DETAILED PROJECT

FINAL FEASIBILITY
REPOR REPOR
 INDEX

1.1 Executive Summary...................................................................................................6

1.2 Introduction......................................................................................................................6
1.3 Site Study and Input Data................................................................................................6
1.4 Applicable Emission Standard.........................................................................................7
1.5 Plant Emissions................................................................................................................7
1.6 Technology Selection for SO2 Control.............................................................................9
1.7 NOx Emission and control.............................................................................................10
1.8 Mercury and PM Controls..............................................................................................10
1.9 Specific Water Consumption..........................................................................................11
1.10 Impact of Plant Design for each 250 MW Unit...............................................................11
1.11 Project Schedule and Project Cost................................................................................12

2.1 Basis of Study..........................................................................................................14

2.2 Environment (Protection) Rules Amendment................................................................14
2.3 Applicable Emission Standard for CTPP.......................................................................17
2.4 Site Study and Data Collection......................................................................................17
2.5 Plant Configuration and Plant Details............................................................................18

3.1 Technology Overview for SO2 and NOX Control...................................................20

3.2 SO2 Pollutant from Coal Combustion.............................................................................20
3.3 SO2 Control Methods.....................................................................................................20
3.4 NOx Pollutant from Coal Combustion............................................................................26
3.5 NOx Emission Control Methods.....................................................................................27

4.1 Technology Selection for SO2 and NOx Control....................................................32

4.2 SO2 Control....................................................................................................................32
4.3 Wet Stack and Condensate collection system..............................................................38
4.4 NOx Control....................................................................................................................39
4.5 Design Data and Performance Parameters...................................................................43

5.1 Mercury & PM Emission Control............................................................................49

5.2 Mercury in Coal and Flue Gas.......................................................................................49
5.3 Mercury Control..............................................................................................................49
5.4 Site Condition on PM &Mercury Emissions...................................................................50
5.5 Requirement of Mercury Capture..................................................................................51
5.6 Particulate Emission Control in Flue Gas......................................................................51

6.1 Plant Water Consumption.......................................................................................56

6.2 MOEF Water Consumption Limit...................................................................................56

Page :2
 6.3 Basis and Assumptions..................................................................................................57
6.4 Specific Water Consumption of the plant.......................................................................57
6.5 Water Requirement for FGD System and Source.........................................................58
6.6 Assessment of plant water consumption.......................................................................58
6.7 FGD Waste water treatment Plant.................................................................................62

7.1 Layout Study............................................................................................................65

7.2 Layout / Land Requirement...........................................................................................65
7.3 FGD System Layout.......................................................................................................65
7.4 SNCR System Layout....................................................................................................66
7.5 FGD-waste water treatment plant Layout......................................................................66
7.6 Powdered activated carbon System Layout..................................................................66
7.7 Buildings & foundations.................................................................................................66

8.1 Auxiliary Power Consumption & Utility Requirements........................................70

8.2 Auxiliary Power Requirement........................................................................................70
8.3 Process Utility Requirement...........................................................................................71
8.4 Utilization of Gypsum.....................................................................................................71
8.5 Reagent Handling and Preparation plant......................................................................72

9.1 Interface Requirement with Existing Plant............................................................75

9.2 Mechanical Interface......................................................................................................75
9.3 Electrical Interface..........................................................................................................75
9.4 Instrumentation & Controls SystemInterface.................................................................77
9.5 Reliability and Availability...............................................................................................77
9.6 Operability and Maintainability.......................................................................................77
9.7 Control System...............................................................................................................78
9.8 Control Room.................................................................................................................78

10.1 Project Cost Estimate....................................................................................80

10.2 Project Cost....................................................................................................................80

11.1 Project Implementation and Schedule........................................................85

11.2 Method of Implementing the Project..............................................................................85
11.3 Project Schedule............................................................................................................85
11.4 Owner’s Responsibility...................................................................................................85

12.0 Conclusions...................................................................................................88

13.1 Financial.........................................................................................................91
13.2 General..........................................................................................................................91

13.3 Cost of Limestone and Ammonia...................................................................................91

Page :3
 13.4 Cost of Land...................................................................................................................91
13.5 Cost of other items.........................................................................................................91
13.6 Project cost Summary....................................................................................................91
13.7 Fixed and variable Cost.................................................................................................92
13.8 Assumptions...................................................................................................................92
13.9 Impact on Generation Cost............................................................................................93

14.0 List of Original Equipment Suppliers (OEMs).............................................95

List of Annexures

Annexure - 1 List of Inputs

List of Exhibit

Exhibit - 01 Schematic Diagram for Wet Limestone based FGD

System Exhibit - 02 Schematic Diagram for Semi Dry FGD System

Exhibit - 03 Schematic Diagram for

SNCR Exhibit - 04 Schematic Diagram

for SCR Exhibit - 05 Schematic Diagram

for EADS

Exhibit - 06 Schematic Diagram for Electron Beam Flue gas

Treatment Exhibit - 07 Schematic Diagram for ReACT

Exhibit - 08 FGD System Output for 250 MW

Units Exhibit - 09 Plot plan

Exhibit - 10 Single Line Diagram for the FGD

system Exhibit – 11 Field Test Results

Exhibit – 12 Flow Diagram for FGD Waste Water Treatment

Plant Exhibit – 13A Source of FGD Make-up – Phase 1

Exhibit – 13B Source of FGD Make-up – Phase 2

Exhibit – 14 Plant Specific Water Requirement

Exhibit – 15 Schematic Diagram – Typical PAC Injection System

Page :4
 1
Executive Summary
1.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.2 Introduction

Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd (XXXXXXX) has a Coal based Thermal
Power Plant with capacity of 4x250 MW in Tehsil Xxxxxxx, Rajasthan. The plant
uses Indian Coal sourced from mines in SECL, Korba (C.G) through washery circuit
and Parsa east & KanteBasan Coal Block, Ambikapur (C.G).

XXXXXXX has appointed Fichtner Consulting Engineers (India) Private Limited (FI)
for carrying out the Evaluation and Assessment of existing power plants of
XXXXXXX and prepare Feasibility Report for meeting revised environmental norms
by the existing units.

The scope of this report is to establish the Feasibility Study for the following units of
Xxxxxxx Thermal Power Project(CTPP).

Table 1.1: List of units Commissioned in CTPP

Thermal Power Plant Name Unit Capacity Year of Commissioning

Unit-I 30.10.2009

Xxxxxxx Thermal Power Unit-II 04.05.2010

4x250 MW
Project, Xxxxxxx Unit-III 14.09.2013
Unit-IV 30.06.2014

1.3 Site Study and Input Data

FI team visited the power plant site to study the plant details. FI team collected the
plant design data, specifically with regard to coal analysis, Plant water consumption,
designed emissions levels of SO2, NOx. Site walkthrough was also conducted to
study the plant equipment layout and to ascertain the space provision and its
availability for installation of pollution control equipment. Annexure-1 lists the data
collected from XXXXXXX during the site visit.

Exhibit-11 lists the stack emission data measured by FI from 13.04.2018 to

19.04.2018.
 The measurement for plant specific water consumption was carried out by FI
personnel on 01st August 2018. The data logged during the measurement is
attached as Exhinit-14.

For the purpose of arriving baseline emission data, a blend of 70% Indian coal with
0.6% Sulphur, and 30% Imported coal with 0.7% Sulphur and 35% ash content as
per the input from XXXXXXX, and water consumption as per design water balance
diagram provided by XXXXXXX are considered.

1.4 Applicable Emission Standard

The Unit-I to Unit-IV falls under the category “ TPPs (units) installed after 1st
January, 2004, up to 31 st December,2016” and “Units smaller than 500MW capacity
units”, as mentioned in the MOEF & CC gazette notification.

Table 1.2: Applicable Emission Standards for this study

Parameters Unit Standard

Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) mg/Nm³ 600

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) mg/Nm³ 300

PM mg/Nm³ 50

Mercury mg/Nm³ 0.03

Water m³/MWh 3.5

1.5 Plant Emissions

Continuous emission monitoring system is installed for the Units – 1,2,3 & 4 of the
plant. Further to that, the emission data measured at site by FI appointed agency for
seven days will also form baseline emission data for the study. However, expected
worst case emission values are calculated based on coal analysis provided by the
XXXXXXX. Field Tests were carried out on Units-1,2 &3. Unit-4 was under annual
shutdown and hence the historical data is considered for PM and highest data from
identical units are considered for SO 2 and NOx.
 Present emission level is assessed and compared with the limiting emission values
mandated by December 2015 MOEF&CC norms.

Table 1.3: Present emissions and MOEF&CC norms

SO2 Particulate Matter (PM) NOx Mercury Specific Water

(mg/Nm3) (mg/Nm3) (mg/Nm3) (mg/Nm3) Consumption
Unit Capacity

Norms Dec 2015 MOEF&CC

NormsDec 2015 MOEF&CC
Site measurement Emission
Present
Norms Dec 2015 MOEF&CC

Present consumption (Base

Norms Dec 2015 MOEF&CC

Site measurement (Base Line
Norms Dec 2015 MOEF&CC
Present Emission (Estimated

Emission
(Base Line

(Base Line Data)

Data-design)
Base Line Data)

Line Data)
data XXXXXXX
Site measurem ent

Data)
250 MW
1900 600 (157.15) NA 50 543.79 300 0.078 0.03
(Unit 1)

250 MW
1900 600 (438.66) NA 50 590.83 300 0.19 0.03
(Unit 2)
3.18 3.5
250 MW
1900 600 (93.7) NA 50 615.29 300 0.13 0.03
(Unit 3)

250 MW
1900 600 - 105# 50 615.2 300 - 0.03
(Unit 4)

 The SO2 emission values indicated are estimated using Thermoflow

Software (used for design of Coal Based Thermal Power Plant
worldwide), based on Coal data furnished as input by XXXXXXX.
 Unit 4 was under shutdown during the site emission measurement
activity performed by FI. The maximum of historic measured data for PM,
maximum of the measured emission data of NOx and Hg at site for units
1 to 3 is considered as baseline data for all the units including unit 4.
#
 Maximum of the historic data from XXXXXXX
 The maximum of the monthly plant actual specific water consumption
data provided by XXXXXXX for the period between April 2016 to January
2018 forms the baseline data for analysing specific water consumption.
 From the collected data and detailed assessment, FI have arrived at the following
observations:

 For the purpose of arriving baseline emission data, a blend of 70% Indian
coal with 0.6% Sulphur, and 30% Imported coal with 0.7% Sulphur and
35% ash content as per the input from XXXXXXX, and water
consumption as per design water balance diagram provided by
XXXXXXX are considered. The estimated SO2 emission value is
exceeding the stipulated limit by around 69%. Hence suitable
SO2emission control system is recommended.
 The NOx emission data measured is higher than the MOEF stipulated
limit of 300 mg/Nm 3. Hence suitable NOx control measures are
recommended for implementation with efficiency of around 34%.
 PM emission is above the MOEF stipulated limit of 50 mg/Nm3.
Therefore, suitable modification to the ESP is recommended to limit the
particulate emission within MOEF&CC stipulation.
 Unit 4 was under shutdown during the site emission measurement
activity performed by FI. The historic emission data of PM, SO 2 & NOx
provided by XXXXXXX for Unit 4 is more than MOEF&CC norms, but the
maximum of the PM, SOx & NOx data recorded during site emission
measurement for 1 to 3 unit is higher than historic emission data so it is
considered as baseline for unit 4.Suitable modification in the ESP is
recommended to meet the MOEF&CC limit.
 The mercury emission measured by FI at site is higher than the MOEF
stipulated limit. Therefore, the plant requires suitable mercury control
measures..

1.6 Technology Selection for SO2 Control

There are many technologies available and these technologies are used in many
plants which are in operation worldwide for SO2 control in flue gas from power
plants. The selection of appropriate technology and equipment will depend on many
factors such as type of boiler, coal analysis, SO 2 removal efficiency required,
operational requirement, environmental regulation, layout feasibility, land
availability, proven technology, auxiliary power and utility requirement and capital &
operating cost.
 Based on the detailed study presented in this report, FI concluded the following
measures and system for further review and implementation.

For Unit #1,2,3 & 4 the estimated SO 2 emission level is around 69 % above the Dec
2015 MOEF&CC norms, for which wet lime stone based FGD is recommended to
limit the SO2 emission level within Dec 2015 MOEF&CC norms.

An overview of available technologies for SO 2 and NOx control is presented in

Section 3.

Scheme, layout and equipment details for the selected technology for SO 2 emission
control are covered in Section 4.

1.7 NOx Emission and control

The highest measured NOx emission for Unit 1,2 & 3 is 543.79 mg/Nm 3,
590.83mg/Nm3and 615.29mg/Nm3respectivily, which forms the baseline data. Unit
4 was under shutdown during the site emission measurement activity performed by
FI. The historic emission data of PM, SOx & NOx provided by XXXXXXX for Unit 4
is more than MOEF&CC norms, but the maximum of the PM, SOx & NOx data
recorded during site emission measurement for 1 to 3 unit is higher than historic
emission data so it is considered as baseline for unit 4.

For all units Combustion control methods along with Selective Non-Catalytic
Reduction (SNCR) technology is the proposed to control NOx emission level as per
Dec 2015 MOEF norms.

NOx control system as applicable for the subject plant is presented in Section – 4 of
this Report.

1.8 Mercury and PM Controls

 In Unit 1,2,3 & 4 the PM level in flue gas is exceeding the MOEF&CC stipulated limit,
Hence, suitable abatement methods are to be implemented considering the PM
reduction due to WFGD. In Unit 1,2,3 & 4 the mercury level in flue gas is 0.19
mg/Nm3. which is exceeding the MOEF&CC stipulated limit by around
84.5%. Powdered Activated Carbon (PAC) injection system is recommended
for mercury capture.

Page :
10
 Details of Mercury and PM emission control methods are described in Section – 5
of the report.

1.9 Specific Water Consumption

The plant design specific water consumption without considering FGD requirement
is within the MOEF&CC stipulated limit. Under design conditions, with the additional
water requirement for FGD, the consumptive water requirement increases by
160 m³/h and the specific water consumption to 3.34 m³/MWh.

1.10 Impact of Plant Design for each 250 MW Unit

The impact of FGD installation on the existing plant design are:

a. The total Auxiliary power consumption for FGD is estimated as 2668kW, which
is about 1.07% of gross unit power output. Major power consumers are Booster
Fan, Slurry recirculation pumps. The spare capacity of existing Unit transformers
(UT) shall be utilized to provide power supply to FGD system.

b. The flue gas temperature at FGD outlet after installation of wet limestone FGD is
around 54.5°C.Hence, each unit is recommended to be provided with separate
RCC wet stack of minimum 100m height, with steel flue with suitable corrosion
and acid resistant lining. Hot flue gas during FGD bypass operation shall be
dispersed through the existing stack.

c. The FGD make up water requirement shall be around 56 m 3/hr, on continuous

basis. The make-up water shall be clarified water.

d. With the additional water requirement for FGD from the clarified water system,
the consumptive water requirement increases by 84 m³/h for each phase. The
specific water consumption for Phase 1 will be 3.38 m 3/MWh and for phase 2 will
be 3.53 m3/MWh, when including FGD water requirement. When considering the
actual historic plant water consumption of 3.18 m 3/MWh, the specific water
consumption including FGD requirement is around 3.35 m 3/MWh, which is within
MOEF&CC stipulation.

e. FGD waste water treatment plant (UF-RO based) is proposed to treat the FGD
waste water.
 f. Lime stone is the sorbent used in FGD. The estimated lime stone requirement
for each unit is around 2.1 TPH based on minimum 85 % purity of limestone.

g. Gypsum generation in the process shall be 3.9 TPH.

h. The aqueous Reagent (aqueous Ammonia) consumption shall be 0.6 TPH for
each boiler

i. Dedicated PLC based control system shall be provided for the FGD system of
Unit #1, 2, 3 & 4. This PLC shall be interfaced with the respective existing plant
DCS for monitoring from CCR through soft link and hardwiring is also envisaged
with Plant DCS for the control & interlock signals with main plant.

1.11 Project Schedule and Project Cost

The EPC project completion time period implementation of FGD, SNCR and ESP
retrofit shall be around 24 months. The project shall be executed in separate
package.

The estimated project cost for the installation of FGD, Combustion modification,
SNCR, PAC, ESP retrofit and WWTP plant for the 4x250 MW units is
Rs.1093 Crores

The estimated total project cost for the installation of FGD is Rs.148.21 Crores
(0.59 Cr/MW), Combustion modification is Rs. 38.18 Crores (0.15 Cr/MW), SNCR is
Rs. 79.34 Crores (0.32 Cr/MW), PAC system is 5.09 Crores (0.02 Cr/MW), ESP
retrofit is Rs.2.19 Cr (0.009 Cr/MW) for each 250 MW unit.

The common FGD waste water treatment plant for all the four units is estimated to
cost Rs.0.90 Cr (0.004 Cr/MW)
 2
Basis of Study
2.1 BASIS OF STUDY

This feasibility study is carried out to verify feasibility of implementing suitable

emission control system / equipment to ensure compliance of Environment
(Protection) Amendment Rules, 2015 issued by Ministry of Environment Forest and
Climate Change, Government of India as a Gazette Notification dated 7 th December,
2015. The basis of the feasibility study is discussed in this section.

2.2 Environment (Protection) Rules Amendment

Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India issued

Gazette notification on 7th December 2015 amending Environment (Protection)
Rules, 1986. Amended rules will be called Environment (Protection) Amendment
Rule, 2015. Gazette notification on Amendment dated 28 th June on the water
consumption limit and stack height.

Emission standards for Thermal Power Plants as per Ministry of Environment,

Forest and Climate Change are given below:

Table 2.1: Emission Standards as per MOEF&CC

Sr.No. Industry Parameter Standards

1 2 3 4
Thermal
“25. Power TPPs (units) installed before 31st December, 2003
Plants
Particulate Matter 100 mg/Nm3
600 mg/Nm3 (Units Smaller than
500 MW capacity units)
Sulphur Dioxide (SO2)
200 mg/Nm3 (for units having
capacity of 500 MW and above)
Oxides of Nitrogen
600 mg/Nm3
(NOx)
0.03 mg/Nm3 (for units having
Mercury (Hg)
capacity of 500 MW and above)

Water consumption Maximum 3.5 m3/MWh

TPPs (units) installed after 1st January 2004, up to
31st December, 2016
Particulate Matter 50 mg/Nm3
Sr.No. Industry Parameter Standards
1 2 3 4
3
600 mg/Nm (Units Smaller than
500 MW capacity units)
Sulphur Dioxide (SO2)
200 mg/Nm3 (for units having
capacity of 500 MW and above)
Oxides of Nitrogen
300 mg/Nm3
(NOx)
Mercury (Hg) 0.03 mg/Nm3

Water consumption Maximum 3.5 m3/MWh

TPPs (units) to be installed from 1st January, 2017

Particulate Matter 30 mg/Nm3

Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) 100 mg/Nm3

Oxides of Nitrogen
100 mg/Nm3
(NOx)
Mercury(Hg) 0.03 mg/Nm3

Water consumption Maximum 3.0 m3/MWh *

Zero Liquid discharge To be adopted

I. All plants with Once Through
Cooling (OTC) shall install
Cooling Tower (CT) and
achieve specific water
consumption up to maximum
of 3.5 m3/MWh within a period
of two years from the date of
publication of this notification.

II. All existing CT-based plants

Water consumption reduce specific water
consumption up to maximum
of 3.5 m3/MWh within a period
of two years from the date of
publication of this notification.

III. New plants to be installed

after 1st January,2017 shall
have to meet specific water
consumption up to maximum
Sr.No. Industry Parameter Standards
1 2 3 4
of 2.5 m3/MWh and achieve
zero waste water discharged”;
MOEF&CC:
Clause No 2 of the Gazette
notification on Amendment
dated 28th June 2018:

Against Sl. No. 5A, Column-

4, Item III, following item shall
be substituted.

“ III. Specific water consumption

shall not exceed maximum of
3.0 m3/MWh for new plants
installed after 1st January
2017 and these plants shall
achieve “Zero waste water
discharge”.

MOEF&CC:
Clause No 33A of the Gazette
notification on Amendment
dated 28th June 2018:
Power generation capacity:

a) 100 MW and above

H=6.902(QX0.277)0.555
or
Stack Height/Limit in 100 m minimum
Meters: b) Less than 100 MW
H=6.902(QX0.277)0.555
(For Thermal Power or
Plants with wet Flue
Gas Desulphurization 30 m whichever is more”;
(FGD)) Where,
Q = Emission rate of SO2 in
kg/hr*
H = Physical stack height in
meter

*total of the all Unit’s connected

to stack

Note: These standards shall apply

to coal / lignite based Thermal
Power Plants.”.
2.3 Applicable Emission Standard for CTPP

Table 2.2: List of units commissioned in CTPP

Thermal Power Unit

Year of Commissioning
Plant Name Capacity
Unit-I 30.10.2009
Unit-II 04.05.2010
CTPP 4x250 MW
Unit-III 14.09.2013
Unit-IV 30.06.2014

The 250 MW units of CTPP are commissioned between the year 2010 and 2014.
Hence the units falls under the category “TPPs (units) installed after 1st January
2004 up to 31st December 2016”, and “Units having capacity of less than 500MW”
as mentioned in the MOEF&CC gazette notification.

Table 2.3: Applicable Emission Standards for this study

Parameters Unit Standard

Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) mg/Nm³ 600

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) mg/Nm³ 300

PM mg/Nm³ 50

Mercury mg/Nm³ 0.03

Water m³/MWh 3.5

2.4 Site Study and Data Collection

FI team visited the power plant site and studied the existing plant design features
and discussed with XXXXXXX officials. FI team collected the plant design data and
related particulars with regard to coal analysis, emissions levels of SO 2, NOx, and
Particulate emission. The emission data were measured at 4x250 MW units by the
agency engaged by FI, which forms the baseline value for this report.

Site walkthrough is conducted to understand the plant equipment layout and to

ascertain the space provision and space availability for additional pollution control
equipment.
2.5 Plant Configuration and Plant Details

Description CTPP -4x250 MW

Plant Configuration 4x250 MW

Two Pass, balanced draft, Sub-critical pressure,
Steam Generator
Pulverized coal fired unit.

Burner arrangement Tilting Tangential corner fired

Blending of Indian coal & imported coal (70:30)

Indian coal, GCV: 4199.38Kcal/Kg,

Sulphur content: 0.6 %, ash content 35%.
Coal Data considered
Imported coal, GCV: 5701.12Kcal/Kg,
Sulphur content: 0.7 %, ash content 15.3%.

4Pass x 7Fields
Electrostatic precipitator Designed for 100 mg/Nm3 emission

220m high Twin brick flue RCC chimney for unit 1 & 2
Chimney
220m high Twin brick flue RCC chimney for unit 3 & 4
Space for FGD is available and marked on the Plot
Space for FGD Plan attached as annexure.

Annexure 1: Lists the data collected from CTPP during site visit which is used as
basis for this study.
 3
Technology Overview for
SO2 and NOx Control
3.1 TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW FOR SO2 AND NOX CONTROL

This section describes the emission control technologies available to control the
most common pollutants such as Oxides of Sulphur (SO2) and Oxides of Nitrogen
(NOx) in flue gas. These technologies include the Flue Gas Desulphurisation (FGD)
and Selective Catalytic & Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SCR/SNCR).

Technologies with higher removal efficiency are required to meet the applicable
emission norms in India, issued by MOEF&CC in December 2015.

3.2 SO2 Pollutant from Coal Combustion

Coal is used as primary fuel in thermal power plants. In India, thermal power plants
use both low sulphur Indian coal and high sulphur containing imported coal. Coal
contains elements like Carbon, Nitrogen, Sulphur, Ash and other elements. Coal
combustion process with air results in formation of pollutants such as NOx, SO 2 and
SO3.

When Sulphur containing fuel undergoes combustion, the sulphur in the fuel
combines with oxygen and forms gaseous SO 2.

S + O2 → SO2

At higher temperatures, with presence of excess oxygen, some percentage of SO2

is further oxidized to SO3.The SOx in flue gas forms acid plumes in the atmosphere
when temperature reduces below acid dew point. This causes corrosive
environment that’s hazardous to life and equipment.

3.3 SO2 Control Methods

The following are the various types of SO 2 removal technology;

a) Wet Limestone based FGD system

b) Semi-Dry FGD system
c) Sea water based FGD system
d) Dry Sorbent injection system
e) Efficient Ammonia Desulphurisation system
f) Electron Beam Flue gas treatment system
g) ReACT Technology
Wet Limestone Based FGD System

Wet limestone based FGD (Wet FGD) is a proven technology used worldwide for
the control of SO2 from utility power plant.

Limestone is commonly used as a reagent for Wet FGD.

The overall process reaction is:

CaCO3+ SO2 + 2 H2O +½ O2 → CaSO4. 2 H2O + CO2

The SO2 removal process occurs as hot flue gas enters the absorber where it is
cooled and saturated by the limestone slurry. The flue gas then flows upward
through the absorber spray zone, where lime stone slurry is sprayed counter current
to the flue gas flow, completing the SO 2 removal process. The process includes
forced oxidation system to convert Calcium Sulphite (CaSO3.½H2O) formed by SO2
removal process to Calcium Sulphate (CaSO 4.½H2O) or gypsum.

The limestone forced oxidation system could achieve efficiency in the range of
90 - 98% in power plants firing variety of coal.

The major systems/equipment of Wet limestone based FGD system are slurry
recirculation pumps, oxidation blowers, Flue gas handling system including Booster
fan and Gas to Gas Heat Exchanger (if opted), Lime slurry preparation, gypsum
handling system, waste water recovery system and related duct work, isolation and
bypass dampers.

Flow diagram for Wet limestone based FGD system is presented in Exhibit No. 1,
Schematic Diagram for Wet Lime stone based FGD system.

Semi Dry Circulating Fluidized Bed Scrubber FGD System (CFBS)

Circulating Dry Scrubber FGD technology is semi-dry type SO2 control technology
used for utility power plants where higher SO 2 capture efficiency is required. Each
CFBS system consists of a Circulating Fluidized Bed Scrubber and one no. 100%
capacity pulse jet fabric filter (PJFF) as major equipments.

Hydrated Lime (CaO) is used as the reagent in the system. Dry lime will be
pulverized and stored in lime storage silos. The lime will be conveyed to hydrator
system where it is hydrated and further stored in hydrated lime storage silos.
Flue gas from the ID Fans will enter the CFBS near the bottom of the scrubber
vessel. The gas will move in turbulent flow upward through the scrubber. The flue
gas, boiler ash, un-reacted lime and FGD byproducts emerge from the top of the
CFBS as a dust / gas mixture that proceeds to the fabric filter. Byproduct material is
re-circulated from the PJFF to the CFBS to maximize reagent utilization.

The flue gas is cooled by evaporation of finely sprayed water injected into the
CFBS. The water is sprayed through return-flow nozzles and is finely dispersed by
hydraulic atomization through the use of high-pressure water pumps. The water flow
is automatically adjusted according to the set process temperature and is
continuously controlled by a control valve in the return-flow line, leading excess
water from the injection nozzles back to the water storage tank.

The cooling of the flue gas reduces its effective volume and also enhances the
reactivity of the pollutants to allow for optimized removal.

The mixture of reagent & ash in flue gas are separated in the fabric filter, and a
large portion of the solids collected are recirculated through a control valve back into
the CFBS. After sufficient retention time in the scrubber the byproduct is discharged
out of the fabric filter to a storage silo by an external conveying system. The pulse
jet fabric filters are designed for online cleaning of filter bags.

Flow diagram for Semi Dry FGD system is given in the enclosed flow diagram
Exhibit No. 2 Schematic Diagram for Semi Dry FGD system.

Sea Water based FGD

Sea water based FGD is a type of Wet FGD, where the sea water is used as reagent.

The alkalinity in sea water is used for scrubbing the SO 2 from the flue gas. This
system is adopted for power plants installed in coastal area based on alkalinity level
in sea water and where SO2 capture efficiency of maximum 90% is required. This
system is not elaborated in this report as it’s not applicable for this power plant.

Dry Sorbent Injection (DSI)

Dry sorbent injection systems involve the injection of a dry sorbent (typically sodium
bicarbonate or lime) into the ductwork following the boiler. SO2 reacts directly with
the
dry sorbent, and the dry product is collected in a downstream particulate control
device. Because a separate absorber vessel is not needed, capital costs are
minimized. Dry injection systems are generally applied when lower removal
efficiencies are required, or in small plants where the capital cost for other absorber
types may not be justified. Dry injection systems can typically achieve removal
efficiencies ranging from 50 to 70% depending on the specific conditions of the
application.

Efficient Ammonia Desulphurisation system (EADS)

The Ammonia based Desulphurisation system is gaining popularity worldwide due

to its environmental friendly and saleable fertilizer generation as a by-product
(Ammonium Sulphate).

The EADS process is based on reaction between Ammonia and SO2 in the
Absorber tower to form the intermediate product Ammonium Sulphite /bisulphate.
Air will be fed into the absorber to oxidise this product into Ammonium Sulphate.

The overall process reaction is:

SO2 +H2O + x NH3--> (NH4)x H2-x SO3-------------(1)

(NH4)x H2-x SO3 + ½ O2 +(2-x) NH3 --> ( NH4)2 SO4-----------(2)

The EADS consists of following three sub-systems:

a. Flue gas system: Flue gas enters the absorber. After cooling, scrubbing, and
demisting steps, clean flue gas is discharged from the stack.

b. Absorption and Oxidation system: Ammonia reacts with SO 2 forming Ammonium

Sulphite/bisulphate, which is subsequently oxidised to Ammonium Sulphate by
air. Heat from the flue gas is utilised to concentrate the Ammonium Sulphate
solution.

c. Ammonium Sulphate system (AS): The AS slurry is further refined through solid-
liquid separation, drying and packaging to produce AS fertilizer.

d. Very high efficiency (99.9%), lower SO2 emission (<35 mg/Nm 3), no waste water
treatment and solid waste disposal cost, zero CO 2 emission, 50% lower auxiliary
power consumption compared to limestone based plants and high value fertiliser
as by-product are the features of this system.
Electron Beam Flue Gas Treatment system

Flue gas treatment using electron beams is a technology in which desulfurization

and denitrating of flue gas is carried out by combining it with ammonia gas and then
irradiating it with electron beams. When the flue gas is irradiated with electron
beams, highly chemically reactive free radicals are generated within the emissions.

The sulphur oxides (SOx) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) present in the flue gas react
with these radicals and are thereby converted first into sulfuric acid and nitric acid
and subsequently into aerosols, (fine powdered matter) of ammonium sulphate and
ammonium nitrate.

These aerosols are then extracted by means of an electrostatic precipitator and the
cleaned flue gas is emitted via the stack.

The advantage of this system being, Desulphurisation and Denitration take place in
one process. The Desulphurisation efficiency is over 95% and Denitration efficiency
is over 80%.

Very few references of Industrial coal burning plants are available in the world and,
maximum size of the plant being 200 MW TPP.

ReACT Technology

Regenerative Activated Coke Technology (ReACT) is an Advanced integrated Multi-

Pollutant Control Technology. This is a fully dry process based on moving bed
adsorption on activated coke.

Contact between flue gas and slow moving bed of activate carbon /coke, provides
mechanisms for efficient adsorption of SO2 and acid gases of Hg,flyash capture, and
surface promoted catalytic and non-catalytic NOx reduction. Ammonia injected into
the flue gas upstream of the moving bed of coke, helps in NOx reduction on the
surface of activated coke which helps in low temperature SCR reactions. NOx and
NH3 are reduced to N2.Ammonia added will help in SOx reduction also. The design
provided for 95% of SOx control generally yields 20-40% NOx reduction. The
Ammonia injection is in the range of 0.5 mol:mol of SO2.

The by product is Sulphuric acid which is saleable.

 Comparison of FGD Systems

The salient features of Wet limestone, Semi-Dry FGD and Ammonia based systems
are summarized in comparative form below for the following reasons:

a. These systems are with proven technologies with high efficiency of SO2 removal.
b. Other systems enumerated above are having fewer references around the globe.
c. Reagents are easily available in India.

Table 3.1- Comparison of Wet FGD and Dry /Semi-dry FGD/EADS/ReACT

Efficient
Wet limestone Dry/Semi Dry Ammonia De-
Parameter REACTTM
based FGD based FGD sulphurisation
(EADS)
Technology Proven Proven Emerging New Multi
technology for technology for technology for pollutant control
variety of coal for plants upto 300 variety of coal and technology
higher capacity MW. For units for higher capacity (SO2/NOx/Hg
Power plants. above 300 MW, Power Plants. control) for
multiple modules variety of coal
are required. and for higher
capacity Power
Plants.
SO2 Removal Higher> 90 % Maximum 94 %. Upto 99.9% Upto 99.9%
Efficiency and up to 98 %
Reagent type Lime stone Quick lime Anhydrous Activated coke
Ammonia and Ammonia
/ Aqueous
Ammonia / Urea
By product Gypsum Unreacted lime Ammonium Sulfuric acid
generated is of along with Sulphate which is
commercial gypsum, calcium generated is marketable.
grade sulphite are widely used as
recovered in the fertilizer
fabric filter, which
are disposed as
land fill.
Requirement No Yes No No
of Fabric filter
Operational Responsive to Lower part load High Turndown Responsive to
Flexibility variation in boiler efficiency. ratio 30-110% variation in
load. boiler load.
Power 1-2% of the 0.5 -1 % of the 0.5-1.0% of the 1.5 – 1.6 % of
consumption Installed Plant Installed plant installed plant the Installed
capacity. capacity. Power capacity. Plant capacity.
consumption is
less due to the
 Efficient
Wet limestone Dry/Semi Dry Ammonia De-
Parameter REACTTM
based FGD based FGD sulphurisation
(EADS)
less number of
equipments and
lower pressure
drop.
Water Water Water Water Water
requirement requirement is requirement is requirement is requirement is
comparatively less in similar to Wet very minimal.
higher due to comparison to Limestone
slurry the wet system. process
preparation.
SO3 capture SO3 capture is High removal SO3 capture is High removal
around 25 - 40 % efficiency for SO3. about 98 %. efficiency for
SO3.
Pressure drop Higher Lower Similar to Wet Higher
across the Limestone FGD.
system
Raw material Cost of Costlier Very Costly. But, Very Costly as,
cost Limestone is less the requirement it needs to be
in comparison to would be 1/3rd of imported.
Lime powder. Limestone per MT
of SO2 removal.
Area Higher Lower Equal to Wet Less compared
Requirement Limestone based to Wet
plant Limestone plant
Suppliers Many suppliers Many suppliers Limited suppliers Limited
available world available world suppliers
wide wide

3.4 NOx Pollutant from Coal Combustion

NOx refers to the cumulative emissions of nitric oxide (NO), nitrogen dioxide (NO 2)
and trace quantities of other nitrogen species generated during combustion.
Combustion of any fossil fuel generates NOx due to high temperatures and the
availability of oxygen and nitrogen from both the air and fuel. N 2 and O2 present in
the air combine to form NO and NO 2 at high temperatures. The quantity of NOx
formed during combustion depends on the quantity of nitrogen and oxygen
available, the temperature, the intensity of mixing and the time for reaction.

The most detrimental effect comes from NO 2 which forms from the reaction of NO
and oxygen. Once in the atmosphere, the NO2 is involved in a series of reactions
that form secondary pollutants. The NO2 can react with sunlight and hydrocarbon
radicals to produce ground level ozone/photochemical (urban) smog, acid rain
constituents,
 and particulate matter. NO2 also absorbs the full spectrum of light and can reduce
visibility. NOx is associated with respiratory disorders, corrosion of materials and
damage to vegetation. Excess NOx concentrations in the air result in a brownish
color.

NOx in flue gas is the result of Oxidizing either Nitrogen in the combustion air or
Nitrogen in fuel or both.

a. Thermal NOX - Combustion at temperatures above 1300 °C forms thermal NOx,

and contributes for 20 % to 40% of total NOx generation in furnace. The
concentration of thermal NO x is controlled by the nitrogen and oxygen molar
concentrations and the temperature of combustion.
b. Fuel NOx - Fuels that contain nitrogen create fuel NOx that results from
oxidation of the already-ionized nitrogen contained in the fuel. This contributes
60% to 80% of total NOx generated in furnace.

3.5 NOx Emission Control Methods

There are two ways to accomplish NOx reduction:

a. Combustion Control Methods
b. Post Combustion Control Methods

Combustion Control Methods

Combustion control methods are the primary methods to reduce NOx; these include
use of Low-NOx burner (LNB), air staging, fuel staging etc. Low-NOx burner
controls fuel and air mixing to achieve staged combustion, which in turn reduces
both flame temperature and oxygen concentration during combustion phases. This
reduces both Thermal NOx and Fuel NOx generation.

Over Fire Air (OFA) is also used in conjunction with low-NOx burners to complete
the combustion process at a lower temperature. Air is injected above the normal
combustion zone when over fire air is used, the burners function at a lower than
normal air to fuel ratio, which reduces NOx formations. OFA system reduces the
NOx formation by creating fuel rich combustion zone.

Post Combustion NOx Control Methods

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) and Selective Non-catalytic Reduction (SNCR)
are the two post combustion NOx Control Methods.
Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) Method

Selective Catalytic reduction (SCR) is a post combustion NOX emission reduction

method wherein ammonia (reagent) injected into the flue gas stream acts as a
reducing agent in the presence of a catalyst, achieving NOx emission reduction of
about 95%.The NOx and ammonia (NH3) reagent react to form Nitrogen and water.
Reaction mechanism is very efficient with very low ammonia slip.

Design ammonia slip values range from 2 to 10 ppm. SCR system can be installed
on new plants or retrofitted onto existing Pulverized coal boiler.

An exothermic reaction occurs as ammonia and NOx flow over catalyst forming
Nitrogen and Water vapour. Following are main process reactions:

Catalyst
4NO + 4NH3 + O2 → 4N2 + 6H2O
Catalyst
2NO2 + 4NH3 + O2 → 3N2 + 6H2O

Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) uses a catalyst and requires a system to meter
and inject ammonia into the flue gas such that it mixes before passing through the
catalyst. The necessary spacing between the ammonia injection grid and the
catalyst, and the space needed by each, require lengthening the boiler duct work.

In High Dust SCR configuration, the catalyst is located at the outlet of the
economizer and upstream of air preheater.

Vertical SCR reactor will be used for coal fired boilers, where the flue gas flows
downward through the catalyst. The reactor contains multiple layers of catalyst. The
volume of catalyst required varies with each installation. Soot blowers are installed
to remove particulates from the catalyst surfaces. For designs with honeycomb
catalyst, the catalyst pitch is typically about 7 to 9 mm to allow easy passage of
particulates and to facilitate cleaning with soot blowers. To obtain uniform gas flow
and remove particulates, high-dust SCR designs usually include turning vanes and
a flow- rectifying grid in the ductwork upstream of the reactor. A hopper may be
installed at the bottom of the SCR to collect ash and other particulates separated
from the flue gas stream. The flue gas exiting the SCR is ducted to the air heater
inlet.
NOx reduction is effective in a limited temperature range. For the majority of
commercial catalysts, the optimum temperatures range from 250˚C to 425˚C,
depending on gas composition and catalyst type. Catalyst effectiveness is reduced
as the gas temperature falls below or rises above the optimum.

The cost of a catalyst is typically a major portion (about 25 to 30%) of total SCR
system cost. Type of catalyst and the volume required are dependent on various
parameters such as inlet NOx level, NOx emission limits, flue gas temperature,
allowable ammonia slip, Oxygen content in flue gas, inlet dust loading, allowable
pressure drop across catalyst, flue gas catalyst poison concentration etc.

The commonly applied catalysts are all based on a porous titanium-dioxide carrier
material on which the catalytically active components like vanadium pentoxide and
tungsten trioxide are dispersed. To provide a large gas contact area with a minimum
pressure loss, the catalysts are provided as elements containing a large number of
parallel channels (corrugated and extruded honeycomb types) or a number of
parallel, spaced plates (plate-type catalysts).

In Low Dust SCR (Clean gas SCR) configuration, the catalyst is located at the outlet
of the ESP and upstream of ID fan OR downstream of FGD.

The arrangement is similar to High dust SCR. Due to lower temperature of the flue
gas to be cleaned, additional heat source (high temperature steam / Liquid fuel
firing) needs to be considered to raise the temperature of flue gas to around 350
Deg.C for effective NOx control.

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR)

Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR) uses no catalyst, but uses aqueous

ammonia or a solution of water and urea distributed in the hot flue gas to reduce
NOx in the flue gas path. Within the appropriate temperature range, the evaporated
solution decomposes into free radicals including NH 3 and NH2. After a series of
reactions, these radicals come into contact with the NOx and reduce it to N 2, also
producing some H2O. The representation of these reactions is given below.

2NO + 2NH3 + ½ O2 → 2N2 + 3H2O for ammonia, or

2NO + CO (NH2) 2 + ½ O2 → 2N2 + CO2 + 2H2O for urea
At temperatures within the optimal temperature range, the reaction proceeds at
normal rates. At temperatures below the optimal range, the reaction rates are slow,
and there is potential for significant amounts of ammonia exit or "slip" through the
system. At temperatures above the optimal range, the necessary reactions do not
occur, and the ammonia or urea reagent will oxidize.

The NOx reduction is effective only within a given temperature range. For the
majority of SNCR systems, the optimum temperatures can range from 760˚C to
1100˚C. With SNCR, as the flue gas temperature approaches the optimum, the
reaction rate increases and fewer injection nozzles are required to achieve a given
NOx removal efficiency.

Optimum temperature, required NOx removal efficiency, flue gas flow and inlet NOx
concentration are used to size the SNCR.

SNCR De-NOx efficiency for large coal-fired units is 25-50% with no by-products.

The salient features of SNCR and SCR system are discussed below.

Table 3.2- Comparison of SNCR & SCR System

Design Criteria SNCR SCR

NOx Reduction
25-50% 60-90%
Efficiency
Operating Temperature 750˚C to 1100˚C 250˚C to 425˚C
Reactor & Catalyst Not required Required
Waste Disposal None Spent catalyst
Energy Consumption Low High
Lower (Only for reagent Higher (for reactor &
Space Requirements
storage & injection system) reagent injection system)
1 to 3 years
Maintenance Low (typical catalyst life)
Ammonia Slip 5 to 20 ppmvd 3to 10 ppmvd
Difficult (Separate Reactor
Simple (only injection grid
with sorbent injection grid
Retrofit for reagent to be installed
and catalyst array are to
at the furnace outlet zone.) be installed)

Combined NOx control Method

Low NOx burners and OFA combined with SNCR or SCR will be the effective NOx
control technic which is followed for the Boilers with higher base NOx level.
 4
Technology Selection
for SO2 and NOx Control
4.1 TECHNOLOGY SELECTION FOR SO2 AND NOX CONTROL

XXXXXXX has installed continuous emission monitoring system for Unit #1,2,3& 4
of the plant. The units are under operation and the emission levels measured at site
by FI engaged agency, estimated value based on design worst coal analysis and
historical data are assessed and compared with the limiting emission values
mandated by December 2015 MOEF&CC norms.

4.2 SO2 Control

Base line SO2 Emission and required SO2 removal efficiency

a) The SO2 emission data estimated by FI based on blended coal anlysis provided
by XXXXXXX is considered as the base emission value.

SO2 emission based on CTPP worst coal

with 0.63% S for 250MW (unit #1,2,3&4) = 1900mg/Nm³ $

$ The emission values indicated are estimated using Thermoflow Software

(used for design of Coal Based Thermal Power Plant worldwide), based on
worst Coal Analysis furnished as input to by XXXXXXX.

b) As per the MOEF&CC norms, for power plants of capacity less than 500 MW
and installed after 1st January,2004, up to 31 st December, 2016” as
mentioned in the MOEF & CC gazette notification. The permitted SO 2
emission is 600 mg/Nm³.

Based on the above the FGD SO2 removal efficiency works out to minimum of
69%.

SO2 Control – Technology Selection

Dry / Semi dry type of Desulphurisation system is not suitable for the
reqiredSO2removal efficiency and unit capacity. The dry/semidry system requires
replacement of boiler auxiliaries – ESP (with bag filter)and ID fans. Also, the by-
product is suitable only for landfilling.
The other technologies like Ammonia based FGD system and React are not widely
installed worldwide and has no reference installation in India. Considering limited
suppliers for these technologies and higher reagent cost, these technologies are not
recommended for this plant.

The following graph represents the world wide population of FGDs.

Wet limestone based Flue Gas Desulphurization (FGD) technology is considered for
SO2 emission control for these units with SO 2 removal efficiency 95% to meet the
December 2015 MOEF&CC norms stipulation.

Wet FGD is selected considering the following:

 Wet limestone based FGD with insitu forced oxidation is proven technology
implemented Worldwide for utility power plants.
 This system will be Add-on to the unit at downstream of ID fan with a tap off and
bypass arrangement. Hence no modification required in ESP
 The Layout of Wet FGD system / equipment and facility is worked out and
feasible to accommodate in the available space optimally.
 Gypsum will be the by product which is marketable.
 Provides higher SO2 removal efficiency (90 to 98%) for range of coal analysis .
 Limestone mines are located close (300 to 400 KM radius) to the plant for
sourcing.
Wet FGD System and Equipment

In Wet FGD system, SO 2 removal process occurs as the hot flue gas enter the
absorber tower where it is cooled and saturated by limestone slurry. The flue gas
flows upwards through the absorber spray zone, where limestone slurry is sprayed
counter current to the flue gas flow, completing the SO 2 removal process.

The overall process reaction is;

CaCO3 + SO2 + 2H2O + ½ O2 → CaSO4.2H2O + CO2

The flue gas is tapped from the flue gas duct at downstream of ID fan discharge
damper. A booster fan is provided to develop the head required to overcome the
pressure drop across the FGD system. The pressurised untreated flue gas from the
booster fan enters the absorber. The flue gas will be dispersed to atmosphere
through the existing stack during FGD bypass condition.

The treated gas from absorber released to the atmosphere through the proposed wet
stack at about 53°C.

FGD system to be installed at this plant shall have inlet, outlet and bypass dampers
to be provided on the ducting. Necessary modifications for the installation of the
bypass damper in the flue gas duct and utilization of the existing duct supports shall
be evaluated during implementation.

The major systems / equipment of the Wet limestone FGD system are listed and
their design & functional details are discussed below.

 Booster Fan
 Lime Handling and Slurry preparation system.
 Absorber and Slurry re-circulation system
 Gypsum dewatering system
 Waste water treatment system
 Emergency Slurry tanks
 Emergency water tanks
 Process water tanks
a) Booster Fan for FGD System

Booster fan shall be required to feed the flue gas to FGD system to address the
following:
 Pressure drop across the FGD system from the unclean flue gas take off
point till the clean flue gas join back to the existing ducting.
 The flue gas temperature drop in FGD system will reduce the draft available
at the proposed wet stack.

In order to develop the head required for the above, Booster fans shall be
provided for the FGD system. The head to be developed by booster fan is
calculated based on thermoflow data.

For Unit # 1,2,3 &4

Booster fan : 2 x 100% (BMCR capacity)

Pressure at Fan inlet : 7 mmWc

Pressure drop due to FGD system : 254 mmWC

Chimney draft : 29 mmWC

Total head by Booster fan : 290 mmWC

2x100% Booster fans are recommended in this plant considering the

redundancy followed for ID fans and also as adequate space is available.

b) Lime handling and Slurry preparation system

The limestone is envisaged to be received through roadways as lumps of (-)150

mm size. Limestone stored in limestone yard shall be crushed to (-) 20mm size
before feeding to wet lime stone ball mill. The crushed limestone from the lime
storage yard shall be conveyed by dense phase pneumatic conveying system to
the storage silo in the lime slurry preparation area.

Ball mills, mill permeate tanks, Hydro cyclones, Lime slurry tanks shall have
redundancy.

The Limestone handling system shall be sized for 25.5TPH to cater the
4 x 250 MW units, considering 8hour operation per day.
c) Absorber and Slurry re-circulation system

Absorber is a spray type absorber where the flue gas and the limestone slurry
flow in the counter current direction. The limestone slurry is sprayed at different
levels in the Absorber through spray nozzle grids. Each elevation spray nozzle
grid is supplied by a dedicated slurry recirculation pump and a common standby
for all the recirculation pumps will be provided. The sprayed lime slurry is
collected in the reaction chamber located in the bottom of the Absorber. The
slurry is re-circulated in the absorber.

The Absorbers to be installed in CTPP shall be designed for optimum Flue gas
velocity. The Slurry pump capacity and the numbers shall be decided based on
the optimum Liquid / Gas (L/G) ratio.

Absorber type and design shall be specific to the FGD supplier, and hence shall
be finalised during implementation.

d) Gypsum dewatering system

The slurry density and pH in the absorber reaction chamber shall be monitored
and portion of the slurry shall be bled to maintain the solids concentration in the
slurry.

The slurry shall be pumped to the 2x100% hydro cyclones where the over flow is
taken back to the absorber and the underflow is taken to the vacuum belt filter.

The gypsum from the vacuum belt filter shall have moisture < 10 %, chlorides
< 100 ppm and shall be stored in the ground floor of the gypsum dehydration
building.

The wallboard gypsum generation from the system is about 3.9 TPH and this
depends on the quality of the limestone fed to the system. The generated
gypsum shall be stored in the ground floor of gypsum dewatering building, which
shall be sized to store for minimum 3 days. Additional space for gypsum storage
shall be decided during implementation phase based on gypsum utilization
program.
 Using pay loader gypsum shall be loading to the truck and it shall be transported
to the cement /gypsum board manufacturer’s location.

e) Emergency Slurry tanks

The Emergency slurry tank shall be of MS with inside glass flake lining/ ceramic
acid resistant tile lining. The capacity of the tank shall be suitable for holding the
volume of one absorber reaction tank. The Slurry tanks shall be provided with
Agitator and pump re-circulation facility to avoid settling of slurry in the tank. The
system is common system and is used only during emergency or planned shut
down for the transfer of slurry from the absorber to take up maintenance work in
the Absorber/ Reaction tank.

f) Process water tanks

The water required for the FGD system shall be tapped from the Makeup water
line to the CW system. The Process water tanks shall be MS with Inside Epoxy
coating. The tank shall be sized for holding 12 hours storage requirement. One
tank shall be used for equipment cooling and the other tank shall be used for
process and mist cleaning requirement. The hot water after the equipment
cooling shall be used for the process and the mist cleaning purpose.

g) Waste water

The waste water from the FGD system has high Suspended and dissolved
solids of about 30,000 ppm. This shall be treated in clarifier which is part of the
FGD system to remove suspended solids, neutralized and transferred to the UF-
RO based FGD waste water treatment plant. Around 1.5 m 3/hr of waste water is
generated from the FGD system. This value is based on similar project
experience.

h) Power & Utility Consumption for each FGD

The auxiliary power consumption for the FGD equipment of each unit shall be
around 2668 KW. The major power consumers are the Booster fan and Slurry
recirculation pumps.

The makeup water quantity for the FGD system including HVAC is estimated to
be around 56 m3/hr. This is as per FI in house data.
 Instrument air requirement for the system shall be1 Nm 3/min, based on FI in
house data.

DM water for make-up of the closed cooling water system, if required shall be
sourced from the existing DM water system header. The requirement will be for
initial filling of the system, and for makeup intermittently.

The limestone consumption estimated shall be 2.1Tons/Hr, considering limestone

purity of 85%.

Wallboard Gypsum generation shall be 3.9 TPH.

4.3 Wet Stack and Condensate collection system

The temperature of flue gas at FGD outlet after installation of wet limestone FGD
shall be around 54.50C. This is in wet saturated condition, hence installation of
separate wet stack of 115m height with suitable internal lining is recommended for
each unit. The wet stack shall be designed as per EPRI wet stack design guide.

The wet stack, ducts handling wet flue gas shall be provided with Stack Liquid
Discharge, corrosion resistant lining, Condensate collection system and drainage.

The stack drain shall be neutralised and send to the existing effluent treatment plant.

The proposed wet stack shall be of RCC shell with steel flue.Since, the flue gas is
wet saturated and with acid condensate the steel flue need to be provided with
suitable corrosion/acid resistant liner.

However the various types of chimney lining and the details are presented below.

 Titanium lining

The flue can is lined internally with Titanium plates of 1 to 2 mm thickness. This
lining process is adopted only for newly constructed chimney.

 Borosilicate lining

Borosilicate lining in the form of tile fixing inside the chimney, which can be done
as retrofit in the already constructed chimney.
  High temperature Glass flake lining

The high temperature glass flake lining is applied similar to internal

anticorrosive coating for pipelines. The high temperature glass flake lining is
also feasible for retrofit projects.

Based on feedback from Liner suppliers, around 3 to 4 months are required for
the applying this lining and the application has to be carried out during
shutdowns in phases.

 Acid resistant brick lining

Use of acid resistant bricks similar to the existing chimney can be done for the
wet stack. However flue gas velocity required to be maintained in such flues
need to be limited to 13 to 14 m/sec unlike the other liners where the velocity
shall be maintained around 16 to 17 m/sec.

Considering the above aspects on space requirement, velocity at stack outlet

for proper dispersion, time required for lining the high temperature glass flake
lining is recommended.

4.4 NOx Control

Refer to Table 1.3, the design NOx levels at the stack of these units are exceeding
the MOEF&CC stipulated limit.

Emission level as derived from the coal used in the plant is assessed and compared
with the limiting emission values mandated by December 2015 MOEF&CC norms.

Base line NOx and required removal efficiency

a) OEM guaranteed value for NOx emission is 615.29 mg/Nm 3.The details of boiler
provided with Low NOx burners, and presence of Over Fire Air (OFA/SOFA) are
not available.

In view of the above Base line data for NOx for the purpose of NOx control
technology selection is considered as 615.29 mg/Nm³
NOx Control Technology Selection

Based on December 2015 MOEF norms Unit #1,2,3&4 were installed after 1st
January 2004. Hence, the permissible maximum NOx emission is 300 mg/Nm³ for
all the 4 units. The units are already provided with upper OFA ports as informed by
XXXXXXX.

The NOx control method proposed to be adopted shall ensure reduction of NOx
from 615.29mg/Nm³ to 300 mg/Nm³. Based on feedback from various boiler
suppliers the combustion control like low NOx burners, Over fire air shall and Low
NOx burners shall contain the NOx emission to 450 mg/Nm3 at the furnace outlet.

Considering that first step NOX control will be achieved by implementing the
combustion control in consultation with boiler supplier, the further NOx control is
required to meet MOEF &CC norms.

The required NOx removal efficiency for reducing NOx from 450 mg/Nm 3 to
300 Nm3 is around 34%. Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR) method is the
proposed as suitable technology.

However it is also recommended to discuss with Boiler OEM for possible

improvement in Base line NOx emission through suitable modification in the wind
box/combustion system.

SNCR system and Equipment

The SNCR system need to be adopted for NOx control, as the NOx control
efficiency required is around 34%, in the absence of primary NOx control system in
the boiler.

Various equipment/ systems of SNCR are discussed in this section, including

selection of reagents used and injection zone.

Equipment in SNCR system

The major equipment of the suggested SNCR system would comprise of the
following.

 The equipment design data is arrived based on the inputs and assumptions
discussed in the report.
 a) Ammonia unloading & Storage system

Three numbers Ammonia bulk storage tanks (for 7 days storage) for both the
units will be provided to store the required aqueous ammonia solution.
Ammonia received in road tankers will be unloaded to the bulk storage tank
by the two nos. (1W+1S) common ammonia unloading pumps.

b) Ammonia metering & mixing system

Ammonia from the bulk storage tank will be transferred to the ammonia
mixing and injection system of each boiler by means of two nos. (1W+1S)
metering pumps supplied for each boiler NOx reactor.

For proper dispersion of ammonia in the boiler flue gas path mixing of
ammonia with air is required. Two (2) nos. (1W+1S) dilution air blowers for
each boiler will supply the required dilution air to the mixing unit where the
ammonia is vaporized and mixed in the required proportion.

c) Ammonia injection & monitoring system

The ammonia solution after mixing with air will be transferred to the injection
lancers of the reactor.

The injection nozzles will be of SS 316 material to withstand chemical

corrosion and erosion.

The effectiveness of the SNCR system operation will be monitored through

NOx measurement made at economizer outlet. To monitor the ammonia
slippage ammonia in flue gas is measured at air preheater inlet.

Refer Exhibit No.3, Schematic diagram for SNCR system.

Reagent Selection

 As detailed in Section-3, either Urea and Ammonia are used as reagents

in SCR/SNCR system.

 FI evaluated the usage of these reagents and found Ammonia as a

feasible reagent for the project based the following aspects:
  Indigenously manufactured urea is not permitted by Government. of India
for industrial usage, however imported technical grade urea is permitted
for industrial purpose like De-NOx system. As Ammonia is manufactured
widely in India and available for continuous use in market, it is suggested
to use Ammonia solution as reagent.

 Urea injection requires DM water for forming urea solution whereas liquid
ammonia solution does not require dilution. Thus, additional cost of DM
water generation and corresponding increase in specific plant water
consumption are avoided with the use of aqueous ammonia.

 Reagent injection zone

 The reaction temperature required for SNCR system is in the range of

760˚C to 1100˚C is the suitable zone in the boiler.

 The NOx and Ammonia measurement will be made at the inlet and outlet
of the NOx reactor.

 Impact of Ammonia injection on Air Preheater

 The Ammonia injected in SCR/SNCR has a negative impact on boiler air

preheater. The injection of ammonia causes partial conversion of SO 2 to
SO3 in flue gas, thus increasing SO3 generation.

 The generated SO3 will lead to acid corrosion and ash clogging due to
production of ammonium hydrogen sulphate and ammonium sulphate

 NH3+SO3+H2O → NH4HSO4 / (NH4)2SO4

 NH4HSO4 accumulation temperature is 150 – 230 °C which has high

viscosity leads to clogging and corrosion to heat exchange part of air
preheater.

 One or more combination of the following methods are recommended to

be adopted to handle the fouling and corrosion in Air preheater due to
deposition of NH4HSO4 / (NH4)2SO4
  Combining the cold and intermediate baskets of the air preheater into
one continuous basket.
 Installing enamel baskets to provide additional corrosion resistance
 Providing high pressure & temperature steam soot blowers at both inlet
and outlet
 Modifying the basket design to a notched flat surface instead of a double
undulating surface
 Suitable method will be finalized while project implementation based on
actual SNCR design, in consultation with boiler supplier.

 Power & Utility Consumption for SNCR

 The auxiliary power consumption for the SNCR equipment & systems will
be around 51 kW. The major power consumers will be the Ammonia
injection pumps and dilution blowers.

 The aqueous Reagent (aqueous Ammonia) consumption estimated is

0.6 TPH for each boiler.

4.5 Design Data and Performance Parameters

Based on the input data collected from CTPP for250 MW and estimated values, the
design data and performance parameters are presented below.

Table 4.2: Boiler and Fuel input Data

Description Unit Data

Plant configuration MW 250
No. of Boiler Nos. 4
Boiler load - 100% BMCR
Blend of Indian coal&
Type of coal -
Imported coal in 70:30 ratio.
Sulphur& Ash content in design coal % Sulphur content: 0.63%

Ambient air temperature (Design) °C 33

Table 4.3: Flue gas Parameters at FGD inlet

Description Unit Data

Plant configuration MW 250

Flue gas flow rate TPH. 1276
Flue gas temperature (including
temperature rise in ID fan & Booster °C 145°C
fan)
Baseline SO2 value mg/Nm3 1900
Dust Load mg/Nm³ 200

Table 4.4 FGD Equipment Design Data(each unit)

Description Unit Data

1. Booster Fans
Plant configuration MW 250
- Quantity Nos. 2x100%
- Capacity m3/s 501
- Total developed Head mmWC 290

- Power consumption kW 1543

2. Absorber
Wet spray tower type
- Type
absorber
- Numbers 1x100%
Carbon steel with internal
- Material of Construction
Glass Flake lining
- Absorber removal efficiency % 68.4% (min)
- FGD removal efficiency % 68.4% (min)
- Absorber gas velocity m/s 3.0

- Absorber diameter m 12.8

3. Limestone Crusher

- Type Hammer mill type

2(1W+1S) common for both
- Number
units.
- Capacity TPH 25.5
 Description Unit Data

- Guaranteed output limestone size mm (-)20

4. Lime Stone Mill

- Type Wet ball mill
- Numbers 2x100% for both FGDs
5. Slurry Recirculation Pumps
- Type Centrifugal pumps
5 (4W+1S) for each FGD(will
- Numbers Nos.
depends on supplier design)
- Capacity of each pump TPH 1314(45pprox..)
6. Limestone Data
- Lime Stone purity % 85 (minimum)
- Lime Stone consumption for FGD
TPH 2.1
system
7. FGD Make Up water Data
- Make up water quality Clarified water
- Make up water for the FGD
TPH 56
system
8. FGD system Auxiliary power
consumption
- Auxiliary power consumption for
kW 2895 (each unit)
FGD
9. Wet Stack Data
- Numbers One (1) for each unit

- Dimension (Height/ flue diameter) m 115 / 4.9

- Lining material High temperature Glass flake
- Stack velocity m/sec 17 (max)
3 layers are required to trap
- Mist eleminators in stack acid condensate at stack inlet.

Table 4.5 FGD performance requirements

Parameter Unit Guaranteed value

mg/Nm3 @ 6% O2
Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) <600
dry volume basis
Table 4.6 : Flue gas Parameters for SNCR

Description Unit Data

Plant configuration MW 250
Flue gas flow rate TPH. 1280
Ammonia injection zone temperature °C 250 – 425
Baseline Nox value mg/NM3 615.29
3
Dust Load g/Nm 87.9

Table 4.7 SNCR Equipment Design Data

Description Unit Data

1. Bulk Ammonia Storage
Tank
- Capacity m3 110
- Quantity Nos. 2
- Material of Construction SS 304
2. Ammonia Unloading Pump
Sized to unload one tanker in 30
- Capacity minutes
- Quantity Nos. Two (1W+1S)
- Material of Construction SS 304
3. Piping & Valves SS 304
4. Ammonia metering pumps
- Capacity m3/hr 2
- Quantity Nos. Two (1W+1S) for each SNCR unit
- Material of Construction SS 304
5. Dilution air supply blower
- Quantity Nos. Two (1W+1S) for each SNCR unit
- Material of Construction Carbon steel
6. Ammonia Solution
- Ammonia
% 29
solution
concentration
- Aqueous Reagent
(Ammonia solution) TPH 0.6(each unit)
consumption for SNCR
system
 Description Unit Data
7. SNCR system
Auxiliary power
consumption
- Auxiliary power
kW 51(each unit)
consumption for SNCR
system

Table 4.8 SNCR performance requirements

Parameter Unit Guaranteed value

mg/Nm3@ 6% O2 dry
Nox <300
volume basis
 5
Mercury & PM Emission Control
5.1 MERCURY & PM EMISSION CONTROL

5.2 Mercury in Coal and Flue Gas

Mercury is present in coal in trace amount and is released during coal combustion
process and can appear in the flue gas as particulate mercury (solid phase) and as
vapour phase mercury (gaseous phase). Vapour phase mercury, appearing in flue
gas, shall be present as either elemental mercury or oxidized mercury depending on
the type of coal. The mercury in solid phase are collected in bottom ash, in the ESP
along with flyash, in FGD effluent in the form of scrubbed slurry.

Concentration of mercury in coal is primarily dependent on coal type. Typically sub-

bituminous coal contains lower Mercury concentration.

Mercury in some chemical form is very toxic. Mercury, when in filters in soil and
water sources, can be converted to methyl-mercury by microorganisms and
accumulate in the fatty tissues of fish that live in the mercury contaminated water.
Consumption of contaminated fish is the main identified risk to humans.

5.3 Mercury Control

5.2.1 Powdered Activated Carbon (PAC) Injection

Powdered Activated Carbon Injection in flue gas path has the potential to achieve
95% Hg control. The performance of activated carbon is related to its physical
properties like surface area, pore size distribution, and particle size distribution and
chemical characteristics. The capacity for Hg capture generally increases with
increasing surface area and pore volume.

PAC is carbon that is treated with high temperature steam to create large surface
area.

The pores of the carbon sorbent must be large enough to provide free access to
internal surface area by mercury ions while avoiding excessive blockage by
previously adsorbed reactants. As particle sizes decrease, access to the internal
surface area of particle increases along with potential adsorption rates.

Powdered activated carbon is injected Upstream / downstream of Air-Preheater as,

it can be effective for both elemental and oxidized mercury capture.
 Oxidized mercury is having a greater rate of adsorption by PAC than elemental
mercury. The presence of Selective Non Catalytic Reduction System (SNCR) for
Nox emission control upstream of the particulate control device tend to increase the
oxidized mercury present, which is subsequently easier by PAC adsorption.
Chemical modification of PAC, such as halogenation (Impregnating carbon with
halogen species), can improve the ability to capture mercury. Entire air quality
control system to be evaluated to determine the co-benefits for mercury capture that
shall minimize PAC injection to provide optimal solution for mercury emission
control.

The PAC system comprises Two no. Bulk silo for storing activated carbon required
for 7 days consumption. One no. screw feeder below each silo shall feed the carbon
at required rate to the supply pipe. One no. transport air blower for each silo will
supply the transportation air to the supply pipe which will carry the carbon to the
injection point at the ESP inlet duct.

The receipt of activated carbon is envisaged through closed tankers.

5.4 Site Condition on PM &Mercury Emissions

The stack emission monitoring for mercury evidenced presence of mercury as

tabulated below:

Measured Dec 2015 Measured Dec 2015 MOEF

MOEF Emission &CC Norms Emission &CC Norms for
Unit Capacity for Hg Mercury
PM PM (mg/Nm3) (mg/Nm3)
(mg/Nm3) (mg/Nm3)
250 MW
157 50 0.078 0.03
(Unit 1)

250 MW
438 50 0.19 0.03
(Unit 2)

250 MW
93 50 0.13 0.03
(Unit 3)

250 MW
105# 50 0.19 0.03
(Unit 4)
(#) Historic maximum data
5.5 Requirement of Mercury Capture

The coal analysis received from CTPP, does not indicate any Mercury (Hg)
presence. However Mercury presence is identified in the flue gas as per FI
measured emission data.

In Unit 1,2,3 & 4 the mercury level in flue gas is 0.19 mg/Nm 3. Which is exceeding
the MOEF&CC stipulated limit by around 84.5%. Powdered Activated Carbon (PAC)
injection system is recommended for achieving mercury control.

However based on the mercury capture efficiency provided by the FGD/Nox control,
the requirement of separate Hg control like PAC or chemical additives for improving
Hg capture efficiency in the FGD-Nox control systems shall be concluded.

5.6 Particulate Emission Control in Flue Gas

The combustion of coal results in production of a large quantity of ash, which

essentially constitutes bottom and fly ash. The fly ash particles, which are in the
form of suspension in the flue gas, from combustion units, contribute to an
increased suspended particulate matter (PM) in the surrounding environment.
Therefore, in order to safeguard the environment, reduction in emission levels of PM
becomes essential. In order to achieve this, various devices, such as cyclone
separators, bag filters and/or electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) are employed.

Indian coal with max.34.8% ash content is fired as primary fuel in this power plant.
As the boilers are Pulverized fired design, 90% of the ash in the form of fly ash is
captured in the ESP.

The Electrostatic precipitator works on the technique that employs the application of
an electric field to separate out the suspended particles from the flue gas by ionizing
the ash particle and collecting in collecting electrode.

An ESP of 4 pass x 7 fields is provided for the unit for controlling the particulate
emission.

The ESP has been designed for an inlet dust burden of maximum 87.9gm/Nm 3 with
an average operating particulate removal efficiency of 99.88% (all fields in
operation).
In Unit 1,2,3 & 4 the PM level in flue gas is exceeding the MOEF&CC stipulated limit
hence modification of existing ESP is recommended to limit the Particulate Matter
within 50 mg/Nm³.

The ESP has been designed for the guaranteed performance of 100 mg/Nm 3 of
Particulate emission with worst coal firing @ BMCR load, which is exceeding the
December-2015 MOEF Norms- 50 mg/Nm3. It is observed that no additional space
is provided at site for installation of additional ESP fields in future.

Hence, abatement methods for the PM emission control is required to increase the
ESP efficiency to 99.95%, considering the design inlet dust loading. It is
recommended that the particulate emission reduction due to wet lime stone FGD
need to be considered prior to implementing the retrofit work in ESP. The ammonia
injection in SNCR will contribute for reduction in ash resistivity, and hence increase
in ESP efficiency. This shall also be considered for the extent of ESP retrofit.

The following are the various retrofit methods to improve ESP collection efficiency.
One of the following measures or combination of them shall be implemented for
achieving the required PM at ESP outlet, considering techno economic aspects, site
conditions, available area, etc.

a) Replacement of damaged electrodes.

b) Decreasing ash resistivity by decreasing flue gas temperature at ESP inlet, by
recovering more heat from exit flue gas in Air preheater. This will require
replacement of APH elements and heat exchangers for utilisation of the
recovered heat energy.
c) Increasing the plate area by reconfiguring the compartment geometry (By
increasing the height of ESP etc.)
d) Replacement of first two fields with new fields
e) Increasing the number of fields by adding new fields before the first field, after
the last field
f) Providing parallel ESP pass to share the dust load of existing ESP
g) Replacing conventional TR sets with Hi-frequency TR set for first one / two fields.
h) Replacing the existing ESP with new ESP implementing the modern
technologies such as Hi-frequency TR set & controls, moving collecting
electrodes etc.
 i) Replacing the existing transformers in last three or four fields with Pulse
generating TR sets.

The advantages of High frequency TR sets over conventional TR sets are mentioned
below:

a) Decreases the ESP dust emission up to 60% without the need of expanding the
ESP
b) Improved power factor in the range of 0.9 ensuring reduced input current and
losses. The power factor of the conventional TR set measures about 0.6
c) Reduced arc shutdown time in the range of 10 micro seconds ensuring quick
voltage restoration.
d) Reduced arc energy results in lesser wear & tear of electrodes
e) Less power consumption based on the above advantages
f) Smaller and lighter than the conventional TR sets.
g) Overall reduction in electrode surface area and weight.

5.5.1 ESP Performance and PM emission Guarantee Table 5.1 :

Present PM levels and MOEF&CC norms

Suspended Particulate Matter

(PM) Efficiency
(mg/Nm3)
Actual
Unit Capacity Present Estimated
Emission Dec 2015 performance
MOEF (Base Line Design (based on
Norms present
Data) emission)

Unit-1 157 50 99.82

99.885
Unit-2 438 50 99.50

Unit-3 93 50 99.89

Unit-4 105 50 99.880

Table 5.2: ESP Design Data

Parameter
Description Unit
250 MW

Flue Gas Flow at guarantee point m3/s 485

Flue gas temperature at inlet in ESP o

C 137

Inlet dust Concentration g/Nm3 87.9

Guaranteed outlet dust concentration with (n-1)
mg/Nm3 100
fields
Collection efficiency with (n-1) fields % 99.885
Collection efficiency required to meet revised
% 99.95
MOEF&CC norms of 50 mg/Nm3

Table 5.3: Activated Carbon Injection system- gn Data

Desi
Parameter
Description Unit
250 MW

Inlet Hg Kg/hr 0.1638

Outlet Hg Kg/hr 0.0259

Mercury removed Kg/hr 0.137

Mercury removal efficiency % 84.2

Activated carbon injection TPH 0.23

Outlet mercury in stack mg/Nm3 0.03

Bulk activated carbon storage silo Nos. 2

Both to cater
Capacity of silo 7 days
requirement
 6
Plant Water Consumption
6.1 PLANT WATER CONSUMPTION

This chapter covers the evaluation of design plant water consumption, and impact of
the additional water consumption due to installation of FGD system, on the existing
plant water system to meet the MOEF&CC stipulated limit. Also the mitigation
measures to limit the plant water consumption within the stipulated MOEF norms is
covered in this chapter.

6.2 MOEF Water Consumption Limit

Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, Government of India issued

Gazette notification on 7th December 2015 amending Environment (Protection)
Rules, 1986. Amended rules will be called Environment (Protection) Amendment
Rule, 2015.

Specific Water Consumption standards for Thermal Power Plants as per Ministry of
Environment, Forest and Climate Change are given below:

Table 6.1 : Water Consumption Limit

SL.NO INDUSTRY PARAMETER STANDARD

1. Thermal Power Water I. All plants with Once through
Plant Consumption Cooling (OTC) shall install
Cooling Tower (CT) and achieve
specific water consumption upto
maximum of 3.5 m³/MWh within
a period of two years from the
date of publication of this
notification.

II. All existing CT-based plants

reduce specific water
consumption upto maximum of
3.5m3/MWh within a period of
two years from the date of
publication of this notification.

III. New plants to be installed after

1st January, 2017 shall have to
meet specific water consumption
upto maximum of 3.0 m3/MWh(*)
and achieve zero waste water
discharged.
 Unit # 1,2,3 &4are commissioned between 2010 to 2014 and so the specific water
consumption to be achieved shall be 3.5m 3/MWh as per Cl.II indicated in
Table 6.1.

6.3 Basis and Assumptions

Following documents form the basis for this chapter.

1. Actual specific water consumption from plant data

2. Design Water Balance Diagram (Phase 1 and Phase 2)
3. FI measured specific water consumption at raw water pump discharge.

6.4 Specific Water Consumption of the plant

The maximum of the monthly plant actual specific water consumption data provided
by XXXXXXX for the period between April 2016 to January 2018 is 3.18 m3/MWh.
This forms the baseline data for analysing specific water consumption.

The plant consumptive water requirement for the 4x250 MW unit as per the design
water balance diagram areas are as below:

For unit 1 & 2 it is about 1638 m 3/hr (when ash water recovery is available). The
specific plant water consumption is 3.22 m3/MWh.
For unit 3 & 4 it is about 1685 m3/hr (when ash water recovery is available). The
specific plant water consumption is 3.37 m3/MWh.

The Specific water consumption as per the actual plant consumption data and
design water balance is within the MOEF & CC stipulated limit.

The FI measured raw water consumption data when 3 units (except Unit 2) in
operation, and plant load at 600 MW is 880 to 920 m3/hr supplied from phase 2 raw
water pump house. This works out to 1.46 m3/MWh to 1.53 m3/MWh.

Since the plant was not in full load operation, and the consumption pattern was
changed due to rainfall that caused reduction in CHP dust suppression etc., the
design water consumption data is considered as baseline for evaluating methods to
optimise water consumption.
6.5 Water Requirement for FGD System and Source

Make up water requirement for each Wet FGD system works out to 56 m³/hr. This
water requirement will be tapped from clarified water storage tank of phase 1 & 2
(168.1 m3/hr) and balance 53.5 m³/hr is suggested to be tapped from the Phase 2
CMB which is supplied for horticulture purpose in design WBD. The 2.4 m3/hr
recovery water from the proposed FGD WWTP shall also be used for the FGD
makeup.

With the additional water requirement for FGD from the clarified water system, the
consumptive water requirement increases by 84 m³/h for each phase.The specific
water consumption for Phase 1 will be 3.38 m 3/MWh and for phase 2 will be 3.53
m3/MWh, when including FGD water requirement.

When considering the actual historic plant water consumption of 3.18 m 3/MWh, the
specific water consumption including FGD requirement is around 3.35 m 3/MWh.

From the above it is concluded that the plant specific water consumption including
FGD requirement is within the MOEF&CC stipulated limit.

There would be reject from each FGD plant, which is estimated at around 1.5 m3/h.
This water contains very high suspended solids and dissolved solids. The reject
water shall be treated in a clarifier to remove suspended matter. This water will be
treated in the proposed UF-RO based waste water treatment plant for achieving
zero waste discharge. The R.O reject shall be used in ash slurry system, and solid
waste will be handled by agencies authorized by XXXXXXX.

6.6 Assessment of plant water consumption

The table provided below provides the assessment of the design consumptive water
requirement, areas of optimization/suggestions to reduce plant water consumption.
 Table 6.2 Plant Water Consumption

Assumptions/
Suggested/
SI No Parameter Unit Value as per WBD Reference/ Basis
optimized Value
details
PHASE - I
Evaporation + drift
1. loss of each Cooling m3/hr 564
tower
Blow down of each
2. m3/hr 162
Cooling tower
Make up for each
3. m3/hr 726
Cooling tower
Total clarified water
4. required for CT m3/hr 1452
Make up
Clarified water
5. required for Service m3/hr 61
water application.
Clarified water
6. required for DM m3/hr 51
plant inlet.
Total clarified water =1452+51+61
7. m3/hr
required for Phase- I =1564
Raw water inlet to Considering 97.5%
8. m3/hr 1604
clarifier recovery

9. Evaporation loss m3/hr 34

Total Raw water =1604+34

10. m3/hr
Required for Phase- =1638
I
Specific Water
=1638/2X250 =1638/2X250
11. Consumption for m3/mw
=3.27 =3.27
Phase-I
This additional water
requirement for FGD
Water required for shall be taken from
= 112-28
12. FGD plant. for m3/hr Clarified water storage
=84
phase. tank.
 Assumptions/
Suggested/
SI No Parameter Unit Value as per WBD Reference/
optimized Value
Basis
details
Water Required for
FGD for one unit is 56
m3/hr ,
2x56 = 112 m3/hr
Is required totally for
phase 1, of which 28
m3/hr will be met by
the CMB water from
phase 2 and recovery
water from the
proposed FGD
WWTP.

Total Raw water

=(1597+112-28)
requirement and
/500
13. specific water m3/hr
=3.38 m3/mw
consumption
,including FGD
(For phase I )
PHASE - II
Evaporation + drift
14. loss of each Cooling m3/hr 610.6
tower
Blow down of each
15. m3/hr 130.5
Cooling tower
Make up for each
16. m3/hr 741
Cooling tower
Total clarified water
17. required for CT m3/hr 1482
Make up

Clarified water
18. required for Service m3/hr 55
water application.

Clarified water
19. required for DM m3/hr 84.8
plant inlet.

Page :
60
 Assumptions/
Suggested/
SI No Parameter Unit Value as per WBD Reference/
optimized Value
Basis
details
Total clarified water
20. m3/hr =1621.8
required for Phase- I
Raw water inlet to
21. m3/hr 1651.3
clarifier
22. Evaporation loss m3/hr 33.75
Total Raw water =1651.3+33.75
23. m3/hr
Required for Phase-I =1685.05
Specific Water
=1685/2X250
24. Consumption for m3/mw
=3.37
Phase-I
This additional water
requirement for FGD
shall be taken from
Clarified water storage
tank.
Water Required for
FGD for one unit is 56
Water required for m3/hr ,
= 112-28
25. FGD plant. for m3/hr 2x56 = 112 m3/hr
=84
phase. Is required totally for
phase 2 ,of which 28
m3/hr will be met by
the CMB water from
phase 2 and recovery
water from the
proposed FGD
WWTP.
Total Raw water
requirement and =1685+84
specific water =1797/(2X250)
26. m3/hr
consumption =3.53 m3/mw
,including FGD
(For phase II)

27. FGD WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT

FGD waste water

FGD waste water generated for one unit
28. m3/hr 6
generated is 1.5 m3/hr, total
4X1.5 = 6.00
 Assumptions/
Suggested/
SI No Parameter Unit Value as per WBD Reference/
optimized Value
Basis
details
Capacity of FGD FGD Waste
29. waste water m3/hr 6.00 Treatment plant UF,
treatment plant SWRO plant to be
considered.
Recovery of waste
30. water treatment m3/hr 2.4 m3/hr Considered as 40%
plant

This is disposed in
3
31. Reject water from m /hr 3.6 Ash slurry sump.

6.7 FGD Waste water treatment Plant

Table 6.2 Design Data for FGD waste water treatment plant

Sl.No. Description Data

II FGD WASTE WATER

TREATMENT PLANT
Capacity of plant : 6 cu.m/hr (Feed flow rate)

A.
FGD Waste collection pit

1) Quantity 1 No.

3) Capacity(Nett) , Min 24 cu.m

MOC RCC (Main Structure)

4) CS with Epoxy Painted (All internals)

B. MEDIA FILTER

1) Quantity 2 x 100 %

2) Gross Capacity , Min(Each) 6 cu.m/hr

Shutoff head of Filter feed pump + static head +
3) Design Pressure
5% overall margin.
4) TSS at the outlet < 5 ppm

5) MOC GRP/FRP

C. ULTRAFILTRATION SKID

1) Quantity 2 x 100 %
Sl.No. Description Data

2) Capacity, Min(Each) 6 cu.m/hr

3) Design Flux 60 LMH (MAX)

4) Type of filtration Pressurized ultra filtration

5) Min recovery 90 %

D. SWRO SKID

1) Quantity Two (2) Nos. X 50 %

2) System Feed flow, in(Each) 6 cu.m/hr (min)

Membrane Housings size /
3) As per the system requirement.
MOC
4) Quantity 2 x 100%

5) MOC (All wetted parts) DUPLEX SS

6) Min Recovery 40%

 7
Layout Study
7.1 LAYOUT STUDY

The System and equipment Layout requirement for the Wet FGD and SNCR
systems is studied to ascertain the feasibility of locating the equipment and facilities
to meet the functional requirements.

Equipment space for FGD, SNCR and FGD waste water treatment plant is
presented in the Plot Plan.

7.2 Layout / Land Requirement

From the site walkthrough survey it is observed that around 15m x 50m space is
available in front of the ID fans.

However for Unit-1 it is observed that, a cooling water pit located in the same area
requires relocation and for Unit-3 it is observed that, 2 nos. existing condensate
storage tanks in that area requires relocation.

7.3 FGD System Layout

The major FGD system equipment namely booster fan, Absorber for each unit are
proposed to be located near the chimney. The Slurry re-circulation pumps,
Oxidation blowers, Gypsum bleed pumps and standby Absorber slurry re-circulation
pump are proposed to be located near the absorber.

2 x 100 % booster fans for the unit is suggested for the FGD system.

The limestone storage, preparation and handling system, and other auxiliary
buildings for FGD is proposed to be located on the east side of chimney which is
allocated for future FGD. One no.115m high wet stack for each unit shall be located
in the space available adjacent to the fly ash silo.

The lime slurry building shall house the wet ball mills, mill permeate tank,
Compressors and DG sets in the Ground floor. The lime slurry tanks and transfer
pumps, Limestone silo, air receivers shall be located outside the Lime slurry
preparation building.

The Electrical and Control rooms, cable vaults shall be located above the lime slurry
preparation building.
 The Process water tanks, Emergency slurry tanks and pump sheds shall be located
near the lime slurry building.

The Gypsum dewatering building shall be located near the emergency slurry tanks.
Gypsum dewatering building shall house the vacuum belt filters and waste water
treatment system. Gypsum generated shall be stored in the ground floor of the
gypsum dehydration building and three days storage capacity of gypsum is
envisaged.

7.4 SNCR System Layout

The reagent- Aqueous Ammonia receipt, storage and distribution to the respective
units will be located in the FGD Reagent preparation plant area. This area will be
properly fenced for protecting any trespassing into this area.

7.5 FGD-waste water treatment plant Layout

The space for the proposed FGD waste water treatment plant shall be around 15m
x 15m near the existing fuel oil facility, as identified in the plot plan.The clarifier, UF-
RO treatment plant, chemical dosing system etc, are recommended to be located in
this space.

7.6 Powdered activated carbon System Layout

The reagent storage and distribution to the respective units will be located in the
FGD Reagent preparation plant area.

7.7 Buildings & foundations

The installation of FGD system in the plant warrants for additional buildings and
facilities along with foundation works for the equipments & support structures.

The following list summarizes the major buildings & structures envisaged for
installing the FGD. The facilities are arrived at based on similar installation and
considering scope of optimizing and finalization during implementation.
Table 7.1 List of Buildings and foundation
Type of
Type of Building Roofing /
Description foundation Side cladding
/ Structure Flooring
expected
Booster Fan Vendor Supply Open / Raft - -
Equipment Foundations
Flue Gas Duct Steel ducts Open / Raft - -
supported on Foundations
Structural steel
frame (for FGD
&SNCR)
Absorber Structural Steel Open / Raft - -
tank Foundations
Elevator - Open / Raft - -
Foundations
Oxidation Vendor Supply Open / Raft - -
Blower Equipment Foundations
Slurry Vendor Supply Open / Raft - -
Recirculation Equipment Foundations
Pump located
below FGD
Limestone RCC Building Open / Raft Brick Wall RCC slab
Slurry Foundations
Preparation
building
Limestone Steel Tank Open / Raft - -
Slurry Tank Foundations
Limestone Steel silo Open / Raft - -
storage Silo Foundations
Gypsum RCC Building Open / Raft Brick Wall RCC slab
Dewatering Foundations
Building
Emergency Steel Tank Open / Raft - -
Slurry Tank Foundations
Process Water Steel Tank Open / Raft - -
Tank Foundations
Process Water Steel Structure Open / Raft Permanent Permanent
pump shed Foundations colour coated colour coated
metal cladding galvanized MS
troughed metal
deck sheet
Limestone Structural Steel Open / Raft Permanent Permanent
unloading & Foundations colour coated colour coated
Storage shed sandwiched galvanized MS
insulated metal troughed metal
 Type of
Type of Building Roofing /
Description foundation Side cladding
/ Structure Flooring
expected
cladding above deck sheet
3m high brick
wall.
Pipe & Cable Steel Structure Open / Raft - -
Racks Foundations
Ammonia Steel structures & Open / Raft - -
Storage tanks Tank Foundations
Activated Steel structure, Open / Raft
carbon silo supported on Foundations
steel columns.
FGD waste RCC Building Open / Raft Brick Wall RCC slab
water treatment Foundations
plant
 8
Auxiliary Power Consumption &
Utility Requirements
8.1 AUXILIARY POWER CONSUMPTION & UTILITY REQUIREMENTS

The auxiliary power required for operation of Wet Lime stone based FGD and
SNCR systems for the Unit #1,2,3 &4 are discussed in this section.

8.2 Auxiliary Power Requirement

The major equipments in FGD and SNCR systems along with the power
consumption are provided below. The sizing of equipment is based on BMCR
condition.

Table 8.1: Major Equipment in FGD,SNCR & PAC system with Power
Consumption

Equipment Unit Unit #1 Unit #2 Unit #3 Unit #4

FGD System
Booster Fan kW 1543 1543 1543 1543
Limestone crusher kW 54 54 54 54
Lime stone mills KW 130 130 130 130
Circulation slurry pump kW 266.5 266.5 266.5 266.5
Oxidation blower kW 38 38 38 38
Absorber Agitator KW 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5
Water pumps KW 55 55 55 55
air compressors, Misc.
kW
pumps 30 30 30 30
Dewatering and by product
kW
handling 40 40 40 40
Reagent preparation and
kW
handling 104 104 104 104
Miscellaneous LT drives,
HVAC, Dust Extraction kW
system etc. 400 400 400 400
FGD Auxiliary Power
kW 2668 2668 2668 2668
Consumption
SNCR System Auxiliary
kW
Power Consumption 51 51 51 51
PAC system kW 20 20 20 20
FGD waste water treatment
kW
plant 10 10 10 10
Total Auxiliary Power
KW 2749 2749 2749 2749
Consumption

Page :
70
 The total Auxiliary power requirement of FGD, SNCR, FGD WWTP and PAC
systems is estimated to be around 2749 kW for each unit. This will work out to
around 1.10% of installed capacity.

8.3 Process Utility Requirement

The following are the process utility requirement for the proposed FGD, SNCR and
PAC system.

a) Make Up water

The FGD make up water requirement for each unit shall be around 56 m 3/hr
(maximum), based on FI experience on similar capacity projects .Clarified raw
water from the clarified water storage tank (phase 1 & phase 2) shall be used as
FGD make up water.
b) FGD Reagent requirement

Lime stone is the Reagent used in FGD. The estimated lime stone requirement is
around 2.1 TPH per unit. The quantity of limestone is arrived based on minimum
purity of 85%.
c) Reagent requirement for SNCR
Aqueous Ammonia (of 29% concentration) is used in SNCR. The estimated
Aqueous Ammonia is around 0.6 TPH per unit.
d) Reagent requirement for PAC system
Powdered activated carbon is used in PAC system. The estimated activated
carbon powder requirement is around 0.23 T/hr for each unit.

8.4 Utilization of Gypsum

The Gypsum generated from the wet limestone FGD is a by-product which can be
sold to industries and agricultural farms. The various usage of gypsum is listed
below.

a) for manufacturing of Wallboard

b) As structural fill in construction work.
c) as mine fill for open and closed mine
d) as a barrier to acid mine drainage formation
e) as a plaster in construction work
f) In agriculture as soil amelioration for acidic and alkaline soil.
 g) as setting agent in cement manufacturing
h) As fertilizer in agriculture.

It is suggested that XXXXXXX shall sell the gypsum to Cement industries similar to
fly ash. Also the gypsum shall be utilized for agriculture purpose and in fly ash brick
manufacturing purpose.

8.5 Reagent Handling and Preparation plant:

Limestone of 85% purity is considered for FGD system. Accordingly, the limestone
requirement for each 250MW unit works out to 50.4 T/Day.

Limestone handling and storage system is one of the major facilities required for
FGD Plant. Limestone requirement for the FGD system may be sourced from
nearby limestone mines. As, limestone is hygroscopic in nature, a closed shed is
required to store raw limestone. Limestone is proposed to be transported to the
plant by dumpers. The expected size of raw limestone is (-) 150mm which will be
crushed and used in the ball mill.

The plant will have 7days storage of raw Limestone storage in closed area. The
limestone from the storage area will be unloaded into the dump hoppers by
dumpers and further transferred into lime stone day silo via limestone crusher,
bucket elevator, and feeders. The complete facility from hopper, part of bucket
elevators will be underground.

Two nos. limestone storage silos each having 24 hours storage capacity will be
provided. Limestone will be discharged from the day silo onto the weigh belt feeder
and forwarded to the wet ball mill inlet.

Miscellaneous systems like ventilation system for the facilities, Dust extraction
system for containing the dust at the limestone handling and gypsum handling area,
conveying and transfer facilities, Dust suppression system at the unloading area,
level switches and indicators, Air blaster system and Gates below hopper and silo
as required shall be envisaged.

The limestone handling system will be designed for eight hour operation catering to
a day’s requirement of both the unit with an operating capacity of 25.5 TPH.
Two wet ball mills are envisaged below the silo (1W+1S) catering to both the units.

Regulated quantity of limestone will be fed to the wet horizontal type ball mill. The
limestone milling system would generally consist of wet ball mill, mill oil unit, mill
product tank with an agitator, mill product pump, and mill hydro-cyclone and 2-way
distributor.

The water of required quality will be supplied to wet ball mill and mill slurry tank.
Slurry from the wet ball mill will flow by gravity to the mill product tank and then
pumped up to the mill hydro-cyclone. The mill hydro-cyclone underflow containing
the oversized material will be recirculated to the wet ball mill inlet directly, while the
overflow will be discharged to the limestone slurry feed tank via 2-way distributor as
a product of wet ball mill system. The limestone slurry will be pumped from the
limestone slurry feed tank to the absorber.

Activated Carbon requirement for each 250 MW unit works out to 5.52 T/Day.

Two no. Powdered Activated Carbon storage silos both having 7 days storage
capacity will be provided.
 9
Interface Requirement
with Existing Plant
9.1 INTERFACE REQUIREMENT WITH EXISTING PLANT

The FGD installation for the 4x250 MW unit is to be done as retrofit to the existing
power plant. This would require many interfaces for process, utility, electrical and
control system.

This section covers the interface details with the operating plant.

9.2 Mechanical Interface

System Interface Detail

Ducting from the existing flue gas duct (with isolation
Flue Gas System damper) to FGD, and return duct from FGD upto
exiting flue gas duct to chimney. Bypass duct with
bypass
damper for FGD shall be provided.
Waste water from FGD Treated in the UF-RO based waste water treatment
system after treatment plant.

Fire Fighting system Extension of existing fire hydrant system to FGD area

The water required for the FGD plant is sourced from

plant clarified water system and CMB.
Make up water a) One tapping each from the clarified water storage
tanks of phase1 and phase 2.
b) One tapping from horticulture pump discharge.
Potable & service water required for the FGD & SNCR
Potable & Service water plant shall be sourced from the existing headers near
boiler area.
DM water (if required) for make up of CCW system of
DM water
FGD, shall be sourced from existing DM water header.

9.3 Electrical Interface

FGD System for 4x250 MW unit

Power requirement of FGD system will be 2668 kW for each unit and for SNCR
system it will 51 kW for each unit as detailed in chapter 08.

SNCR power, PAC and FGD WWTP power is required at 415 V level which can be
derived from 415 V FGD PCC.

FGD power need to be drawn at 6.6 kV level from the power plant.

The Xxxxxxx 4X250 MW power plant has Station Transformer configuration.

Each Station transformer is rated for 50 MVA and the unit auxiliary transformer is
rated for 20 MVA.

As per the transformer loading details received during input data collection, loading
of ST-1 , ST-2 and ST-4 was 21 MW , 21.7 MW and 3.71 MW respectively. Hence
the Station transformer will have the adequate spare capacity to feed the FGD
system. During site visit, Unit Transformers of Unit-1 & Unit-2 were under
maintenance.

As per the data collected during site visit no spare feeders are available in station
switchboards of Units 1,2,3 & 4.Hence, following is proposed to cater the FGD
loads. For Units 1,2,3 & 4 new additional feeder panel need to be provided by
extending the sides of station switchboards, necessary and required modification for
expansion of bus bars shall be carried during detailed engineering.

For the FGD system, Power supply is envisaged at two levels viz., 6.6 kV & 415 V,
to provide power for all the drives and equipment. For FGD system, one 6.6 kV
Switchboard with two incomers and bus coupler will be provided. Motors rated
>200 kW will be fed from 6.6 kV Switchboard. Motors rated up to 200 kW will be fed
from 415 V supply. 415 V supply will be derived from 6.6 kV FGD switchboard
through LT service transformers.

Dedicated 220V DC battery system is envisaged for control supply and critical DC
power requirement.

Dedicated 415 V AC emergency DG set is envisaged for the FGD system to feed
critical 415 V drives and panels.

Dedicated 230 V AC UPS supply system is envisaged to feed PLC panels and
workstations.

A detailed Single line diagram indicating the power distribution arrangement is

enclosed as Exhibit-10 with this report.

ESP Retrofit for 4X250 MW Units

The retrofitting measures for augmentation of ESP efficiency may require facilities
such as addition of 415V power feeders and control panels. The number of
additional
 power feeders, additional control panels and the power requirement can be
ascertained based on the extend of the modification to be performed in the ESP in
consultation with ESP vendor.

The usage of existing spare feeders in the ESP MCC and or addition of new feeders
will be decided during detail engineering. The additional power if required will be
marginal and can be fed from the existing LT board. The layout and location of new
control panels and the extension of ESP MCC if emerges will be decided during
detail engineering.

9.4 Instrumentation & Controls SystemInterface

Dedicated PLC based control system shall be provided for the FGD system and
separate dedicated PLC based control system is envisaged for the control and
operation of SNCR system. These PLCs shall be interfaced with the respective
existing plant DCS for monitoring from CCR through softlink and hardwiring is also
envisaged with Plant DCS for the control & interlock signals with Main plant.

Spare I/O channels (to be added if required in future) and spare soft link ports in
plant DCS shall be utilized for these softlink and hardwired interface.

9.5 Reliability and Availability

The minimum target reliability of the control system hardware like each electronic
module/card, power supply, peripheral devices etc. considering its failure rate/mean
time between failures (MTBF), meantime to repair (MTTR), should be designed in
such a way that the availability of the complete C&I system is assured for
99.7%.Redundancy of components and system shall be dictated by availability
criteria as mentioned above to ensure that the system availability target as well as
safety considerations in critical applications are fully met.

To ensure the availability of control system, suitable redundancy shall be provided

at sensor level, hardware and software.

9.6 Operability and Maintainability

The design of the control systems and related equipments shall adhere to the
principle of 'Fail Safe' operation wherever safety of personnel / plant equipment is
 involved. 'Fail Safe' operation signifies that the loss of signal, loss of excitation or
failure of any component shall not cause a hazardous condition.

9.7 Control System

The programmable logic controller (PLC ) based control system shall fully achieve
the various functions of modulating controls, open loop controls including sequence
interlock and equipment protection, monitoring, alarming etc. for Flue gas
desulphurization system & SNCR system. PLC based control systems of the FGD &
SNCR systems shall be interfaced to Plant DCS through redundant soft link
interface and hardwiring is also envisaged with Plant DCS for the control & interlock
signals with Main plant. Control, operation & monitoring will be done from the local
control room located in the FGD Area. However a remote operating station of FGD
PLC& SNCR PLC shall be located in the existing Central control Room (CCR).

All the C&I devices and equipments shall be provided to achieve these functions
and to make the system complete and operable. The control system shall be latest
with State of the Art technology. All equipment, system and accessories of this
project shall be from the latest proven product range of a reputed experienced
manufacturer whose successful performance has been established by a
considerable period of satisfactory operation in similar FGD & SNCR operations of
coal fired and utility power stations and shall be based on the best modern
engineering practice. All equipment / systems located in air conditioned areas shall
also be designed and constructed to operate for short periods of plant operation
when air-conditioning equipment malfunctions (without loss of function, departure
from specifications requirements or damage) at the maximum ambient temperature
of 50°C and relative humidity of 95% RH).

9.8 Control Room

Local control room shall accommodate the control and monitoring equipments of the
Flue gas desulphurization & SNCR for the Unit #1,2,3&4, 4x 250 MW CTPP plant.

The local control room shall house the operator stations, engineering station,
printers and control panels of the FGD, WWTP, SNCR and PAC systems and in
addition remote operating stations of FGD, WWTP, SNCR and PAC system PLCs
shall be located in the existing unit CCR.
 10
Project Cost Estimate
10.1 PROJECT COST ESTIMATE

10.2 Project Cost

The project cost estimates for FGD, combustion modification, SNCR, ESP retrofit,
WWTP and PAC systems proposed have been worked out on the following basis:

 Available in-house data base

 Market prices prevailing as on date
 Project cost estimate given in this report are indicative and for report purpose
only based on prevailing market prices as on date

Table 10.1 Project Cost Estimate –FGD [Rs in Crores]

Description Unit #1 Unit #2 Unit #3 Unit #4

Mechanical 60 60 60 60

Electrical and C&I works 7 7 7 7

Civil works 32 32 32 32

Equipment cost 99 99 99 99
Taxes & duties (Mechanical, Civil
18.81 18.81 18.81 18.81
works, Electrical and C&I)
Erection, Testing and
Commissioning (including tax & 9.41 9.41 9.41 9.41
duties)
Overheads &Contingency 7.95 7.95 7.95 7.95

Project Cost 135.17 135.17 135.17 135.17

Rs. Cr/MW 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.54

Interest During Construction 12.44 12.44 12.44 12.44

Financing Charges 0.61 0.61 0.61 0.61

Total Capital Cost 148.21 148.21 148.21 148.21

Total Capital Cost/MW 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59

Page :
80
 Table 10.2 Project Cost Estimate –-SNCR [Rs in Crores]

Description Unit #1 Unit #2 Unit #3 Unit #4

Mechanical 50 50 50 50

Electrical and C&I works 2 2 2 2

Civil works 1 1 1 1

Equipment cost 53 53 53 53
Taxes & duties (Mechanical, Civil
10.07 10.07 10.07 10.07
works, Electrical and C&I)
Erection, Testing and
Commissioning (including tax & 5.04 5.04 5.04 5.04
duties)
Overheads &Contingency 4.26 4.26 4.26 4.26

Project Cost 72.36 72.36 72.36 72.36

Rs. Cr/MW 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29

Interest During Construction 6.66 6.66 6.66 6.66

Financing Charges 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33

Total Capital Cost 79.34 79.34 79.34 79.34

Total Capital Cost/MW 0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32

Table 10.3 Project Cost Estimate – Combustion modification -DeNOx [Rs in

Crores]

Description Unit #1 Unit #2 Unit #3 Unit #4

Mechanical 25 25 25 25

Electrical and C&I works 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Civil works 0 0 0 0

Equipment cost 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5

Taxes & duties (Mechanical, Civil

4.85 4.85 4.85 4.85
works, Electrical and C&I)

Erection, Testing and

Commissioning (including tax & 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42
duties)
Description Unit #1 Unit #2 Unit #3 Unit #4

Overheads &Contingency 2.05 2.05 2.05 2.05

Project Cost 34.82 34.82 34.82 34.82

Rs. Cr/MW 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14

Interest During Construction 3.20 3.20 3.20 3.20

Financing Charges 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16

Total Capital Cost 38.18 38.18 38.18 38.18

Total Capital Cost/MW 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15

Table 10.4 Project Cost Estimate –ESP retrofit [Rs in Crores]

Description 4x250 MW

Replacement of existing TR sets with High frequency TR

0.25
sets (each)
Project Cost of replacing of existing TR sets sets with High
frequency TR sets for the first two field of the 4 pass each 2
with one TR set.
Project cost /MW 0.01

Interest During Construction 0.18

Financing Charges 0.01

Total Capital Cost 2.19

Total Capital Cost/MW 0.009

Table 10.5 Project Cost Estimate – PAC System [Rs in Crores]

Description Unit #1 Unit #2 Unit #3 Unit #4

Mechanical 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8

Electrical and C&I works 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3

Civil works 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3

Equipment cost 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4

Taxes & duties (Mechanical, Civil
0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65
works, Electrical and C&I)
Erection, Testing and
0.32 0.32 0.32 0.32
Commissioning (including tax &
Description Unit #1 Unit #2 Unit #3 Unit #4
duties)

Overheads &Contingency 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27

Project Cost 4.64 4.64 4.64 4.64

Rs. Cr/MW 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02

Interest During Construction 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43

Financing Charges 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02

Total Capital Cost 5.09 5.09 5.09 5.09

Total Capital Cost/MW 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02

Table 10.6 Project Cost Estimate –FGD WWTP [Rs in Crores]

Common for all 4
Description
units
Mechanical 0.3
Electrical and C&I works 0.1
Civil works 0.2
Equipment cost 0.6
Taxes & duties (Mechanical, Civil works, Electrical and C&I) 0.11
Erection, Testing and Commissioning (including tax & duties) 0.06
Overheads &Contingency 0.05
Project Cost 0.82
Rs. Cr/MW 0.0033
Interest During Construction 0.08
Financing Charges 0.0037
Total Capital Cost 0.90
Total Capital Cost/MW 0.004
 11
Project Implementation and
Schedule
11.1 PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION AND SCHEDULE

11.2 Method of Implementing the Project

The Project is envisaged to be implemented as multiple package EPC contract

comprising FGD along with the auxiliaries, SNCR and auxiliaries, PAC system,
WWTP, combustion modification, retrofit on ESP for the 4x250 MW unit. The supply
& execution of civil works including equipment foundations, buildings, supply &
installation of electrical equipment and instruments are also included under the
scope of EPC contractor.

Contractor’s EPC scope shall include the submission of required design inputs/
drawings for execution of civil and electrical works.

The EPC Contractor will be assisted in formulating the concepts, systems, basic
and detailed engineering, procurement, interface engineering, construction
management services, Erection and testing management services, Inspection,
quality control, expediting and Project management by Engineering Consultants /
competent professionals.

11.3 Project Schedule

FI interaction with various OEMs and experience on similar capacity FGD project,
the following project implementation schedule is arrived for the project.

 The overall EPC project schedule for implementation of FGD work will be 24
months. Interfacing of Flue gas duct for FGD will be the major activity that
requires unit shutdown.
 Project Schedule for SCR systems shall be 15 months.
 Project schedule for PAC system, ESP retrofit & WWTP plant shall be 6
months.

11.4 Owner’s Responsibility

The proposed project being a brown field project, construction facilities will have to
be developed, around the available infrastructure and the requirement to implement
the project within scheduled time frame.
Owner will have to carry out project preparatory works such as identification of
storage and fabrication yard, approach roads for the material gate, arranging of
construction power, construction water etc.

It is recommended that owner to arrange for the space for the FGD in phases
without affecting plant operation.
 12
Conclusions
12.1 CONCLUSIONS

 To restrict the SO2 emission levels below the stipulated value of 600 mg/Nm3,
wet lime stone based FGD with efficiency of around 69% is recommended.
 The FI measured value of NOx emission is 615.29 mg/Nm 3. To restrict the NOx
emission levels below the stipulated value of 300 mg/Nm 3, Combustion control
methods along with Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR) technology is
recommended.
 Adequate space is available in the plant for accommodating wet limestone FGD
and SNCR system for all the 4 units.
 In Unit 1,2,3 & 4 the PM level in flue gas is exceeding the MOEF&CC stipulated
limit, Hence, suitable abatement methods are to be implemented considering the
PM reduction due to WFGD.
 Mercury level in Unit 1,2,3& 4 flue gas is 0.19 mg/Nm3. which is exceeding the
MOEF&CC stipulated limit by around 84.5%. PAC system is recommended to
control mercury to the stipulated limit.
 The total Auxiliary power consumption for FGD, SNCR, PAC and WWTP
systems of each 250MW units is estimated as 2749 kW, which is about 1.1% of
gross unit power output.
 The flue gas temperature at FGD outlet after installation of wet limestone FGD is
around 54.5°C.Hence, each unit is recommended to be provided with separate
RCC wet stack of minimum 100m height, with steel flue with suitable corrosion
and acid resistant lining. Hot flue gas during FGD bypass operation shall be
dispersed through the existing stack.
 The design specific plant water consumption is within the MOEF&CC stipulated
limit. The FGD make up water requirement shall be around 56 m 3/hr, on
continuous basis. The make-up water shall be clarified water.
With the additional water requirement for FGD from the clarified water system,
the consumptive water requirement increases by 84 m³/h for each phase.The
specific water consumption for Phase 1 will be 3.38 m 3/MWh and for phase 2 will
be 3.53 m3/MWh, when including FGD water requirement. When considering the
actual historic plant water consumption of 3.18 m 3/MWh, the specific water
consumption including FGD requirement is around 3.35 m 3/MWh, which is within
MOEF&CC stipulation.
 FGD waste water treatment plant (UF-RO based) is proposed to treat the FGD
waste water.

Control System:

 Dedicated PLC based control system shall be provided for the FGD system and
separate dedicated PLC based control system shall be provided for the SNCR
system. These PLCs shall be interfaced with the existing plant DCS for
monitoring from CCR through softlink. Hardwiring is also envisaged with Plant
DCS for control & interlock signals with main plant. Spare I/O channels (to be
added if required in future) and spare soft link ports shall be utilized for these
softlink and hardwired interface.

Project Cost:

 The estimated project cost for the installation of FGD, Combustion modification,
SNCR, PAC, ESP retrofit and WWTP plant for the 4x250 MW units is Rs.1093
Crores
 The estimated total project cost for the installation of FGD is Rs.148.21 Crores
(0.59 Cr/MW), Combustion modification is Rs. 38.18 Crores (0.15 Cr/MW),
SNCR is Rs. 79.34 Crores (0.32 Cr/MW), PAC system is 5.09 Crores (0.02
Cr/MW), ESP retrofit is Rs.2.19 Cr (0.009 Cr/MW) for each 250 MW unit.
 The common FGD waste water treatment plant for all the four units is estimated
to cost Rs.0.90 Cr (0.004 Cr/MW)

System/Equipment Unit wise cost estimate Plant wise cost estimate

FGD 148.21 592.84
Combustion modification 38.18 152.70
SNCR 79.34 317.38
PAC 5.09 20.36
ESP retrofit 2.19 8.77
FGD WWTP (common
- 0.90
for 4 units)
Total 1093

Project Schedule:
 The EPC project completion time period implementation of FGD, Combustion
modification, SNCR, PAC system and ESP retrofit shall be around 24 months.
The project shall be executed in separate EPC package for each system.
 13
Financial

Page :
90
13.1 FINANCIAL

13.2 General

The project cost estimates have been worked out on the following basis.

 The proposed power plant will be executed through Engineering, Procurement

and Construction (EPC) route.
 Other estimates have been prepared and presented based on market prices
prevailing as on date and based on internal data base.
 Project cost estimate given in this report are indicative and for report purpose
only.

13.3 Cost of Limestone and Ammonia

The landed cost per ton of limestone and Ammonia has been taken as Rs. 2500 and
Rs.49000 respectively.

The landed cost per ton of Powdered Activated Carbon is considered as Rs.45000.

13.4 Cost of Land

The required land is identified inside the existing Plant boundary.

13.5 Cost of other items

 Cost of various other items has been estimated based on prevailing market price.
 GST has been considered as 18% wherever applicable ( i.e., supplies, civil
works and erection, testing and commissioning.

13.6 Project cost Summary

System/Equipment Unit wise cost estimate Plant wise cost estimate

FGD 148.21 592.84
Combustion modification 38.18 152.70
SNCR 79.34 317.38
PAC 5.09 20.36
ESP retrofit 2.19 8.77
FGD WWTP (common
- 0.90
for 4 units)
Total 1093
13.7 Fixed and variable Cost

The following fixed and variable costs are considered along with appropriate
escalations.

The fixed costs include

a. Interest on Loan
b. Return on Equity
c. Depreciation
d. O&M Expenses
e. Interest on Working Capital-Loan

The variable cost covers the Limestone and ammonia cost.

Appropriate escalations have been considered for the Operation &Maintenance

expenses.

13.8 Assumptions

The salient parameters used in the analysis are;

Debt – Equity Ratio : 80: 20

Interest on Loan : 11% p.a.

Interest on working Capital Loan : 11.80% p.a.

Repayment period : 12 years

Loan grace period : No Moratorium period considered

Design useful life of the plant : 25 years

Plant Load Factor : 85%

Increase in Auxiliary Power consumption: 2% ( 5.25% to

7.25%) Return on equity : 15.5%

Depreciation for Plant & Machinery : Straight line method, As per CERC
norms.

Operation & Maintenance cost : Rs. 2.08 lacs/

MW Escalation on O&M cost : 6.24% per annum

Discount Rate : 8.85%

13.9 Impact on Generation Cost

Based on the above assumptions, fixed and variable cost is listed below:

Parameter Unit Value (4X250 MW)

Impact on Fixed Cost (First Year) Rs./kWh 0.410

Impact on Variable Cost (First Year) Rs./kWh 0.258

Impact on Total Cost (First Year) Rs./kWh 0.668

Levelised impact on cost (18 Years) Rs./kWh 0.53

 14
List of Original Equipment
Suppliers (OEMs)
14.1 LIST OF ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT SUPPLIERS (OEMS)

The various technology providers of FGD and SCR/SNCR system in Indian

market are listed below.

Flue Gas Desulphurization System

a) Andritz Technologies
b) K C Cottrell India Pvt Ltd
c) GE-Alstom
d) China Datang Technologies & Engineering Co, Ltd
e) BHEL (licensee of MHPS, Japan)
f) Babcock Power Engineering
g) Thermax Limited (licensee of Marsulex Environmental Technologies Inc., USA)
h) Hitachi, Japan
i) Jiangnan Environmental Technology – China
j) Hamon Group
k) ISGEC

SCR/SNCR System

a) ISGEC
b) Andritz Technologies
c) K C Cottrell India Pvt Ltd
d) GE-Alstom
e) China Datang Technologies & Engineering Co, Ltd
f) ERC Chemtrol Pvt. Ltd.
g) Jiangnan Environmental Technology – China
h) Hammon group
Annexure-1
List of Inputs
 Annexure - 1
List of
Inputs

The following key inputs received from XXXXXXX CTPP are used for preparing the
report:

a) Plot Plan (pdf)

b) Water balance diagram

c) Contract data sheet.

d) Monthly environment data.

e) Station coal analysis.

TCE CONSULTING ENGINEERS LIMITED

PUNJ LLOYD LIMITED

FICHTNER
List of Exhibit

Exhibit - 01 Schematic Diagram for Wet Limestone based FGD

System

Exhibit - 02 Schematic Diagram for Semi Dry FGD System

Exhibit - 03 Schematic Diagram for SNCR

Exhibit - 04 Schematic Diagram for SCR

Exhibit - 05 Schematic Diagram for EADS

Exhibit - 06 Schematic Diagram for Electron Beam Flue gas

Treatment

Exhibit - 07 Schematic Diagram for ReACT

Exhibit - 08 FGD System Output for 250 MW Units

Exhibit - 09 Plot plan

Exhibit - 10 Single Line Diagram for the FGD system

Exhibit - 11 Field Test Results

Exhibit - 12 Flow Diagram for FGD Waste Water Treatment Plant

Exhibit - 13A Source of FGD Make-up – Phase 1

Exhibit - 13B Source of FGD Make-up – Phase 2

Exhibit - 14 Plant Specific Water Requirement

Exhibit - 15 Schematic Diagram – Typical PAC Injection System

Consulting
Engineers (India)
Private Limited
Chennai, Bangaluru
Consulting Engineers
(India) Private Limited
Chennai, Bangaluru
Consulting Engineers
(India) Private Limited
Chennai, Bangaluru
Consulting Engineers
(India) Private Limited
Chennai, Bangaluru
Consulting Engineers
(India) Private Limited
Chennai, Bangaluru
EXHIBIT -06
10

SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM OF ELECTRON BEAM FLUE GAS TREATMENT SYSTEM

 5

1 2 3 4
1. Unit 1 FGD Area
2. Unit 2 FGD Area
3. Unit 3 FGD Area
4. Unit 4 FGD Area
5. FGD ,SNCR
Auxiliaries
6. FGD- Waste
water treatment
plant(15mx15m)
7. Space for Wet
7 7 stack dia 12m each
(unit wise)

6
           

  
 





    
  
 
 














 

Consulting Engineers (India) Private Limited





 

 
  

 

 

       

 
       
    
  
 

 

 

 

    
  

Consulting Engineers
(India) Private Limited
Chennai, Bangaluru
 Exhibit No. 13A

FGD
makeup
FGD makeup

FGD makeup

Exhibit No. 13B

TCE CONSULTING ENGINEERS LIMITED

PUNJ LLOYD LIMITED

FICHTNER
 EXHIBIT No. 14

Note: Plant load at 600 MW, Unit 2 under shutdown- During measurement
EXHIBIT - 15 Schematic Diagram- Typical PAC injection
System