Internal Data Search by Company/Division Name
Carbon Management Programs for Fossil-fueled Boilers - Webinar March 31, 2011
Three speakers discussed regulation of greenhouse gases, CO2 capture and storage, reduction through energy efficient in coal-fired boilers.
Revision Date: 3/31/2011
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Alstom, EPRI, Andover Technology Partners, CO2
Greenhouse Gas Mitigation from Power Plants by James Staudt - Hot Topic Hour March 31, 2011
Jim Staudt PhD, President of Andover Technology Partners, provided an overview of ongoing activities in the greenhouse gas mitigation area with particular focus on the U.S. EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Options Database. It is designed to help developers, suppliers, consultants and the operators select the best options.
Revision Date: 3/31/2011
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Andover Technology Partners, CO2
Mercury Measurement and Control - Part 1, Webinar - Hot Topic Hour March 28, 2013
MATS Compliance
Revision Date: 3/28/2013
Tags: 327310 - Cement Manufacturing 水泥生产, 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, ADA-ES, CB&I, CleanAir Engineering, Andover Technology Partners, Activated Carbon, Sorbent Trap, Bromine, Mercury Monitoring, Mercury
Mercury Measurement and Control by Jim Staudt, Andover Technology - Hot Topic Hour March 28, 2013
Discussed the issues facing utility boilers, industrial boilers and Portland cement kilns that need to measure and control Hg emissions.
Revision Date: 3/28/2013
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, 327310 - Cement Manufacturing 水泥生产, Andover Technology Partners, Mercury Monitoring, Activated Carbon, Mercury
Reviewed the status of GHG regulations in the U.S. and various technologies for mitigating GHG emissions in the power and cement sectors.
Revision Date: 7/25/2013
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, 327310 - Cement Manufacturing 水泥生产, Andover Technology Partners, Greenhouse Gas, Regulation
GHG Compliance Strategies, Reduction Technologies and Measurement - Hot Topic Hour July 25, 2013
Revision Date: 7/25/2013
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Andover Technology Partners, Sidley Austin LLP, Sanford Cohen & Associates, World Resources Institute, Greenhouse Gas, Regulation
GHG Compliance Strategies, Reduction Technologies and Measurement Webinar - Presenter Bios
Revision Date: 7/25/2013
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, World Resources Institute, Sidley Austin LLP, Sanford Cohen & Associates, Andover Technology Partners
Constellation Energy installed SNCR systems at the CP Crane Station, units 1 and 2. These SNCR systems use continuous ammonia slip analyzers that work on the principle of tunable diode laser (TDL) spectroscopy and provide continuous, real-time indication of ammonia slip in the duct. These analyzers facilitated optimization of the SNCR system to avoid high ammonia slip transients that are the principal contributors to downstream problems normally associated with ammonia slip.
Revision Date: 4/14/2014
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Constellation Energy, Tourgee & Associates, Andover Technology Partners, Analyzer - NH3, SNCR, Analyzer - TDL, Ammonia Slip, Monitoring, Ammonia Monitoring, USA
Measuring Ammonia Slip from Post Combustion NOx Reduction Systems
In many facilities there may be room for process improvement that could reduce operating costs or provide revenue enhancement opportunities. Operating SNCR or SCR technology closer to its limit offers these benefits but increases the risk of high ammonia slip. The risk could be abated with the use of ammonia monitoring technology. But, except for gas-fired plants, continuous ammonia slip monitoring technologies have not been available at a practical price to facilitate these cost-saving or revenue enhancing improvements. Conditions that exist in high dust, high temperature, high NOx and/or high SO2 environments make most analyzer methods of continuously measuring ammonia unsuitable for application to coal plants. An overview of the technologies available for measuring ammonia in the high dust region downstream of a Nox reduction system and the status of their development is provided.
Revision Date: 4/14/2014
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Andover Technology Partners, SNCR, SCR, Analyzer - TDL, Analyzer - NH3, Ammonia Slip, Monitoring, Ammonia Monitoring
There is a comparison of NOx differential, UV photometry, TDL and IR as options for NH3 measurement. Successful control of SNCR and TDL is chronicled.
Revision Date: 4/17/2014
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Andover Technology Partners, Continuous Emissions Monitor, Analyzer - TDL, Analyzer - Nox, Analyzer - NH3, SNCR, Ammonia Slip, Nox Monitoring, Monitoring, Ammonia Monitoring
Measurement Differences between CEMS and Sorbent Traps
This study examined some of the factors that could contribute to differences between Method 30B Hg measurements and those that result from Hg CEMS.12 The following conclusions can be drawn: • When Hg is not controlled, the contribution of HgP is generally not enough to result in a significant difference between Method 30B and electronic Hg CEMS. • ACI and Br addition for Hg control will increase HgP. When Hg is controlled to MATS control levels, HgP that makes it past the PM control device may be sufficient to cause Method 30B to overestimate the gaseous Hg emissions by a significant degree, but typically not enough to impact whether or not a RATA is passed. • At sufficiently high Br levels, there is a potential for Br to contribute to differences between Method 30B and Hg CEMS that are not explained by HgP alone. One possible mechanism is the reaction of Br on the probe filter (or other surface) with gaseous Hg. This will be exacerbated if the probe or filter surfaces are reactive (ie., not adequately coated), if the filter condition has deteriorated or if material with reactive surface has accumulated on the filter. Others have also suggested that interference with the sample conversion system may contribute to this difference. For most Br addition rates expected under practical conditions, this potential effect is not expected to be significant. • The use of brominated activated carbon will impact the difference between Hg CEMS and sorbent traps due to formation of HgP as a direct and intended result of controlling Hg. The increased HgP that makes it past the PM control device will contribute to a difference between Hg CEMS and Method 30B. On the other hand, Br released from brominated activated carbon does not appear to impact gaseous mercury measurements to any significant degree. • This paper explored some key factors that might impact the difference between Hg CEMS
Revision Date: 4/30/2014
Tags: 562213 - Solid Waste Combustors and Incinerators , Andover Technology Partners, Sorbent Trap, Mercury Monitor, Continuous Emissions Monitor
Jim provided the following comparison between CEMS and Sorbent Traps - Method 30B includes HgP, which results in overestimation of gaseous Hg that may be significant at MATS Hg levels but not enough to impact RATA pass or fail Differences in HgT up to about 0.50µg/Nm3 (typically less, but sometimes more) may be explained by HgP when controlling Hg with ACI and/or Br. Will vary somewhat by coal Hg levels, PM emissions, ACI injection, etc. Bromine “interference” should not be a concern except possibly under extremely high furnace Br injection rates and is not a concern for brominated activated carbon.
Revision Date: 5/8/2014
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Andover Technology Partners, Sorbent Trap, Mercury CEMS
Sorbent Traps vs. Mercury CEMS Webinar - Hot Topic Hour May 8, 2014
The Hot Topic Hour yesterday included an extensive and friendly debate over the results of sorbent traps and mercury CEMS. The differences of opinion were about gaseous mercury measurement.
Revision Date: 5/8/2014
Tags: 221112 - Fossil Fuel 化石燃料, Durag, Ohio Lumex, Cooper Environmental, Andover Technology Partners, Carbonxt, Sorbent Trap, Multi-metal, CEMS, Mercury