Precipitator Market Overview

Precipitator Market Overview

Wet precipitation is the hottest growth segment. One real possibility is that each coal-fired boiler with a wet scrubber will be equipped with a WESP for mist removal. Over the next ten years more than 100,000 MW of FGD systems will be installed in the U.S. If half of these utilize WESPs, the market will be 5000 MW/year at $40/kW. This will be $200 million/year.

WESPs could penetrate other regions as well. As Europe becomes more sensitive to the condensibles issue, there is likely to be a market developing. The Japanese already incorporate tail end WESPs for coal-fired plants in sensitive areas.

The biggest market for dry precipitators is China. Fifteen thousand to 20,000 MW of new coal-fired plants are slated to commence operation each year in the next decade. Eighty percent of these will be equipped with precipitators. So the market could average 16,000 MW x $25/kW or $400 million/year.

Other markets for precipitators include refineries, cement kilns, and pulp and paper mills. There are a modest number of precipitator retrofit projects for fluid catalytic cracking units in the U.S.

Cement kiln operators are favoring fabric filters, whereas once precips were nearly always utilized. Black Liquor recovery boilers remain an application where precipitators are nearly always utilized.

The upgrading of dry precips on U.S. coal-fired boilers is a huge potential. Assume that 40 percent x 250,000 MW upgrade, and then there will be 100,000 MW of upgrades. At $30/kW this is a $3-billion market or $300 million/year for the next ten years. Environmental groups are challenging Title V permits. Power plants will be hard pressed to prove that they are meeting the permitted levels which are frequently 0.2 lbs/MMBtu or higher. With new fine particulate ambient standards, it is a foregone conclusion that these high emitters will be required to reduce emissions to the NSPS levels (0.03 lbs/MMBtu) or lower. New coal-fired units are typically required to meet 0.02 lbs/MMBtu of discrete particulate and 0.03 lbs/MMBtu including condensibles.

Detailed forecasts for each country and each industry segmented by wet and dry precips are provided in Electrostatic Precipitators: World Markets. For more information, click on: http://www.mcilvainecompany.com/air.html#N018 .

DOE Conference on SCR/SNCR Generates Good Dialog

Some 200 attendees got their money's worth and more from the DOE SCR/SNCR conference last week in Pittsburgh. Most of the news was positive. SCR performance is meeting expectations. SO₃ oxidation can be minimized. Mercury oxidation attributable to SCR is substantial as long as HCl is present. Catalyst cleaning can reduce lifetime costs. In fact, in one installation reactivity was restored to 100 percent whereas SO₂-SO₃ conversion was reduced substantially. This was due to a special cleaning process. The only bad news was the possible failure of the spray drier baghouse using activated carbon to remove mercury efficiently

Here are the questions which utilities are asking this month:

What are the odds of getting better than 90 percent mercury removal if you burn bituminous coal, have an SCR, and have a wet scrubber with additives to prevent mercury release?
How much mercury removal will you get if you burn PRB coal, have a spray drier baghouse, and inject carbon between the spray drier and baghouse?
What percent NO_x removal will realistically be achieved over the campaign, if the SCR has 90 percent removal at optimum or guarantee conditions?
Are additives or wet precipitators the solution for SO₃ emissions?
What is the cost and availability of catalyst with 0.1-0.2 percent SO₃ conversion?
Will there be particulate reduction requirements and, if so, when? Will they be tied into toxic metals (surrogate)?
What is the quantity of fine particle emissions, and how do you measure them?
How important will HCl, HF, and toxic heavy metals be in your APC planning?
How soon will any of the new multi-pollutant technologies be a viable alternative?
Can you minimize risk by staging, and is this cost effective?

McIlvaine is addressing these questions in the Power Plant Knowledge System and will also be conducting a 4-hour discussion of them at Power-Gen on December 8. (Listed under Discussion Groups in the registration material.)

SCR and FGD Will Remove 90 Percent of Mercury

Tests by CONSOL are providing insights on the ability of SCR to oxidize mercury and of scrubbers to capture the oxidized mercury at plants burning bituminous coals. Without the SCR, 20 percent of mercury is typically unoxidized but with the SCR in place only 3-6 percent is unoxidized. This is an over simplification of the paper presented by Jeff Withum of CONSOL. Of three plants recently tested, the mercury removal was over 90 percent for the spray drier absorbers. It was less for the wet FGD. But Hans Hartenstein pointed out that this was because elemental mercury was released from the scrubber. If an additive such as TMT 15 is used, the wet scrubber should do a better job than the SDA on mercury capture. Hans points out that mercury is not a concern in Germany where all coal plants have FGD and SCR. Most use additives to prevent mercury releases.

Here are all the headlines from our Utility Fax Alert. It is part of the Utility Environmental Upgrade Tracking System. For more information, click on: http://www.mcilvainecompany.com/energy.html .

UTILITY FAX ALERT

#646 – October 31, 2003

Table of Contents

SCR CONFERENCE

· DOE Conference on SCR/SNCR Generates Good Dialog

· DOE to Fund Research on NO_x