EAP - Oil Shale publications

PUBLISHED
SINCE 1984

Oil Shale

ISSN 1736-7492 (Electronic)
ISSN 0208-189X (Print)

Impact Factor (2022): 1.9

FULL-SCALE TESTS ON THE CO-FIRING OF PEAT AND OIL SHALE IN AN OIL SHALE FIRED CIRCULATING FLUIDIZED BED BOILER; pp. 250–262

PDF | https://doi.org/10.3176/oil.2017.3.04

Authors

TÕNU PIHU, ALAR KONIST, Dmitri Neshumayev, LAURI LOO, ARTJOM MOLODTSOV, ALEKSANDR VALTSEV

Abstract

The paper presents analysis of data obtained from tests of oil shale (OS) and peat co-combustion in a full-scale 250 MW_th (useful heat output) circulating fluidized bed (CFB) boiler. The tests were conducted at nominal boiler load, with peat thermal input up to 30%. During the experiments, gas analysis was performed and ash samples were collected. The specific consumption of the oil shale and peat blend per useful heat and gross electricity was calculated and other techno-economic characteristics were determined.
It was found that the co-combustion of oil shale and wet peat increased the CO emission to the level of 60 mg/Nm³. The NOx concentration increased from 120 to 165 mg/Nm³. The SO₂ and HCl emissions remained at a very low level – below 20 mg/Nm³. A significant ash reduction, approximately 4%, was measured in the case of a 30% peat content. Due to the high peat moisture, the flue gas volume increased 5–10%. As a result of addition of peat, the content of particulate matter (PM) 10/2.5 was also lower than that by conventional oil shale CFB firing. Oil shale and peat co-combustion can be considered as a viable option and near-term solution for reducing the environmental impact of oil shale power production.

References

1. FE032: Capacity and production of power plants. Statistics Estonia, 2017. [Online]. Available: www.stat.ee. pub.stat.ee. (accessed 10 Feb 2017).

2. Roos, I., Soosaar, S., Volkova, A, Streimikene, D. Greenhouse gas emission reduction perspectives in the Baltic States in frames of EU energy and climate policy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 2012, 16(4), 2133–2146.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.01.013

3. Loo, L., Maaten, B., Siirde, A., Pihu, T., Konist, A, Experimental analysis of the combustion characteristics of Estonian oil shale in air and oxy-fuel atmospheres. Fuel Process. Technol., 2015, 134, 317–324.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2014.12.051

4. Konist, A., Valtsev, A., Loo, L., Pihu, T., Liira, M., Kirsimäe, K. Influence of oxy-fuel combustion of Ca-rich oil shale fuel on carbonate stability and ash composition. Fuel, 2015, 139, 671–677.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.09.050

5. Konist, A., Pihu, T., Neshumayev, D., Siirde, A. Oil shale pulverized firing: Boiler efficiency, ash balance and flue gas composition. Oil Shale, 2013, 30(1), 6–18.

6. Konist, A., Maaten, B., Loo, L., Neshumayev, D., Pihu, T. Mineral sequestration of CO₂ by carbonation of Ca-rich oil shale ash in natural conditions. Oil Shale, 2016, 33(3), 248–259.
https://doi.org/10.3176/oil.2016.3.04

7. Hotta, A., Parkkonen, R., Hiltunen, M., Arro, H., Loosaar, J., Parve, T., Pihu, T., Prikk, A., Tiikma, T. Experience of Estonian oil shale combustion based on CFB technology at Narva Power Plants. Oil Shale, 2005, 22(4), 381–397.

8. Lüschen, A., Madlener, R. Economic viability of biomass cofiring in new hard-coal power plants in Germany. Biomass Bioenerg., 2013, 57, 33–47.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2012.11.017

9. Konist, A., Pihu, T., Neshumayev, D., Külaots, I. Low grade fuel – oil shale and biomass co-combustion in CFB boiler. Oil Shale, 2013, 30(2S), 294–304.
https://doi.org/10.3176/oil.2013.2S.09

10. Krzywanski, J., Rajczyk, R., Bednarek, M., Wesolowska, M., Nowak, W. Gas emissions from a large scale circulating fluidized bed boilers burning lignite and biomass. Fuel Process. Technol., 2013, 116, 27–34.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2013.04.021

11. Sahu, S. G., Chakraborty, N., Sarkar, P. Coal–biomass co-combustion: An overview. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev., 2014, 39, 575–586.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.106

12. Hupa, M. Interaction of fuels in co-firing in FBC. Fuel, 2005, 84(10), 1312–1319.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2004.07.018

13. Hupa, M. Ash behavior in fluidized bed combustion – recent research highlights. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Circulating Fluidized Beds, 13–16 May 2008, Hamburg, Germany, 845–856.

14. Yrjas, P., Skrifvars, B.-J., Hupa, M., Roppo, J., Nylund, M., Vainikka, P. Chlorine in deposits during co-firing of biomass, peat, and coal in a full-scale CFBC boiler. From 18^th International Conference on Fluidized Bed Combustion, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, May 22–26, 2005, 679–687. ASME Proceedings, 2005.
https://doi.org/10.1115/FBC2005-78097

15. Doshi, V., Vuthaluru, H. B., Korbee, R., Kiel, J. H. A. Development of a modeling approach to predict ash formation during co-firing of coal and biomass. Fuel Process. Technol., 2009, 90(9), 1148–1156.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2009.05.019

16. Pronobis, M. The influence of biomass co-combustion on boiler fouling and efficiency. Fuel, 2006, 85(4), 474–480.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2005.08.015

17. Lu, G., Yan, Y., Cornwell, S., Whitehouse, M., Riley, G. Impact of co-firing coal and biomass on flame characteristics and stability. Fuel, 2008, 87(7), 1133–1140.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2007.07.005

18. Plamus, K., Ots, A., Pihu, T., Neshumayev, D. Firing Estonian oil shale in CFB boilers - ash balance and behaviour of carbonate minerals. Oil Shale, 2011, 28(1), 58–67.
https://doi.org/10.3176/oil.2011.1.07

19. Kuusik, R., Uibu, M., Kirsimäe, K. Characterization of oil shale ashes formed at industrial-scale CFBC boilers. Oil Shale, 2005, 22(4S), 407–419.

20. Pihu, T., Arro, H., Prikk, A., Rootamm, R., Konist, A. Corrosion of air preheater tubes of oil shale CFB boiler. Part I. Dew point of flue gas and low-temperature corrosion. Oil Shale, 2009, 26(1), 5–12.
https://doi.org/10.3176/oil.2009.1.01

21. Shao, Y., Wang, J., Xu, C., Zhu, J., Preto, F., Tourigny, G., Badour, C., Li, H. An experimental and modeling study of ash deposition behaviour for co-firing peat with lignite. Appl. Energ., 2011, 88(8), 2635–2640.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.02.006

22. Baxter, L. L., Miles, T. R., Miles Jr., T. R., Jenkins, B. M., Milne, T., Dayton, D., Bryers, R. W., Oden, L. L. The behavior of inorganic material in biomass-fired power boilers: field and laboratory experiences. Fuel Process. Technol., 1998, 54(1–3), 47–78.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3820(97)00060-X

23. Badour, C., Gilbert, A., Xu, C., Li, H., Shao, Y., Tourigny, G., Preto, F. Combustion and air emissions from co-firing a wood biomass, a Canadian peat and a Canadian lignite coal in a bubbling fluidised bed combustor. Can. J. Chem. Eng., 2012, 90(5), 1170–1177.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cjce.20620

24. Parve, T., Loosaar, J., Mahhov, M., Konist, A. Emission of fine particulates from oil shale fired large boilers. Oil Shale, 2011, 28(1S), 152–161.
https://doi.org/10.3176/oil.2011.1S.07

Plamus, K., Soosaar, S., Ots, A., Neshumayev, D. Firing Estonian oil shale of higher quality in CFB boilers – environmental and economic impact. Oil Shale, 2011, 28(1S), 113–126.
https://doi.org/10.3176/oil.2011.1S.04

Back to Issue