SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT DEQE (2) So�rir ESSEX 1.��_3_--
S�EWF�I�G£ 11/srR/�'T ---
.. ._ . _....a- t_ ---`���` . . .'.� l
-- � -
I
'.O:i)"I1 ESSEX SEWERAGE DIS1RICT
Al
MA 06970 SUMMARY LABORATORY ANAL, _ET Sheet I of 2
ll /
LOCATION NAME: 4pfloa✓! Ge%1jtae-. Err• 409420 CODE: TYPE OF SAMPLE.: re.10
G/arl4 T�ea7.,.en r S e/of* C.(3/1i/93).
STREET ADDRESS:: OR7 /.f/4r/zrs� �oi1 S�� SAMPLE SITE: HOURS OF SAMPLING:
CITY/TOWN: /e4bap7y NAME OF TESTING FACILITY:
Day of the Week o%ft,' ® -Avel- Q)
Parameter Date 3 //;$ 3-Ir 13
1 2 •3 4 COMMENTS
I)H /R k9 // 7o mGrab(ol 9 S/s,,A., En,•,
2. SeLtleable Matter SeP'l9„° 360
0 Total Solids llu 4ko /G/r40 crolca /:ee P//7 /A.
4 . Total Volatile Solids /'/ vrs. 47,pF"�sfy�rO33s Sao�+Kll� 363x'
5 Total Suspended Solids 80,960 $$ ot0
.�Ii2td,1—VolaLile Stjspencled Scjj( s ^/ev-S.S - - _- -- � 7i3 geY656.1-- - --..—.
7. Total Dissolved Solids
8. Total Volatile Dissolved Solids
9. PhenoIS
10. Fats . Oils F. Grease
ll . Hardness
12 . Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD,)
_1_�_Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)--------------- __--
14 . Ac i d i L y as C a C 0 - ------ -------__—_---
15. Alkalinitv as CaC4_—_
-----
17. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen ( IKN)
18. Chlorides
19. C •aside
i0. Sul fa to.
21 . Sulfidos- - --- ----- ----- --- ---- - -- - -------
22_Fluorine as Fluuridc___,__-_-__ ____ -
SHEET 2 of 2
- 1 2 3 4 COMMENTS
23. Aluminum
24. Antimony
6'�• Arsenic (006) 74 $0
26. Barium
27. Beryllium
18. Boron -- --- ------ -------____.I -- --
4. Cadmium ( wow) <0. 06 IVY.
�. Calcium N. T. N.1.
r
�7. Chromium, Total ( �rw,� 0• A. N.T
32. Chromium, Trivalent
11. Chromium, Hexavalent
�. Copper + 0.
31. gold I I,
36. Iron
JD. Lead -Co. I/ N•7.
/38• Lithium \
Mercury ?061 4,0 I N• I•
a. Nickel � pp� 1 �0, I- ( Pi.T.
41 . Phosphate I
4 Selenium ( i �� S•G I </. f/
43. Silver I
114. Sodium +I+
1+5. Tin I 1
9) z i nc w0w.� 2. 3 N.1.
V7 P;ssol.rd Ca. (s i3,000 A/.T.
100 Flow - Gallons/day Water Meter
Measured Flow '
• r ! 1
CITY OF SALEM HEALTH DEPARTMENT
BOARD OF HEALTH
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
ROBERT E. BLENKHORN One Broad Street
HEALTH AGENT March 22, 1983
(617)741-1800
James Vitale, Executive Director
South Essex Sewerage District
Fort Avenue
Salem, MA 01970
Dear Mr. Vitale:
The Salem Board of Health request that they be informed of the
issue of the transport and disposal of waste at the South Essex
Sewerage Waste Water Treatment Plant at Fort Avenue in Salem
from the firm of the Eastman Geletin Co. in Peabody, Mass.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
Very truly yours,
FOR THE BOARD OF HEALTH
ROBERT E. BLENKHORN
Health Agent
REB/q
3 ,
''°°"" CITY OF SALEM
R 2 .8199
OF sAL
- tcALTH DE
'? g
ITS City COUISCll
"POINMBti'Pi" ,._____.._.__..__
Ordered:
That the Council Committee on Public Health investigate the recent decision to
truck to Salem and the S.E.S.D. the odor causing material from Peabody. The enclosed
articles stating recent testing of disposed waste by the Peabody Board of Health show
presence of Mercury, Chromium, Cadium, Arsenic, Selenium, and Lead. And also, that the
S.E.S.D. be notified imrediately that the City Council Grants weekly reports on all monitoring
of said dumping, the effects of said dumping on the plant, and the residents.
.In City Council March 10, 1983 /
Adopted - Copy to be forwarded to the Board of. Health V
ATTEST: JOSEPHINE R. FUSCO
CITY CLERK
. � �-
0 �
� �l �
� � � ��,5
R ��
�f�� �
Il C ��
�1
i
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
50 FORT AVENUE - P.O. BOX 989
SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970
TEL. 617-744-4550
BOARD MEMBERS
JAMES A. "TALE CRAIG STEPNO
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR July 14, 1983 CHAIRMAN
CHARLES F MANSFIELD ALAN F TAUBERT
TREASURER COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC WORKS,BEVERLY
OLIVE A. DUPUIS TRACY I FLAGG
CLERK OF BOARD REPRESENTATIVE,TOWN OF DANVERS
CHARLES B. HARDWICK. JR.
REPRESENTATIVE TOWN OF MARBLEHEAD
KEVIN W. MARSTON
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES PEABODY
JUL 151933 ANTHONY V FLETCHER
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES,SALEM
Salem City Council
CITY OF SALEM
Office of City Clerk HEALTH DEPT.
City Hall
Salem, MA 01970
Gentltmen:
In accordance with the City Council Order adopted on March 30,
1983, 1 herewith enclose a copy of the records of delivery of liquid
wastes from Eastman Gelatine Corp. to SESD Wastewater Treatment Facilities
at Fort Avenue in Salem during the month of June.
Very truly yours,
SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
James A. Vitale
Executive Director
JAV:od
Enclosure
cc: C. R. Grinnell , District Engineer
J. J . Auge, Chief of Monitoring 8 Enfor ment
R. Blenkhorn, Salem Board of Health
t
s
South Essex Sewarage District page 1
EASTMAN GELATINE DELIVERIES TO SEPTAGE FOR JUNE 1983
DATE PERMIT# PH
6-1 4035 12.20
6-1 4037 12.20
6-1 4039 12.15
6-2 4044 12. 10
6-3 4049 12.25
6-3 4054 12.14
6-3 4056 12.20
6-6 4072 12.40
6-7 4074 12.35
6-7 4075 12.35
6-7 4076 11 .50
6-8 4077 12.30
6-8 4079 12.20
6-8 4083 12.30
6-8 4086 12.10
6-8 4088 12.20
6-9 4091 12.30
6-9 4096 12.30
6-9 4098 ------
6-10 4100 12.30
6-10 4102 11 .98
6-10 4104 12.15
6-10 4106 12.30
6-10 4107 12.02
6-14 4115 12.25
6-14 4117 12.30
6-14 4121 12.30
6-14 4125 11 .77
6-14 4131 11 .79
6-14 4132 11 .68
6-15 4140 11 .30
6-15 4142 11 .40
6-15 4144 11 .50
6-16 4147 11 .93
6-16 4151 11 .75
6-16 4153 11 .61
6=)7 4157 11 .88
6-17 4158 11 .77
6-17 4160 11 .70
6-20 4167 11 .45
6-20 4168 11 .52
6-20 4169 11 .48
6-21 4174 11 .70
6-21 4176 11 .98
6-21 4177 11 .78
6-22 4180 11 .60
6-22 4181 11 .60
6-22 4183 11 .60
6-23 4190 11 .71
6-23 4191 11 .61
I
r
page 2
South Essex Sewarage District
EASTMAN GELATINE DELIVERIES TO SEPTAGE FOR JUNE 1983
DATE PERMIT # PH
6-23 4193 11 .60
6-24 4197 11 .73
6-24 4201 11 .50
6-27 4206 11 .30
6-27 4207 11 .25
6-27 4211 11 .60
6-28 4215 11 .88
6-28 4220 11 .69
6-28 4223 11 .70
6-29 4227 11 .88
6-29 4230 11 .77
6-29 4231 11 .83
6-30 4234 11 .83
6-30 4235 11 .80
6-30 4238 11 .75
1 /
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
=' SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
'? S0 FORT AVENUE - P 0 BOX 989
`' j SALEM. MASSACHUSETTS 01970
TEL 617-744-4550
BOARD MEMBERS
JAMES A VITALE CRAIG STEPNO
EXEC M, DIRECIOR RECEIVED _HAIR".+N
CHARLES F MANSFIELD ✓ ALAN F TALBERT
TREASURER COMMISSIONER OF PUBL.0'AORKS BEVER:'
OLIVE A DUPUIS JUL 26 1983 July 22, 1983 TRACY I FLAGG
CLERK OF BOARD REPRFSE%TATNE TOWN OF DAN:FRS
CITY OF SALEM CHARLES B HARDWICK. JR
HEALTH DEPT, REPRESFNTATIVE TOIL OF M.ARBLEHEA1
KEVIN W MARSTON
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SER`::CES PLASOp�
ANTHONY V FLETCHER
Mr. Robert Blenkhorn DiRLCIOP OF 'PUBLIC SEW-CES >LEM
Salem Board of Health
1 Broad St.
Salem, MA 01970
Dear Mr. Blenkhorn:
The S.E.S.D. Lab has completed total coliform testing on
the beach samples which were delivered here on July 19 , 1983 .
The results of these tests are as follows:
LOCATION TOTAL COLIFORM/100ml
Pickman Park <10
Mackey Beach < 10
Osgood Beach < 10•
Forest River 10
Pioneer Village < 10
Palmer Cove < 10
Winter Island < 10
Juniper Beach < 10
Willows 40.
Memorial Drive 30
Collins Cove <10
If you have any questions concerning this testing, feel free
to contact me at any time.
Very truly yours,
SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
William W. Liss
Chemist
WWL:od /I \
I/
LEGAL NOTICE"
F REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
The South Essex Sewerage District, a public agency, invites
proposals and applications for engineering design services to
conduct a technical, economic and environmental study to determine
the feasibility .of utilizing coal and wastewater sludge mixtures
as a supplementary fuel for a steam generating utility boiler.
The applicant must be experienced in the design, operation .
and control of fossil fueled electric power generating facilities
and wastewater treatment facilities.
The design services required will involve; planning, estimating,
sampling and laboratory work, combustion and stack emissions testing,
thermodynamics, wastewater treatment, chemical analysis, sludge
processing, industrial hygiene, etc.
Application forms and a written scope of work are available
and can be obtained at the District Administration Building, 50
Fort Ave. , Salem, Mass. 01970 between the hours of 8:30 a.m. -
4:30 p.m. , Monday thru Friday.
The fee for the proposed work will be negotiated,. but not
to exceed $500,000.00.
No briefing session is planned.
The time for completion after a notice to proceed is 120
consecutive days for the first phase and 365 consecutive days
beyond the successful completion of the first phase.
Written requests for information should be addressed to Mr.
James A. Vitale, ExecutiveDirectorat the above noted address.
Written applications and proposals will be received no later
than 2:00 P.M. E.S.T. on May 25, 1983 at which time and place said
submittals will be publicly opened•.
All submittals must be in a sealed envelope bearing on the
outside the name of the bidder, his address , and the endorsement
"Application and Proposal for Engineering Design Services" . If
forwarded by mail, the sealed envelope containing the submittal
and marked as directed above, ' must be enclosed in another envelope
addressed to the South Essex Sewerage Board, P. 0. Box 989, Salem
MA 01970.
The District reserves the right to reject any and all sub-
mittals if it is deemed to be in the best public interest to do so.
James A. Vitale
Executive Director
SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
ragC 1 UL D .
t
SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES
MY, 1983
INSTRUCTION TO APPLICANTS:
The South Essex Sewerage• District, a public agency, invites
applications and proposals for engineering design services to con-
duct a technical, economic, and environmental study to determine
the feasibility of utilizing coal/wastewater sludge mixtures as a
supplementaty fuel for a steam generating utility boiler.
Written applications and proposals will be received at the
office of the South Essex Sewerage Board located in the Administration
Building, 50 Fort Avenue, Salem, Mass. no later than 2:00 P.M EST on
May 25 , 1983 at which time and place said submittals will be publicly
opened.
All submittals must be in a sealed envelope bearing on the
outside the name of the applicant, his address and the endorsement
"Application and Proposal for Engineering Design Services" . If
forwarded by mail, the sealed envelope containing the submittal and
marked as directed above,must be enclosed in another envelope
addressed to the South Essex Sewerage Board, 50 Fort Avenue, P.O.
Box 989, Salem, MA 01970.
Application forms and a written scope of work are available and
can be obtained at the office of the Board between the hours of
8 : 30 a.m. to 4 : 30 p.m. , Monday thru Friday except holidays.
RIGHT TO REJECT OR ACCEPT PROPOSALS:
The District reserves the right to reject any and all applications/
proposals if it is deemed to be in the best public interest to do so.
QUESTIONS REGARDING FEASIBILITY STUDY:
Any questions or requests for additional information should be
addressed in writing to Mr. James A. Vitale, Executive Director at the
address noted above.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
1. ) "Laboratory Analyses and Laboratory Ashing Furnace
Combustion Tests of Coal/Sludge Mixtures" FTG-83-6813-
01-011 Dec. 15, 1982 .
The Babcock & Wilcox Co.
Research and Development Division
P. O. Box 835
Alliance, Ohio 44601
a
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: (cont' d)
2. ) Outline of Feasibility Study Co-Combustion of Coal
and Sewage Sludge" Jan. 19 , 1983.
New England Power Company
20 Turnpike Road
Westborough, MA 01581
EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT:
The applicant whose proposal is accepted by the South Essex
Sewerage Board will be required and agrees to duly execute a
written contract.
INFORMATION FOR APPLICANTS:
The South Essex Sewerage District has petitioned the Inspector
General' s office for a determination as to the jurisdiction of the
Designer Selection Board and the applicability of MGL Chap. 7 , Sect.
39A and Chapter 579 of the Acts of 1980. All applicants are advised
that the RFP may be suspended at any time.
There is a strong possibility that the feasibility study may be
expanded Lo include a pilot testing program of incinerating sewage
solids/sludges utilizing the starved-air mode.
APPLICATION FORM:
The application form must be completed to include all sub-
consultants to be used during the progress of the study.
ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS:
The design engineer and/or joint venture must be knowledgeable
and thoroughly familiar with- all facets of electric power generating
facilities/utilities and the design/construction of wastewater treat-
ment facilities including other environmental disciplines, such as
air pollution control.
TIME OF COMPLETION:
After the notice to proceed, the successful applicant will be
required to complete the first phase of the study within- 120 consecutive
days and 365 consecutive days beyond the successful completion of the
first phase.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
A study to determine the technical, environmental and economical
feasibility of a process for the management of municipal sewage sludge
and energy recovery involving the combustion of dehydrated sludge as a
supplementary fuel in existing coal-fired steam generating utility
boilers.
Page 3 of 5.
t
PROJECT OBJECTIVE:
The primary objective of the study is to collect and evaluate
the technical data in order to demonstrate that the proposed project
is technically, environmentally and economically feasible, and that
the project will not adversely impact the efficiency and operation
of the NEPCO boilers.
DESIGN FEE:
The fee for the proposed work will be negotiated, but not to
exceed $500, 000.00.
SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS:
1. ) All applicants are requested to review the NEPCO
feasibility outline and to incorporate as part of
the proposal a phased study program subdivided by
various tasks and designed to gather, assemble and
assess sufficient detailed information to conclude
the project' s viability.
The first phase of the program should be designed
to assess the project's technical and environmental
feasibility and include a conceptual design and a
preliminary estimate for capital, operation and
maintenance costs.
*Please note that should the first phase indicate that
the project is not viable, the study would be discontinued.
2 . ) The applicant selected to. do the study will be required
to prepare and submit an application for Federal and
State grants for this feasibility study.
3 . ) In the event that the E.P.A. and/or Mass WPC participate
in the costs of the study, please be advised that various
Federal/State requirements will be included in the contract
document such as; 40 CFR 33. 1030 , Certifications M.G.L.
Charter 7 Section 301 (e&f) ,etc.
4 . ) A contract will not be executed by the South Essex Sewerage
District unless Federal and/or State grants are awarded _ in _
a substantial portion which is acceptable by the South Essex
Sewerage Board.
APPLICATION to SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
I
Feasibility Study on the Ca-Combustion of dried sewage sludge and
TITLE: coal mixture in an electric power generating station utility boiler.
LOCATION: Salem, Massachusetts
2. NAME OF FIRM YEAR
(or Joint Venture). ESTABLISHED:
ADDRESS:
2• NAME AND TITLE OF PHONE
PRINCIPAL TO CONTACT: NUMBER:
4. KEY PERSONS.SPECIALISTS AND INDIVIDUAL CONSULTANTS FOR THIS PROJECT.("itegWra).maural.mechamid,elmrical)
NAME AND TITLE MASS. REG.NO. DISCIPLINE
L RSCENT PROd:CTS BEST ILLUSTRATING CURREN—GUALIFICATIO IS FOR THIS PROJECT:
PROJECT NAME AND LOC-ATIOL .. PROJECT COST YEAFo PHASES- REFERENCES
in accordance .ith'immediate Service Authorized.' ii printed in DSB Public Notice_, i.e.sQ*,PmL Plant.working Plans.suPerv.of coria.
d. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCES SUPPORTING YOUR FIRM'S QUALIFICATIONS FOR
THIS PROJECT: IN=DE irM -ESTDiATEO TD3 TO DEVELOP SCOPE OF S&WICES AS PUBLI= AWERTISED.
). PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY INSURANCE
NAME OF COMPANY !AGGREGATE AMOUNT f POLICY NUMBER EXPIRATION DATE
(As a condition of application, each applicantalrees to carry, if selected for the new!project. professional liability Insurance
in an amount ep,lal to 10: of the estimated consuuctron cost of this project, in conformance with the provisions of Article XVI
if the stancard cesijn contract)
t. PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF THIS FIRM. AHLA PRINCIPAL SPECIALIZATIONS:
c' NAMES AND TIT—ES OF 4LL PARTNERS OR DIRECTORS MASS. REG. N0. DISCIPLINE
10. FULL TIME PERSONNEL !N YOUR FIRM, BY DISCIPLINE:
(inorcate both total number in each discipline and, within brackets, the total number holding Mass. registrations) 1
Administrative Fire Protection Engineers_ (_) Surveyors
Architects _ ( _) Interior Designers Transoertatien Engineers (_)
Civil Engineers _ ( _) Landscape Architects _ I Energy Specialist
Construct. Inspectors_ Mechanical Engineers — Life Safety Code Specialist
Draftsmen Planners OTHER:
Ecologists Sanitary Engineers
Economists Solis Engineers --
TOTAL PERSONNEL
Electrical Eagrs. _ ( _) Specification Writers
TOTAL REGISTERED ( )
Estimators Structural Engineers
11. ALL WORK, By FIRM (or Joint Venture). CURRENTL" BEING PERFORMED DIRECTLY FOR MASS. AGENCIES:
PP.^!ECTNAME AND LOCA71ON_ _ ._ PRO.IECT C05T`YEAR PHASES*_i__ REFERENCES ,
I
i
1
i
•For key, see L•cm 5 on front
IL The foregoing is a statement or facts.
i a ..w at syr. ✓MwiN q•ra wrU J�Lt, .,enc
Cy,fent or _:eaee: ?tate- Foe R•echures shook be on f.!e with the Board. Apoiicnnts agree to execute the standard eonVact
'rr �es.rne•s Se•��ces
)
i
New England Power Company
20 Turnpike Road I
New England Power Westoorough•Massachusetts 01561
Tel.(617)3669011
January 19, 1983
e Mr. James 'A. Vitale, Executive Director
South Essex Sewerage District
50 Fort Avenue
P. 0. Box 989
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
Dear Mr. Vitale:
You have asked whether New England Power Company (NEP) might consider
burning South Essex Sewerage District (SESD) sludge with coal at its Salem
Harbor Generating Station and, if so, what questions must be answered to
determine the feasibility of a co—combustion program.
Attached is an outline of a feasibility study for co—combustion of Cnal
and sewage sludge which would investigate methods and economics of sludge
burning. The study would be conducted by SESD or its contractor. You may
wish to expand the study to investigate other issues of concern to SESD.
" If the study .were funded and undertaken by SESD and the results indicated
that coal and sludge could be economically burned at the Salem Harbor Station
in a technically-and environmentally sound manner, NEP would be interested in
pursuing the project. NEP reserves the right to make the final judgment,
following review of the study final report and assessment of regulatory
constraints, as to the feasibility of the project.
1 'Very truly }roars,
Andrew H. Aitkeu
Director of Environmental Affairs
I
AHA-gv
iiEnclosure
A New England Electric System company
OUTLINE OF FEASIBILITY STUDY
CO-COMBUSTION OF COAL AND SEWAGE SLUDGE
1.0 Introduction
The South. Essex Sewerage District (SESD) wishes to determine the
feasibility of burning sewage sludge in combination with coal at New
England Power Company's (NEP) Slaem Harbor Generating Station. The
sludge may be partially dried as produced 'by the SESD centrifuges
(approximately 25% by weight solids) or completely dried (approximately
90% by weight solids) with supplemental drying. It may be processed
prior to combustion, such as by shredding or pelletizing. The sludge
may be mixed with coal prior to combustion, such as in the Station coal
yard or it may be injected directly into the one or more boilers through
separate burner ports. The ratio of coal to sludge may vary depending
on the rate of sludge production at SESD and the coal burning rate at
Salem Harbor Station.
The objective of the study is to identify and quantify technical,
environmental and economic facts that could preclude or constrain the
use of coal/sludge mixtures as utility boiler fuels. These factors, as
Zescribed in detaii below, include:
Sludge quantity and characteristics
Sludge drying - alternate methods
Sludge handling - transportation, preparation,
storage and mixing with coal
Combustion/deposition tests of coal/sludge mixture (CSH)
Effects on electrostatic precipitator efficiency
Stack emissions
Characteristics of resulting ash
Economics - capital and 06M costs
Aesthetics - udor, dust, etc.
Worker safety - active bacteria
Mixtures of sludge and, coal should be analyzed and burned in a
laboratory furnace, such as the Babcock & Wilcox Laboratory Ashing
Furnace (LAF) which is capable of simulating utility combustion
characteristics. It may also be necessary to perform additional testing
on larger scale equipment including field testing with a utility boiler.
The scope of the study should be sufficient to include the likely
range of coal and sludge characteristics. It is estimated that
Iaboratory testing will continue for one year.
- 2 -
2.0 Sludge Quantity
Hake an accurate estimate of daily sludge production rate at SESD
by conducting periodic measurements of influent flow rate and
concentration of settleable solids in ml/1. Sufficient measurements at
different times of the day should be made to establish the range and
variability of sludge production rates. A suggested sample program is
two sample series (several samples over the course of a day) per month
for one year.
3.0 Sludge Characteristics
Samples of sludge to be combusted with coal should be taken at
random from SESD over a one—year period. For each sample of sludge to
be combusted with coal, perform a complete analysis of sludge including:
Ultimate analysis
Gross heating value
Percent solids
Chemical analysis
Heavy atsls
Pesticides on EP test list
Active bacteria
4,0 Sludge Drying
Investigate methods of drying sewage sludge from partially dry
_I (approximately 25% solids by weight from the SESD centrifuge) to fully
_ dry (approximately 90% solids by weight). Recommend the preferred
drying method considering:
Daily sludge production rate as determined in 1.0
Odor problers during handling and drying
Location for drying equipment
Worker protection from active bacteria
Capital cost of equipment
Manpower requirements
Energy requirements
Other O&M costs
Improvement in heating valuc of sludge from drying
- 3 -
5.0 Sludge Handling
Investigate methods of transporting partially or fully dried sludge
i from SESD to Salem Harbor Station and methods of preparing sludge for
combustion with coal. The investigation should include mixing sludge
with coal prior to combustion (e.g. , in the coal yard) and separate
handling and direct injection of sludge into a boiler from a supple-
mental sludge preparation plant. Recommend the preferred methods of
transportation, storing, preparing and mixing or injecting the sludge
considering:
Daily sludge production rate
Transportation Effects -- Temperature, freezing, settling
Storage Effects -- Freezing, settling, chemical and biological
changes.
Fuel Preparation — Drying, grinding, pelletizing
Odor problems during:
Transportation
Mixing/storage at rleis: H rbor Station in coal yard, coal
bunkers or supplemental sludge preparation plant
( Worker protection from active bacteria
jCapital cost of equipment
S
All 0&M costs
Effects of sludge on handling, conveying and fuel preparation
equipment
6.0 Coal and Sludge Combustion
1
' Investigate the combustion of coal and sewage sludge mixtures at
various weight ratios of coal to sludge under conditions which are
representative of electric utility pulverized coal boiler firing. The
supe of activities must be sufficient to identify fuel relaeed
technical characteristics,which would preclude its use as boiler fuel.
The investigation should include selecting and assessing fuel burning
equipment; analyzing the combustion performance; assessing the fly ash
agglomeration and deposition data and predicting slagging and fouling
potential of the various mixtures.
i
I
i
4
Test burns should continue for a period of one year as described in
9.0 below. Each test burn should include a thorough fuel characteri—
zation including the parameters listed in 3.0 above plus:
Ratio of coal to sludge
Flue feed rate
Secondary air temperature
Furnace wall temperature
Excess oxygen
Fly ash production rate
Fly ash ignition loss
Bottom ash production rate
Bottom ash ignition loss
a
Overall combustion efficiency
Slagging index
r Ash fusion temperature
Burning profile
Ratios of coal to sludge should represent typical sludge production
rates, coal burning rates and the ability to mix coal and sludge.
Ratios should be representative of:
Full load on three units
Partial load
Minimum load
Inadequate mixing of coal and sludge
7.0 Particulate Collection —
Investigate effects on electrostatic precipitator performance which
might occur with various mixtures of coal and sludge as described in 6.0
above including:
Flue gas conditioning
Particle size distribution
Unburned carbon (ignition loss),
Ash resistivity
i
1
i 8.0 Stack Emissions
I
� • Investigate effects on stack emissions which might occur with
various mixtures of coal and sludge as described in 6.0 including:
S02 emissions
j NOx emissions
Particle size distribution
Unburned carbon (ignition loss)
!' Polycyclic organic matter (PON)
Transmissometer opacity
Visible emissions
Ground level impacts including nuisances (odor)
9.0 Ash Characteristics
Investigate effects on fly ash aa: bottom ash characteristics for
various mixtures o: coal and sludge with particular emphasis on
establishing whether or not the resulting ash would be classified as a
hazardous waste. Other characteristics of interest include effects on:
aAsh handling with pressurized pneumatic system
Ash storage in silos
Ash conditioning with water for transportation
1 Mixtures of coal and sludge as described in 6.0 above should be
burned under conditions representative of a utility boiler firing. The
j resulting fly ash and bottom ash from each test burn should be tested
i using the Extraction Procedure Toxicity Test and analyzed for the
I complete list of toxic elements and compounds including:
Arsenic Chromium (hexavalent) Selenium
Barrium Lead Silver
Cadmium Mercury Organic Pesticides
Pesticides may be omitted if found to be absent from the sludge
when tested as in 2.0 above.
itA series of test burns and analyses should be conducted for various
coal/sludge ratios for each cargo of coal delivered to Salem Harbor
Station over a period of one year. Testing should continue until it can
be determined through appropriate statistical methods that no mixture of
coal and sludge will produce an ash which fails the hazardous waste
test. If this is not possible, then it must be determined what is the
minimum coal/sludge ratio that will produce an ash which is certain of
passing the hazardous waste test.
I.
r
` - 6 -
10.0 Economics
Conduct an overall economic analysis of burning SESD sewage sludge
with coal at Salem Harbor Station, including the data developed in 3.0
through 5.0 above.
11.0 Other
All sampling, sample preservation and analyses will be conducted in
accordance with appropriate protocol of ASTM and .APHA standard methods.
EP toxicity testing should be conducted in accordance with EPA test
methods at 40 CFR Part 261 - Identification and Listing of Hazardous
Waste; Appendix II - EP Toxicity Test Procedures. All sampling and
analysis should be done by the feasibility study contractor or under his
direction with suitable records of custody. Suggested sampling
schedules and parameters for analysis may be modified during the
feasibility study to reflect results of initial testing.
F Suitable samples of coal will be provided by HEP. Sludge samples
will be provided by SESD. All casts for the feasibility study will be
borne by SESD.
1 .
9
ii
'P,
LABORATORY ANALYSES AND LABORATORY ASHING
FURNACE COMBUSTION TESTS OF COAL/SEWAGE SLUDGE MIXTURES
FTG-83-6813-01-011
Prepared by
G. A. Clark
The Babcock & Wilcox Company
Research and Development Division
P.O. Box 835
Alliance, Ohio
Submitted by
The Babcock & Wilcox Company
Industrial Power Generation Division
125 High Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02110
December 15, 1982
r
1 . INTRODUCTION
Laboratory analyses and Laboratory Ashing Furnace (LAF) combustion
tests were made on coal/dried sewage sludge mixtures for the Commonwealth
of Massachusetts South Essex Sewerage District (SESD) , located in Salem,
Massachusetts. SESD is seeking an alternative to their present method of
ocean sewage sludge disposal and is interested in burning mixtures of coal
and dried sludge in cooperation with the neighboring Salem Willows Station
of New England Power Company. SESD requested that the Alliance Research
Center (ARC) perform laboratory tests and provide them with samples of LAF
bottom ash and fly ash for further study as aids in determining the
technical feasibility of this undertaking.
SESD supplied ARC with samples of raw sewage sludge and coal (a West
Virginia bituminous, metallurgical coal presently used at Salem Willows).
ARC then prepared two coal/sludge mixtures, with the coal and sludge blended
in proportions based on their ash content to give coal ash sludge ash ratios
of 15:1 and 25:1 by weight. Laboratory chemical analyses were performed on
these samples. Additional coal and sludge samples were then received and
blended for LAF combustion tests.
Ia
i
1
i
1
2. CONCLUSIONS
The limited scope of activities herein did not indicate any fuel related
technical characteristics that would preclude their use as boiler fuels. The
small amount of sludge in the mixtures did not produce laboratory results
that would indicate that the behavior of the mixtures in a boiler would be
significantly different than the coal alone. No significant.problems occcured
in the pulverization, transport, and combustion of these mixtures in the LAF.
The major difficulty with these mixtures was with the odor and possible
hygienic problems associated with the sludge. The hygienic considerations,
due to possible presence of active bacteria in sludges, were countered with
safe laboratory practices. The odor problem was significant throughout the
drying and preparation steps, suggcsting the need for specialized drying
and handling equipment for routine handling of these materials.
It should be noted here that these conclusions are based on a limited
scope of activities which did not constitute a thorough fuel characterization.
It may be desirable to perform additional testing on larger scale equipment
prior to any large scale commitment with these fuels.
2
3. TEST PROGRAM
Initial quantities of 43 pounds of coal and two 1 gallon cans of raw
sewage sludge were supplied by SESD. Measurements of the ash percentages
of the coal and sludge were performed and the solids concentration of the
sludge was determined so that the mixtures could be prepared at the desired
ash ratios. The coal was given ARC sample number C-17172, and the sludge
was given sample number M-37757.
Two coal/sludge mixtures were prepared from the above. Sample number
F-2176 contained the necessary proportions to give a ratio of 15:1 , coal
ash to sludge ash. F-2177 was similar, except that the ash ratio was 25:1 .
The following laboratory analyses were performed on these two mixtures:
• Total Moisture
• Gross Heating Value
Ultimate Analysis
• Chemical Analysis of Ash
s Burning Profile
• Semi-quantitative Chemical Analysis of Ash
(for additional chemical elements not examined in B&W's
quantitative ash analysis)
SESD then expressed their desire for LAF combustion tests, which
necessitated additional fuel quantities. Accordingly, SESD provided a 240
pound coal sample, ARC sample number C-17193, and an approximate 6E pound
quantity of sewage sludge cake, ARC sample cumber M-37845. The ash percentages
of the coal and sludge and the solids content of the sludge were determined
to permit blending at the proportions of the first two mixtures.
Two coal/sludge mixtures were prepared from these samples. Following
standard LAF procedure, the coal was air dried. The sludge was partially air
dried to ti90% solids concentration, and mixed with the coal . The mixtures were
3
then pulverized to 70% minus 200 mesh according to standard LAF procedures.
LAF firings were conducted under the following conditions:
Coal Feed Rate: 8-10 pounds per hour
Secondary Air Temperature: 475°F
Furnace Wall Temperature: 2550°F
Excess Oxygen: 3.2%
Bottom Ash Production Rate: 40-160 grams per hour
(varies with falling pieces of slag)
Bottom Ash Ignition Loss: 72%
Fly Ash Production Rate: 125 grams per hour
Fly Ash Ignition Loss: 9%
Overall Combustion Q8% based on carbon in coal and
Efficiency: ig�aition lossas of bottom ash and
fly ash. Exciudes any carbon present
in slag and present in the flue gas.
The above values are typical values obtained during the two days of
firing. They represent data collected during coal/sludge mixture firing after
the furnace had been brought up to temperature using a combination of
electrical heating and natural gas firing. Temperatures within the flame and
the gases in the combustion chamber are not measured, but estimates place
temperatures at about 3000°F in the flame, varying downward to the furnace
wall temperature. Following the combustion tests, the bottom ash and fly
ash samples produced were submitted to SESD.
4
4. LABORATORY RESULTS
The following are the results of the laboratory analyses performed on
the coal , sludge, and coal/sludge mixtures:
Sample No. C-17172 C-17193
Description Puly. Coal Raw Coal
NEPCO, 43U NEPCO, 24011
Basis As Received Dry
Air Dried
Ash, X 7.52 7.7 7.21 7.3
Sample No. M-37757 M-37845
Description Sewage Sludge Sewage Sludge
SESD, 2 Gallons SESD, Cake, 25% Solids
Partially Partially
Basis As Received Air Dried Dry As Received Air Dried RIX
Solids, % 5.8 89.8 -- 25.5 89.9 --
Ash, % — 32.6 36.3 -- 37.7 41.9
Sample No. P-2223 F-2224
Description Raw Coal and Sludge Raw Coal and Sludge
Mixture Mixture
15:1 Ash Ratio 25:1 Ash Ratio
Coal (C-17193): Sludge Coe! (C-17193) : Sludge
(M-37845) (M-37845)
Sample for: LAF Firing LAF Firing
5
�I
Sample No. M-37845
Description Sewage Sludge SESD
Cake, 252 Solids
Ash Analysis
Spectrographic Semi-Quantitative Analysis (2)*
Silicon as 5302 Major
Aluminum as A1203 5.0
Iron as Fe 203 1.0
Titanium as TiO2 0:9
Calcium as CaO Major
Magnesium as MgO 1.9
Sodium as Na20** 0.94
Potassium as K20** 0.42
Nickel as NiO <0.06
Chromium as Cr203 1.2
Molybdenum as Mo03 0.06
Vanadium as V 2 0 5 <0.1
Cobalt as Coo <0.06
Copper as Cu0 0.1
Zinc as Zn0 <0.3
Lead as Pb0 0.1
Tin as Sn02 <0.06
Zirconium as ZrO2 <0.06
Manganese as MnO <0.06
*The results of spectrographic analysis are reported by the Research Center as
the oxides. This does not necessarily mean that the elements are present as
such in the sample.
**£lame Photometer.
6
I
ii
I
Sample No. F-2176 F-2177
Description Coal and Sludge Mixture Coal and Sludge Mixture
15:1 Ash Ratio 25:1 Ash Ratio
NEPCO Coal: SESD Sludge NEPCO Coal: SESD Sludge
(C-17172) (M-37757) (C-17172) (M-37757)
Basis WET DRY WET DRY
Tote: Moisture, X 1.6 - 1.6 -
Gross Heating Value
Btu per Lb. 13640 13860 13710 13930
Btu per Lb. (M&A Free) - 15100 -- 15140
Ultimate Analysis, X
Moisture 1.6 -- 1.6 --
Carbon 76.46 77.70 76.85 78.10
Hydrogen 5.10 5.18 5.06 5.14
Nitrogen 1.57 1.60 1.37 1.39
Sulfur 1.45 1.47 1.44 1.46
Ash 8.07 8.20 7.84 7.97
Oxygen (Difference) 5.75 5.85 5.84 5.94
Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
7
Sample No. F-2176 F-2177
Description Coal and Sludge Coal and Sludge
Mixture Mixture
15:1 Ash Ratio 25:1 Ash Ratio
Ash Analysis (Spectrographic). X
(Quantitative)
Silicon as 5102 46.71 47.74
Aluminum as Al203 23.18 23.92
Iron as Fe 203 13.35 13.25
Titanium as T102 1.11 1.06
Calcium as CaO 3.74 2.97
Magnesium as MgO 0.74 0.72
Sodium as Na20* 0.96 0.82
Potassium as K20* 1.87 1.93
Sulfur as SO 4.15 3.51
Phosphorus as P 2 0 5 1.70 1.20
*By Flame Photometer.
8
Sample No. F-2176 F-2177
Description Coal and Sludge Coal and Sludge
Mixture Mixture
15:1 Ash Ratio 25:1 Ash Ratio
Ash Analysis
Spectrographic Semi-Quantitative Analysis (Z)*
Nickel as NiO <0.06 <0.06
Chromium as Cr203 0.4 0:?
Molybdenum as Mo03 <0.06 <0.06
Vanadium as V 2 0 5 0.1 0.1
Cobalt as Coo <0.06 <0.06
Manganese as MnO <0.06 <0.06
Copper as Cu0 <0.1 <0,1
Zinc .as Zn0 <0.3 <0.3
Lead •as Pb0 <0.06 <0.06
Tin as Sn02 <0.06 <0.06
i Zirconium as ZrO2 <0.06 <0.06
7
i
i
a
i
? *The results of spectrographic analysis are reported by the Research Center as
the oxides. This does not necessarily mean that the elements are present as.
such in the sample.
i
i
4
i
� 9
BURNING PROFILE OF F-2176
COAL-SLUDGE BLEND, 15:1 ASH RATIO
30
dTGA 1-CA Format, 2163
28 .
26
24
22 1
20
b� 16
x Ix
w 14
i
o 12
W
10
8 /
6 / I
4
2
0 rr
(Cl 100 200 .300 400 600 600 700 800 9Do 1000 1100 (C)
(F) 32 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 (F)
FURNACE TEMPERATURE
10
'r
BURNING PROFILE OF F-2177
COAL-SLUDGE BLEND: 25:1 ASN RATIO
I
- I
30 .
}26 dTGA 1-CA F.o mat, 2164
26
24
22
z_ 20
rn
18
F
16
x
W 14
3
LL
O 12
W
lo
H -
s
6
4
2
(C) 0 100 200 300 400 500 6011 700 800 SW 1000 1100 (C)
(F) 32 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 (F)
'b FURNACE TEMPERATURE
�w
11
As Fired
18
I I I Code Coal M Vhf FC Ash
•'•• ••' Anthracite 1,1 4.7 84.6 9.6
•••�•—� Anthracite 1.2 6.4 77.3 1S,1
16 .0. LV 8ituninous 0.4 16.4 71.0 12.2
.. o— iN 8ituninous 1.5 3 .4 48.0 .4
—— 5uhhituninous 12.0 333 21
.4 33.2 21.4
14
Libmite 32.0 27.2 ' 33.4 7.4
x 12 ( I I °.,, r� I
10 0
_
0 0
r El � •
_
I-0 meg! ij•' °t -
o
0 .1 -.O�l 1 %4. 1 CIA,
100 300 500 700 900 1100
Furnace Temperature .0c
FIGURE COMPARISON OF BURNING PROFILES FOR COALS OF DIFFERENT RANK
The burning profiles indicate that this fuel should ignite in a manner
similar to a high volatile bituminous coal . Burn out can be expected to be
similar to that of a high to medium volatile bituminous coal . Burning profiles
for various ranks of coal are attached.
I
r
13
5. LABORATORY ASHING FURNACE RESULTS
Both coal/sludge mixtures were fired in the LAF without difficulty under
the conditions outlined in Section 3. Operating data routinely collected
during operation of the LAF showed no significant difference from that
encountered in coal combustion. These fuels produced considerable slag
on the furnace wall , but this has previously been experienced with coals.
Although the parent coal was not fired in this case, it is not reasonable to
assume that the slagging qualities were due to the presence of the sludge.
Also, the presence of wall slag in the LAF is not necessarily indicative of
a slagging problem in full scale boilers equipped with sootblowers. B&W
slagging indices, calculated for the two mixtures, indicate a medium slagging
classification. Additional information would be obtained from ash fusion
temperatures of the parent coal and tine mixtures.
The ash products collected from the LAF had no discernable differences
from other LAF ashes in terms of collection and appearance.
A description of the Laboratory Ashing furnace is attached as Appendix A.
14
I.
APPENDIX A
THE SECOND-GENERATION LABORATORY ASHING FURNACE
!3
5
THE SECUM-GENERATION LABORATORY ASHING FURNACE
1
by
Charles L. Wagoner
The Babcock 6 Wilcox Company
Research and Development Division
Alliance Research Center
Alliance. Ohio 44601
Prepared for
The Engineering Foundation Publication:
Experimental Research Into Fouling and Slagging Resulting From
Impurities in Combustion Gases
Proceedings of the July 1981 Conference
R Session 3 -- Pilot Plant Experience in Horth America
e'
a
i
'e
t
THE SECOND-GENERATION LABORATORY ASKING FURNACE
f ABSTRACT
t
E
� I
In 1469, Attig and Barnhart described a Babcock i Wilcox laboratory ashing
furnace at an international conference in Marchwood. England 11). The small,
pulverized fuel-fired furnace was designed to produce fly ash with properties
similar to ash from a utility steam generator.
A second-generation furnace was completed early in 1481. This new unit has
one added capability -- the combustion of solid-liquid mixtures* 1: is designed
to provide improved understanding of formation and characteristics of deposits
formed on sootblown heat—transfer surfaces.
INTRODUCTION
} Accurate prediction of the effectiveness of sootblowing and the quality of
heat transfer in a steam generator is a necessity for the boiler designer. The
required accuracy Is difficult to obtain for a fuel that has not been burned
previously in a boiler and is available only in a small quantity. Further
1
complications arise because of wide potential variations in ash quality and
{ quantity.
She design objective of the second-generation laboratory ashing furnace
(LAFt11) is to obtain useful engineering information directly from combustion
tests using a limited amount of fuel. This permits using core drillings or
material from restricted small-scale production runs.
x
Improvements include a new coal feeder and combustion chamber/guard heater
design. A complete system was added for storing, pumping and burning coal-oil
mixtures (COft), or other solid-liquid mixtures. Also, we are developing a
deposition test section as part of a current Department of Energy (DOE) contract.
LABORATORY ASKING FURNACE (LAF 11)
Description of Pulverized Fuel Unit
An isometric drawing of the pulverized fuel-fired unit is shown in Figure 1.
The LAF I1 is comprised of five major components:
1. A system for feeding pulverised fuel
2. A laminar flow coal burner to minimize impingement of ash on the
furnace wall
3. A refractory combustion chamber with a three-zone, electrically-powered
guard heater to control outward beat flux through the furnace walls
4. A water-cooled pressurized boiler to cool the hot flue gas
5. A system for collecting fly ash
j Pulverized fuel is prepared using a small impact mill to achieve a product
with about 70 to 75 weight percent passing a No. 200 sieve (75ye ). Any material
not passing a No. 60 sieve (250p ) is removed by sieving. The sample of
i pulverized fuel is air-dried at 105'F and loaded into the i:opper of a twin-screw
9 feeder. Higher levels of moisture are simulated by adding steam to the
combustion air.
The coal feeder is mounted on load cells and weighed continuously.
Additional fuel can be added at any time because the feeder is not pressurized.
i.
A-2
M
Fuel passes from the feeder into an eductor where it is mixed with primary
air and transported to the burner. Typically, primary air is 20 percent, of total
combustion air. Secondary air passes through an electrically-powered preheater,
is heated to about 4009F, and then is delivered to the burner.
i
The burner is comprised of three concentric tubes. Preheated secondary air
flaws through the inner and outer tubes; primary air/pulverized fuel flows
through the middle tube. No swirl is Imparted by the burner. This keeps furnace
wall slagging at a minimum.
Typical firing rates for pulverized fuel are in the range of 50,000 to
150,000 Btuthr.
i
The furnace wall is a silicon carbide tube that is four feet long with a one
foot Anside diameter. The wall is enclosed by a three-zone guard heater with
Clobar elements. This eater to used to control the rate of cooling of the
flame. Typical wall temperature is between 2500' and 2600'F. Furnace residence
times are on the order of one to two seconds. The furnace wall can be cooled to
permit extinction measurements as described in a recent publication by
Winegartner.and Lin 12j.
An uncooled refractory slagging probe can be inserted above the furnace
outlet to simulate flame impingement on the high temperature surface of a thick
:3 wall slag. The furnace exit gas temperature at this convergent location usually
Is near 24501F.
A deposition test section (Figure 2) will be designed and constructed as
part of a current contract sponsored by DOE 131: This will adapt the existing
LAF I1 for fundamental depositiou� studies. The refractory-vnlled section will be
located below the exit of the combustion chamber. Ports will be included for
insertion of deposition tubes and sootblower nozzles, and will permit application
of optical diagnostic instruments. The air-cooled tubes will be designed to have
the capability for slowly rotating the deposition surface in a bar-Soule oscills-
tion to provide a uniform thickness of deposit. The deposition section/tube
A-3
combination will be designed to simultaneously simulate furnace wall slagging and
superheater fouling conditions, including metal and gas temperature combinations,
tube alloys, and sootblowing.
Deposition tube metal temperatures will be determined from thermocouples
embedded in the tube. Deposit surface temperature will be measured using two—
color pyrometry. Deposit thickness will be determined from analysis of time—
lapse photography. Heat flux from the hot gas through the deposit and tube wall
will. be determined from calorimetric measurements of the cooling fluid. 'These
measurements will allow calculation of the thermal conductivity of the deposit.
Spectral emissivity of the deposit, from visible to mid—infrared wavelengths,
will be determined from measurements of spectral irradiance in spectral regions
where the combustion product gases are essentially transparent. In wavelength
regions where the combustion gases are absorbing, the emissivity will be
estimated by interpolation.
The deposition section will be two feet long with an inside diameter of five
Inches. Flue gas velocity will be nearly 10 feet per second at the superheater
tube. The deposition tubes will have one inch outside diameters.
A pressurized water heat exchanger cools the flue gas before fly ash Is
collected in a cyclone separator followed by a bag filter. The sample of fly ash
j is used for a variety of laboratory analyses, including measured sintering
strength
i
Description of Coal—Oil Mixture (COM) System
C The system for handling solid—liquid mixtures is shown in Figure 3. The
main components include a heated, 55—gallon storage, tank with an air—powered
mixer, a Moyno pump with a variable speed drive, heated connecting lines, and a
burner with either an internal or external mixing sprayer plate that can use
I� either air or steam for atomization.
{
i The slurry burner is installed in place of the pulverized fuel burner.
The storage tank is mounted on load cells and weighed continuously-
A-4
ontinuously.A-4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Six coal-oil mixtures, one No. 6 oils and three parent pulverized coals have
been tested using LAP 11 this year under contract to the U. S. Maritime
Administration (MARAD)161. As a results we have measured relative values and
ranked the fuels using the following parameters:
• Atomizer Wear
• Flame Quality and Length
As Slagging Potential from Deposition on Refractory Probe
• Fly Ash Sintering Potential from Measured Sintering Strength
• Carbon Conversion Efficiency
Although details cannot be released at this time, significant differences
were found among t:; fuels.
CONCLUSIONS
The choice of COM fuel for a shipboard demonstration on the Creat Lakes for
MARAD was greatly aided by testing using LAP 11. The results complemented other
laboratory analyses and greatly improved our ability to predict engineering
properties from fuel analyses.
The LAP II is expected t3 continue to prc.3uce useful engineering information
in future studies.
- r .
q_S
. i
REFERENCES
111 R. C. Attig and D. H. Barnhart, 'A Laboratory Method of Evaluating Factors
Affecting Tube Bank Fouling in Coal-Fired Boilers," Presented at the
International Conference on the Mechanism of Corrosion by Fuel Impurities,
Marehwood. England; May 1963.
121 E. C. Winegartner and C. J. Lin, 'Laboratory Combustibility Testing of Solid
Fuels.' Presented at ASME Winter Annual Meeting; December 1979.
131 C. L. Wagoner. 'Measurement of Fundamental Properties Characterising Coal
Minerals and Fireside Deposits.' Presented at the Department of Energy AR 6
TD Contractor's Review Meeting, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; March 4. 1981.
141 D. H. Barnhart and P. C. Williams, "The Sintering Test: An Index to Ash-
Fouling Tendency." Trans. of the ASME - Vol. 78, pp. 1229-1236, August 1456.
151 S. J. Vecci, C. L. Wagoner and C. B. Olson, 'Fuel and Ash Characterisation
and Its Effect on the Design of Industrial Boilers,' Presented to the
American Power Conference, B6W Paper No. BR-1117; April 1978.
161 "At-Sea Test and Demonstration of a Coal-Oil Mixture as a Marine Boiler
Fuel." U. S. Maritime Administration Contract MA-80-SAC-01037.
i
e
t
A- 6
j
L R
• ` • � � �J, I �a r
� a
o•
le
L 1
r.'Zz
1
if
o J 9
'S. r t '� F t R L �• 1 � ! � '.
i'4t .. 'f
� f �♦ �� i � { P J V /> f .
r •�. s � r f. . . Fly + � ,y r i. 18 `.r
MIOT1lONER
T10-40LOR NOZZLE
PYROMETER
99%
OR CAMERA
FURNACE HALL
SLAGGING Tm
. �OOT�l01fE11��.i'
NOZZLE
O
FNEATER
FOO ULI(NG
TWO-COLORTU6E ,\
PYROMETER
OR CAMERA
FIGURE 2 CONCEPTUAL DRAWING OF DEPOSITON TEST SECTION
FUEL STORAGE TANK
MIXER
.1,
�P
L�
SAMPLE VALVE /
Ll
WEIGHT
DIC
INDICATOR
'ay R
R �
FIGURE 3 SYSTEM FOR SOLID-LIQUID MIXTURES
PACE A-9
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
.. SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
}, .;;• ¢ 50 FORT AVENUE - P 0. BOX 989
SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970
TEL 617-744-4550
BOARD MEMBERS
JAMES A VITALE CRAIG STEPNO
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CHAIRMAN
CHARLES F MANSFIELD ALAN F TAUBERT
TREASURER COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC'WORKS BEVERLY
OLIVE A DUPUIS TRACY I FLAGG -
CLERK OF BOARD REPRESENTATIVE TOWN OF DANVERS
CHARLES B HARDWICK JR
March 21 , 1983 REPRESENTATIVE TOWN OF MARBLEHEAD
KEVIN W MARSTON
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES PEABODY
ANTHONY V FLETCHER
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES SALEM
Mr . John Rizzone
Eastman Gelatine Corp.
227 Washington Street
Peabody , MA 01960
Dear Mr. Rizzone:
The South Essex Sewezage District has reviewed the lime waste
which Eastman Gelatine has requested to truck to the District sept-
age receiving facilities . Our testing laboratory has found that
your waste passes our parameters for acceptance.
Included is a copy of the regulations for the disposal of your
material at the SESD facilities . Please note #9 on pH. Any load
with a pH of 12. 5 or higher will not be allowed to be discharged to
our facility.
If at anytime your lime waste becomes incompatible with District
operations , we will be forced to discontinue accepting your trucks .
As of today, you may discharge whatever amounts necessary of this
type of waste that are produced at your Peabody plant.
If you have any questions , feel free to contact me .
Sincerely,
SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
Z�2 &Air
JVitale
JAV: slb E ecu tive Director
Enc.
CC : James Auge
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
�I =_ SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
50 FORT AVENUE - P O. BOX 989
SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970
TEL 617744-4550
BOARD MEMBERS
JAMES A. VITALE CRAIG STEPNO
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CHAIRMAN
CHARLES F MANSFIELD ALAN F TAUBERT
TREASURER COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC WORKS REVERLY
OLIVE A DUPUIS April 4 , 1983 TRACY I FLAGG
CLERK OF BOARD REPRESENTATNE TOWN OF DANVERS
CHARLES B HARDWICK. JR
REPRESE6iATiVE TOWN OF MARRL`HEAD
KEVIN W MARSTON
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES PLABODY
ANTHONY V. FLETCHER .
Salem City Council DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES SALEM
Office of the City Clerk
City Hall
Salem, MA 01970
Gentlemen:
In accordance with the City Council Order adopted on
March 10, 1983; I herewith enclose copies of the SESD records
of laboratory tests and the delivery schedule of trucks hauling
liquid wastes from the Eastman Gelatine Corp. to the SESD Waste-
water Treatment Facilities at Fort Ave. in Salem. Since the
inception of this procedure, we have not observed any detrimental
effects on the treatment plant operations, nor have we had any
complaints of odors from the residential neighborhood.
Very truly yours,
SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
J e� A. Vitale
ecutive Director
JAV:od
Encl .
cc: A. V. Fletcher
is
C01IMONWEALTIA OF MASSACHUSEI"fS
SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
50 FORT AVENUE - P O BOX 989
y.,
-� SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970
TEL. 617-744-4550
BOARD MEMBERS
JAMES A. VITALE CRAIG STEPNO
EXECUTIVE DIRECT OR 14, 1983 CHAIRMAN
CHARLES F MANSFIELD ��r�'G��V L+✓ ALAN F. TAUBERT
TREASURER G COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC WORKS BEVERLY
OLIVE A DUPUIS 21 �g TRACY I. FLAGG
CLERK,OF BOARD 1 REPRESEN'TATTVE TOWN OF DANVERS
I_ M CHARLES B HARDWICK, JR
ctly
F{SDEP RF.PRFGE\TATiVE TOWN OF MARRLEHEAG
KEVIN W MARSTON
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES PEABOD�
ANTHONY V FLETCHER
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES SALEM
Salem City Council
Office of City Clerk
City Hall
Salem, MA 01970
Gentltmen:
In accordance with the City Council Order adopted on March 30,
1983, 1 herewith enclose a copy of the records of delivery of liquid
wastes from Eastman Gelatine Corp. to SESD Wastewater Treatment Facilities
at Fort Avenue in Salem d.uring the month of June.
Very truly yours,
SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
--u Gc 4!� 6yc t6�
James A. Vitale
Executive Director
JAV:od
Enclosure
cc: C. R. Grinnell , District Engineer
J . J . Auge, Chief of Monitoring E E rcement
R. Blenkhorn, Salem Board of Health
Suu_ti E.,sex scwar,agL District ac{c i
EASTMAN GELATINE DELIVERIES TO SEPTAGE FOR JUNE 1983
DATE PERt11 T# PH
6-1 4035 12.20
6-1 4037 12.20
6-1 4039 12.15
6-2 4044 12.10
6-3 4049 12.25
6-3 4054 12.14
6-3 4056 12.20
6-6 4072 12.40
6-7 4074 12.35
6-7 4075 12.35
6-7 4076 11 .50
6-8 4077 12.30
6-8 4079 12.20
6-8 4083 12.30
6-8 4086 12.10
6-8 4088 12.20
6-9 4091 12.30
6-9 4096 12.30
6-9 4098 ------
6-10 4100 12.30
6-10 4102 11 .98
6-10 4104 12, 15
6-io 4106 12.30
6-lo 4107 12.02
6-14 4115 12.25
6-14 4117 12.30
6-14 4121 12.30
6-14 4125 11 .77
6-14 4131 11 .79
6-14 4132 11 .68
6-15 4140 11 .30
6-15 4142 11 .40
6-15 4144 11 .50
6-16 4147 11 .93
6-16 4151 11 .75
6-16 4153 11 .61
6-17 4157 11 .88
6-17 4158 11 .77
6-17 4160 11 .70
6-20 4167 11 .45
6-20 4168 11 .52
6-20 4169 11 .48
6-21 4174 11 .70
6-21 4176 11 .98
6-21 4177 11 .78
6-22 4180 11 .60
6-22 4181 11 .6o
6-22 4183 11 .60
6-23 4190 11 .71
6-23 4191 11 .61
i
page 2
South Essex Sewarage District
EASTMAN GELATINE DELIVERIES TO SEPTAGE FOR JUNE 1983
DATE PERMIT N PM
6-23 4193 11 .60
6-24 4197 11 .73
6-24 4201 11 .50
6-27 4206 11 .30
6-27 4207 11 .25
6-27 4211 11 .60
6-28 4215 11 .88
6-28 4220 11 .69
6-28 4223 11 .70
6-29 4227 11 .88
6-29 4230 11 .77
6-29 4231 11 .83
6-30 4234 11 .83
6-30 4235 11 .80
6-30 4238 11 .75
I
rom
RAYMOND G. BOUCHARD
FACILITIES ENGINEER
MEMO TO
.
/THE ATTACHED IS SENT TO YOU
1/ for your information
........ for your approval and signature
........ for your coments
........ for your files
........ to follow through
...I.... to follow through and report
' ....... to confer with me
.../o read and pass on to .......................... . ...............
as you requested
.... PLEASE RETURN ✓. DO NOT RETURN
ATA4&V-►AJD V% A-c o" OF Mia
RFP -%40,r wks 2"Vq -STS
OP
South Essex Sewerage District
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
'i
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS RECEIVED
SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
MAY.2 61983
50 FORT AVENUE - P O. BOX 989
SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 CITY OF SALE
TEL. 617-744-4550 HEALTH DEPT.
BOARD MEMBERS '
JAMES A VITALE CRAIG STEPNO
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR CHAIRMAN
CHARLES F. MANSFIELD ALAN F. TAUBERT
TREASURER May 20 , 1983 COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC WORKS.BEVERLY "
OLIVE A. DUPUIS TRACY 1. FLAGG
CLERK OF BOARD REPRESENTATIVE.TOWN OF DANVERS -
CHARLES B. HARDWICK, JR
REPRESENTATIVE TOWN OF MARBLEHEAD j
KEVIN W. MARSTON
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES.PEABODY
ANTHONY V. FLETCHER �.
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES SALEM
SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES R
MAY 1983
3.
AMENDMENT #1
IT IS REQUEST�D THAT NINE (9) COPIES OF THE
PROPOSAL/APPLI/ICATZN BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW BY
THE SOUTH ESSEX/SEWERAGE BOARD.
James A. Vitale
Executive Director
SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
r
^ �j
LEGAL NOTICE
. ti
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
The South Essex Sewerage District, a public agency, invites
proposals and applications for engineering design services to
conduct a technical, economic and environmental study to determine
the feasibility of utilizing coal and wastewater sludge mixtures
as a supplementary fuel for a steam generating utility boiler.
The applicant must be experienced in the design, operation
and control of fossil fueled electric power generating facilities
and wastewater treatment facilities.
The design services required will involve; planning, estimating,
sampling and laboratory work, combustion and stack emissions testing,
thermodynamics , wastewater treatment, chemical analysis, sludge
processing, industrial hygiene, etc.
Application forms and a written scope of work are available
and can be obtained at the District Administration Building, 50
Fort Ave. , Salem, Mass, 01970 between the hours of 8: 30 a.m. -
4 :30 p.m. , Monday thru Friday.
The fee for the proposed work will be negotiated,. but not
to exceed $500,000. 00.
No briefing session is planned.
The time for completion after a notice to proceed is 120
consecutive days for the first phase and 365 consecutive days
beyond the successful completion of the first phase.
Written requests for information should be addressed to Mr.
James A. Vitale, Executive Director at the above noted address.
Written applications and proposals, will be received no later
than 2 : 00 P.M. E.S.T. on May 25, 1983 at which time and place said
submittals will be publicly opened.
All submittals must be in a sealed envelope bearing on the
outside the name of the bidder, his address, and the endorsement
"Application and Proposal for Engineering Design Services" . If
forwarded by mail, the sealed envelope containing the submittal
and marked as directed above, must be enclosed in another envelope
addressed to the South Essex Sewerage Board, P. 0. Box 989 , Salem
MA 01970.
The District reserves the right to reject any and all sub-
mittals if it is deemed to be in the best public interest to do so.
James A. Vitale
Executive Director
s SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
i
' Page I of 5.
A .
c
SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
ENGINEERING DESIGN SERVICES
MAY, 1983
INSTRUCTION TO APPLICANTS:
The South Essex Sewerage District, a public agency, invites
applications and proposals for engineering design services to con-
duct a technical, economic, and environmental study to determine
the feasibility of utilizing coal/wastewater sludge mixtures as a
supplementaty fuel for a steam generating utility boiler.
Written applications and proposals will be received at the
office of the South Essex Sewerage Board located in the Administration
Building, 50 Fort Avenue, Salem, Mass. no later than 2:00 P.M EST on
May 25, 1983 at which time and place said submittals will be publicly
opened.
All submittals must be in a sealed envelope bearing on the
outside the name of the applicant, his address and the endorsement
"Application and Proposal for Engineering Design Services" . If
forwarded by mail , the sealed envelope containing the submittal and
marked as directed above,must be enclosed in another envelope
addressed to the South Essex Sewerage Board, 50 Fort Avenue, P.O.
Box 989, Salem, MA 01970.
Application forms and a written scope of work are available and
can be obtained at the office of the Board between the hours of
8: 30 a.m. to 4 : 30 p.m. , Monday thru Friday except holidays .
RIGHT TO REJECT OR ACCEPT PROPOSALS:
The District reserves the right to reject any and all applications/
proposals if it is deemed to be in the best public interest to do so.
QUESTIONS REGARDING FEASIBILITY STUDY:
Any questions or requests for additional information should be
addressed in writing to Mr. James A. Vitale, Executive Director at the
address noted above.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
1.-) "Laboratory Analyses and Laboratory Ashing Furnace
Combustion Tests of Coal/Sludge Mixtures" FTG-83-6813-
01-011 Dec. 15, 1982.
The Babcock & Wilcox Co.
Research and Development Division
P. O. Box 835
Alliance, Ohio 44601
Page 2 of 5.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: (cont'd)
2. ) Outline of Feasibility Study Co-Combustion of Coal
and Sewage Sludge" Jan. 19 , 1983.
New England Power Company
20 Turnpike Road
Westborough, MA 01581
EXECUTION OF A CONTRACT:
The applicant whose proposal is accepted by the South Essex
Sewerage Board will be required and agrees to duly execute a
written contract.
INFORMATION FOR APPLICANTS:
The South Essex Sewerage District has petitioned the Inspector
General ' s office for a determination as to the jurisdiction of the
Designer Selection Board and the applicability of MGL Chap. 7 , Sect.
39A and Chanter 579 of the Acts of 1980 . All applicants are advised
that the RFP may be suspended at any time.
There is a strong possibility that the feasibility study may be
expanded to include a pilot testing program of incinerating sewage
solids/sludges utilizing the starved-air mode.
APPLICATION FORM:
The application form must be completed to include all sub-
consultants to be used during the progress of the study.
ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS:
The design engineer and/or joint venture must be knowledgeable
and thoroughly familiar with all facets of electric power generating
facilities/utilities and the design/construction of wastewater treat-
ment facilities including other environmental disciplines , such as
air pollution control.
TIME OF COMPLETION:
After the notice to proceed, the successful applicant will be
required to complete the first phase of the study within 120 consecutive
days and 365 consecutive days beyond the successful completion of the
first phase.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
A study to determine the technical , environmental and economical
feasibility of a process for the management of municipal sewage sludge
and energy recovery involving the combustion of dehydrated sludge as a
supplementary fuel in existing coal-fired steam generating utility
boilers.
Page 3 of 5.
PROJECT OBJECTIVE:
The primary objective of the study is to collect and evaluate
the technical data in order to demonstrate that the proposed project
is technically, environmentally and economically feasible, and that
the project will not adversely impact the efficiency and operation
of the NEPCO boilers.
DESIGN FEE:
The fee for the proposed work will be negotiated, but not to
exceed $500, 000. 00.
SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS:
1. ) All applicants are requested to review the NEPCO
' feasibility outline and to incorporate as part of
the proposal a phased study program subdivided by
various tasks and designed to gather, assemble and
assess sufficient detailed information to conclude
the project' s viability.
The first phase of the program should be designed
to assess the project's technical and environmental
feasibility and include a conceptual design and a
preliminary estimate for capital, operation and
maintenance costs.
*Please note that should the first phase indicate that
the project is not viable, the study would be discontinued.
2. ) The applicant selected to do the study will be required
to prepare and submit an application for Federal and
State grants for this feasibility study.
3. ) In the event that the E.P.A. and/or Mass WPC participate
in the costs of the study, please be advised that various
Federal/State requirements will be included in the contract
document such as; 40 CFR 33. 1030, Certifications M.G.L.
Charter 7 Section 301 (e&f) ,etc.
4 . ) A contract will not be executed by the South Essex Sewerage
District unless Federal and/or State grants are awarded in
a substantial portion which is acceptable by the South Essex
Sewerage Board.
i
i
i
PAGE 4 OF 5
APPLICATION to SOUTH ESSEX SEWERAGE DISTRICT
1.
Feasibility Study on the Co-Combustion of dried sewage sludge and
TITLE: coal mixture in an electric power generating station utility boiler,
LOCATION: Salem, Massachusetts
Z' NAME OF FIRM YEAR
(or Joint Venture): ESTABLISHED:
ADDRESS:
3• NAME AND TITLE OF PHONE
PRINCIPAL TO CONTACT: NUMBER:
a, KEY PERSONS.SPECIALISTS AND INDIVIDUAL CONSULTANTS FOR THIS PRODECT:(ardtiteaural.smaural.medunital.elamicaq
NAME AND TITLE MASS. REG. NO. DISCIPLINE
L RSCENT PROXECTS BEST ILLUSTRATING CURREN-QUALIFICATIO-IS FORTHIS PROJE :T:
PROJECT NAME AND LOCATION PROJECT COST YEAR PHASES- REFERENCES
In accordance with"Immediate Service Authorized' as printed in DSB Public Notices, i.e.s ..dy,preL Plans,wakiny ptans.superv, of eonsa,
li. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCES SUPPORTING YOUR FIRM'S QUALIFICATIONS FOR
THIS PROJECT: IKCWDE TAE ESTM&TED TIME TO ai1EIAP SCOPE OF SEMIC.FS AS Pu9LI= ADPE°R MED.
'7. PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY INSURANCE
NAME OF COMPANY (AGGREGATE AMOUNT POLICY NUMBER (EXPIRATION DATE
(As a condition of application, each applicantafrees to carry, if selected for the new project, professional liability Insurance
in an amount ttttjal to 10% of the estimated construction cost of this project, in conformance with the provisions of Article XVI
of the stancard cesi:n contract)
6. PRINCIPAL BUSINESS OF THIS FIRM. ANL• PRINCIPAL SPECIALIZATIONS:
Page 5 of 5 .
-5, NAMES AND TITLES OF at.l PARTNERS OR DIRECTORS MASS. REG. ND- DISCIPLINE _
i
t
Ill, FULL TIME PERSONNEL !N YOUR FIRM, BY DISCIPLINE.
(Inotcate both. total number An each discipline and, within brackets, the total number holding Mass. registrations)
Administrative Fire ProtacU*n Engiaeers_ (_) Surveyors
Architects _ ( ��) Interior Designers Tranaoortation Engineers_ {�_)
Civil Engineers i� { �) Landscape Architects { I Energy Specialist• - •
Construct. Inspectois— Mechanical Engineers { } Life Safety Code Specialist
I -
Oraftsmen _e Planners OTHER:
Ecologists Sanitary Engineers
Economists _,_ Soils Engineers --
TOTAL PERSONNEL
Electrical Eagrs. ( ) Specification Writers
i TOTAL REGISTERED { )
Estimators _ Structural Engineers
i I.) ALL WORK. BY FIRM for Joint Venture), CURRENTL" BEING PERFO'tMED DIRECTLY FOR MASS. AGENCIES
PROJECT NAME AND LOCATION _ _ . PROJECT CD$'( i EAR PHASES_.._`_,— REFERENCES
� 1
t
I I
1
f
i
•
For key, see ttcm S on front ,
IL' The foreroing is a starem+ntof facts.
y
a..•n w'y:+E ✓NY. IL: KA. w..0 .it it
Cu*rent ar _cca:e= "ante. Filc R!achures shoul: be on We with the Board. ADobcanz agree to execute tht smndard contract
'erlCes.r!ne•s Se•�,as
1
j
New England Power Company
20 Turnpike Road
New England Power Westborough,Massachusetts 01561
Tei.(617)3669011
January 19, 1983
'3 Mr. James A. Vitale, Executive Director
South Essex Sewerage District
50 Fort Avenue
P. 0. Box 989
Salem, Massachusetts 01970
Dear Mr. Vitale:
You have asked whether New England Power Company (NEP) might consider
burning South Essex Sewerage District (SESD) sludge with coal at its Salem
Harbor Generating Station and, if so, what questions must be answered to
determine the feasibility of a co—combustion program.
Attached is an outline of a feasibility study for co—combustion of coal
and sewage sludge which would investigate methods and economics of 'sludge
burning. The study would be conducted by SESD or its contractor. You may
wish to expand the study to investigate other issues of concern to SESD.
If the study were funded and undertaken by SESD and the results indicated
that coal and sludge could be economically burned at the Salem Harbor Station .
In a technically and environmentally sound manner, KEP would be interested in
pursuing the project. NEP reserves the right to make the final judgment,
following review of the study final report and assessment of regulatory
constraints, as to the feasibility of the project.
t • "Very truly yours,,/
CA
Andrew H. Aitken
Director of Environmental Affairs
3 AHA:gv
Enclosure
Y
A New England Electric System company
{
r r
OUTLINE OF FEASIBILITY STUDY
CO-COMBUSTION OF COAL AND SEWAGE SLUDGE
i
1.0 Introduction
The South Essex Sewerage District (SESD) wishes to determine the
feasibility of burning sewage sludge in combination with coal at New
England Power Company's (NEP) Slaem Harbor Generating Station. The
sludge may be partially dried as produced by the SESD centrifuges
(approximately 25% by weight solids) or completely dried (approximately
90% by weight solids) with supplemental drying. It may be processed
prior to combustion, such as by shredding or pelletizing. The sludge
may be mixed with coal prior to combustion, such as in the Station coal
yard or it may be injected directly into the one or more boilers through
separate burner ports. The ratio of coal to sludge may vary depending
on the rate of sludge production at SESD and the coal burning rate at
Salem Harbor Station.
The objective of the study is to identify and quantify technical,
environmental- and economic facts that could preclude or constrain the
use of coal/sludge mixtures as utility boiler fuels. These factors, as
described in detail below, include:
Sludge quantity and characteristics
Sludge drying - alternate methods
I
Sludge handling - transportation, preparation,
storage and mixing with coal
Combustion/deposition tests of coal/sludge mixture (CSM)
Effects on electrostatic precipitator efficiency
I - �
Stack emissions
i
Characteristics of resulting ash
i
'- Economics - capital and 06M costs
Aesthetics - odor, dust, etc.
Worker safety - active bacteria
Mixtures of sludge and coal should be analyzed and burned in a
laboratory furnace, such as the Babcock 6 Wilcox Laboratory Ashing
Furnace (LAF) which is capable of simulating utility combustion
characteristics. It may also be necessary to perform additional testing
on larger scale equipment including field testing with a utility boiler.
t
The scope of the study should be sufficient to include the likely
range of coal and sludge characteristics. It is estimated that
Iaboratory testing will continue for one year.
i
— 2 —
2.0 Sludge Quantity
-� Make an accurate estimate of daily sludge production rate at SESD
by conducting periodic measurements of influent flow rate and
concentration of settleable solids in ml/l. Sufficient measurements at
different times of the day should be made to establish the range and
variability of sludge production rates. A suggested sample program is
two sample series (several samples over the course of a day) per month
- for one year.
3.0 Sludge Characteristics
Samples of sludge to be combusted with coal should be taken at
y random from SESD over a one—year period. For each sample of sludge to
be combusted with coal, perform a complete analysis of sludge including:
Ultimate analysis
Gross heating value
Percent solids
Chemical analysie
Heavv xtsls
Pesticides on EP test list
Active bacteria
4.0 Sludge Drying
Investigate methods of drying sewage sludge from partially dry
e! (approximately 252 solids by weight from the SESD centrifuge) to fully
dry (approximately 90% solids by weight). Recommend the preferred
drying method considering:
Daily sludge production rate as determined in 1.0
. Odor problers during handling and drving
Location for drying equipment
.� Worker protection from active bacteria
Capital cost of equipment
Manpower requirements
Ener
- gy requirements
Other O&M costs
Improvement in heating value of sludge from drying
.I
i
I
5.0 Sludge Handling
Investigate methods of transporting partially or fully dried sludge
from SESD to Salem harbor Station and methods of preparing sludge for
combustion with coal. The investigation should- include mixing sludge
with coal prior to combustion (e.g. , in, the coal yard) and separate
handling and direct injection of sludge into a boiler from a supple—
mental sludge preparation plant. Recommend the preferred methods of
transportation, storing, preparing and mixing or injecting the sludge
considering:
Daily sludge production rate
Transportation Effects -- Temperature, freezing, settling
Storage Effects -- Freezing, settling, chemical and biological
changes.
Fuel Preparation -- Drying, grinding, pelletizing
Odor problems during:
4
Transportation
Mixing/storage at « lei: 9Arbor Station in coal yard, coal
bunkers or supplemental sludge dge pzepazatiaa plant
( Worker protection from active bacteria
Capital cost of equipment
All O&M costs
Effects of sludge on handling, conveying and fuel preparation
equipment
i
i 6.0 Coal and Sludge Combustion
1
Investigate the combustion of coal and sewage sludge mixtures at
various weight ratios of coal to sludge under conditions which are
representative of electric utility pulverized coal boiler firing. The
supe of activities must be sufficient to identify fuel rtlaced
technical characteristics which would preclude its use as boiler fuel.
The investigation should include selecting and assessing fuel burning
equipment; analyzing the combustion performance; assessing the fly ash
J agglomeration and deposition data and predicting slagging and fouling
potential of the various mixtures.
E
1
I
4
Test burns should continue for a period of one year as described in
4.0 below. Each test burn should include a thorough fuel characteri-
zation including the parameters listed in 3.0 above plus:
Ratio of coal to sludge
Flue feed rate
Secondary air temperature
Furnace wall temperature
Excess oxygen
6.
Fly ash production rate
Fly ash ignition loss
Bottom ash production rate
I
Bottom ash ignition loss
Overall combustion efficiency
Slagging index
Ash fusion temperature
Burning profile
Ratios of coal to sludge should represent typical sludge production
rates, coal burning rates and the ability to mix coal and sludge.
Ratios should be representative of:
Full load on three units
Partial load
Minimum load
Inadequate mixing of coal and sludge
7.0 Particulate Collection
Investigate effects on electrostatic precipitator performance which
might occur with various mixtures of coal and sludge as described in 6..0
above including:
Flue gas conditioning
Particle size distribution
Unburned carbon (ignition loss).
Ash resistivity
8.0 Stack Emissions
-i Investigate effects on stack emissions which might occur with
_+ various mixtures of coal and sludge as described in 6.0 including:
J I S02 emissions
' j NOx emissions
Particle size distribution
Unburned carbon (ignition loss)
Polycyclic organic matter (POM)
Transmissometer opacity
1
Visible emissions
I
Ground level impacts including nuisances (odor)
I 9.0 Ash Characteristics
Investigate effects on fly ash an! bottom ash characteristics for
various mixtures o: coal and sludge with particular emphasis on
,i establishing whether or not the resulting ash would be classified as a
hazardous waste. Other characteristics of interest include effects on:
Ash handling with pressurized pneumatic system
I
j Ash storage in silos
Ash conditioning with water for transportation
Mixtures of coal and sludge as described in 6.0 above should be
burned under conditions representative of a utility boiler firing. The
:j resulting fly ash and bottom ash from each test burn should be tested
using the Extraction Procedure Toxicity Test and analyzed for the
`I complete list of toxic elements and compounds including:
.i Arsenic Chromium (hexavalent) Selenium
Barrium Lead Silver
Cadmium Mercury Organic Pesticides
A
Pesticides may be omitted if found to be absent from the sludge
when tested as in 2.0 above.
i
II A series of test burns and analyses should be conducted for various
coal/sludge ratios for each cargo of coal delivered to Salem Harbor
Station over a period of one year. Testing should continue until it can
be determined through appropriate statistical methods that no mixture of
g
coal and sludge will produce an ash which fails the hazardous waste
test. If this is not possible, thea it must be determined what is the
minimum coal/sludge ratio that will produce an ash which is certain of
passing the hazardous waste test.
a
r
- 6 -
10.0 Economics
Conduct an overall economic analysis of burning SESD sewage sludge
u with coal at Salem Harbor Station, including the data developed in 3.0
through 5.0 above.
11.0 other
All sampling, sample preservation and analyses will be conducted in
accordance with appropriate protocol of ASTM and APRA standard methods.
EP toxicity testing should be conducted in accordance with EPA test
methods at 40 CFR Part 261 — Identification and Listing of Hazardous
Waste; Appendix Il — EP Toxicity Test Procedures. All sampling and
analysis should be done by the feasibility study contractor or under his
direction with suitable records of custody. Suggested sampling
schedules and parameters for analysis may be modified during the
feasibility study to reflect results of initial testing.
d
Suitable samples of coal will be provided by NEP. Sludge samples
will be provided by SESD. All costs for the feasibility study will be
borne by SESD.
'i
IIr,
i
r.
t
V
i
�1
is
LABORATORY ANALYSES AND LABORATORY ASHING
FURNACE COMBUSTION TESTS OF COAL/SEWAGE SLUDGE MIXTURES
FTG-83-6813-01-011
Prepared by
G. A. Clark
a
The Babcock & Wilcox Company
Research and Development Division
P.O. Box 835
Alliance, Ohio
Submitted by
The Babcock & Wilcox Company
Industrial Power Generation Division
125 High Street
Boston, Massachusetts 02110
i
December 15, 1482
1
a
1. INTRODUCTION
Laboratory analyses and Laboratory Ashing Furnace (LAF) combustion
tests were made on coal/dried sewage sludge mixtures for the Commonwealth
of Massachusetts South Essex Sewerage District (SESD) , located in Salem,
i Massachusetts. SESD is seeking an alternative to their present method of
y� ocean sewage sludge disposal and is interested in burning mixtures of coal
y and dried sludge in cooperation with the neighboring Salem Willows Station
of New England Power Company. SESD requested that the Alliance Research
Center (ARC) perform laboratory tests and provide them with samples of LAF
bottom ash and fly ash for further study as aids in determining the
technical feasibility of this undertaking.
SESD supplied ARC with samples of raw sewage sludge and coal (a West
Virginia bituminous, metallurgical coal presently used at Salem Willows).
ARC then prepared two coal/sludge mixtures, with the coal and sludge blended
in proportions based on their ash content to give coal ash sludge ash ratios
of 15:1 and 25:1 by weight. Laboratory chemical analyses were performed on
these samples. Additional coal and sludge samples were then received and
blended for LAF combustion tests.
i
'1
1
1
! 1
r
1
i
i
I
3 1
2. CONCLUSIONS
The limited scope of activities herein did not indicate any fuel related
technical characteristics that would preclude their use as boiler fuels. The
small amount of sludge in the mixtures did not produce laboratory results
that would indicate that the behavior of the mixtures in a boiler would be
significantly different than the coal alone. No significant problems occcured
in the pulverization, transport, and combustion of these mixtures in the LAF.
The major difficulty with these mixtures was with the odor and possible
hygienic problems associated with the sludge. The hygienic considerations ,
due to possible presence of active bacteria in sludges, were countered with
safe laboratory practices. The odor problem was significant throughout the
drying and preparation steps, suggcz*ing the need for specialized drying
and handling equipment for routine handling of these materials.
It should be noted here that these conclusions are based on a limited
scope of activities which did not constitute a thorough fuel characterization.
It may be desirable to perform additional testing on larger scale equipment
prior to any large scale commitment with these fuels.
2
3. TEST PROGRAM
Initial quantities of 43 pounds of coal and two 1 gallon cans of raw
sewage sludge were supplied by SESD. Measurements of the ash percentages
of the coal and sludge were performed and the solids concentration of the
sludge was determined so that the mixtures could be prepared at the desired
ash ratios. The coal was given ARC sample number C-17172, and the sludge
was given sample number M-37751.
Two coal/sludge mixtures were prepared from the above. Sample number
F-2176 contained the necessary proportions to give a ratio of 15:1 , coal
ash to sludge ash. F-2177 was similar, except that the ash ratio was 25:1 .
The following laboratory analyses were performed on these two mixtures:
• Total Moisture
e Gross Heating Value
Ultimate Analysis
e Chemical Analysis of Ash
• Burning Profile
s Semi-quantitative Chemical Analysis of Ash
(for additional chemical elements not examined in B&W's
quantitative ash analysis)
SESD then expressed their desire for LAF combustion tests, which
necessitated additional fuel quantities. Accordingly, SESD provided a 240
pound coal sample, ARC sample number C-17193, and an approximate 6E pound
quantity of sewage sludge cake, ARC sample dumber M-37845. The ash percentages
of the coal and sludge and the solids content of the sludge were determined
to permit blending at the proportions of the first two mixtures.
Two coal/sludge mixtures were prepared from these samples. Following
standard LAF procedure, the coal was air dried. The sludge was partially air
dried to ti90% solids concentration, and mixed with the coal . The mixtures were
3
then pulverized to 70% minus 200 mesh according to standard LAF procedures.
LAF firings were conducted under the following conditions:
Coal Feed Rate: B-10 pounds per hour
Secondary Air Temperature: 475°F
Furnace Wall Temperature: 2550°F
Excess Oxygen: 3.2%
Bottom Ash Production Rate: 40-160 grams per hour
(varies with falling pieces of slag)
Bottom Ash Ignition Loss: 72%
Fly Ash Production Rate: 125 grams per hour
Fly Ash Ignition Loss: 9%
Overall Combustion 98% based on carbon in coal and
Efficiency: ignition losses of bottom ash and
fly ash. Exciudes any carbon present
in slag and present in the flue gas.
The above values are typical values obtained during the two days of
firing. They represent data collected during coal/sludge mixture firing after
the furnace had been brought up to temperature using a combination of
electrical heating and natural gas firing. Temperatures within the flame and
the gases in the combustion chamber are not measured, but estimates place
I
j temperatures at about 3000°F in the flame, varying downward to the furnace
wall temperature. Following the combustion tests, the bottom ash and fly
ash samples produced were submitted to SESD.
1
4
4. LABORATORY RESULTS
The following are the results of the laboratory analyses performed on
the coal , sludge, and coal/sludge mixtures:
Sample No. C-17172 C-17193
Description Pulv. Coal Raw Coal
NEPCO, 430 NEPCO, 2400
Basis As Received Dry Air Dried
Ash, X 7.52 7.7 7.21 7.3
Sample No. M-37757 M-37845
Description Sewage Sludge Sewage Sludge
SESD, 2 Gallons SESD, Cake, 252 Solids
Partially Partially
Basis As Received Air DriedDDS As Received Air Dried Dry
Solids, 2 5.8 89.8 -- 25.5 89.9 --
Ash, 2 -- 32.6 36.3 -- 37.7 41.9
Sample No. F-2223 F-2224
Description Raw Coal and Sludge Raw Coal and Sludge
Mixture Mixture
15:1 Ash Ratio 25:1 Ash Ratio
Coal (C-17193): Sludge Coal (C-17193) : Sludge
(M-37845) (M-37845)
Sample for: LAP Firing LAF Firing
5
Sample No. M-37845
Description Sewage Sludge SESD
Cake, 25% Solids
Ash Analysis
Spectrographic Semi-Quantitative Analysis (Z)*
Silicon as 5102 Major
Aluminum as Al203 5.0
Iron as Fe 203 1.0
Titanium as TiO2 0:9
Calcium as CaO ' Major
Magnesium as MgO 1.9
Sodium as Na20** 0.94
Potassium as K20** 0.42
Nickel as NiO <0.06
Chromium as Cr203 1.2
Molybdenum as Mo03 0.06
Vanadium as V 2 0 5 <0.1
Cobalt as Coo <0.06
Copper as Cu0 0.1
Zinc as Zn0 <0.3
Lead as Pb0 0.1
Tin as Sn02 <0.06
Zirconium as ZrO2 <0.06
Manganese as MnO <0.06
*The results of spectrographic analysis are reported by the Research Center as
the oxides. This does not necessarily mean that the elements are present as
such in the sample.
**Flame Photometer.
6 '
Samole No. F-2176 F-2177
Description Coal and Sludge Mixture Coal and Sludge Mixture
15:1 Ash Ratio 25:1 Ash Ratio
NEPCO Coal: SESD Sludge NEPCO Coalt SESD Sludge
(C-17172) (M=37757) (C-17172) (M-37757)
Basis WET DRY WET DRY
Tool Moisture, % 1.6 -- 1.6 --
Gross Heating Value
Btu per Lb. 13640 13860 13710 13930
Btu per Lb. (M&A Free) - 15100 -- 15140
Ultimate Analysis. X
Moisture 1.6 -- 1.6 --
Carbon 76.46 77.70 76.85 78.10
Hydrogen 5.10 5.18 5.06 5.14
Nitrogen 1.57 1.60 1.37 1.39
Sulfur 1.45 1.47 1.44 1.46
Ash 8.07 8.20 7.84 7.97
Oxygen (Difference) 5.75 5.85 5.84 5.94
Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00
7
I
Sample No. F-2176 F-2177
Description Coal and Sludge Coal and Sludge
Mixture Mixture
a 15:1 Ash Ratio 25:1 Ash Ratio
9
Ash Analysis (Spectrographic), X
(Quantitative)
Silicon as Si02 46.71 47.74
Aluminum as A1203 23.18 23.92
Iron as Fe203 13.35 13.25
Titanium as TiO2 1.11 1.06
Calcium as CaO 3.74 2.97
MagnesiumMgOgn as Mg 0.74 0.72
Sodium as Na20* 0.96 0.82
Potassium as K20* 1.87 1.93
i Sulfur as SO 4.15 3.51
Phosphorus as P205 1.70 1.20
M
*By Flame Photometer.
w
I
p
S
Sample No. F-2176 F-2177
Description Coal and Sludge Coal and Sludge
Mixture Mixture
15:1 Ash Ratio 25:1 Ash Ratio
i
Ash Analysis
Spectrographic Semi-Quantitative Analysis
Nickel as NiO <0.06 <0.06
Chromium as Cr203 0.4 0.7
Molybdenum as Moo <0.06 <0.06
Vanadium as V 2 0 5 0.1 0.1
Cobalt as Coo <0.06 <0.06
Manganese as MnO <0.06 <0.06
Copper as Cu0 <0.1 <0.1
Zinc .as Zn0 <0.3 <0.3
Lead as Pb0 <0.06 <0.06
Tin as Sn02 <0.06 <0.06
Zirconium as Zr02 <0.06 <0.06
:i
*The results of spectrographic analysis are reported by the Research Center as
the oxides. This does not necessarily mean that the elements are present as
such in the sample.
:1
i
9
3
BURNING PROFILE OF F-2176
COAL-SLUDGE BLEND, 15:1 ASN RATIO
j
! dTGA 1-CA Format, 2163
28
28
24
22
Z 20 =_
> qs
F
S
W 14
IL
o 12
W
10F
s
s �{
4 .
2 /P
(C) U 100 2UD 300 400 600 800 700 800 9DO 1000 11 1100 ICI
(F► 32200 400 BCS BOD 1000 1200 1400 1$00180D 2000 (F)
FURNACE TEMPERATURE
10
a
BURNING PROFILE OF F-2177
COAL-SLUDGE BLEND: 25:1 ASH RATIO
30,
- dTGA 1-CA Format, 2164
26
26
24
22
2 20 _
16
I
.1
16 -
14
6 -
14 -
3r`
U.
0 12
W
10
6
i
4 , i
j _ b
(C) 0 100 200 300 400 ., 800 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 (C)
(F) 32 200 400 800 800 1000 1200 1400 1800 1800 2000 (F)
FURNACE TEMPERATURE
4 ,
I
11
20
As Fired
18 Code Coal M VM FC Ash
— Anthracite 1.1 4.7 84.6 9.6
Anthracite 1.2 6.4 77.3 15.1
16 I I I _ ❑ LV Bituninous 0.4 16.4 71.0 12.2
o— HV Bituminous 1.5 35.4 48.0 15.1
— Suhbituminous 12.0 33.4 33.2 21.4
14
I.ibmite 32.0 27.2 33.4 7.4
12
o �.❑o
obi-�a
CO
44 13
G 8 1
MEl
C / o13
l `
�` o a—
e � r
a / -e — /-o— o— � — �e ❑
e ❑
100 300 500 700 900 11u0
Fumace Temperature o c
FIGURE COMPARISON OF BURNING PROFILES FOR COALS OF DIFFERENT RANK -
The burning profiles indicate that this fuel should ignite in a manner
similar to a high volatile bituminous coal . Burn out can be expected to be
similar to that of a high to medium volatile bituminous coal . Burning profiles
for various ranks of coal are attached.
13
5. LABORATORY ASHING FURNACE RESULTS
Both coal/sludge mixtures were fired in the LAF without difficulty under
the conditions outlined in Section 3. Operating data routinely collected
during operation of the LAF showed no significant difference from that
encountered in coal combustion. These fuels produced considerable slag
on the furnace wall , but this has previously been experienced with coals.
Although the parent coal was not fired in this case, it is not reasonable to
assume that the slagging qualities were due to the presence of the sludge.
Also, the presence of wall slag in the LAF is not necessarily indicative of
a slagging, roblem in full scale boilers equipped P q pped with sootblowers. B&W
slagging indices, calculated for the two mixtures, indicate a medium slagging
classification. Additional information would be obtained from ash fusion
temperatures of the parent coal and tine mixtures.
The ash products collected from the LAF had no discernable differences
from other LAF ashes in terms of collection and appearance.
A description of the Laboratory Ashing furnace is attached as Appendix A.
14
,
APPENDIX A
THE SECOND-GENERATION LABORATORY ASHING FURNACE
{
i
t
Q
t
THE SECOND-GENERATION LABORATORY ASHING FURNACE
by
.y
7 Charles L. Wagoner
The Babcock 6 Wilcox Company
Research and Development Division
Alliance Research Center
Alliance$ Ohio 44601
Prepared for
The Engineering Foundation Publication:
v
Experimental Research Into Fouling and Slagging Resulting From
Impurities to Combustion Gases
Proceedings of the July 1981 Conference
Session 3 -- Pilot Plant Experience in North America
3
t
3
TEE SECOND-GENERATION LABORATORY ASNINC FURNACE
ABSTRACT
i In 1963, Attig and Barnhart described a Babcock b Wilcox laboratory ashing
i
furnace at an international conference in Marchwood, England (1J. The small,
pulverised 'fuel-fired furnace was designed, to produce fly ash with properties
similar to ash from a utility steam generator.
i
A second-generation furnace was completed early in I981. This new unit has
one addxd capability -- the combustion of solid-liquid mixtures. It is designed
to provide improved understanding of formation and characteristics of deposits
formed on sootblown heat-transfer surfaces.
INTRODUCTION
I
Accurate prediction of the effectiveness of sootblowing and the quality of
heat transfer in a steam generator is a necessity for the boiler designer. The
4�
required accuracy is difficult to obtain for a fuel that has not been burned
previously in a boiler and is available only in a small quantity. Further
complications arise because of wide potential variations in ash quality and
quantity.
The design objective of the second-generation laboratory ashing furnace
x
(LAP 11) is to obtain useful engineering information directly from combustion
tests using a limited mount of fuel. This permits using core drillings or
arterial fro= restricted snail-scale production runs.
I
A.. I
Improvements include a new coal feeder end combustion chamber/guard heater
design. A complete system was added for storing, pumping and burning coal-oil
mixtures (Gals), or other solid-liquid mixtures. Also, we are developing a _
deposition test section as part of a current Department of Energy (DOE) contract.
LABORATORY ASKING FURNACE (LAF 11)
Description of Pulverized Fuel Unit
An isometric draving of the pulverized fuel-fired unit is shown in Figure 1.
The LAF II is comprised of five major components:
E
1. A system for feeding pulverized fuel
2. A laminar flow coal burner to minimize impingement of ash on the
furnace wall
3. A refractory combustion chamber with a three-zone, electrically-powered
guard heater to control outward heat flux through the furnace walls
4. A water-cooled pressurized boiler to cool the hot flue gas
5. A system for collecting fly ash
i
i
i
! Pulverized fuel is prepared using a small impact mill to achieve a product
with about 70 to 75 weight percent passing a No. 200 sieve (75p ). Any material
not passing a No. 60 sieve (250p ) is removed by sieving. The sample of
pulverized fuel is air-dried at 105•F and loaded into the hopper of a twin-screw
feeder. Higher levels of moisture are simulated by adding steam to the
combustion air.
The coal feeder is mounted on load cells and weighed continuously.
Additional fuel can be added at any time because the feeder is not pressurized.
I
A-2
Fuel passes from the feeder into an eductor where it is mixed with primary
air andtransported to the burner. Typically, primary air is 20 percent of total
combustion air. Secondary air passes through an electrically-powered preheater,
is heated to about 400•F, and then is delivered to the burner.
i
The burner is comprised of three concentric tubes. Preheated secondary air
flows through the inner and outer tubes, primary air/pulverized fuel flows
through the .middle tube. No swirl is imparted by the burner. this keeps furnace
i
wall #lagging at a minimum.
Typical firing rates for pulverized fuel are in the range of 50,000 to
150.000 Btu/hr.
i
The furnace wall is a silicon carbide tube that is four feet long with a one
foot inside diameter. I'he wall is enclosed by a ihree-zone guard heater with
Globar elements. This haater is used to control the rate of cooling of the
- flame. typical wall- temperature is between 2500• and 2600'F. Furnace residence
times are on the order of one to two seconds. the furnace wall can be cooled to
permit extinction measurements as described in a recent publication by
Winegartner and Lin 121.
i
An uncooled refractory slagging probe can be inserted above the furnace
outlet to simulate flame impingement on the high temperature surface of a thick
wall slag. the furnace exit gas temperature at this convergent location usually
is near 1450•F.
A deposition test section (Figure 2) will be designed and constructed as
part of a current contract sponsored by DOE 131. this will adapt the existing
LAF II for fundamental deposition, studies. The refractory-walled section will be
located below the exit of the combustion chamber. Ports will be included for
insertion of deposition tubes and sootblower nozzles, and will permit application
of optical diagnostic instruments. The air-cooled tubes will be designed to have
M the capability for slowly rotating the deposition surface in a harmonic oscilla-
tion to provide a uniform thickness of deposit. The deposition section/tube
A-3
!J combination will be designed to simultaneously simulate furnace wall slagging and
superheater fouling conditions, including metal and gas temperature combinations,
tube alloys, and sootblowing.
Deposition tube metal temperatures will be determined from thermocouples
embedded in the tube. Deposit surface temperature will be measured using two—
color pyrometry. Deposit thickness will be determined from analysis of time—
lapse photography. Heat flux from the hot gas through the deposit and tube wall
will, be determined from calorimetric measurements of the cooling fluid. These
measurements will allow calculation of the thermal conductivity of the deposit.
Spectral emissivity of the deposit, from visible to aid—infrared wavelengths,
will be determined from measurements of spectral irradiance in spectral regions
where the combustion product gases are essentially transparent. In wavelength
regions where the combustion gases are absorbing, the emissivity will be
estimated by interpolation.
The deposition section will be two feet long with an inside diameter of five
Inches. Flue gas velocity will be nearly 10 feet per second at the superheater
tube. The deposition tubes will have one inch outside diameters.
A pressurized water beat exchanger cools the flue gas before fly ash is
collected in a cyclone separator followed by a bag filter. The sample of fly ash
Is used for a variety of laboratory analyses, including measured sintering
strength 14,51.
Description of Coal—Oil Mixture (COM) System
The system for handling solid—liquid mixtures is shown in Figure 3. The
main components include a heated, 55—gallon storage tank with an air—powered
mixer, a Moyno pump with a variable speed drive, beated connecting lines, and a
burner with either an internal or external mixing sprayer plate that can use
either air or steam for atomization.
The slurry burner is installed in place of the pulverized fuel burner.
i
The storage tank is mounted on load cells and weighed continuously-
A-4
ontinuously.A-4
N
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Six coal—oil mixtures, one No. 6 oil, and three parent pulverized coals have
been tested using LAF I1 this year under contrgct to the U. S. Maritime
Administration (MABAD)16J. As a result, we have measured relative values and
ranked the fuels using the following parameters:
• Atomizer Hear
• Flame Quality and Length
• Slagging Potential from Deposition on Refractory Probe
• Fly Ash Sintering Potential from Measured Sintering Strength
• Carbon Conversion Efficiency
Although detaills cannot be released at this time, significant differences
ware found among t.a fuels.
CONCLUSIONS
The choice of COM fuel for a shipboard demonstration on the Great Lakes for
MARAD was greatly aided by testing using LAP 11. The results complemented other
laboratory analyses and greatly improved our ability to predict engineering
properties from fuel analyses.
The LAF II is expected to continue to produce useful engineering information
in future studies.
j
A_S
r REFERENCES
111 R. C. Attig and D. B. Barnhart, 'A Laboratory Method of Evaluating Factors
Affecting Tube Bank Fouling in Coal-Fired Boilers,' Presented at the
International Conference on the Mechanism of Corrosion by Fuel Impurities,
Marchwood. England; May 1963.
121 E. C. Winegartner and C. J. Lin, 'Laboratory Combustibility Testing of Solid
Fuels." Presented at ASME Winter Annual Meeting; December 1979.
131 C. L. Wagoner, 'Measurement of Fundamental Properties Characterising Coal
Minerals and Fireside Deposits.' Presented at the Department of Energy AR b
TD Contractor's Review Meeting, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; March 4, 1981.
141 D. B. Barnhart and P. C. Williams, 'The Sintering Test: An Index to Ash-
Fouling Tendency." Trans. of the ASME - Vol. 78, pp. I229-1236* August 1956.
151 S. J. Vacci, C. L. Wagoner and G. B. Olson, "Fuel and Ash Characterisation
and Its Effect on the Design of Industrial Boilers." Presented to the
American Power Conference, B&W Paper No. BR-1137; April 1978.
161 "At-Sea Test and Demonstration of a Coal-Oil Mixture as a Marine Boiler
Fuel," U. S. Maritime Administration Contract MA-BO-SAC-01037.
r
k
�E
a
t '
A- 6
r
�Te y�'� } �,� y� 3F � y r!t � �?�i"'y +• kf.x, E .:>t��!
� rix - a ." ,•,s° ' 'Tq ft i�ns,y„'iX`�Rz,.�� Rf„� �,�.�.
• •- � s r< ;'�I `^p��'�` yi2�'s� ' i.,�� -• S3'r.ry
t.
i
• • I 'C�. � �{� u. mit tY r
-„r T _ .•. .., 2�♦ _::1,- ti_ y t� ��C'�p*. 4lT�kka .NN:y: Eat c+t r'��'}.,.
� pa�r H �''+. r .:::. .'� i � rr 1 ,a � Pa �- �.. B�yyyy"jj�' -t ty'n •�v,
i !'r '' LLt
'� r• r x-: � s a r.-n '
• zR s F 1.'kt ; rte¢
k •Y k. �..• r^ ! -.. r3ftxlt
Az, { i i r r { •j� /
S
•t.,+�` ''����� h 44
t 'wy4r
4�is,4t ^�' j fj1 ' x�+v aTr r� s
e'�
t. J
sy, 'UY .i•
i�+ +yt'`hS,'���b•.�� Ys+ f �t�``r i 10 �a. s}�� f.. 4 �,'^ #"''
900TSLOWER
T17aCMAMERMA9%
NOZZLE
PYOR
i
FURNACE HALL
/LAGGING TUBE
BOOT/LONER�t!'
NOZZLE
O
IRP RNEATER
4 FOULING
TIME . TWO-COLOR
PYROMETER
OR CAMERA
r FIGURE 2 CONCEPTUAL DRAWING OF DEPOSITON TEST SECTION
FUEL STORAGE TANK
\ MIXER
•r.
A�
�a
a
SAMPLE VALVE
`�4 /�• E WEIGHT
INDICATOR
P
= t
Pad R
Va .r
FIGURE 3 SYSTEM FOR SOLID-LIQUID KWURES
f PASS A-9