Coal boilers picked over gas despite $700K cost premium
J. Barber
Abstract
J. Barber
Abstract
St. Vincent College in Pennsylvania is paying a $700,000 cost premium to install coal-fired instead of natural gas-fired boilers because local costs of coal are one-third the costs of gas. The two boilers should save the school $145,000 a year more than gas boilers, and will give a five-year payback for the $1.5 million investment. A cost analysis showed that coal boilers could give a 78-79% efficiency for $103,000 in annual fuel costs, while the same performance using gas would cost $250,000. The higher capital cost for coal-fired boilers is partly due to the additional equipment and operating personnel required for solid fuel systems.
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.
St. Vincent College in Pennsylvania is paying a $700,000 cost premium to install coal-fired instead of natural gas-fired boilers because local costs of coal are one-third the costs of gas. The two boilers should save the school $145,000 a year more than gas boilers, and will give a five-year payback for the $1.5 million investment. A cost analysis showed that coal boilers could give a 78-79% efficiency for $103,000 in annual fuel costs, while the same performance using gas would cost $250,000. The higher capital cost for coal-fired boilers is partly due to the additional equipment and operating personnel required for solid fuel systems.
Key concepts: Coal, Waste management, Natural gas, Capital cost, Payback period, Operating cost, Fuel gas, Environmental science