CONFIDENTIALRESTRICTEDPUBLIC INTERNAL

OVERVIEWFLUE GAS DESULPHURIZATION

TECHNOLOGIES FOR INDIAN MARKET

1

Samik GuptaNew Delhi22/9/2017

CONTENTS

MoEF & CC Regulations & Implication

Overview of Mature DeSOx Technologies

Important Technical Factors for Consideration

Part 2

Part 3

Part 1

Way Forward for ImplementationPart 4

Part 5

ConclusionPart 6

Indicative Cost Comparison

225-Sep-17

MoEF & CC Regulations & Implication

Part 1

325-Sep-17

MoEF&CC Environmental Norms - Dec 7, 2015

Category 1 Category 2 Category 3WORLD BANK EMMISSION NORMS FOR SOLID FUEL PLANT RATING ≥ 600 MW

PARAMETER (mg/NM3)

PREVIOUS NORMS

TPPs installed before 31 Dec 2003

TPPs installed after1 Jan 2003 up to 31 Dec 2016

TPPs to be installed from 1 Jan 2017

NDA DA

< 500 MW

> 500 MW

< 500 MW

> 500 MW

For all Units

Particulate Matter 150/50 100 50 30 50 30

Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) None 600 200 600 200 100 200-850 200

NOx None 600 300 100 510-1100 200

Mercury None NA 0.03 0.03 0.03

Timeline for compliance

• Category 1 & 2 Projects: to comply within 2 years form the date of Notification

• Category 3 Projects have to comply prior to Commissioning

MoEF & CC norms more stringent than World Bank

425-Sep-17

Applicability of New Technologies

150 GW of existing market plus

new installations

525-Sep-17

SOx Gap Analysis

ParameterFlue gas SOx range

(mg/NM3)

Required Limit(mg/NM3)

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 1058 - 2858 100

Notes:• Data for a 660 MW supercritical unit• The SOx data represents the range of SOx levels obtained due to the combustion process burning the range of “design”,

“best” and “worst” coal at TMCR and BMCR load conditions. • Coal sulphur content 0.26 – 0.7 %• Dry, 6% oxygen basis• SO3 ~ 1%

Reduction efficiency ~ 96.5%

625-Sep-17

Overview of Mature DeSOx Technologies

Part 2

725-Sep-17

FGD

WetDry

LSFO Sea Water SDA

Spray TowerJBR

CDS

Overview of Mature FGD Technologies

Legend:

LSFO: Limestone Forced Oxidation

JBR: Jet Bubbling Reactor

SDA: Spray Dryer Absorber

CDS: Circulating Dry Scrubber

Other types -• Dry sorbent injection• REACT Multipollutant

825-Sep-17

Attribute Limestone Wet FGD Spray Tower Sea Water Spray TowerDry FGD Spray Dryer Absorber (SDA)/

Circulating Dry Scrubber(CDS)

Commercial StatusUnits with single absorber modules are in

operation up to 900 MW unit capacity

(largest population > 85%)

Units with single absorber modules are

in operation up to 1000 MW unit capacity

Units are in operation in facilities up to 500 MW.

Multiple absorber modules are required for

units above 350 -400 MW range.

Reagent Limestone (CaCO3) Sea Water Lime (CaO) /Hydrated lime Ca(OH)2

Byproduct Saleable gypsum (CaSO4) or landfill Treated sea water

Calcium sulfite (CaSO3) and calcium sulfate

(CaSO4) along with some fly ash

Mostly used in landfill

Sulfur in coal <6% (high flexibility) < 2% <2.5%

SO2 Removal Efficiency

~98-99% ~98-99% 90-95%, up to 98% in CDS

SO3 Removal Does not efficiently capture SO3 Efficiently removes SO3 as well as HCl, HF, Hg

Comparison of Mature FGD Technologies

925-Sep-17

Attribute Limestone Wet FGD Spray Tower Sea Water Spray TowerDry FGD

Spray Dryer Absorber (SDA)

Operating temperatureFlue gas at outlet is saturated with water ~ 55 deg C Flue gas at outlet is unsaturated (typically

15 - 30 deg C above dew point)

Footprint Small in power island and, large overall Relatively smaller than wet FGD

Pros/Cons

Acid corrosion potential downstream

Higher Capital Cost

High power consumption

Waste water needs treatment for reuse/disposal

No corrosion potential

downstream

Lowest Capital Cost

Dry byproduct/no waste water

High power consumption

High maintenance cost

High cost reagent

Byproduct use limited

Comparison of Mature FGD Technologies

1025-Sep-17

Wet Limestone Forced Oxidation ProcessSpray Tower

JBR

1125-Sep-17

Parameter Unit Value RemarksLimestone consumption rate Ton/h 8.2 Per absorber @ 85% purity

Gypsum generation Ton/h 11 Per absorber on dry basis, purity >

85%, moisture < 15%

Flue gas temperature at stack inlet Deg C ~ 55 ~85 with gas to gas heater

Pressure drop on flue path due to FGD

mmwg 385 Including absorber and GGH

Auxiliary power consumption kW 14000 Both units with GGH

Noise level dBA < 85

Make up water requirement M3/h 220 (max) Both units

Effluent water generation M3/h 42 (max) Both units

Effluent qualityChloride ppm 10,000

Temperature Deg C 37 - 65

pH 5-6

LSFO Typical Operating Parameters (Spray Tower)

Note: Representative data for a 2 x 660MW plant. Above parameters are calculated based on max S coal & BMCR basis. The numbers are indicative and supplier specific.

1225-Sep-17

Sea Water FGD Process

SEA WATER FROM CONDENSER

1325-Sep-17

Dry FGD Processes

SDA CDS

• Additional capture of SO3, HCl, HF, Hg• Improved efficiency of CDS ~ 1-2%• Particulate emission guarantee

1425-Sep-17

Simple Dry Systems

• Suitable for small units• Ca(OH)2 powdered reagent• Can be retrofitted with existing ESP• Cost effective

Bag Filter

1525-Sep-17

Parameter Unit Value Remarks

Lime (CaO) consumption rate Ton/h 8 Per unit @ 90% purity

Flue gas temperature at reactor

Deg C ~ 65 - 70

Auxiliary power consumption kW 15000 Both units

Noise level dBA < 85

Make up water requirement M3/h 210 (max) Both units (CT blowdown

grade)

CDS (NID) Typical Operating Parameters

Note: Representative data for 2 x 660 MW plant. Above parameters are calculated based on max S coal & BMCR basis. The numbers are indicative and supplier specific.

1625-Sep-17

Important Technical Factors for Consideration

Part 3

1725-Sep-17

Coastal

Type of Condenser cooling system > sea water open cycle

First choice in favour of sea water FGD may be considered

Rethinking needed on use of cooling tower on coastal plants as per new MoEFCC regulation. Result in prohibitively high cost for independent sea water pumping for FGD (~ INR 250 Cr/unit) + Cooling Tower (~INR 250 Cr/unit).

Location of Plant

1825-Sep-17

LSFO largest space due to many ancillaries • Absorber Area/slurry pumps/booster fan/GGH• Buildings (air blowers, bleed pumps, dewatering equipment,

control & electrical room)

• Limestone Storage & handling • Limestone milling/product tanks/pumps

• Gypsum storage area• FGD waste water treatment

Sea Water FGD requires large treatment basin

Dry FGD most compact

Space & Layout

172 ft

125

ft

600 MW

500x150 ft

1925-Sep-17

10-12 Million Tons of lime stone per year (for existing capacity)

Purity Impacts saleability of gypsum, preferred 85% or more Limestone mines located in Rajasthan, MP, Gujarat, AP, Telengana, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Orissa

Lime is obtained from chemical suppliers mostly in powdered or pebble form

Availability of Reagents

Limestone analysis Unit Range

Calcium as Cao % by mass 50-54

Magnesium as MgO % by mass 1.0-2.0

CO2 % 41-42

Sulphur (as S) % 0.1

Alumina ( Al2O3) % 0.5-1.5

Silica+ Al2O3+ Fe2O3 % 3.0

Bond Grindability g/rev 2.65

Powder Gravity g/cm2 2.65

Limestone sample obtained from mine located in MP

2025-Sep-17

By-product offtake

Possible gypsum useso Building industry: plaster, blocks & boardo Cement industryo Agricultural soil conditionerMinimum by product gypsum purity requirement 85-90%o Achievable saleable grade gypsum purity 90%o Lower grade gypsum used in manufacture of port land

cemento Plant Owner tie ups with cement and building material

industries nearby o Policy mandate for use of byproduct gypsum in

cement/building industries

Dry FGD byproduct used as landfill

2125-Sep-17

Use of Gas to Gas Heater (wet FGD)

o Practical limit of gas reheating constrained by size/cost

o Typical reheat temperature 85 – 90 deg C

o Better dispersion from stack.

o Prevents white plume

o Reduces water consumption by pre-cooling the flue gas minimizing evaporation loss.

But

o Does not entirely eliminate downstream corrosion due to SO3 in flue gas

o Ducting and stack still needs costly lining materials

o Adds to auxiliary power and OPEX

o Generally regenerative type heaters 10% of CAPEX

Gas to Gas Heater

2225-Sep-17

Dry FGD systems allow existing stack to be used as is

Wet systems need existing stack to be specially lined > duration 3-4 months > generation loss

Alternatively, a new shorter stack for FGD > old stack as is (only for FGD bypass operation)

Without GGH wet stack design to be adopted

Use of high efficiency mist eliminator to minimize droplet carry over

Condensate collection & draining system

Maintain proper gas velocity to eliminate droplet entrainment

Wet booster fan downstream of FGD

NDCT as stack

Stack Operation & Protection

2325-Sep-17

Chemical Resistance

Temperature Resistance deg C

Life Relative Cost Remarks

Borosilicate blocks on steel/concrete38 or 51 mm

Suitable for wet flue gas,

with high SO3 level

200 Long life /minor

maintenance

2 Can withstand higher temperature for short periods

Vinyl Ester FRP Do 150 Long life 2 Do

Glass flake vinyl ester on steel,2 mm

Do 140 Needs reapplication

/ maintenance in medium

term

1 (lowest) Do

Alloy cladding (C276 or Ti) steel,1.5 mm

Do 427 - 900 Long life 3 (highest) Suitable for all boiler upset conditions

Stack Operation & Protection Stack Lining Materials

2425-Sep-17

Major consumers:

o Cooling tower evaporation

o Wet FGD system (0.16-0.2 m3/MWh)

o Ash handling system

o Coal handling system

o Power cycle system

o HVAC system

Impact on Overall Water Balance

Case Plant water consumption without

FGDCOC=5

Plant water consumption with FGD

COC=5

Remarks

(m3/h)

(A)

m3/MWhr)

(B)

(m3/h)

(C)

(m3/MWhr)

(D)

1 3862 2.93 4036 3.06 FGD water 216 m3/h supplied from clarified water

2 2868 2.17 3091 2.34

Case 1: Both FA & BA Wet Disposal, with zero ash water recoveryCase 2: BA wet disposal & FA Dry Utilization, with 60% ash water recoveryThe figures shown in above table are indicative for a 2 x 660 MW plant with cooling tower

2525-Sep-17

Need for WFGD Waste Water Treatment

o Aggressive quality with very high TDS (Cl, heavy metals). Reuse within plant difficult

o Bled off to control chemistry in reaction chamber

o Schemes have been tried with conventional physical/chemical precipitation or biological treatment to target specific metal species.

o Slip stream flue gas heating u/s of APH to evaporate waste bleed.

o Stricter environmental regulations often call of zero liquid discharge which is complicated and costly.

FGD Waste Water Treatment

2625-Sep-17

Way Forward for Implementation

Part 4

2725-Sep-17

Schedule Realistic schedule - FGD project cycle 3 years (1 year planning and award + 2 year execution)

CEA/Regional Power Committees (RPCs) have published phasing plans starting 2020. More than 270 existing units (210 –660 MW range) ear marked for FGD installation in phasing plan

New plants under construction (planned COD after Jan 2017) to get suitable time extensions for concurrent FGD implementation.

Applicability CFBC boilers generally exempt

Partial capacity FGD in smaller (< 500 MW) plants – cost effective

Considered decision to retire old, non performing units (> 30 yrs) For larger plants (> 500 MW) wet FGD (limestone & sea water) are most suitable techno economically.

Space a critical constraint in older plants (pre 2003 COD). Dry technologies may be considered due to compactness/ease of retrofit, specially for < 500 MW.

FGD can bring a co-benefit in reduction of SPM (& Hg) - consider integrated approach with ESP modification

Way forward for Implementation

2825-Sep-17

Long term sourcing of 90% pure limestone. Ministry of mines to ensure ~10 Million tpy.

Policy mandate for use of by-product gypsum (rather than natural) with 90% quality met by plant.

Reduction of plant downtime during installation. New chimney versus existing chimney lining/modification (12-16 weeks or more). Leads to revenue loss ~ INR 7 lac/MW/week

Procurement readiness to meet installation deadlines starting 2020 – bulk orders by Dec 2017.

@ 30 GW per year and 3 units per supplier ~ at least 10 - 12 good suppliers are needed. Reputed technology suppliers globally available – US, Europe, Japan, South Korea, China – transfer of technology through

various collaborations/ventures/subsidiaries with Indian players to be accelerated to bring in more competition.

Way forward for Implementation

2925-Sep-17

Indicative Cost Comparison

Part 5

3025-Sep-17

Indicative Cost Comparison Wet & Dry FGD

Note: 1. This analysis does not include for LS WFGD:a) Cost of revenue loss due to shutdown for existing chimney

lining2. CAPEX of sea water FGD is marginally lower than LS WFGD

Assumptions:

The costs are based on budgetary estimates and indicated for reference onlyCost indicated is for 2 units of 660 MW each

Plant life is 25 yearsPlant capacity factor is considered 85%

Escalation rate is considered 3%

NPV discount rate is considered 10%O&M staff per shift is considered 4

O&M labor rate is considered INR 800 per dayFor semi dry FGD O&M includes filter bag and cage changes @ 15% of Capex every 4 years

FGD power consumption is considered 1% to 1.15% for LS WFGD and SD FGDPower cost is considered INR 4.67/KWh

Limestone consumption is considered 16.4 tons per hour for WFGD

Limestone (> 85% purity) cost is considered INR 2000 per ton Gypsum production is considered 22 tons per hour

Gypsum price is considered INR 700 per ton for saleLime consumption is considered 16 tons per hour for SDFGD

Lime (> 90% purity) cost is considered INR 6000 per ton

Repair/maintenance cost is considered 1% of FGD plant capital cost

Summary Cost Analysis for FGD 2 x 660 MW unitsLimestone Wet FGD Dry FGD (CDS) Remarks

FGD Plant Capital Cost (including civil & structural, erection, testing &commissioning)

INR Cr 550 370

Includes:Gas gas heater for WFGD

Excludes :a) reagent unloading/ crushing/ conveying for bulk storage areab) by product disposal system

Chimney lining INR Cr 80 Borosilicate for WFGDBulk Reagent handling INR Cr 15 5ZLD treatment package INR Cr 100Total installed cost INR Cr 745 375

INR Cr/MW 0.56 0.28

Total O&M Cost per year INR Cr/yr 68.61 136.74O&M labor 0.10 0.10Aux power 48.68 52.16

Reagent 23.83 71.48 Lime for CDS or limestone for WFGD

WWTS reagents 0.02Waste water treatment reagents for WFGD

Gypsum (marketable) -11.47 Revenue from selling gypsum. NA for CDS

Repair/maintenance 7.45 13.00includes annualized filter bag change for CDS every 4 years

O&M 25 yr NPV INR Cr 814.47 1623.18

Plant 25 yr lifecycle cost INR Cr 1559.47 1998.18

3125-Sep-17

Conclusions

Part 6

3225-Sep-17

Major boost in AQCS market in India

Mature FGD technologies proven worldwide are ready to be adopted for Indian market

Qualified, global FGD technology suppliers to collaborate with Indian suppliers for critical design & supply.

Choice of best technology to be made after detailed analysis covering all aspects of plant life, interfaces, emission gap, sustainable operation and cost.

All stakeholders (plant operators, policy makers, regulators) should work together to address remaining concerns (mostly related to investment and cost recovery) to clear the path to speedy implementation. .

Conclusions

3325-Sep-17

tractebel-engie.comShaping our world

Let’s keep in touch – T +91 1244698500