, including nuclear, for
different regions plus tradable renewable en-
ergy credits as a better answer.
Gallagher added that the answer may
not be here today, but weve got to work on
the technologies that are available to make
it so that we can burn the coal that weve
discovered. You know, I started out in the
nuclear business. I think its fantastic. Its
just going to take a little while [to change
the minds of those who dont know] how
great nuclear can be.
In response to an audience question about
the optimal percentage of renewables that the
grid can accommodate, Litzinger said that it
varied but was probably between 15% and
20%, because of the intermittency. Above that
level, more fossil-fueled capacity would need
to be added, and for any notable amount, a
lot of transmission needs to be built (a point
Morris seconded). Crane answered that its
going to depend on the area of the country
youre in.
One particular audience question elicited
a round of pointed answers. When asked
about the government basing renewable
policy on estimates from the Energy Infor-
mation Administration (EIA) that assume a
40% capacity factor for wind, Morris jumped
in to say that The EIA has never been right
with any number theyve ever forecasted.
Its not, he clarified, that theyre dishonest,
but theyre wrong.
Litzinger added that the EIA has favored
the high end of capacity factors.
In Cranes view, consumers are being
sold a bill of goods on high capacity factors
that may not be achievable.
Gallagher made the point crystal clear by
saying, All our wind developers would be
jumping off the roof [in excitement if they
got 40% capacity factors].
One More Worry:
NERC Standards Compliance
One audience question concerned an issue that
all power generators across North America
have to grapple with: North American Electric
Reliability Corp. (NERC) reliability standards.
Gallagher noted that Sempra in the past
three years has probably spent five times as
much on NERC compliance as it did before
the Critical Infrastructure Protection pro-
gram became mandatoryeven though the
company was in compliance before.
Morris asked, Theyre creating something
they think is well thought through, but does
it add to the stability of the grid? Though he
believes 100% in audits, I thought it was
a great idea, but its getting out of control,
Morris said.
At Exelon, the NERC compliance group
grew from 3 to 17 people. Even if the audit
phase goes well, Crane observed, there can
be problems with interpretation.
Litzinger, too, identified NERC com-
pliance as a cost-driver and added that its
unclear if the standards have added to grid
reliability. Yet, he noted that, given whats
happened in the financial sector, regulatory
compliance is likely going to get stronger.
Gail Reitenbach is POWERs
managing editor.
The fuel handling marketplace is changing
The need to contain cost, increase efciency, and ensure OSHA compliance is
more urgent than ever. Benetech has you covered. Were committed to helping
you face todays tough challenges with our innovative, proven technologies
and over 25 years of leading industry experience.
End-to-end solutions
Leverage the power of our Total Dust Management (TDM
) technologies and
the expertise of our highly trained team of Plant Professionals (P
2
), and youll
have everything you need to implement effective solutions for risk mitigation,
asset optimization, fuel exibility, and combustible dust compliance.
Trust the company with more than 195 projects relating to coal conversions,
blending, and plant assessments for safety improvements. Trust Benetech.
Were on your side.
With Benetech on your side,
you know youre covered
FUEL THE FUTURE
Get to know Benetech. Call 800-THE-COAL x241, or visit BenetechUSA.com

Consulting
Services
Experienced Engineering
and Project Management
Industry-leading
Technologies
Turn-key
Capabilities
Plant Services
and Maintenance
|
July 2009 46
F
ossil fuels will play a smaller role
in our energy future. Renewable
and indigenous fuels will become
more prominent. Carbon management is
here to stay, said Dr. Marco J. Castaldi, a
professor in the Department of Earth and
Environmental Engineering at Columbia
University in New York City, citing the find-
ings of the National Research Council of the
National Academies.
This was just one of many forward-look-
ing statements made during the presentations
and discussions that occurred on May 11 at
the preconference workshop on biomass fun-
damentals and applications, which was held
in conjunction with ELECTRIC POWER. In
particular, Castaldis presentation centered
on trends related to U.S. power plants that
use waste-to-energy (WTE) technology. He
emphasized that WTE plants are poised to
become an important part of the U.S. electric
generation industry.
New Power Paradigm
Castaldi pointed out that the new paradigm
emerging in U.S. energy policy has an em-
phasis on the following issues:
The security of the procurement of fuel
and growing concerns about supply chain
disruptions.
The projected increased energy demand.
The rising concentration of atmospheric
CO
2
.
Space-constrained or preferred land use.
In the U.S., there is a strong need for car-
bon-neutral energy production, he said. Zero
emissions mean more than just sequestering
CO
2
from fossil fuels. We need to reduce our
dependence on single feedstocks. We need to
turn to indigenous and distributed sources of
fuel. However, power produced from waste/
biomass must be as economically attractive as
current sources such as fossil fuels.
Castaldis presentation focused on the in-
creased use of WTE facilities as a response
to these issues. WTE conserves fossil fuels
by generating electricity, he said. One ton
of municipal solid waste (MSW) combusted
equals 45 gallons of oil or 0.28 tons of coal.
Currently, WTE facilities process 14% of all
U.S. MSW.
One clear advantage of using nonhaz-
ardous MSW as a fuel source for American
electric power generation is its sheer volume.
More than 220 million tons of MSW are
generated each year in the U.S., according
to Castaldi. U.S. landfills are filling up, and
MSW disposal costs are steadily increas-
ing. Another benefit of using MSW as a
fuel source for generating electricity is that
it emits two-thirds less CO
2
than coal when
combusted.
Currently, two modern ways to dispose
of post-recycling solid waste exist, Castaldi
said. First, there is thermal treatment with
energy recovery. The heat content per MSW
metric ton can generate more than 2,800 kWh
of electricity. The second way is through
controlled landfilling with partial methane
recovery. The heat content in the methane
generated from an MSW metric ton can gen-
erate more than 760 kWh of electricity.
The use of WTE is experiencing strong in-
ternational growth (Figure 1). Castaldi cited
the following statistics:
Thirty-five nations are currently using
WTE technology.
More than 600 WTE plants are in operation.
The global WTE industry processes ap-
proximately 170 million metric tons of
waste per year.
In the U.S., the WTE industry processes
more than 26 million metric tons of waste
per year.
Globally, urban landfilling manages ap-
proximately 830 million metric tons of
waste per year.
In comparison, U.S. landfills handle
around 225 million metric tons of waste
per year.
Overcoming Dioxin Challenges
In the past, there was a widespread percep-
tion that WTE facilities emit a large amount
of dioxins, Castaldi noted. The reality is that
the total dioxin emissions from all U.S. WTE
plants have been estimated by the U.S. Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency (EPA) to be at
12 grams TEQ (toxic equivalent) of dioxins,
he said. However, before the Maximum
The Growing Role
of Waste-to-Energy in the U.S.
Using nonhazardous waste for power generation is a trend thats gaining steam
for several reasons. Though there are several environmental reasons, an-
other is the reliability of the fuel supply.
By Angela Neville, JD
1. WTE goes worldwide. Several Asian countries, including Japan and Taiwan, are
the global leaders in terms of extensive use of waste-to-energy facilities. There are 780 WTE
plants worldwide processing 140 million tons of waste per year. Courtesy: Waste to Energy
Research & Technology Council
U.S.
89 WTE facilities
29 million tons per year
Western Europe
388 WTE facilities
Asia
301 WTE facilities
U
.
S
.
D
e
n
m
a
r
k
S
w
e
d
e
n
G
e
r
m
a
n
y
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
I
t
a
l
y
U
.
K
.
I
r
e
l
a
n
d
J
a
p
a
n
T
a
i
w
a
n
S
i
n
g
a
p
o
r
e
C
h
i
n
a
Waste to energy (WTE) Recycling/composting Landll
July 2009
|
Achievable Control Technology regulations under the Clean Air Act
were enacted, they emitted about 10,000 grams TEQ. Now the major
source of dioxins in the U.S. comes from backyard barrel burning,
with levels at 580 grams TEQ.
According to EPA data, dioxin emissions from WTE generators
now account for less than 1% of total dioxin emissions in the U.S., he
pointed out (Figure 2).
Benefits of WTE Plants
Most WTE facilities in the U.S. process between 500 and 3,000 tons
of waste per day, which provides enough electricity to power 2.8 mil-
lion homes, he said. Furthermore, WTE is compatible with recycling
and helps to promote resource minimization. For example, WTE plants
annually remove more than 700,000 tons of ferrous materials.
Another important advantage of WTE facilities is their positive
impact on U.S. air quality, according to Castaldi. He emphasized that
todays U.S. WTE facilities have to meet some of the worlds most
stringent environmental standards. They achieved compliance with
new Clean Air Act pollution control standards in 2000.
In addition, as stated earlier, WTE facilities produce lower levels
of greenhouse gas emissions compared to traditional coal-fired power
plants. The EPA estimates that WTE facilities prevent 33 million met-
ric tons of CO
2
per year from being emitted, he noted.
WTE facilities also save valuable real estate, he added. They
reduce the space required for landfills by about 90%.
Finally, one important fact not to be ignored during this challeng-
ing economic period is that WTE facilities provide positive economic
benefits. WTE is a $10 billion industry that employs more than 6,000
U.S. workers, and the annual wages exceed $400 million, he noted.
Future Outlook
In 2007, the U.S. WTE industry had 87 plants that used approximately
29 million tons of MSW as a fuel source. The net generation of these
WTE plants totaled approximately 2.6 GW, and theres potential for
an additional 20 GW of WTE capacity in the U.S., which would be
equivalent to saving 200 million barrels of oil or avoiding the mining
of 70 million tons of coal and 420 million tons of overburden ore,
according to Castaldi.
Abundant supplies of MSW make WTE electricity generation
well-positioned to be an attractive and dependable source of renew-
able power in the years ahead.
Angela Neville, JD is POWERs senior editor.
2. Dispelling dioxin myths. Due to improved air quality con-
trol systems, present-day WTE plants no longer emit high levels of
dioxin. Today, U.S. municipal waste incinerators produce less than 1%
of known dioxin emissions. Courtesy: Waste to Energy Research &
Technology Council
E
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s

(
k
g
/
y
e
a
r

t
o
t
a
l
)
250
200
150
100
50
0
1990 1993 1996 1999 2000
106,000
104,000
102,000
100,000
98,000
96,000
94,000
92,000
90,000
88,000
86,000
M
S
W

d
i
s
p
o
s
a
l

(
t
o
n
s
/
d
a
y
)
Year
Emissions MSW disposal
|
July 2009 48
I
n the U.S., climate change has gone from
being an obscure topic to the subject of
household discussions in the matter of a
few short years. Reflecting the growing im-
pact that carbon constraint issues have had on
the electric utility industry, this years ELEC-
TRIC POWER conference offered a session
titled CO
2
Control Policy Alternatives and
Implications, which featured two insight-
ful presentations about this complex topic.
The two speakers, Block Andrews, PE, with
the Strategic Environmental Solutions Divi-
sion of Burns & McDonnell Engineering,
and Steven M. Carpenter, director of carbon
management at Marshall Miller & Associates
Inc., took a balanced look at both the prog-
ress achieved so far and the technical chal-
lenges ahead related to implementing carbon
capture and storage (CCS).
It is likely that some form of global
warming legislation will be enacted within
the next two years, and the electric utility sec-
tor is certain to be impacted, said Andrews.
The legislation could take the form of a car-
bon emissions tax, taxes on fuels, a cap-and-
trade program, or other hybrid combination
of programs. The reduction levels that will
be required and the timeframe to achieve the
reductions are still unknown. With all these
uncertainties, utilities still have to provide
adequate, reliable, low-cost power to their
customers (Figure 1).
Several of the current CO
2
-capture proj-
ects that will utilize the greenhouse gas for
enhanced oil recovery (EOR) are progressing
and are pushing the commercialization of
several promising CO
2
-capture technologies,
according to Andrews (Figure 2).
CCS Challenges
Andrews pointed to a number of realities re-
lated to the removal of CO
2
through geologic
sequestration:
The volume of CO
2
is huge. One ton of bi-
tuminous coal generates 2.5 tons of CO
2
.
The supply of CO
2
will overwhelm the cur-
rent demand from EOR. For example, in
Carbon Control:
The Long Road Ahead
The industry is preparing for carbon legislation by exploring options for deal-
ing with CO
2
. But even if the technical issues are resolved, actually se-
questering CO
2
poses a number of other daunting challenges.
By Angela Neville, JD
1. Looking ahead. This Electric Power Research Institute chart shows projected 2030
targets for certain practices that would affect carbon emissions. Source: EPRI
2. A trio of CO
2
capture technologies. Currently, integrated gasification combined-
cycle technology is the most likely to become commercially viable within the next six years.
Courtesy: Burns & McDonnell
Annual Energy
Outlook (AEO)
2007
AEO 2008
AEO 2008
(Early release)
Impact of efciency
measures in Energy
Independence and
Security Act of 2007
(EISA2007)
U
.
S
.

e
l
e
c
t
r
i
c

s
e
c
t
o
r
C
O
2

e
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
s

(
m
i
l
l
i
o
n

m
e
t
r
i
c

t
o
n
s
)
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030
Carbon emissions of existing generation resources
Pre-combustion (convert syngas to H
2
-IGCC)
Pilot Demonstration Commercial
Post-combustion (ue gas cleanup)
Oxyfuel combustion (pure oxygen combustion)
Today 2010 2015 2020 2025
Technology EIA 2008 reference Target
Efciency Load growth ~ +1.05%/yr Load growth ~ +0.76%/yr
Renewables 55 GWE by 2030 100 GWe by 2030
Nuclear generation 15 GWe by 2030 64 GWe by 2030
Advanced coal No heat rate improvement 1%3% heat rate improvement
generation for existing plants 130 GWe existing plants
40% new plant efciency 46% new plant efciency
by 20202030 by 2020; 49% in 2030
Carbon capture and sequestration None Widely deployed after 2020
Plug-in hybrid None 10% of new light-duty vehicle
electric vehicles sales by 2017; 33% by 2030
Distributed energy <0.1% of baseload in 2030 5% of baseload in 2030
Mitsubishi Power Systems Americas, Inc.
100 Bayvlew Clrole - Sulte 6000 - Newpcrt Beaoh, C^ 92660
19498568400 - www.mpshq.com
in SCR Systems for
COAL, OIL, GAS and
FCCU Applications
Over 30 years of experience and more than 500
units in commercial operation around the world
convey the quality and reliability of Mitsubishis
SCR technology.
Tis pioneering commitment develops
designs for varied applications:

Coal Boilers

Oil and Gas Boilers

Combined Cycle GT

Simple Cycle GT

Diesel Engines

Process Heaters

FCCU (Renery)
Mitsubishi is a recognized leader in SCR
reliability with licensed technology,
including SCR catalyst technology, to
partners throughout the world.
We are proud to support air quality
improvement with continuing
technology developmentlike our
Zero Slip Ammonia SCR System.
Mitsubishi
Working towards a cleaner environment.
ABOVE: Employing both high NOx
removal eciency and high
reliability, our Coal SCR unit
provides air quality protection to
the commercial operation of
Plant Hammond #4,Georgia Power.
LEFT: As a pioneer in SCR
technology for varied applications,
Mitsubishi supplied the rst SCR
for FCCU in the USA to the
ExxonMobilTorrance, CA renery.
Visit www.mpshq.com for
Rewarding Career Opportunities
|
July 2009 50
Texas the Permian Basin oil fields current
EOR demand is approximately 7,000,000
tons of CO
2
per year. In comparison, one
600-MW coal-fired power plant produces
5,000,000 tons of CO
2
per year.
The CO
2
pipeline network will need to be
expanded.
In order for geological sequestration of
CO
2
to work, the U.S. will have to use
both depleted oil and gas field sites plus
greenfield sites.
The U.S. is still in the initial education
process with the general public.
The permitting of geologic sequestration
sites will probably be fought by national
environmental groups and face local op-
position. Landowners will probably take
the position of not under my backyard
(NUMBY).
There will be a very long research and de-
velopment process. He estimated that geo-
logic sequestration wont be commercially
available in the U.S. until approximately
2025 (Figure 3).
Other Barriers to Success
In his presentation, Carpenter cited many of
the same concerns about CCS implemen-
tation expressed by Andrews; in addition,
he pointed out some other potential road-
blocks.
Cost. Carpenter emphasized the estimated
cost increase if CCS is widely adopted by the
U.S. electric industry in the coming years.
The current average consumers power cost
is estimated to be 10.6 per kWh more than
the current cost, said Carpenter. Another
cost is the parasitic load to power plants
created by the carbon capture process. One
analyst estimates if CCS were implemented
through the entire U.S. fleet, that would cre-
ate a 40-GW parasitic load, which equals 80
new 500-MW plants.
He also noted that the lease costs of stor-
ing CO
2
under the surface of private land-
owners property is unknown, but could be
quite expensive.
Storage Validation. Measure, monitor,
and verify has become monitoring, verifi-
cation, and accounting, Carpenter said. In
general, there is a lack of geological homoge-
neity and a lack of federal and international
standards.
Standards and Regulations. Carpen-
ter referred to several laws that could poten-
tially govern CCS activities in the future.
For example, he cited the Safe Drinking
Water Act Class VI underground injection
control well regulations. He also mentioned
the current House bill (the American Clean
Energy and Security Act of 2009), which
was introduced recently by Reps. Henry
Waxman and Edward Markey. The bill
(H.R. 2454) seeks to establish a carbon
emissions reduction goal, a cap-and-trade
program, and a federal renewable energy
standard.
Other unresolved legal issues affecting the
future development of CCS projects pertain
to the acquisition of geologic storage rights
and the creation of sequestration storage
fields, according to Carpenter. Either federal
or state laws will have to resolve issues re-
lated to eminent domain, contractual rights
of impacted parties, compulsory pooling, and
unitization.
Risks and Liabilities. In addition, he em-
phasized that new laws and insurance prod-
ucts will need to be developed to deal with
the allocation of risk in regard to geologic
sequestration. For example, one possible
resolution is the governments assumption of
liability for CO
2
stored underground and the
release of the landowner from liability if the
CO
2
migrates onto adjacent properties or in
some other way causes damage.
Unfinished Business
The ability to expand CO
2
sequestration
beyond EOR to include greenfield geologi-
cal structures, such as saline formations or
unmineable coal seams, presents daunting
challenges that clearly need to be resolved by
additional technological development, public
education, and regulatory structure. Success-
ful implementation of CCS also will require
that risk issues be identified and risk mitiga-
tion strategies developed for project partici-
pants and other affected parties. Its hard to
predict how far down the road these goals
will be accomplished.
Angela Neville, JD is POWERs
senior editor.
Enhanced oil recovery
Today 2010 2015 2020 2025
Commercial
Geological sequestration (will vary greatly by type and location)
3. A slow slog. A number of industry analysts predict that geologic sequestration of cap-
tured CO
2
may not be commercially feasible until almost 2025. Courtesy: Burns & McDonnell
www.processbarron.com/power (888} 663-2028
total systems solutions
Process Barron helps
power producers evaluate
viable system strategies
and make smart equipment
decisions to achieve greater
operational efciency and
fuel future growth. Contact
us today to learn how we
can put our expertise to
work for you.
"JS(BT)BOEMJOH4ZTUFNT
4PMJE'VFM"TI)BOEMJOH4ZTUFNT
&RVJQNFOU%FTJHO'BCSJDBUJPO
'JFME*OTUBMMBUJPO4FSWJDF3FQBJS
efciency solutions for
power providers
MENLO PARK HOUSTON BEIJING TOKYO ZURICH
www.sriconsulting.com/PEP
Smart Research. Smart Business.
Process Economics Program Report:
Carbon Capture from Coal Fired Power Generation
Clean energy is the ultimate goal, and the reality
is that coal will be a major source of energy for
many years to come. Industry needs carbon
capture methods that it can utilize today. Carbon
capture is a worldwide imperative and comp-
lementary to overall clean energy strategies.
Coal is an abundant and relatively
inexpensive energy source. Coal-fired power
plants produce forty-six percent of the
world's power, but in the process are
responsible for forty-one percent of GHG
emissions. Clean Coal Technology (CTT)
initiatives aim to revamp aging power plants
to decrease CO emissions, but no proven
2
methods exist at base load power plant
scale to accomplish this daunting technical,
economic and operational challenge.
In its Carbon Capture from Coal Fired Power
Generation report, SRI Consulting's PEP
program publishes the results of its
simulation research that confirm the first
baseline models for capturing CO .
2
For more information on this report, including abstract, table on contents and purchasing
information, contact Angela Faterkowski, +1 281 203 6275,
afaterkowski@sriconsulting.com or visit our website.

The Carbon Capture from Coal Fired Power Generation
report includes:
Introduction
Summary
Industry Status
- Coal Resources, Reserves and Activity
- Chinese Coal Industry
- US Coal Industry
- Carbon Capture Projects
- Coal and the Economy
Technology Review by Process
- Advanced US Government Sponsored R&D
- Gasification
- ICC with CO Capture
2
- Acid Gas Removal
- IGCC Air Blown Gasification
Supercritical PC Technology and Economics
- Background
- Process Description
- Block Flow Diagram
- Process Economics
IGCC Process Design and Economics
- Power Block
- Total Plant Air Emissions
- Process Economics
|
July 2009 52
F
or at least a decade, the electric util-
ity industry has argued that reducing
airborne mercury emissions from coal-
fired power plants to the 90% level that en-
vironmentalists and many regulators have
advocated is technically impossible. That
may be about to change, according to presen-
tations in the Hg Technologies sessions at
the ELECTRIC POWER conference in Chi-
cago this May. Much greater mercury capture
than the 30% to 50% now available may be
on the horizon for both eastern bituminous
and Powder River Basin coal.
Mitigating Mercury
According to Sam Kumar, manager of Bab-
cock & Wilcoxs (B&Ws) particulate control
group, the 90% holy grail of mercury con-
trol is in sight. But attaining that 90% goal is
going to be difficult, complicated, and costly.
And capturing mercury before it gets into
the air may, if not managed very carefully,
degrade a plants particulate control systems.
Kumar was lead author on a B&W paper pre-
sented at the conference.
The emerging approach, Kumar told the
audience, is a tricky mixture of chemical ap-
proaches, including powdered activated car-
bon injection into the gases coming off the
combustor, along with injection of trona or
calcium carbonate to reduce sulfur trioxide
(SO
3
) in the exhaust gas. The big research
discovery, Kumar said, is the role of SO
3
in
limiting the role of activated carbon injec-
tion. The SO
3
gets on the activated carbon
before the mercury, limiting the ability of
the carbon sorbent injection to do its job
(Figure 1).
The trick, Kumar said, is to capture the
mercury as a particulate on the carbon and
then capture the particulate in the plants
particulate control system, typically an elec-
trostatic precipitator (ESP) or, less often, a
fabric filter bag house. In some cases, Kumar
noted, plants may require both an ESP and a
bag house to achieve the 90% removal stan-
dard. That will add considerable capital dol-
lars to the whole Hg removal operation.
Several companies, Kumar said, are of-
fering commercial carbon sorbent technol-
ogy, as well as doing considerable private
research and development. Among these, he
said, are Norit Americas, ADA-ES, Calgon
Carbon, and Sorbent Technologies.
Getting the mercury job done, Kumar
said, will require tailoring the chemical
Technology Could Deliver
90% Hg Reduction from Coal
Reducing mercury emissions at coal-fired power plants by 90% has been con-
sidered the holy grail of mercury control. A new technique promises to get
us thereat a price.
By Kennedy Maize
1. Injecting chemicals. Coal-fired power plant owners have many options for controlling
mercury emissions. Source: Babcock & Wilcox
Boiler
Powdered
activated carbon
injection
Spray dryer
absorber
Fabric lter or
electrostatic
precipitator
Coal
preparation
CaCl
2
injection
(if needed)
Different systems, different results. These are the mercury removal potentials for
different AQCS technologies when a plant is firing bituminous coal. Source: Babcock & Wilcox
AQCS
conguration
Baseline
Hg removal
Mercury
control
Expected total
Hg removal Notes
PAC 50%70% SO
2
<5 ppmd
PJFF 50%70% PAC 70%90% SO
2
<5 ppmd
PAC 50%70% SO
2
<5 ppmd
SDA/PJFF 50%70% PAC 70%90% SO
2
<5 ppmd
Absorption Plus 60%90%
Absorption Plus 80%90%
TOXECON 90% SO
2
<5 ppmd CS-ESP 10%30%
TOXECON 90% SDA/ESP 30%50%
Notes: AQCS = air quality control system, CS-ESP = cold-side electrostatic precipitator, PAC = powdered activated
carbon, PJFF = pulse jet fabric lter, SDA = spray drier absorber, WEGD = wet ue gas desulfurization.
Absorption Plus/PAC 80%90% SO
2
<5 ppmd CS-ESP/WFGD 50%60%
Absorption Plus/PAC 90% SO
2
<5 ppmd SCR/CS-ESP/WFGD 70%90%
15076
Clean Energy Update, brought to you by the editors of
The Energy Daily, is the only weekly e-newsletter focusing on the business,
technology and implementation of alternative energy generation. Its
designed for the executives and engineers who are building and planning
new plants, capacity and infrastructure to capitalize on renewable
energy geothermal, wind, hydro, solar and biofuels.
Check us out at www.cleanenergyupdate.info
For advertising opportunities contact Erica Lengermann at
(301) 354-1598 or at elengermann@accessintel.com
Clean Energy Update Drilling Down on
Renewable Regulation and Technology
|
July 2009 54
streams to the plant characteristics and its coal (see table, p. 52).
In the case of ESPs, he said, the additional particulate load from
activated carbon injection can overwhelm the ESP, increasing par-
ticulate emissions and altering stack plume opacity. This puts a
premium on ESP maintenance, he said, noting that potentiality
simply increases the need for best practices when it comes to ESP
maintenance. Thats not a problem with bag houses, but they exist
on few of todays coal-fired plants. Adding them would mean major
capital expenses, noted Kumar.
Just the Right Spot
Among the considerations in the Hg reduction game, Kumar said, are
where to locate the carbon injection and alkaline (trona or calcium
carbonate) injection. In some cases, he noted, it may make sense to
put activated carbon injection downstream from the ESP. Doing so
preserves the quality of the fly ash, which is useful in the manufacture
of concrete, providing a CO
2
reduction benefit.
An ESP uses electro-physics to capture particulates and involves a
balance of spaces and electrical charges to tune the machine, whereas
a bag house presents a classic physical barrier. The injection of sor-
bents may upset the ESP parameters, but a bag house downstream
from the ESP essentially shuts the door to particulates, although it is
an expensive option.
The bottom line, said Kumar, is that considerable progress has been
made to increase mercury reduction performance by activated carbon
injection and other sorbent advancements. The holy grail of mer-
cury reduction may be within the grasp of coal plant operators.
Kennedy Maize is a POWER contributing editor and executive
editor of MANAGING POWER (www.managingpowermag.com).
The UDI Combined-Cycle/Gas Turbine (CCGT) Data Set contains basic
ownership, location information, and unit equipment details for simple-
cycle, combined-cycle, and gas turbine cogeneration plants worldwide.
This unique database is the largest such information resource available
including over 21,000 installed or projected generating units at more than
8,000 regulated utility, private power, and auto-producer power stations in
150+ countries. These are linked to more than 4,000 plant management and
support contact names with titles and primary job functions.
For more details, visit www.udi.platts.com, or call your nearest Platts ofce:
North America EMEA Latin America Asia-Pacic Russia www.platts.com
+1-800-PLATTS8 (toll-free) +44-(0)20-7176-6111 +54-11-4804-1890 +65-6530-6430 +7-495-783-4141 support@platts.com
+1-212-904-3070 (direct)
New! UDI
Combined-Cycle/
Gas Turbine (CCGT)
Data Set
Identify gas turbine installations by model
and vintage anywhere in the world!
ASHROSS RUMig-Rail Car
Low prole, high speed railcar unloading system. In-ground system meant
for stationary use.
ASHROSS RUM-Rail Car
Railcar unloading machine,
train drives over the RUM,
walks off the track by itself.
Unloads anywhere, anytime
with speed and efciency.
ASHROSS RC-Reclaimer
Coal reclaimer. Use with dozer or other equipment. Moves the entire pile of
coal and reclaims the coal in a fast and efcient manner.
ASHROSS 1260 C-Truck
Self-propelled, mobile, towable drive over
unloading system for belly dump and end
dump trailers.
ASHROSS ST-Truck
Stationary drive over unloading system for belly dump and end dump
trailers.

530 South 250 West Pleasant Grove, Utah 84062
801-785-6464 Fax; 801-785-6486
www.ashross.com email: sales@ashross.com
Financing Available
COAL HANDLING EQUIPMENT
Unload railcars fast and inexpensively
C
a
ll to
d
a
y
!
8
0
1
-7
8
5
-6
4
6
4
Technol ogi es f or coal - f i r ed power pl ant s ar e
evol vi ng rapi dl y, and COAL POWER has evol ved
t oo. I n i t s l at est onl i ne f or mat you get ever yt hi ng
you val ued i n pr i nt and so much mor e:
Access t o COAL POWER wher ever you can
use a br owser.
Iechni ca| ar t i c| es, coa| power news, b| os,
opi ni on, and i nf or mat i on.
Easy r et r i eva| of ar chi ved COAL POWER f eat ur es.
| nst ant access t o our adver t i ser s f or mor e
i nf or mat i on about t hei r pr oduct s.
Ihe abi | i t y t o comment on st or i es and shar e your
knowl edge wi t h t he coal - bur ni ng power pl ant
communi t y.
I ob boar d.
Subscr i be t oday f or e- mai l al er t s when each
new i ssue i s post ed.
e- mai l : subscr i be@coal power mag. com
Then vi si t t he onl i ne home of COAL POWER
www. coal power mag. com
magazi ne
POWER
From the edi tors of POWER: The onl i ne magazi ne
devoted to the coal -fi red power generati on i ndustry
Special Advertising Section
|
July 2009 56
C
overage of ELECTRIC POWER 2009 wouldnt
be complete without acknowledging the
important role that all of the exhibitors play
in the event. Though we didnt have time to pho-
tograph all exhibitors, this section is a reminder of,
and thank you to, a few of our valued exhibitors and
advertisers.
(Top) Siemens Power Generation provides products, plants,
and services for the generation of power and district heat. (Bot-
tom) Benetech provides a full range of products and services
relating to the safe storage, transfer, and processing of coal.
(Top) Flexco Engineered Systems Group provides engineering
conveyor solutions by solving customer transfer point challenges
using its CFMTS technology. (Bottom) Rentech Boiler Systems
designs and manufacturers high-quality custom boilers in a
variety of categories, including fire-packaged boilers and waste
heat boilers.
(Left) Hitachi Power Systems America, Ltd. is a leading sup-
plier of equipment and services for new thermal, nuclear, and
hydro facilities and retrofit applications. (Above) Solvay Chem-
icals SOLVAir group offers solutions for air pollution control of
acid gases, and can help plants become economically viable.
056_POW_0709_EP Vendor Gallery.indd 56 6/17/09 7:50:23 AM
Gallery of Exhibitors
July 2009
|
(Top) Mitsubishi
offers gas and steam
turbines, boilers/
SCRs, and dedicated
power generation
services as well as
parts manufacturing
for the Americas.
(Middle) Conoco-
Phillips is an inter-
national, integrated
oil company that
licenses several
world-class tech-
nologies, including
E-Gas gasification.
(Bottom) Roberts &
Schaefer designs
and constructs fuel-
handling facilities for
the electric power
industry.
(Top) Nebraska Boiler offers watertube steam generators,
specializing in packaged D-, A-, and O-type boilers. (Middle)
Day & Zimmermann is the leading provider of managed
maintenance solutions to the U.S. power generation industry.
(Bottom) GE Water & Process Technologies Power Indus-
try Solutions includes fuels and combustion additives for
combustion processes, and integrated solutions for cooling
water, boiler feedwater, water reuse, wastewater, and FGD
wastewater.
|
July 2009 58
WELDING PROCESSES
B
oiler tubing is made of different types
of steel. For superheater and reheater
sections that operate at higher temper-
atures, components are manufactured from
austenitic stainless steel due to its properties
of high creep strength and good corrosion re-
sistance. However, because austenitic stain-
less steel is expensive, tubing in the earlier
boiler stages, where design temperatures are
lower, can be made of less-costly ferritic al-
loys such as Grade 22 steel, which contains
chromium and molybdenum, and is com-
monly known as a Cr-Mo steel. Unfortunate-
ly, at some point, the austenitic steel and the
ferritic alloy have to be welded together, with
the result that, among the thousands of tubing
joints in a typical boiler, many are transition
joints, where the two metals have to be joined
by dissimilar metal welds (DMWs).
Historically, DMWs have proven to be
a weak location where premature failures
may occur. If not properly fabricated, these
welds can result in inferior properties and
substantially reduce component life. Careful
selection of welding filler material, preheat
temperature, and postweld heat treatment
temperature are paramount for dissimilar
welds to avoid poor reliability.
Why Dissimilar Metal Welds Fail
In the 1980s, research conducted by the
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) and
others indicated that a number of the issues
associated with DMW failures are related to
the composition of the welds filler metal
the metal added in the making of a joint dur-
ing the welding process (Figure 1). Research
also showed that conventional 309 stainless
steel filler metal resulted in the shortest life
and that nickel-based filler metals resulted in
three to four times that life.
Research further indicated that DMW
failures are caused by two key mechanisms.
One mechanism is a result of the difference
in the rates of thermal expansion among dif-
ferent alloys and filler metals. Thermal ex-
pansion of an alloy is the amount that the
material expands upon heating and shrinks
during cooling, and that property is unique
to a given material. When two alloys with
different thermal expansion rates are joined,
stress develops at the fusion line between
the alloys as temperature changes. This dif-
ferential expansion mismatch can contribute
to creep fatigue damage.
Research also showed that premature fail-
ures of DMWs are caused by a mechanism
called carbon migration. One of the factors
that give the Cr-Mo alloys their creep strength
is that they form carbides by the combina-
tion of carbon and other elements, including
chromium. When two materials with different
levels of chromium are joined together, the
carbon migrates during elevated temperature
service from the lower-chromium-containing
Improved Filler Metal Enables
Higher-Temperature Dissimilar
Metal Welds
The welding of dissimilar metal joints in new and retrofit power plant boiler
tubing has long proved challenging. New plants designed to operate at
higher temperatures and pressures require advanced alloys and a filler
metal that produces reliable welds. EPRI recently developed and spon-
sored the commercialization of a new filler metal. Its first application is
the fabrication of boiler tubes for American Electric Powers ultrasuper-
critical John J. Turk, Jr. Power Plant.
By Kent Coleman, Electric Power Research Institute and John Hainsworth, Babcock & Wilcox
1. Filler metal. Cross section of filler metal weld. Courtesy: EPRI
www.turbocare.com
energy revolution
Get ready for the new
{ wi t h t he l eadi n g s e r v i c e a n d r e p a i r p a r t n e r i n t h e i nd us t r y }
Engineered Solutions
around the world and
in your backyard
|
July 2009 60
WELDING PROCESSES
alloy to the higher-chromium alloy. As the
temperature rises, the rate of carbon migra-
tion increases. This migration results in an
area of depleted carbon, called a carbon-
denuded zone, in the lower-alloyed mate-
rial and results in lower creep strength due
to there being less carbon available to form
carbides (Figure 2).
In the 1990s, based on this research, EPRI
developed a new filler metal, called HFS6,
that was intended to solve these problems.
The high nickel content of the filler metal re-
sulted in thermal expansion similar to that of
low-alloy ferritic tube materials. HFS6 also
contained a low chromium content that would
result in a smaller carbon-denuded zone than
was possible with available nickel-based and
austenitic fillers, thereby eliminating carbon
migration. HFS6 was never commercialized,
however, because of its tendency to develop
microscopic cracks, called microfissures,
which resulted in lower service life.
A New Filler Metal for Grade 91
and 92 Joints
Over the past 10 years, the need for a new
filler metal for DMWs has become even
more pressing as new plants have been de-
signed for higher efficiency and as advanced
alloys, such as the higher-strength ferritic/
martensitic Grade 91 and 92 alloys, have
been developed for higher temperature/pres-
sure operation. (See Why new U.S. super-
critical units should consider T/P92 piping
in POWER, April 2006.)Grade 91 is special-
ly modified and heat-treated steel with 9%
chromium, 1% molybdenum, and is vana-
dium enhanced. Grade 92 is similar to Grade
91, except that some of the molybdenum has
been replaced with tungsten, resulting in
even higher creep strength. These alloys have
been the materials of choice for piping, tub-
ing, and header retrofits and new installations
for many cogeneration activities. They offer
several advantages over conventional Cr-Mo
steels in that they are often less expensive to
install because their higher strength allows
for lower material tonnage and fewer over-
all welding requirements due to the thinner
cross sections required.
With the increasing use of Grade 91/92 steel,
EPRI took another look at HFS6 to see if it
could be reconstituted to avoid microfissuring
and provide a new filler metal for weld joints
between Grade 91/92 pipes and tubes and low-
alloy ferritic or austenitic pipes and tubes.
Given the promising nature of the original
filler metal, the research team used that met-
als composition as a starting point. More than
55 different chemical compositions of filler
metals were manufactured and evaluated for
microfissuring tendencies. The filler metals
were produced through controlled additions
of 16 different elements: carbon, silicon, man-
ganese, phosphorus, sulfur, chromium, mo-
lybdenum, iron, vanadium, tungsten, copper,
aluminum, cobalt, niobium, tin, and nickel.
Modifications to the baseline alloy com-
position eventually yielded an alloy that is
virtually microfissure-free in the area where
the weld is deposited. Like its predecessor,
HFS6, the new filler metal, named EPRI P87
(P87), avoids the damage mechanisms that
lead to failures in conventional filler met-
als. The thermal expansion of P87 is closer
to that of low-alloy ferritic base metals, such
as Grades 22, 91, and 92, than to traditional
Inconel 625 and 309 stainless steel filler met-
als. This means that, as tubing is heated and
expands, there is less difference in expansion
between the filler metal and the base metal
on the ferritic side of the joint, and therefore
less stress on the welds. Because it contains
less chromium, P87 also eliminates carbide
formation and carbon migration, which have
historically been shown to be detrimental in
traditional DMWs.
In addition, P87 offers several advantages
related to how the welding process is done.
Welding requires post-weld heat treatment
(PWHT), which is a standard tempering pro-
cedure of applying heat following the weld-
ing process in order to toughen the weld metal
and the base metal affected by the welding.
Current construction codes require PWHT
at different temperatures for the hardenable
ferritic materials, Grade 22 and Grade 91/92
steels. However, when two different steels
are joined, the PWHT must be performed us-
ing the higher temperature of the two materi-
als. If the lower-alloyed materials are heated
to too high a temperature, it can weaken the
base metal affected by the welding, and fail-
ures can occur.
Many studies have also shown that, at low
stress levels (where piping and tubing nor-
mally operate), Grade 91 and 92 weldments
will fail in the so-called Type IV location,
which is an area of the base metal affected
by the heat of welding. Research conducted
by EPRI shows that P87 can be used, prior
to making the final joint, to butter the base
metals, or to add metal to the end of the tube
or pipe and thereby provide a protective buf-
fer, allowing separate PWHT of each alloy at
the optimum temperature. Once this step is
performed, the final weld may then be made
without PWHT.
The EPRI filler metal also allows this
separate PWHT to be done at the factory, on
many components at a time, rather than at
the plant site, joint by joint. This capability
can avoid the need for additional bracing that
may be required during field PWHT to pre-
3. EPRI P87 filler metal. This is the commercial version of P87, manufactured by Metrode
Products Ltd. Courtesy: EPRI
Denuded zone Filler metal
100 microns
2. Carbon migration. In dissimilar
metal welds using conventional filler metals,
carbon can migrate, under increased tem-
perature, from the low-alloy base metal to the
high-alloy filler metal, creating a weak, carbon-
denuded zone in the base metal next to the
fusion line. Courtesy: EPRI
July 2009
|
WELDING PROCESSES
vent distorting piping and can significantly
reduce the time allotted for PWHT, thereby
shortening the construction schedule.
Commercialization and Application
Metrode Products Ltd., an English manufac-
turer of welding consumables, has commer-
cialized EPRI P87 (Figure 3). Although P87
can be used in retrofit applications, one of
Metrodes first sales of the filler metal was
for a new plant application. The company
sold about 1,500 pounds of the filler metal in
shielded metal arc welding form to Babcock
and Wilcox (B&W) for construction of Unit
1 of American Electric Powers (AEPs) John
W. Turk, Jr. Power Plant, a 600-MW baseload
plant near Texarkana, Arkansas, and the first
ultrasupercritical (USC) pulverized coal plant
in the U.S. (See page 34 for an artists depic-
tion of the completed plant and a detailed de-
scription of Turks steam turbine design.)
B&W was contracted for the engineering,
design, supply, and installation of a 600-
MW net pulverized coalfired spiral-wound
universal pressure boiler. USC plants are
designed to operate with overall plant heat-
to-electricity conversion efficiencies that are
higher than those of supercritical plants. To
achieve these efficiencies, USC plants oper-
ate at higher temperatures; in the case of the
Turk Plant, the design calls for a main steam
condition temperature of 1,110F at 3,675 psig
and a reheat steam condition temperature of
1,125F at 775 psi.
These higher temperatures pose chal-
lenges for the DMWs in the tubes of a USC
boiler. For this application, the P87 filler
metal was used because it allows the design
to increase the temperature use limits for the
DMWs between the Grade 91 and 92 alloys
and the austenitic stainless steels above the
boiler roof line. With the P87 filler metal, the
operating temperature of the DMWs can be
increased, while the inherent joint stresses
can be maintained at values similar to those
of the traditional Inco Weld A/182 DMWs
used at lower operating temperatures.
Fabrication of the boiler pressure parts
for the Turk plant has been completed, and
the parts are being delivered to the plant site
for erection. The plant is under construction,
and major foundations are being installed.
Figure 4 shows sample welds using P87.
These DMWs also used the EPRI modified
60-degree weld prep angle, on the Grade 91
side of the joint.
Future Work
The P87 filler metal used for the Turk plant
was supplied as shielded metal arc elec-
trodes. Work is ongoing between EPRI and
B&W on the development of a solid wire
form of P87; a prototype has been tested in
trial welds, but the material has not been
commercialized. A solid wire P87 would
allow the filler metal to be used in gas
metal arc welding (also called metal inert
gas welding) and gas tungsten arc welding
(also called tungsten inert gas welding). Use
in these other welding processes would in-
crease applications of the filler metal.
Kent Coleman (kcoleman@epri.com)
manages EPRIs Boiler Life and Availability
Improvement Program. John Hainsworth
(jhainsworth@babcock.com) is a techni-
cal consultant with Babcock & Wilcox in
Materials and Manufacturing Technology.
4. Sample welds. Sample welds made
with P87 filler metal using the modified EPRI
weld prep. Courtesy: B&W
POWER magazine has served the generation industry for more than 125 years. Now POWER is making it
easier than ever for industry professionals to fnd career opportunities and for hiring authorities to fnd the
best candidates for open positions. The Careers-in-POWER job board on powermag.com allows visitors to post
resumes anonymously, view the latest job positions, post job listings, and set up personal job alerts.
JOB SEEKERS:
Access the most recent positions available to engineers, operations and maintenance managers, and
corporate and general managers at coal, nuclear, combined-cycle, and alternative power facilities.
EMPLOYERS/RECRUITERS:
Attract highly qualifed candidates by posting open positions on the Careers-in-POWER job center.
Visit Careers-in-POWER on powermag.com to become part of the fastest growing site dedicated to connecting
power generation employers and employees. Contact: Diane Hammes at dianeh@powermag.com; 713-343-1885.
Where Does the
Industry Find Its
Best People?
www.CAREERSinPOWER.com
|
July 2009 62
A
total overhaul of the U.S. power de-
livery system, commercial practices,
and regulatory oversight is required
to accommodate the higher levels of renew-
able energy expected to be generated over the
next decade. Specifically, transmission of the
anticipated enormous quantities of renewable
energy from coast to coast poses several key
challenges and risks that must be mitigated
as part of any comprehensive energy plan.
The key question is, Can a growing body of
renewable energy and a federal transmission
plan be forced into what is surely a shotgun
marriage?
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commis-
sion (FERC) recognizes the challenges posed
by bringing electrons from new and disparate-
ly located renewable energy sources to popu-
lation centers. In late May, FERC announced a
series of transmission planning meetings that
will focus on wider integration of regional
energy resources into the nations power grid.
In essence, renewable energy generation,
principally wind energy, is located where the
transmission infrastructure does not exist, and
other distributed energy resources are located
in transmission-constrained regions.
According to FERC Chairman Jon
Wellinghoff, Planning is one of the three
legs on the transmission policy stoolthe
others are siting and cost allocationand all
are crucial to meeting the goals of assimilat-
ing demand resources, renewable energy and
distributed generation into the grid for the
benefit of consumers.
We believe that the FERC review process
currently under way will acknowledge that
renewable energy development is changing
the traditional energy source and transmission
planning process in three principal ways:
Market push, not pull, is driving project
development.
Longer distances are hindering new trans-
mission capacity additions.
The intermittency of most renewable en-
ergy drags down new transmission line
economics.
Together, these planning changes make it
unlikely that evolutionary changes alone will
enable the nation to reach its ambitious re-
newable goals. Rather, a more revolutionary
approach that includes a proactive, regional
approach to wind and other renewable energy
generators will be required, as will electric
system operation policies and procedures, and
electricity market development, to keep access
to transmission corridors open (Figure 1).
Moving from Market Pull
to Product Push
Historically, load-serving entities (LSEs)
dictated when, where, and how much new
generation would be added. Their integrated
resource plans (IRPs) determined the tim-
ing of plant additions, the fuel sources, and
the location of the new generation resources.
Transmission planners followed the lead of
LSEs to route the necessary transmission ca-
pacity while also seeking to lessen area con-
gestion, if necessary. Traditionally, new power
generation resourcesand, by extension, new
transmissionresponded to a market pull:
predicted load demand. The role of the state
and local governments was oversight, provid-
ing access to transmission, and setting rates.
In contrast, renewable mandates have up-
ended the traditional approach to developing
an IRP. Rather than anticipated customer
demand driving generation and transmission
decisions, government mandates are now in
the drivers seat. Twenty-nine states and the
District of Columbia have a renewable port-
folio standard that requires utilities in those
states to supply some percentage of renew-
able electricity by a date certain.
For instance, the California Public Util-
ity Commission (PUC) requires that 33% of
that states power originate from renewable
energy sources by 2020. In order to achieve
this extraordinary goal, all new power gen-
eration procured by the states utilities must
come from renewable energy sources. In this
new world, the pull of market demand has
been supplanted by a government-mandated
technology push that determines which re-
newable developers pushing new power into
the system in response to state-mandated lev-
els of renewable power have access to limited
transmission infrastructure.
One of the other challenges to building
new transmission capacity to move renew-
able energy long distances that was discussed
by Wellinghoff is identifying acceptable sit-
ing locations for renewable energy facilities.
One important initiative toward this goal in
the Western Interconnection (Figure 2) is the
Western Governors Associations (WGA)
The Odd Couple:
Renewables and Transmission
The tension between the growing number of renewable energy projects and
limited transmission capacity is reflected in Washingtons legislative agen-
da of establishing a national renewable portfolio standard and new trans-
mission lines dedicated to moving renewable energy coast-to-coast. Even
if those ideas become law, hurdles to the happy marriage of renewables
and transmission remain.
By Martin Piszczalski, PhD, Sextant Research
1. How the grid is managed. The
U.S. electricity grid is divided into three sepa-
rate management units or interconnections.
Within each interconnection are further levels
of grid operation involving states, utilities,
regions, and a host of different regulators.
The fractured nature of the grid impedes the
efficient flow of energy between intercon-
nections and complicates adding renewable
energy to the mix. Source: National Renew-
able Energy Laboratory
Remote,
renewable
power site
Tap, interconnection
Balancing authority
Backbone (typically 500 kV)
RTO/ISO Utility
Notes: ISO = independent system operator,
RTO = regional transmission organization.
Big Ideas!
Big Results!
?[P]=^fc^1TP?PacÛcWT>]T
?^fTa8]Sdbcah4eT]ccWPc2êTabXc0[[
2>0;60B=D2;40AB>;0AF8=3
18><0BB64>C74A<0;C830;F0E4
12
May 18 20, 2010 | Baltimore, MD
Baltimore Convention Center
fffT[TRcaXR_^fTaTg_^R^\
For exhibiting and
sponsorship information,
contact HUNTER JONES
Phone: 832-242-1969 ext. 308
hunterj@tradefairgroup.com
For conference information,
contact CARRIE SHAPIRO
Phone: 832-242-1969 ext. 321
carrie@tradefairgroup.com
|
July 2009 64
Western Renewable Energy Zones (WREZ)
study. In the WREZ studywhich covers 11
western states, two Canadian provinces, and
areas of Mexico that are part of the Western In-
terconnectionas many as 50 zones with sub-
stantial renewable resources are in the process
of being identified so that renewable projects
can be expedited and transmission projects can
be planned in advance (Figure 3).
The ultimate goal of the WGA is to devel-
op 30,000 MW of clean and diversified energy
by 2015. This work is in turn driving trans-
mission planning. For instance, in Californias
Renewable Energy Transmission Initiative,
competitive renewable energy zones are being
developed in the most cost effective and en-
vironmentally benign manner.
The state with the largest installed wind
power capacity has already identified Com-
petitive Renewable Energy Zones (CREZ)
within the Electric Reliability Council of
Texas (ERCOT) Interconnection. In March,
the Texas PUC assigned approximately $5
billion of transmission projects to be con-
structed in these CREZ that will eventually
transmit 18,456 MW of wind power over
more than 2,300 miles of new transmission
lines from power-heavy West Texas and the
Panhandle to highly populated metropoli-
tan areas of the state. The regulatory body
expects that the new lines will be in service
within four or five years. The Texas PUC took
about three years to select the most produc-
tive wind zones in the state, designate them
as CREZ, and devise a transmission plan to
move power generated from those zones to
various populated areas in the state. Many of
these new transmission projects will begin
construction later this year.
Longer-Distance Transmission
The principal renewable resourceswind,
solar, geothermal, and hydroelectricare
usually great distances from load centers.
Typically, the greater the length of the trans-
mission lines, the more time, money, and
regulatory hurdles there are to clear.
There are positive indications that a more
regional transmission planning process is tak-
ing hold; however, the long period of time nec-
essary to develop interstate transmission lines
makes planning, siting, and permitting prob-
lematicfor the developer as well as the inves-
tor. We recommend several actions to shorten
these too-long projects that delay bringing ad-
ditional renewable energy to market.
Provide More Regulatory Oversight.
We believe that more oversight needs to be
provided by regulators who have the authority
to resolve any impasse that occurs, especially
when new transmission lines cross state lines
and more regulatory agencies are involved.
A super-regulator is needed both for master
planning as well as for specific project approv-
als. Today, federal agencies such as FERC, the
U.S. Forest Service, the Fish and Wildlife Ser-
vice, the Bureau of Land Management, and
others are involved in virtually every interstate
transmission project, not to mention a host of
state and local regulators, any one of which
can bring a project to a standstill for a host of
reasons.
More market oversight is also required
so that even when transmission does exist,
a renewable developer doesnt have to ne-
gotiate with multiple companies to deliver
power at a distance. For instance, Claude
Eastern
Interconnection
Texas
Interconnection
Western
Interconnection
2. Power flow. Transmission of energy from renewable projects, from the plant to the load,
should be invisible to grid users, regardless of which interconnection they are in. Source: U.S.
Energy Information Administration
arkline
1.800.786.4855 / www.parkline.com
Attractive ... Durable ... Flexible ... Maintenance Free
These are just a few of the reasons utility companies
rely on Parklines equipment enclosures.
Whats Your Reason?
July 2009
|
3. Mapping renewable hubs. The most recent draft map from the Western Governors Association illustrates Qualified Resource Areas
(QRAs) as those areas with a high density of developable renewable energy resources after screening for known technical and environmental
limitations for which data are available. These data will be used to determine Western Renewable Energy Zones (WREZ) in the Western Intercon-
nection. When the WREZ are determined, then an overall transmission plan, much like ERCOTs, can be developed. Source: Western Governors
Association
|
July 2009 66
Mindorff of Mainstream Renewable Power
said his company contracted with six trans-
mission operators to move power from one
Alberta, Canada, wind farm to one customer.
There should be one authority for one-stop
shopping to determine the costs of delivering
electricity anywhere at any time.
Shorten Procedural Time. The surge
in renewable power is stretching out project
completion times. For instance, a necessary
project step is acquiring a transmission inter-
connection agreement. The California Inde-
pendent System Operator recently had 361
interconnection requests pending at one time,
overloading its processing and planning ca-
pabilities. In a similar queue at the Southwest
Power Pool, 61% of the requesters were from
the wind industry alone.
Minimize the Extra Money Required.
Greater transmission distances, in general,
increase per-unit transmission costs. In par-
ticular, the more transmission operators
that are involved in connecting a generation
source to a single customer, the greater the
potential for pancaking charges (multiple
rate surcharges for electricity crossing ser-
vice territory boundaries).
More insidious are unpredictable trans-
mission costs. Power sellers, buyers, and
investors adamantly want price certainty in
the total delivered cost. However, congestion
charges can make the delivered price vary,
especially in locational marginal pricing.
For new transmission construction and up-
grades, cost allocation and recovery remains
contentious. The issue here is how to appor-
tion costs. To the new generator? Across all
users of the upgraded network? Ultimately,
rate payers cover the cost of transmission.
Everyone wants to know the answer to the
question, What is the added premium to de-
liver renewable energy? Many transmission
networks have both fossil fuel and renewable
generators sharing the same network. Cer-
tainly, intermittent renewable sources have
higher system-integration costs. Load bal-
ancing is more involved as well.
A recent Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory study may provide an early an-
swer to the cost question. It indicates that
transmission unit costs for wind are only
about $15/MWh (see sidebar).
However, that cost varies, depending on
the configuration. For instance, the lowest
cost scenario is having a concentrated pool
of new power (thousands of megawatts). In
this case a very high voltage line (765 kV)
can transport that power very economically,
even over great distances.
Nevertheless, renewables do add addition-
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
(LBNL) recently issued a research report
that examines the expected costs for new
transmission infrastructure that would be
needed to support an accelerated program
for renewable energy projects, particular-
ly wind energy. The report, The Cost of
Transmission for Wind Energy: A Review
of Transmission Planning Studies was re-
leased in February 2009. (A copy of the
report can be downloaded at http://eetd
.lbl.gov/ea/ems/reports/lbnl-1471e.pdf.)
The authors objectives in preparing
this report were threefold: to define the
transmission costs for a rapidly growing
wind power industry, to discuss different
transmission planning approaches, and to
examine the models used to estimate fu-
ture wind deployment. Our interest in this
article is to focus on the transmission cost
estimates prepared by LBNL.
The cost estimates are based on a re-
view of 40 transmission planning studies
completed between 2001 and 2008 by
various developers, independent system
operators/regional transmission opera-
tors, state agencies, and individual utili-
ties. There is a wide range in transmission
costs, although the costs are generally
less than $500/kW. The cost of the medi-
an study scenario was $300/kW, or about
15% to 23% of the typical installed cost
of a wind turbine plant.
The authors also concluded that varia-
tion in the study methodologies used in
these 40 transmission siting studies and
the characteristics of the specific grid
may affect transmission installation costs
(Table 1). Depending on the original pur-
pose of the transmission line under study
(whether it was congestion or deliverabil-
ity focused), the authors concluded that
the purpose affected the costs of adding
wind energy to the mix.
The study also reviewed three high-
level wind transmissiononly studies, as
shown in Table 2. These costs are gen-
erally consistent with the median cost
identified in the original study sample of
$300/kW.
What isnt adequately discussed are the
operating costs, in say $/kWh, for a trans-
mission system installed solely for deliver-
ing wind energy to a load center. Given the
high installed costs of transmission and
the low capacity factor of wind compared
to conventional forms of generation, per-
haps a more appropriate figure of merit to
compare the cost of any form of generation
is its cost per unit of electricity delivered,
rather than purely installed costs.
What Will New Transmission Cost?
Table 1. Qualitative effects of grid study methodology and grid char-
acteristics may affect estimated transmission costs. Source: LBNL
Table 2. Estimated installed cost of wind transmission based on
three higher-level studies of wind transmission. Source: LBNL
General framework
Congestion focused
(tends to decrease cost)
Deliverability focused
(tends to increase cost)
Objective of building
new transmission
Economically reduce congestion
costs created by the addition
of new generation
Accommodate the full nameplate capacity
of any new generation during a peak snapshot
in time
Treatment of
wind energy
Account for the expected
generation characteristics
of wind energy
Treat all new generation the same, based
on the nameplate capacity of the resource
Transmission system
characteristics
Integrated network of highly
connected transmission
Sparsely interconnected transmission lines
Study Wind capacity Unit cost of transmission for wind power
10% Wind Energy by 2030:
AEP 765 kV Overlay Study
200400 GW $150$300/kW
20% Wind Energy by 2030:
Wind Deployment System
290 GW $207/kW
Annual Energy Outlook 2008
Projections for 2030: National
Energy Modeling System
40 GW $450/kW consisting of $316/kW for transmission
and $133/kW for long-term multipliers
July 2009
|
al costs to the whole system. For instance, speedy ramp-up of backup
power is essential when a wind farm goes down with as little as one-
hour warning. Reliability issues kick in as well.
Wind and Solar Generation Are Intermittent
Wind and solar farms produce power intermittently due to weather
changes and time of the day and season. For either technology, the
nameplate power can be produced only over about one-third of the
daily hours. Stated another way, a plants potential annual capacity
factor is typically around 33%.
Some opponents of wind projects take an overly simplistic approach
and state that any utility that has renewable energy sources must provi-
sion three times the number of wind/solar megawatts and claim that
that overhead produces the equivalent baseload power. Unfortunately,
simply scaling up wind or solar power in this manner does resolve
the delivery mismatch to the baseload demand that is actually needed.
Someplace in the delivery chain this intermittency of energy pro-
duction versus load demand must be smoothed out. LSEs tradition-
ally have taken on this burden themselves. Typically, an LSE backfills
wind/solar gaps with natural gasfired plants to make up for any
shortfall in energy production based on a number of factors, includ-
ing the season, weather, and the regions operating experience. Using
the same approach with very remote wind and solar farms isnt as
straightforward. To do so would make the entire long-distance energy
delivery chain, in effect, run intermittentlyif the remediating, bal-
ancing measures are not applied.
A more recent procurement practice is for the LSE to insist that the
renewable producer directly supply steady, baseload-style power. In
particular the LSE expects the renewable power producer to have its
own storage or natural gas backup. An example would be Xcel En-
ergys April 2009 request for proposal for 600 MW of solar thermal
that is fortified in this way.
Its All About the Dispatch
Energy researchers have been seeking the holy grail: a technology
that transforms intermittent forms of energy production into the
same sort of firm, baseload capacity we now enjoy from coal-fired
and nuclear power plants. Many have proposed the standard list
of energy storage options, such as compressed air energy storage,
pumped hydro, stored heat or ice storage, batteries, flywheels, and
the like. None of these alternatives has been proven in a utility-scale
energy storage facility, so their use remains hypothetical.
The ultimate grid would accept power generated from any type
of plant, especially widely dispersed wind or solar farms that have
complimentary operational patterns. This grid would also serve to
pool the many disparate, nondispatchable renewable plants so that
they would appear to the grid as a reasonably predictable, virtually
dispatchable, baseload energygenerating plant. Nature, in effect,
would do the energy balancing. This approach assumes an extensible
and far-reaching transmission grid that is all but invisible to the en-
ergy generator but that has sufficient capacity to absorb all projected
future renewable power sources.
Developing this renewable energy transmission superhighway is
sure to require a legislative push to mature the concept into steel,
concrete, and wires. Such a radical transformation of the transmis-
sion grid would allow resources planners to move past the antiquated
concept of a market pull for traditional baseload power, because
supply and demand would be average over large numbers of plants,
especially the predicted plethora of small renewable projects located
in every corner of the country.
Today, building renewable plants is not the problem. The principal
problem facing developers is economically connecting those plants
with the grid to get the power to market. New transmission planning
must encourage and sustain the renewable power renaissance rather
than be the cause of project delay and deferral, as it is today. The
transmission planning now under way in the Western Interconnec-
tion, and the new transmission lines recently awarded by ERCOT,
are excellent examples of rigorous regional planning. The next step:
Interconnect each of the regions to form the ultimate grid.
Questions Awaiting Answers
The electricity industry is now facing up to several very important
decisions that demand answers now rather than later. Will it be neces-
sary to have almost the entire fossil fuel fleet dispatchable to fill the
gaps in renewable power production? Will the U.S. need to move to
a French-style infrastructure: highly centralized operations that are
regulated at the national level? Should the federal government assume
complete responsibility for siting new transmission corridors?
Some have even questioned whether the federal government should
be picking winners and losers by specifically allocating capacity on
interstate transmission lines or whether the government should con-
sider direct investment in what has been a market-driven business if
private investors are not available.
Answers to these questions must be forthcoming, as they will di-
rect the overhaul of the countrys power delivery system, change to-
days commercial practices, and streamline regulatory oversight of
future transmission infrastructure projects.
Martin Piszczalski, PhD (martinp@ic.net) is an industry
analyst with Sextant Research. He works with renewable power
developers, governments, and multi-lateral agencies to develop
renewable power markets, especially for geothermal energy. For
the past year he was in the Western Renewable Energy Zones
study group of the Western Governors Association.
For more information visit: www.victoryenergy.com For immediate inquiries call: 918.274.0023
2008 VICTORY ENERGY OPERATIONS, LLC 10701 E. 126th St. N., Collinsville, OK 74021
Heavy-Duty Fired Boilers and HRSGs

- Drum pressures - up to 2,000 PSIG
- Steam capacities - up to 400,000 PPH
Massive Manufacturing Facilities

- State-of-the-art equipment is utilized to maintain superior levels of quality
control for each and every step of the manufacturing process
Large Inventory of Parts

- Wall-to-wall boiler-room parts -- ready to ship 24/7
THINK
BIGGER!...
BOILERS
|
July 2009 68
COFIRING BIOMASS
B
iomass cofiring is neither a new nor
an experimental technology; it is a
tested and proven one, vetted by pri-
vate industry and government agencies both
in the U.S. and abroad. Cofiring involves re-
placing a portion of a coal-fired generating
plants coal supply with biomass, which is
then combusted with the remaining coal to
generate electricity. With relatively straight-
forward, plant-specific modificationstypi-
cally involving alterations to fuel-processing,
storage, and delivery systemscofiring can
be deployed in nearly all types of coal-fired
boilers, including stokers, fluidized beds,
pulverized coal boilers, and cyclones.
Once deployed, biomass cofiring can
contribute anywhere from 2% to 30% of the
total heat input needed for generation, there-
by replacing a sizable portion of the typical
coal supply.
For that reason alone, cofiring biomass in
U.S. coal-fired boilers should be viewed today
as a serious option for reducing carbon emis-
sions and as a strategy for meeting a renewable
portfolio standard. That rationale was behind
FirstEnergys decision to go even further and
convert two units at its coal-fired R.E. Burger
Plant to 100% biomass (see sidebar).
Although in the late 1980s through the
1990s there were many successful field tests
Biomass Cofiring:
Another Way to Clean Your Coal
Demand for renewable power is burgeoning as state governments (and maybe
soon the U.S. federal government) impose increasingly rigorous environ-
mental and procurement standards on the energy industry. Surprisingly,
biomass cofiring has yet to attract much attention, even though it could
help many utilities meet their renewable portfolio requirements, reduce
carbon emissions, and solve other regional environmental problems. U.S.
developers, investors, and regulators should consider including cofiring
as part of the energy mix going forward.
By Larry Eisenstat, Andrew Weinstein, and Steven Wellner, Dickstein Shapiro LLP
Akron-based FirstEnergy Corp. announced in April that it will con-
vert two units at its coal-fired R.E. Burger Plant in Shadyside,
Ohio, to burn biomass (Figure 1). Ohios renewable portfolio stan-
dard requires that 25% of the electricity sold in the state come
from renewable forms of energy by 2025. Today, 86% of the states
power is produced from coal.
Units 4 and 5 at Burger have been designated for the $200 mil-
lion retrofit scheduled for completion by 2013. Combined, these
two units are rated at 312 MW. FirstEnergy expects these two units
to burn biomass grown specifically as a fuel source, such as corn
stalks, wheat, or grass. FirstEnergy will conduct test burns of vary-
ing amounts of the biomass fuel leading up to the conversion.
Improved environmental performance is certainly one of the
big attractions of cofiring biomass fuels, especially in utility-scale
projects. Biomass generally has lower sulfur content than typical
coals consumed today, so SO
2
emissions will decrease for an equiv-
alent energy content added to the furnace. NO
x
reductions also
have been noted in operating plants because the nitrogen content
of biomass fuel is usually lower than the nitrogen content found in
an equivalent amount of coal, and adding biomass can also reduce
flame temperatures, leading to lower levels of thermal NO
x
.
A closer look at typical biomass fuel properties reveals further
fundamental fuel differences with coal. Biomass fuels are typi-
cally more volatile than coal fuels and have higher oxygen con-
tent. Also, wood fuels in particular have very little ash content,
typically on the order of 1% or less. For the typical utility-scale
power plant, each of these fuel qualities is a big improvement
over burning coal, especially the ash advantage, as there is less
ash to handle and send to a landfill.
There are downsides to biomass fuels. Some forms of biomass,
such as some straws and grasses, have a higher percentage of
potassium and chlorine than coal, which can lead to increased
slagging, fouling, and corrosion of furnace tubing.
Dr. Robert Peltier, PE
FirstEnergy to Convert Coal-Fired Burger Plant to Biomass
1. Converting to biomass. FirstEnergy Corp. recently an-
nounced that Units 4 and 5 at the coal-fired R.E. Burger Plant will be
retrofitted to combust 100% biomass. Courtesy: FirstEnergy Corp.
July 2009
|
COFIRING BIOMASS
at utility installations in the U.S. with support
from the National Renewable Energy Labo-
ratory, there has been comparatively little
new work over the past decade.
The European Union, on the other hand,
has been very actively engaging in retrofit-
ting many central station coal-fired plants
to cofire a variety of biomass and waste
products, and the number of installations is
steadily rising. The worlds largest cofiring
project is at the Drax Power Station, in North
Yorkshire, UK. The 4,000-MW power station
is producing 10%, or 400 MW, from biomass
cofiring with a goal of reaching 12.5% by
mid-2010. Drax is also developing two other
300-MW biomass projects in the UK that,
together with Drax, will produce 15% of the
renewable energy in the UK.
Although wood historically has been the
most common cofiring fuel, any number of
other biomass fuels can be used, with the op-
tions typically driven by proximity to local
supplies. Thus, even though regions such as
the Northeast, Southeast, and Midwest might
have the largest potential native wood stocks,
other regions have their own potential fuel
stocks. Also, the type of available biomass
fuels will help define the best of the cofiring
technology options for a particular plant (see
Three Cofiring Options, next page).
Why Cofire?
The main reason to use cofiring, of course,
is environmental: Sustainably grown bio-
mass is widely recognized as a greenhouse
gasneutral fuel (Figure 2). Although other
renewable options, such as wind and solar
energy, are cleaner, in that they do not
require burning any fossil fuels, cofiring
directly reduces the levels of sulfur oxide,
nitrogen oxide, and carbon dioxide from
emissions-heavy coal-fired facilities. Ac-
cordingly, cofiring should be an increas-
ingly attractive option in todays regulatory
environment.
In addition, cofiring can uniquely address
a number of basic circumstances concerning
U.S. electricity production and delivery:
The U.S. remains heavily reliant on coal, a
fact unlikely to change anytime soon.
Transmission infrastructure limitations
could make the procurement of wind and
solar energy prohibitively expensive for
certain regions of the country.
Those same regions possess a plentiful
amount of biomass that may be utilized to
cofire coal-fired generators.
Why So Little Cofiring?
Although cofiring is a step in the right direc-
tion, thus far it has made little headway in
the U.S., as the nations imagination remains
focused largely on wind and solar energy.
Domestic cofiring is currently limited to just
a few dozen plants, many of which use waste
biomass from industrial and agricultural pro-
duction facilities to generate power for pro-
duction at those same facilities, rather than
for other customers.
The reason for this lack of development
usually is quite simple: cost. For the most
part, the financial commitments and other
costs of developing cofiringincluding the
real and perceived cost of regulatory uncer-
tainty and the potential exposure to unknown
future costshave outweighed its benefits.
But that calculus may be about to change.
New Incentives for Renewables
Obviously, the political landscape for renew-
able mandates and carbon regulation has im-
proved significantly in recent years. There are
now concrete initiatives in placeand more
likely to comethat should make investors,
developers, and plant operators alike inves-
tigate cofiring as a profitable and pragmatic
renewable resource alternative.
Currently, 28 states and the District of
Columbia have mandatory renewable port-
folio standard (RPS) regimes that require
end-use electricity providers to procure a
portion of their electricity supply from qual-
ifying renewable resources. Whether cofir-
ing qualifies under these programs varies.
A number of states have explicitly defined
cofiring as a qualifying resource, while
others have excluded it outright, likely be-
cause of its dependency on coal facilities.
Other programs are silent and, arguably, the
governing state commission would have to
determine whether cofiring constitutes a re-
newable resource on a case-by-case basis.
What is clear, though, is that, although RPS
rules might be specific to each state, these
standards typically attach real financial val-
ue to electricity produced from renewable
resources.
In addition to the existing state RPS pro-
grams, the president and the Democratically
controlled Congress have indicated that
both a federal RPS and a national carbon
regulation regime are top priorities for this
session. If adopted, a federal RPS would
impose a significant renewable obligation
upon electricity providers across the coun-
try, filling in the existing gaps among the
states and requiring electricity providers to
procure renewable resources that will sat-
isfy their obligations.
The leading Senate RPS proposal is by
Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) and in-
cludes biomass as a qualifying resource,
but cofiring is not explicitly addressed.
Bingamans draft is still under review in the
Senate Energy and Natural Resource Com-
mittee but is expected to move to the Senate
floor in late summer.
Representative Henry Waxmans RPS pro-
posal, now H.R. 2454, the American Clean
Energy and Security Act of 2009, is expected
to be on the full House floor in early sum-
mer. H.R. 2454 explicitly includes cofiring
as a renewable resource, providing that the
proportion of electricity attributable to the
biomass qualifies for renewable energy cred-
its (RECs).
Legislators also continue to debate the
definition of biomass and are focusing espe-
cially on the easing of restrictions on renew-
able feedstocks to allow for procurement of
biomass from federal lands.
Both a national RPS and carbon regulation
should fundamentally alter the incentives un-
derlying the current resistanceor, at least,
indifferenceto cofiring by encouraging the
swift deployment of renewable resources at
the lowest possible cost, particularly in those
regions of the country where wind and so-
Total greenhouse gas emissions
868g CO
2
equivalent/kWh
1.0
Fossil
energy
in
Biomass
transportation
Coal
mining
1.3
25.9
2.3
Construction
18.7
Coal
transportation
Power plant
operation
Landll and
mulching
Electricity
out
0.34
Avoided
carbon
emissions
220.7
1,024.9
2. Carbon neutral or better. The carbon lifecycle and energy balance when cofiring
15% biomass with coal. In this example, carbon emissions are reduced by 18%. Source: Na-
tional Renewable Energy Laboratory
|
July 2009 70
COFIRING BIOMASS
lar production would be relatively limited.
Cofiring, by taking advantage of existing in-
frastructure, certainly fits this bill and could
serve as a key component in any RPS and
carbon regulation regime.
Indeed, the UKs experience with simi-
lar reform bears this out. Most of the UKs
coal-fired plants, which collectively generate
a sizable portion of that nations electricity,
have now been modified to utilize biomass
as a portion of their fuel stocks. The UK
agency governing energy and the environ-
ment attributed the proliferation of cofiring
to the enactment of renewable requirements
and carbon regulations. As likely will be true
of the final U.S. legislation, the obligations
and incentives created by the rules in the UK
included the attachment of a tradable value
to electricity produced from renewable re-
sources, which fundamentally changed the
cost-benefit analysis for owners, develop-
ers, and, importantly, regulators of coal-fired
generating facilities.
With the increased use of cofiring, costs
for this technology have dropped. The ex-
panded use of cofiring has promoted the
development of an expanding biomass fuel
market, driving down cost while increas-
ing supply. Developers in the UK also have
gained increased familiarity with cofiring
technology as well as with the capabilities
of existing coal-fired technologies to incor-
porate it. This has led to decreased capital
costs and shorter lead times for the modi-
fication of these facilitiesexperience that
operators in the U.S. could rely upon to ease
the transition here.
The UK experience reinforces the conclu-
sion that anticipated changes in U.S. renew-
able obligations and carbon regulation will
considerably alter the factors that have hin-
dered U.S. investment in cofiring. No doubt,
There are typically three distinct options for cofiring biomass in
conjunction with a coal-fired power plant. Each option has its
own advantages and disadvantages (Figure 3). The common theme
of each is to fire the biomass in a way that reduces the quantity
of coal fired in the furnace.
Direct Cofiring
Direct cofiring is a straightforward and low-cost option, and there-
fore usually the first choice of plant operators. The biomass and
coal may be mixed in the coal yard or perhaps prior to entering
the plants mills. They also may be prepared separately and mixed
on a conveyor prior to entering the fuel storage hoppers. In other
plants, the coal and biomass are injected separately into the fur-
nace, which complicates the equipment arrangement, fuel process-
ing, and controls but does allow the burning of greater quantities
of biomass. Usually, this approach enables cofiring up to about 5%
without any significant equipment or controls changes.
The final selection of direct cofiring is contingent on the quan-
tity and type of biomass expected to be consumed. Successful
projects that are using this cofiring approach include Centrale
Gelderland 13, located in Nijmegen, Netherlands, which uses 5%
to 8% construction and demolition wood (with the percentage
based on heat input) and Electrabels Maasvlakte power station,
Rotterdam, Netherlands, which uses secondary fuel types such as
wood pellets, rice pellets, and other wood scraps. The Nanticoke
Power Station in Ontario, Canada (the largest coal-fired plant in
North America) is conducting extensive testing of biomass fuels.
Indirect Cofiring
Indirect cofiring entails the gasification or pyrolysis of the bio-
mass and then injecting the gaseous fuel produced into the fur-
nace of the boiler. In other plant configurations, the flue gas from
a biomass precombustion chamber is vented to the furnace, where
combustion is completed. This option requires much new equip-
ment and a possibly complicated connection to the furnace and
control systems. On the plus side, it does not contaminate the ash
used for resale and avoids other unpleasant side effects such as
scaling and fouling on the furnace tubes.
These modifications also add a new capability to the furnace:
gaseous fuel flexibility. This approach for burning biomass fuels
is only recently getting traction with installations at the Zeltweg
plant in Austria, the Lahti plant (Kymijrvi Power Plant) in Fin-
land, and the AMER-9 Power Station in the Netherlands, which
uses 27% direct wood waste and 5% indirect cofiring through a
circulating fluidized bed gasifier.
Parallel Cofiring
Parallel cofiring involves constructing a completely separate bio-
mass-fired boiler and then cross-connecting the two steam sup-
plies into a common header. This approach is very straightforward
in application but does require a large investment in duplicating
much of the furnace-side equipment and fuel-handling systems.
Parallel cofiring has found favor in pulp and paper plants, where
separate boilers are installed for bark and waste wood. The limit-
ing factor when selecting this retrofit approach is the existing
steam turbine. This approach has the highest capital costs among
the three cofiring options. One successful project that is using
this cofiring approach is the Avedre Power Station in Denmark.
For more information on cofiring technology or projects, the
International Energy Agency IEA Bioenergy, Biomass Combustion
and Cofiring subgroup, Task 32, publishes a Handbook of Biomass
Combustion and Cofiring and maintains a international cofiring
project database at www.ieabcc.nl.
Dr. Robert Peltier, PE
3. Biomass options. These are the three principal biomass cofiring technology options. Source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory
Three Cofiring Options
Boiler Boiler
Boiler Boiler
Biomass
Biomass
Biomass
Coal
Coal
Coal
Gasication
reactor
Direct coring Indirect coring Parallel coring
o
o
o
o
o
ooo
o
o
o
o
o
ooo
o
o
o
o
o
ooo
July 2009
|
COFIRING BIOMASS
it still will be the case that the localized na-
ture of biomass stocks, the potential technical
challenges associated with modifying exist-
ing coal-fired facilities, and a continuing de-
gree of regulatory uncertaintyparticularly
any requirement to re-open air permitswill
be cost-related hurdles that potentially could
discourage the adoption of this technology.
Yet, on the basis of lessons learned from the
UK experience, each of these hurdles can be
overcome with the right mix of policy and fi-
nancial incentives.
Indeed, as familiarity with the technolo-
gy increases and stakeholders and the public
recognize the tangible benefits of cofiring,
it should increasingly be accepted as one
piece of the solution, and the costs of regu-
latory uncertainty should continue to dimin-
ish over time.
Will Biomass Cofiring
Work for Me?
Cofiring should be part of any conversation
about how best to meet renewable obliga-
tions. However, given the wide variety of
boiler technologies, accessible fuel stocks,
and state-by-state regulatory regimes, the
economic viability of cofiring has to be eval-
uated on a plant-by-plant basis. Any genera-
tor owner or operator investigating the use of
cofiring should consider a number of factors,
including these:
Cofiring technologies available for use
with specific boilers.
Capital costs of retrofitting existing or
modifying proposed coal facilities.
Availability and cost of local biomass re-
sources.
Environmental benefits.
Financial benefits (for example, tax cred-
its and RECs).
Potential funding availability under the
2009 Recovery Act.
Though these considerations demonstrate
that cofirings cost-benefit analysis differs
from similar analyses for other renewable
resources, the UKs experience demonstrates
that these factors are not inherently prohibi-
tive but, rather, entirely manageable.
Most importantly, biomass generally, and
cofiring specifically, seem to be an effec-
tive solution to the lingering and significant
concern that regional variation in wind and
solar potential would require some regions,
particularly the Southeast and Midwest, to
develop alternate renewable resources or pur-
chase RECs from regions flush with those re-
sources. As fate would have it, most of those
areas with limited wind and solar energy
have the necessary components for cofiring:
a plethora of coal plants and significant bio-
mass fuel potential. Thus, cofiring is an ideal
solution to the regional hurdles confronting a
federal RPS.
Recently in Kansas, state officials ap-
proved Sunflower Electric Corp.s construc-
tion of a controversial coal plant in exchange
for, among other things, the owners commit-
ment to cofire a specified percentage of the
coal plants heat input with biomass.
In short, cofiring is an underutilized op-
portunity for domestic renewable genera-
tion. If past experience is any indication, the
coming changes to the industry should fun-
damentally alter the incentives for cofiring,
rendering it a low-cost, reliable source of re-
newable energy. Plant owners and operators,
as well as politicians and regulators, should
seize this opportunity to investigate it for
themselves.
Larry Eisenstat (eisenstatl
@dicksteinshapiro.com) is a partner at
Dickstein Shapiro LLP and head of its
Energy Practice. Andrew Weinstein
(weinsteina@dicksteinshapiro.com)
and Steven Wellner (wellners
@dicksteinshapiro.com) are associates in
Dickstein Shapiros Energy Practice.
Biomass Handling Equipment
Complete Engineered Systems
Pulverized Coal Boiler Conversions
CFB Boiler Feed Systems
USA: CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
Jeffrey Rader Corporation
398 Willis Road
Woodruff, SC, USA 29388
Phone: 864.476.7523
Fax: 864.476.7510
CANADA: Montreal, Quebec
Jeffrey Rader Canada
2350 Place Trans-Canadienne
Dorval, Quebec H9P 2X5 Canada
Phone: 514.822.2660
Fax: 514.822.2699
CANADA: Vancouver, BC
Jeffrey Rader Canada
Unit 2, 62 Fawcett Road
Coquitlam, BC V3K 6V5 Canada
Phone: 604.299.0241
Fax: 604.299.1491
SWEDEN: Stockholm
Jeffrey Rader AB
Domnarvsgatan 11, 163 53 SPNGA
Stockholm, Sweden
Phone: +46 8 56 47 57 47
Fax: +46 8 56 47 57 48
For information on how Jeffrey Rader Corporation can solve your Biomass Handling needs, visit us at www.jeffreyrader.com/pow
Silos
Wood Hogs
Disc Screens
Open Storage
Closed Storage
Truck Dumpers
Chain Conveyors
Bucket Elevators
Screw Conveyors
Screw Reclaimers
Pneumatic Conveying
Material Handling for
Biomass Power Generation
UNI TED STATES CANADA SWEDEN UNITED STATES CANADA SWEDEN
See our Biomass video at www.jeffreyrader.com/videoB
|
July 2009 72
NEW PRODUCTS
TO POWER YOUR BUSINESS
CO
2
Sensor/Transmitter
The recently released EX-5165 Sensor/Transmitter from ENMET Corp.
is a three-wire 4-20 mA sensor for the detection of carbon dioxide
in ranges from 0 to 500 ppm and 0% to 100% by volume. It also
features a 24 VDC loop-powered transmitter. The nondispersive
infrared sensor continuously monitors high concentrations of the gas,
and it can operate in an anaerobic environment. The device provides
an LCD of carbon dioxide concentration and has three LED alarm
point indicators. EX-5165 is meant to be used in conjunction with an
appropriate power supply and any one of several controllers available
from ENMET. It is approved for location in Class I, Division 1, Groups B,
C, and D atmospheres. (www.enmet.com)
Remanufactured Generator Ends
Caterpillar Inc. introduced a new family of remanufactured
generator ends for standby, prime, and continuous power
applications. The C32 and 3500 series Caterpillar engines
have been used for applications ranging from distributed
generation to prime power for remote communities. The
rst wave of remanufactured generator ends includes 34
part numbers, which are available worldwide in 60-Hz
and 50-Hz packages with ratings from 910 kW to 2.5 MW.
Caterpillar says that the remanufactured generators come
with same-as-new quality at a fraction of the price of
new. Turnkey support is available from the Cat dealer
network. (www.cat.com)
Tool and Equipment
Management Software
Washington-based software developer Dynamic Systems
Inc. launched the Basic Tool Manager, a software based
on barcode technology, which has been developed for
companies that want to reduce the loss of tools and
save time tracking down equipment and tools. Using
a wireless barcode reader, users can scan a personnel
badge and then a piece of equipment. The tool manager
software can then track who has the tool.
(www.click2barcode.com)

July 2009
|
NEW PRODUCTS
Inclusion in New Products does not imply endorsement by POWER magazine.
High-Torque Electric Rotary Actuator
Rotork Process Controls introduced the SM-6000 S2, an electric
rotary actuator for a wide range of heavy-duty damper drive
applications found in power plants. The actuator provides high
speeds and high torque for continuous modulating duty. It also
offers positioning accuracy and can operate well in harsh and
rugged environments.
The SM-6000 S2 includes an internally mounted digital
amplier that can be easily programmed via non-intrusive rotary
switches and a vacuum uorescent display on the front of the
unit. Standard features include an operating temperature of 40F
to 185F, automatic torque limiting, and a watertight, doubled-
sealed enclosure with a separately sealed terminal compartment
designed for hostile environments. Several options are also
available, including an extended temperature range to 225F and
faster speeds. The actuator is available in many speed/torque
combinations, which can be adjusted to meet specic application
requirements. (www.rotork.com)
Pressure Blowers
for High-Volume Applications
Chicago Blower has developed a series of 16 higher-pressure
blowers that are suited to combustion air, aeration, cooling
and drying systems, and other high-volume processes. The
blowers support pressures of up to 91-inch water gauge and
volumes of up to 18,000 cubic feet per minute. Features
include a lightweight aluminum alloy wheel design to
reduce motor loads. Designated constant velocity, the
convex wheel sides and precisely shaped air chambers
maintain consistent velocity to produce a stable ow across
the entire performance range, while also reducing sound
levels. The Design 53 single-stage pressure blower (shown
here), which is also commonly used in pneumatic conveying
systems, is available in fan sizes of between 4 inches and 14
inches. (www.chicagoblower.com)
25-Ton Hydraulic
Internal/External Puller
Posi Locks hydraulic line featuring the patented
Safety Cage has been expanded to include the PH-
113IE, a three-jaw, 25-ton internal/external puller
that is designed to solve problems associated with the
removal of gears, bearings, and other press-t items.
The PH-113IEs internal puller jaws have a reach from
2.5 inches to 7 inches and a spread from 8 inches to 21
inches. The external jaws have a reach of 12 inches and
a spread of 2.5 inches to 18 inches with standard jaws.
The optional long jaws offer a reach of 20 inches and
a spread of 1.5 inches to 30 inches. Jaws are changed
simply by removing the ball-lock pins and replacing
the jaw. The internal and external slots are lined up,
so users can change from internal pulling to external
pulling in a matter of seconds. (www.posilock.com)
0709 Power Classified.indd 74 6/17/09 11:47:58 AM
July 2009
|
Power Plant Buyers Mart
July 2009
|
Opportunities in Operations and Maintenance,
Project Engineering and Project Management,
Business and Project Development,
First-line Supervision to Executive Level Positions.
Employer pays fee. Send resumes to:
POWER PROFESSIONALS
P.O. Box 87875
Vancouver, WA 98687-7875
email: dwood@powerindustrycareers.com
(360) 260-0979 l (360) 253-5292
www.powerindustrycareers.com
READER SERVICE NUMBER 201
Want to:
Store biomass in silos?
Store in piles or domes?
Automate the reclaim?
Control the fow?
The answer:
Laidig Systems
BIOMASS COFIRING?
www.laidig.com
www.powermag.com 76
George H. Bodman
Pres. / Technical Advisor
Offce 1-800-286-6069
Offce (281) 359-4006
PO Box 5758 E-mail: blrclgdr@aol.com
Kingwood, TX 77325-5758 Fax (281) 359-4225
GEORGE H. BODMAN, INC.
Chemical cleaning advisory services for
boilers and balance of plant systems
BoilerCleaningDoctor.com
Boiler Cleaning Professionals
Explosive Deslagging Services Camera Assisted On-line Blasting Detonating Cord and Overhead
Hazard Blasting Introducing On-line Video Inspection/Recording of Bundle, Pendant and Wall Deposits
Grit-Blasting Electrostatic Precipitator Field Cleaning UT and Boiler/Vessel Overlay Preparation
On-line Radiant Recovery with Shatter Blast Bead Impact Deslagging
Big Water High Pressure Washing Air Pre-heater Baskets, Furnace + Boiler Washing
Heat Exchanger/Condenser Hydro-Laze, Pipeline Cleaning
Vacuum Services, Wet + Dry Fly Ash, Sludges, Silo + Vessel Evacuation
Number One In Safety and Compliance. Privately Owned and Operated
24/7 Emergency Response From Many US Locations
800-866-6247 www.naisinc.com
e-mail: naisinc@naisinc.com
Need Cable? From StoCk
Copper Power to 69kv; Bare ACSR & AAC Conductor;
Underground UD-P & URD, PILC-AEIC; Interlock Armor to
35kv; Copper Instrumentation & Control; Thermocouple
Basic Wire & caBle
Fax (773) 539-3500 Ph. (800) 227-4292
E-Mail: basicwire@basicwire.com
WEB SITE: www.basicwire.com
GEGU's - 750 KW Guascor - natural gas fred -
3/60/480 volts (Qty 2)
GTGUs - 20 MW Brown Boveri oil fred cheap
BOILERS - 200,000#/HR Combustion Engineering
package - 600# steam pressure - gas fred
- 25,000#/HR ABCO - 150# steam pressure -
natural gas and propane fred (Qty 4)
We buy and sell transformers, boilers, steam tur-
bine generator units, gas turbine generator units,
diesel engine generator units, etc.
INTERNATIONAL POWER MACHINERY CO.
50 Public square - Terminal Tower, suite 834
cleveland, OH 44113 U.s.a.
PH 216-621-9514/FaX 216-621-9515
Email: kernx06@sbcglobal.net Web: www.intlpwr.com
PRODUCT Showcase
Place one or more diffusers
downstream of a valve to
eliminate cavitation
Eliminate noise
Eliminate pipe vibration
Reduce valve first costs
Reduce valve maintenance
CU SERVICES LLC
725 Parkview Cir, Elk Grove, IL 60007
Phone 847-439-2303
RCRONFEL@CUSERVICE.NET
www.cuservices.net
ELIMINATE
VALVE CAVITATION
24 / 7 EMERGENCY SERVICE
BOILERS
20,000 - 400,000 #/Hr.
DIESEL & TURBINE GENERATORS
50 - 25,000 KW
GEARS & TURBINES
25 - 4000 HP
WE STOCK LARGE INVENTORIES OF:
Air Pre-Heaters Economizers Deaerators
Pumps Motors Fuel Oil Heating & Pump Sets
Valves Tubes Controls Compressors
Pulverizers Rental Boilers & Generators
847-541-5600 FAX: 847-541-1279
WEB SITE: www.wabashpower.com
FOR SALE/RENT
POWER
EQUIPMENT CO.
444 Carpenter Avenue, Wheeling, IL 60090
wabash
SCANNING SERVICES
gkspowergen.com 734-582-9600
3D Laser Scanning
Digital Site Survey
As-Built Documentation
Solar Taurus 60
7 Units (Gen 1) & (Gen 2)
All Natural Gas
Low Nox 25 ppm
Mobile PCR U.G. Switch gear
60 Hz 13.8 kV
50 Hz Conversion Available
Mid America Engine, Inc.
662-895-8444 Fax: 662-895-8228
205-590-3505 Fax: 205-590-3885
Wesley: wtuggle@maegen.com
Art: asigler@maegen.com
Greg: gposey@maegen.com
Keith: kcoleman@maegen.com
MOBILE GEN SETS
5.2 MW
Solar Maintained
Low Time
July 2009
|
Need a Thorough Mix?
Ash, coal, sludges, what do You need to mix?
Get a thorough mix with:
Pugmill Systems, Inc.
P.O. Box 60
Columbia, TN 38402 USA
ph: 931/388-0626 fax: 931/380-0319
www.pugmillsystems.com
CONDENSER OR GENERATOR AIR COOLER TUBE PLUGS
THE CONKLIN SHERMAN COMPANY, INC.
Easy to install, saves time and money.
ADJUSTABLE PLUGS- all rubber with brass insert. Expand it,
install it, reverse action for tight ft.
PUSH PULL PLUGS-are all rubber, simply push it in.
Sizes 0.530 O.D. to 2.035 O.D.
Tel: (203) 881-0190 Fax:(203)881-0178
E-mail: Conklin59@aol.com www.conklin-sherman.com
OVER ONE MILLION PLUGS SOLD
POWER
Classifieds
CONTACT DiANe HAmmes
Phone: 713-343-1885 Fax: 832-251-8963
dianeh@powermag.com
To AdverTise in
July 2009
|
Advertisers index
Enter reader service numbers on the FREE Product Information Source card in this issue.
Page
Reader
Service
Number Page
Reader
Service
Number
Applied Bolting technology 11 10
www.appliedbolting.com
Ashross 54 31
www.ashross.com
Babcock & Wilcox Cover 4 3
www.babcock.com
Baker Concrete 39 23
www.bakerconcrete.com
Bechtel Advertising 17
www.bechtel.com
Benetech 45 26
www.benetechusa.com
Beumer Maschinenfabrik GMBH 23 17
www.beumer.com
Conoco Phillips 35 22
www.conocophillipslubricants.com/POWER
day & Zimmermann 19 15
www.dayzim.com
entech design inc 15 12
www.entechdesign.com
Ge energy 7 8
www.ge-energy.com/gasification
Hadek Protective systems 9 9
www.hadek.com
Hitachi Power systems Cover 3 2
www.hitachi.us/hpsa
Jeffrey rader 71 37
www.jeffreyrader.com/pow
Mitsubishi Power 49 28
www.mpshq.com
Mobil industrial Lubricants 2, 3 5, 6
www.mobilindustrial.com
norit Americas 21 16
www.norit-americas.com/mercury
Paharpur Cooling towers 47 27
www.paharpur.com
Parkline 64 35
www.parkline.com
Petro-valve 1, 13 4, 11
www.petrovalve.com
Plymouth tube Co 41 24
www.plymouth.com
Process Barron 50 29
www.processbarron.com/power
rentech Boiler systems inc Cover 2 1
www.renetechboilers.com
roberts & schaefer 22 34
www.r-s.com
siemens 29 20
www.siemens.com/energy/cybersecurity
solvay Chemicals inc 5 7
www.solvair.com
sOr inc 16 13
www.sorinc.com
stF sPA 27 19
www.stf.it, www.bwe.dk
superbolt 33 21
www.superbolt.com
turbine energy solutions 44 25
sales@turbineenergysolutions.com
turbocare inc 59 32
www.turbocare.com
victory energy 67 36
www.victoryenergy.com
Westinghouse electric 25 18
www.westinghousenuclear.com
CLAssiFied AdvertisinG
Pages 74-77, To place a classified ad, contact:
Diane Hammes, POWER magazine, 713-343-1885,
dianeh@tradefairgroup.com
Untitled-2 1 6/17/09 8:18:28 AM
|
July 2009 80
COMMENTARY
Managing Solars Revenue
Impact on Utilities
By Mike Taylor
S
ince 1882, when Thomas Edison installed the worlds first
central generating plant in New York City, utility business
models have varied little from the basic one: cover costs
and generate profit by selling more electricity. But today, un-
precedented challenges are sweeping through the industry. Soon
utilities will face yet another new challenge: the large-scale im-
plementation of distributed solar power, which can result in lower
electricity sales. As solar implementation further challenges busi-
ness-as-usual models, whats a forward-thinking utility to do?
The PV Industrys New Business Models
Much like the wind energy industry earlier in this decade, the
global photovoltaic (PV) industry is poised for significant growth
over the next five yearson the order of tens of gigawatts in-
stalled annually by 2015. Unlike wind, however, PV can readily
scale from watts up to hundreds of megawatts per installation.
Ownership can vary from the utility to the utilitys customer or a
solar developer, and installation can occur on both the customer
and utility sides of the meter.
Recent innovative business models for PV projects include the
installation of 40 MW of PV on 200,000 utility poles, implemen-
tation of distributed power plants (up to 500 MW distributed
on hundreds of customers property on the utility side of the
meter), and announcements for centralized projects up to 550
MW. It is not an exaggeration to say that PV will become a new
disruptive technology in the electricity sector, just as personal
computers and cell phones were in their respective industries.
For most utilities, the question of solar implementation should
not be If but How soon? By whom? and Where?
Anticipating Solar Energys Impact
on Utilities Profits
Lets fast forward five years. You are an electric utility located
in a state with leading solar generation capacity. Solar compa-
nies are rapidly installing residential and commercial PV systems
using no-cost performance contractseffectively selling your
customers solar electricity at a lower price than you can. Solar
is a phone call and credit check away from everyone. Currently,
5% are reducing their annual utility consumption 25% to 75%,
and your revenues are falling commensurately. This is on top
of revenue fluctuations from weather, energy efficiency, electric
vehicles, fuel-switching, population growth or decline, and other
electricity consumption changes. Profits, if not eroding, are po-
tentially volatile, and the long-term forecast is unknown.
With this scenario to look forward to, what are your options
for managing PVs revenue impact over the coming years? Here
are seven possible options.
Net Metering Limitations. You could ask regulators to limit
the size of any one PV installation and/or the aggregate of PV
systems in your territory. Prognosis: Unpopular. This runs counter
to the energy democratization movement that PV represents. Do
you really want to be that utility in the age of viral Internet?
Increase Fixed Charges. You could increase the monthly
fixed charge to recover fixed costs and lower the volumetric en-
ergy charge. Prognosis: Incomplete. Simple economics (and the
justification for your smart meter initiative) was predicated on
aligning pricing with the cost of service.
Fuel Clause Adjustments. You can calculate, or more likely
guesstimate, your lost revenues based on the performance of
your customers PV systems, and recover them through a fuel
clause adjustment. Prognosis: Incomplete. Regulators may ques-
tion whether your utility can push that particular risk on rate-
payers without also sharing other revenue risks with them.
Real-Time Pricing. The fundamental problem with electricity
markets is the mismatch between cost of service and price, some-
thing that real-time pricing can address, as PV generation will be
compensated at more cost-appropriate levels. Prognosis: Efficient.
But is it possible? Time-of-use rates have business appeal, but
they may not be practical for the average consumer. And what if
both energy storage and advanced energy management are avail-
able, allowing customers to maximize the arbitrage difference?
More-Frequent Rate Cases. You can increase the frequency
of rate cases to minimize the under- and overcollection of rev-
enues, followed by an adjustment of rates. Prognosis: Possible.
But is that efficient? Are annual rate cases appealing?
Decoupling. You can change the mechanism for utility com-
pensation, breaking the link between customer consumption and
utility revenues and profits by targeting revenues based on an-
other metric, such as the number of customers. Prognosis: Pos-
sible. But change is difficult. Do you prefer the devil you know
rather than something new?
A New Paradigm. Played out over time, the PV marketin
concert with storage, electric vehicles, the smart grid, and other
developmentscertainly has the potential to drastically change
the traditional utility business model within our lifetimes. Prog-
nosis: To be determined. Will you be ready?
Getting Ready
Within the 10- to 15-year timeframe of your next integrated
resource plan, this scenario will no longer be hypothetical. To
learn more about this important issue, download the Solar Elec-
tric Power Associations recently released report, Decoupling
Utility Profits from Sales: Issues for the Photovoltaic Industry,
from www.solarelectricpower.org.
Large PV deployment and market developments wont occur for
all utilities in every state, but even conservative estimates point
toward a large percentage of electricity consumers having a cost-
competitive PV option by 2015. Its time to see PV as a viable
business option rather than a technological novelty. Decoupling
is one strong option to consider.
Mike Taylor (mtaylor@solarelectricpower.org) is the director of
research and education for the Solar Electric Power Association.
Untitled-4 1 6/17/09 6:54:21 PM

Powermag200907 2 DL

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Powermag200907 2 DL

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY FOR THE GLOBAL GENERATION INDUSTRY

Block Lining System

linings protect chimneys from fire.

Block Lining System is an innovative

lining successfully protected the

linings could save your chimney from

Block Lining System.

Constructability Starts Here

processed feedwater heater tubing

is available in wall thicknesses up to

, our exclusive alternative to titanium and

Get to know Benetech. Call 800-THE-COAL x241, or visit BenetechUSA.com

Heavy-Duty Fired Boilers and HRSGs

Massive Manufacturing Facilities

Large Inventory of Parts

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen