SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “FGD Effluent”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

22 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2023

Aqueous Bromide Discharges from U.S. Coal-Fired Power Plants: Points of Origin, Concentration Ranges, and Effluent Treatment Costs

Bromide discharges from coal-fired power plants have received increased attention from regulatory bodies due to their contribution to the formation of disinfection byproducts (DBPs) in downstream drinking water treatment plants. Here, this paper characterizes the relative contributions of bromide from coal feedstocks and bromine-based mercury control processes, estimates the distribution of bromide concentrations at 85 active coal-fired power plants across the United States (U.S.) with wet flue gas desulfurization units, and estimates the cost of bromide removal from wastewater discharge using year 2020 data. Bromide discharges are estimated at the plant level using a combination of the reported coal rank and composition combusted, estimates of bromide addition in mercury control techniques under multiple halogen addition scenarios, and the estimated flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater flow rate. The median, simulated plant-level estimation of total FGD wastewater flow is 18.3 gallons/min at a bromide concentration of 319 mg/L, equivalent to ~11.6 tonnes/year of bromide discharges to the environment. Next, we evaluated the expected cost of employing the best available technology (BAT) to control bromide discharges in FGD wastewater to prevent contributions to DBP formation. Treatment would need to remove more than 99.8% of bromide to reach the 0.2 mg/L voluntary incentive program (VIP) limit. The total cost of treatment depends on whether disposal is on- or off-site; the average costs for all plants combined come to an average of $110 million ($95.2/kgal) in 2021 U.S. dollars for on-site disposal, or $134 million ($115/kgal) for off-site disposal.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

DOE OSTI2017

Evaluating the Techno-Economic Feasibility of Forward Osmosis Process Utilizing Low Grade Heat: Applications in Power Plant Water, Wastewater, and Reclaimed Water Treatment

Recovering and using uncoverted heat produced during electric power generation holds potential to significantly improve the efficiency of the electric power industry. One potential use of this low-temperature waste heat is on-site water treatment using waste heat driven processes to comply with the 2015 Effluent Limitation Guidelines for the Steam Electric Generating Sector. Ammonia-carbon dioxide forward osmosis (NH 4 HCO 3 FO) is a two-step waste heat driven process that involves a membrane separation process in which an osmotic pressure gradient created by an NH 4 HCO 3 draw solution is used to pull water across the membrane and a distillation column to regenerate the NH 4 HCO 3 draw solution. In this work we estimate the quantity, quality, and spatio-temporal availability of waste heat produced at U.S. coal, nuclear, and natural gas plants. We combine these estimates of waste heat availability with a techno-economic optimization model of NH 4 HCO 3 FO in order to assess the potential of NH 4 HCO 3 FO to treat flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater, gasification wastewater, and boiler feedwater. We find that in 2012, 18.9 billion GJ of waste heat was discharged from the U.S. coal, natural gas, and nuclear fleet, although only 900 million GJ of waste heat was discharged at temperatures suitable for NH 4 HCO 3 FO. A maximum of 1.9 billion m3/yr of water could be produced using this waste heat to drive a NH 4 HCO 3 FO. The costs of waste heat driven NH 4 HCO 3 FO for FGD and gasification wastewater treatment to zero liquid discharge (ZLD) and boiler feedwater treatment are 2.20-2.40/m 3 and 0.35-0.65/m 3 , respectively. With mechanical vapor compression and crystallization for ZLD wastewater treatment and reverse osmosis for boiler feedwater treatment as the cost benchmark technologies, waste heat driven NH 4 HCO 3 FO is cost competitive for ZLD wastewater treatment, but not boiler feedwater treatment.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Novel Algae Technology for CO2 Utilization

The United States, the world’s largest energy user and second largest CO2 emitter, is heavily dependent on fossil energy. In 2014, U.S. coal burning utilities emitted ~1562 million (MM) tons/year (TPY) of CO2 into the atmosphere, accounting for 76% of the total US power sector emissions1. Hence, reducing the CO2 emission footprint from coal plants is widely viewed as a key element in mitigating global warming. Despite significant interest, implementation of CO2 capture technologies has been constrained by the high capture cost which significantly increases the total cost of electricity. Not only is capturing CO2 with traditional technologies expensive, but generally the CO2 has little value and additional expense must be incurred for sequestration. This project funded by a SBIR grant from the U.S. D.O.E. to Helios-NRG in collaboration with the State University of New York at Buffalo (UB) and Membrane Technology and Research Inc. (MTR) aimed to develop a novel, algae based technology to capture CO2 from the effluent of coal-based power plants and convert it to renewable bio-fuels and higher value co-products such as animal feed and nutraceuticals with the potential to enable a substantial reduction in the net cost of carbon capture. The Phase 2 project was aimed at further demonstrating the technical feasibility of the proposed multi-stage continuous (MSC) flow CO2 capture system and the generation of high-value co-products to offset the CO2 capture cost. The project was completed and the project objectives were met and exceeded. A first-of-a-kind integrated, laboratory scale MSC process unit was fabricated and tested in a greenhouse. The tests were conducted with the preferred algae species identified in Phase I and simulated flue gas containing contaminants at levels typically present in the post flue gas desulfurization (FGD) stream, including ~12% CO2, acid gas (SOX, NOX), and a large number of heavy metals. The tests were successful and demonstrated a 25g/m2/day seasonal average algae productivity and an 80% CO2 capture efficiency. Two new algae species were identified for high-value nutraceutical production. Studies to improve growth rate and nutraceutical content of these algae species were performed and a pathway for further improvements was identified. A new dewatering technology called DeAqua was further advanced. Significant improvement in the performance index was achieved. The anti-fouling membrane was developed and fabricated into a module. The fabricated membrane module was tested with algae slurry and demonstrated improved fouling resistant properties, that can potentially reduce the cost and energy of the critical dewatering step. Test data were used to simulate operation of the overall process. The preliminary economic analysis was updated and modelled based on a 5000-acre algae farm. To the extent possible, the financial and operating assumptions used were the same as those used in the DOE’s 2022 projections for algae technology for CO2 capture and utilization. The results showed the proposed technology’s potential to significantly reduce the cost of CO2 capture compared to current options and that the high value products generated from the CO2 captured can make a step change in the cost of carbon capture. Plans to advance the technology to Phase 2B were developed and potential end-user partners were identified.

Maloney, James↗

DOE OSTI2017

Technoeconomic Optimization of Waste Heat Driven Forward Osmosis for Flue Gas Desulfurization Wastewater Treatment

With the Environmental Protection Agency’s recent Effluent Limitation Guidelines for Steam Electric Generators, power plants are having to install and operate new wastewater technologies. Many plants are evaluating desalination technologies as possible compliance options. However, the desalination technologies under review that can reduce wastewater volume or treat to a zero-liquid discharges standard have a significant energy penalty to the plant. Waste heat, available from the exhaust gas or cooling water from coal-fired power plants, offers an opportunity to drive wastewater treatment using thermal desalination technologies. One such technology is forward osmosis (FO). Forward osmosis utilizes an osmotic pressure gradient to passively pull water from a saline or wastewater stream across a semi-permeable membrane and into a more concentrated draw solution. This diluted draw solution is then fed into a distillation column, where the addition of low temperature waste heat can drive the separation to produce a reconcentrated draw solution and treated water for internal plant reuse. The use of low-temperature waste heat decouples water treatment from electricity production and eliminates the link between reducing water pollution and increasing air emissions from auxiliary electricity generation. In order to evaluate the feasibility of waste heat driven FO, we first build a model of an FO system for flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater treatment at coal-fired power plants. This model includes the FO membrane module, the distillation column for draw solution recovery, and waste heat recovery from the exhaust gas. We then add a costing model to account for capital and operating costs of the forward osmosis system. We use this techno-economic model to optimize waste heat driven FO for the treatment of FGD wastewater. We apply this model to three case studies: the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) 550 MW model coal fired power plant without carbon capture and sequestration, the NETL 550 MW model coal fired power plant with carbon capture and sequestration, and Plant Bowen in Eularhee, Georgia. For each case, we identify the design that minimizes the cost of wastewater treatment given the safely recoverable waste heat. We benchmark the cost minimum waste-heat forward osmosis solutions to two conventional options that rely on electricity, reverse osmosis and mechanical vapor recompression. Furthermore, we quantify the environmental damages from the emissions of carbon dioxide and criteria air pollutants for each treatment option. With this information we can assess the trade-offs between treatment costs, energy consumption, and air emissions between the treatment options.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗