Life-cycle costs and economic feasibility of the atmospheric fluidized-bed combustion power plants
R.A. Holstein
Abstract
R.A. Holstein
Abstract
Coal-fired power plants produce the largest share of electric power generated in the US. Since coal is plentiful and relatively cheaper than gas or oil. The incentive to use coal is great. Increased state and federal environmental regulations and licensing requirements have caused an increase in construction costs for these plants. These facilities, in order to comply with the regulations, have to employ the best available technologies to achieve the lowest possible suflur emissions when located near designated areas. One of these emerging innovations is the atmospheric fluidized bed boiler. The technology for these plants is reviewed and capital and operational cost estimates are given. It was found that the atmospheric fluidized bed boilers are cost competitive with conventional units only when scrubbers are required and when they are burning high sulfur content coal.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Coal-fired power plants produce the largest share of electric power generated in the US. Since coal is plentiful and relatively cheaper than gas or oil. The incentive to use coal is great. Increased state and federal environmental regulations and licensing requirements have caused an increase in construction costs for these plants. These facilities, in order to comply with the regulations, have to employ the best available technologies to achieve the lowest possible suflur emissions when located near designated areas. One of these emerging innovations is the atmospheric fluidized bed boiler. The technology for these plants is reviewed and capital and operational cost estimates are given. It was found that the atmospheric fluidized bed boilers are cost competitive with conventional units only when scrubbers are required and when they are burning high sulfur content coal.
Key concepts: Coal, Waste management, Fluidized bed, Capital cost, Scrubber, Power station, Environmental science, Combustion