Performance/Cost Estimates for Retrofitting Control Technologies

Jones, J. B.; Emmel, T.E.; Laseke, B.A.

doi:10.1080/08940630.1988.10466425

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To perform a good feasibility analysis, one must utilize methods and assumptions of cost analysis that are accurate, and that are accepted as the standard by the industry for which the analysis is being made. Others 11,12 have suggested that, for the electric power generation industry, the cost analysis methods most often used and accepted are those of the Electric Power Research Institute, as documented in their Technical Assessment Guide (EPRI TAG). 13 The specific economic analysis method employed in this study was the levelized revenue requirement (LRR) analysis.…”

Section: Methods Of Economic Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

The Economic Feasibility of Using Hydrogen Peroxide for the Enhanced Oxidation and Removal of Nitrogen Oxides from Coal-Fired Power Plant Flue Gases

Haywood¹,

Cooper

1998

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research at the University of Central Florida has determined that the injection of hydrogen peroxide (HO) into a simulated flue gas stream effectively oxidizes NO to NO, and NO to HNO and HNO. These oxides of nitrogen are much more soluble in water than NO, and therefore may be more easily scrubbed from the flue gas in a typical wet scrubber. Oxidation and NO removal efficiencies of greater than 90% were demonstrated in the laboratory. An economic comparison between the HO injection-wet scrubbing method and the selective catalytic reduction (SCR) method of NO removal was conducted for a design base case and a variety of alternative cases. This study illustrates the trade-off between capital and operating costs for the two alternatives. The single largest factor in determining whether the total cost of the HO injection-wet scrubbing method compares favorably with the total cost of the SCR method is the HO:NO molar ratio. At the HO:NO molar ratio demonstrated in the laboratory (1.92:1.0), the HO injection-wet scrubbing method of NO removal was shown to be uneconomical. However, the molar ratio in a full-size coal-fired power plant could be lower than that found in the laboratory. Based on all the cost assumptions stated in this article, at a molar ratio of 1.37:1.0, the hydrogen peroxide injection method was calculated to be an economically feasible alternative to the SCR method for NO control.

show abstract

Section: Methods Of Economic Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%