Comprehensive Report to Congress on the Clean Coal Technology Program Demonstration of Pulse Combustion in an Application for Steam Gasification

~-- ---~.- Dislribution .__.~..~.-~-_.._ Category UC-101 Comprehensive Rep.ort to Congress Clean Coal Technology Program Demonstration in an Application of Pulse Combustion for Steam Gasification A Project Proposed By: ThermoChem, Inc. U.S. Department of Energy Assistant Secretary For Fossil Energy Office of Clean Coal Technology Washington, D.C. 20585 October 1992 September 4,200l The following reports were obtained from NTIS and should be added to the Compendium. There will be two or three more packages of about this size to send you all of the reports we have. I suggest that once they have all been scanned we add a single item to the What’s New portion of the Home Page that says something like “X new reports now available in electronic format”. Then on the What’s New page itself we could list each of the reports with the appropriate link. Sound reasonable? 1) Comprehensive Report to Congress, Clean Coal Technology Program, Demonstration of Pulse Combustion in an Application for Steam Gasification, Oct. 1992 (DE93000959) 2) Passamaquoddy Technology, L.P., Interim Technical Report, March 1992 (DE920 19868) 3) The Encoal Project: Initial Commercial Shipment and Utilization of Both Solid and Liquid Products. Topical Report, March 1995 (DE95009735) 4) Encoal Mild Coal Gasification Project Public Design and Construction Report, December 1994 (DE9500971 1) 5) Encoal Mild Coal Gasification Project. Annual Report, October 1990 - September 1991, February 1992 (DE92001273) 6) Encoal Mild Coal Gasification Project. Annual Report, October 1993 (DE94012274) 7) Encoal Mild Coal Gasification Demonstration Project. Annual Report, October 1993 ~ September 1994, March 1995 (DE95009710) 8) Demonstration of an Advanced Cyclone Coal Combustor with Internal Sulfur, Nitrogen, and Ash Control for the Conversion of a 23 MMBtu/Hr Oil Fired Boiler to Pulverized Coal Final Technical Report, March, 1987 -February 28, 1991, August 1991 (DE92002587) 9) Demonstration of an Advanced Cyclone Coal Combustor with Internal Sulfur, Nitrogen, and Ash Control for the Conversion of a 23 MMBtu/Hr Oil Fired Boiler to Pulverized Coal. Final Technical Report, Appendices, August 1991 (DE92002588) 10) Desulfurization of Flue Gas by the Confined Zone Dispersion Process. Final Report, October 1989 (DE90005529) 11) Environmental Monitoring Plan, LIFAC Sorbent Injection Desulfurization Demonstration Project Note that report number 8 still has the NTIS cover and back page. Please don’t scan either of these pages. All of these reports (with the exception of 11) are listed on the Compendium with the NTIS number referenced. If you have any trouble locating where to put them in the Bibliography, let me know. Thanks, Mark TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 2.0 3.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................. INTRODUCTIONAND BACKGROUND.................................... 2.1 Requirement for a Report to Congress ...................... 2.2 Evaluation and Selection Process .......................... ...................................... 2.2.1 PON Objective 2.2.2 Qualification Review ............................... ............................. 2.2.3 Preliminary Evaluation . .......................... 2.2.4 Comprehensive Evaluation ............................. 2.2.5 Program Policy Factors ............................... Other Considerations 2.2.6 2.2.7 National Environmental Policy .............................. Act (NEPA) Compliance 2.2.8 Selection .......................................... TECHNICAL FEATURES ............................................. ....................................... 3.1 Project Description 3.1.1 Project Summary .................................... 3.1.2 Project Sponsorship and Cost ....................... 3.2 Pulse Combustion in an Application for Steam Gasification of Coal ............................ ................. 3.2.1 Overview of Technology Development ................................ 3.2.2 Process Description 3.2.3 Application of Technology in _ ................................... Proposed Project ........................... 3.3 General Features of the Project 3.3.1 Evaluation of Developmental Risk ................... 3.3.1.1 Similarity of the Project to Other .......... Demonstration/Commercial Efforts ...................... 3.3.1.2 Technical Feasibility ..................... 3.3.1.3 Resource Availability 3.3.2 Relationship Between Project Size and ............. Projected Scale of Commercial Facility 3.3.3 Role of the Project in Achieving Commercial ...................... Feasibility of the Technology 3.3.3.1 Applicability of the Data to be ................................. Generated 1 3 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 7 7 7 8 8 11 11 11 11 17 18 20 20 21 24 24 25 25 25 TABLE OF CONTENTS 4.0 5.0 6.0 Identification of Features that Increase the Potential for Commercialization ....... 3.3.3.3 Comparative Merits of the Project and Projection of Future Commercial Economics and Market Acceptability ........ ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS ................................... PROJECTMANAGEMENT............................................. 5.1 Overview of Management Organization ...................... 5.2 Identification of Respective Roles and Responsibilities ......................................... 5.3 Project Implementation and Control Procedures ............ 5.4 Key Agreements Impacting Data Rights, Patent Waivers, and Information Reporting ....................... 5.5 Procedures for Commercialization of the Technology ....... PROJECTCOST AND EVENT SCHEDULING .............................. 6.1 Project Baseline Costs ................................... 6.2 Milestone Schedule ....................................... 6.3 Repayment Plan ........................................... 3.3.3.2 26 26 28 30 30 30 32 35 35 37 37 38 38 1.0 Public EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Law No. 101-121 provided (CCT) projects retrofitting, Notice 1991. to $600 million demonstrate existing to conduct technologies facilities. cost-shared that are Clean Coal capable of end, a energyThese in the to Technology replacing, January efficient technologies emissions minimize and/or manner. or repowering Toward that innovative, in the 1990s. reductions facilities Program Opportunity (PON) was issued by the Department proposals of being nitrogen to demonstrate significant commercialized oxides of Energy (DOE) in This PON solicited capable technologies of sulfur environmental (2) providing were to be capable of (1) achieving dioxide for and/or impacts, future from existing and interstate such as transboundary pollution, acceptable energy needs in an environmentally In response to the PON, 33 proposals evaluation, facilities also facility. One of the nine projects entitled selected nine projects control and "repowering" generating were selected technologies advanced pollution increase were received for award. that that by DOE in May 1991. These projects involved After both but of the can be "retrofitted" the operating to existing life technologies plant capacity not only reduce air pollution and extend for funding is a project will provide proposed by ThermoChem. Inc. demonstration "Demonstration of Pulse Combustion in an Application a commercial Inc. of coal using International, for Steam Gasification of Coal" (PCASGC). This project of the Manufacturing to provide and Technology Conversion heat of reaction. (MTCI) process for producing pulse combustion medium-Btu gas by steam gasification the endothermic involves The PCASGC demonstration ton/day indirect occurring the indirect product dry basis) heating project the construction unit. for the required of a 428 ton/day The gasifier steam-coal bed. will (300 use fluidized to provide bed, coal gasification the energy The heat will be generated reaction in the gasifier. heating will be added to the gasifier by means of of the bundles of heat exchanger tubes submerged in the fluidized by pulse combustion gas, with the heat exchanger tubes acting 1 The hot gas for of a portion as the resonance tubes for the pulse combustor. Product Pulse combustion reducing increases heat transfer rate by a factor in the gasifier. of 3 to 5, thus greatly gas, consisting carbon dioxide the heat transfer area required predominantly of hydrogen (Hz), carbon monoxide (CO), to the (CO,), and methane (CH,), is cooled and scrubbed to remove ammonia The cleaned product gas which is not sent as fuel power. and not receiving plant will any DOE costbe constructed will be byfeed be used to produce electric project and hydrogen-sulfide. pulse combustor will Although adjacent exported product not part to the of the demonstration MTCI gasifier. K-Fuel- share funds, a subbituminous coal upgrading By-product plant, plant will (KAFuel.) steam from the -gasifier for use by'the and high-temperature, provide high-pressure water from the K-Fuel. process steam and boiler water for the gasifier. The PCASGCDemonstration Caballo Rojo Mine, located Rojo Mine will This.demonstration provide will project will be constructed Wyoming. at Caballo Rojo. Inc.'s south of Gillette, Coal from the Caballo the feed coal to the gasifier. be conducted over.48 months. construction, is $37.333,474. start-up. Project activities include design and engineering, The total project cost and operations. is $18,666,737. The coto I DOEIs share funder is ThermoChem, whose share is $18.666.737. Operations are scheduled begin in 1994, and the project is scheduled for completion in 1996. 2 2.0 INTRODUCTIONAND BACKGROUND 2.1 Reouirement for a Reoort to Conaress funds for Law the fourth "An clean Act coal On October demonstration 23. 1989, Congress made available program (CCT-IV) in Public 101-121. Making for the "Act"). and of Appropriations -for the Department of the Interior Fiscal Year Ending September 30. 1990. and for Among other things, operation future this Act appropriates of such 'I... . ..." "a general of cost-shared, existing effect, clean coal projects facilities requiring and Related Agencies Other Purposes" (the funds for the design, to demonstrate technologies request construction, the feasibility commercial applications capable of retrofitting Law 101-512 for CCT-IV by projects request .for for or repowering was signed into On November 5, 1990, Public for proposals of make selections no later than February 1, 1991. and to negotiations no later than eight months after proposals." Public Law 101-121 appropriates a total the date of the general of $600 million for executing CCT-IV. Of this total. $7.2 million are required to be reprogrammed for the Small Business Innovative Research Program (SBIR). and 625.0millfon are designated for Program Direction program. Funds for costs incurred by DOE in implementing for the CCT-IV The remaining $567.8 million was available award under the PON. which directs The purpose of this the Department project selected report is to comply with Public a full and comprehensive Law 101-512, report to prepare to Congress on each for award under the CCT-IV program. DOE issued a draft and took into received deadline. PON for public comment on November 20. 1990. receiving The final PON was issued on January on the draft comments received a total 15, 1991, PON. DOE of 19 responses from the public. consideration 33 proposals the public in response to the CCT-IV solicitation by the May 17, 1991, 3 2.2.1 As stated obtain that demonstrate PON Obiective 1.2, the objective cost-shared of the CCT-IV solicitation Clean Coal economically in the 1990s. or replacing for Technology competitive existing was to to must while the an in in PON Section innovative, "proposals to conduct projects technologies energy efficient, repowering (2) manner." Review providing are capable of being commercialized significant of nitrogen reductions and/or These technologies facilities dioxide energy and/or needs be capable of (1) retrofitting, achieving oxides in the emissions of sulfur future environmentally 2.2.2 acceptable Qualification The PON established be considered pass Qualification." seven Qualification The Qualification Criteria Criteria project and provided that. "in order to in the Preliminary Evaluation Phase, a proposal must successfully were as follows: or facility must be located in (4 (b) (cl The proposed demonstration the United States. The proposed demonstration with coal(s) project must be designed for and operated in the United a cost-share at least States. of at least 50% of from mines located The proposer total three project must agree to provide project phases. costs, allowable with 50% in each of the (4 (e) (f) The proposer must have access to, and use of..the site(s) for the duration proposed site of the project. and any proposed alternate The proposed project fulfilling The proposer Plan" its team must be identified in the project. selected, 7.7. it and firmly committed to proposed role agrees that, with if will submit a "Repayment consistent PON Section 4 (g) The proposal proposing organization entirety. 2.2.3 Preliminarv that must be signed by a responsible to of the Cooperative official of bind the the organization, authorized contractually to the performance Agreement in its Evaluation Evaluation would be performed on all The PON provided a Preliminary proposals that successfully passed the Qualification Review. In order to be considered in the Comprehensive Evaluation phase, a proposal must b,e consistent with the stated finance, Evaluation objectives of the PONand must contain cost, sufficient information on management. technical, described 2.2.4 The Technical Demonstration likelihood existing and other areas to permit the Comprehensive to be performed. in the solicitation Evaluation Comprehensive Criteria Factors Evaluation Project were divided intotwomajor categories: feasibility (1) the and were from the the were used to assess the technical and (2) the Commercialization meet future and the energy cost of the proposed technology as to use of coal. of success of the project, facilities, as well acceptable Factors through of used to assess the potential environmentally to reduce emissions needs effectiveness proposed technology The Cost and Finance performance potential in comparison Evaluation to existing criteria technologies. the business were used to determine and commitment of the proposer. the Cost Estimate proposed would cost. be of minimal project would be evaluated to determine the Proposers were advised that this to the selection..," selection. and that a Proposers were after The PDN provided reasonableness determination detailed cautioned provide Sharing cost that of that the ' . ..will estimate if importance be requested the total than the amount specified more funding Plan. cost estimated after selection is greater to in the proposal, DOE would be under no obligation in the proposer's original Cost than had been requested 5 2.2.5 Proaram Policv that Official Factors the following to select program policy factors could be used would best The PONadvised proposers by the Source Selection serve program objectives: a range of projects that (4 0.‘) The desirability a diversity of selecting projects that collectively represent of methods, technical approaches, projects and applications. solicitation transport in emissions that of of The desirability contribute pollutants sulfur of selecting in this to near-ten by producing and/or reductions an aggregate nitrogen in transboundary net reduction dioxide oxides. projects that collectively conditions. that by the utilize a a (cl The desirability diversity of selecting broad range of U.S. coals and are in locations and climatic which represent of EHSS. regulatory, (4 The desirability achieve pollution a balance and of selecting,projects between (1) reducing (2) providing for in this ~solicitation emissions future energy needs fuels. strategic sites, total which and transboundary environmentally acceptable use of coal or coal-based projects that for form provide (4 The desirability energy security provide multiple considerably requirements. of selecting benefits fuel dependent and are for remote. resource on one import-dependent options fuel for or that energy regions The word "collectively." as used in the foregoing program policy factors, was defined to include projects selected in this solicitation and prior clean coal solicitations, as well as other ongoing demonstrations in the United States. , 2.2.6 The PDN stated to projects treat technologies. application projects value. geographic of received Other Considerations that, in making selections, in states DOEwould consider bodies giving preference projects if, factors, or after two located This for which the rate-making the same as pollution could criteria of those states the Clean Coal Technologies consideration the evaluation identical control breaker policy be used as a tie and the program if, evaluation scores and remained essentially by so doing. selected Policv would be significantly Act (NEPA) Comoliance equal in altered. This consideration distribution 2.2.7 National evaluation would not be applied the regional of the projects Environmental As part Policy of the and selection for process, with the Clean Coal Technology the National Quality Environmental NEPA regulations were This in Program developed (40 CFR 1500-1508). December 15, 1987). published procedure Final in the included a procedure compliance Act of 1969 (NEPA). the Council DOE final Federal on Environmental replacing 24. and the DOE guidelines Register for compliance with NEPA (52 FR 47662, the DOEguidelines of a publicly (DOE/EIS-0146). publicly 1992 (57 FR 15122). issued available NEPA regulations on April Impact DOEuse. the publication Environmental and consideration Statement of confidential available Programmatic November 1989. and the preparation environmental site-specific under NEPA. 2.2.8 After considering Selection the evaluation reviews for internal preselection project project-specific as appropriate DOEalso prepares demonstration documents for each selected criteria, the program policy factors, and the NEPA strategy as stated in the PON, the Source Selection Official selected nine projects as best furthering the objectives of the CCT-IV PON. These selections were announced on September 12, 1991, during a press conference. 3.0 TECHNICAL FEATURES 3.1 Project Descriotion demonstrate the production of medium-Btu fuel gas by the MTCI ThermoChem will Feed to the gasifier will be Powder River PCASGCprocess. coal from the Caballo Rojo Mine, which has almost 450 million reserves. The,site Basin subbituminous tons of recoverable for the demonstration is the Caballo Rojo Mine near Gillette, plant Wyoming, as shown in Figure 1. The product fuel gas from the gasification will be utilized to generate electric or in anon-site Power & Light (K-Fuel.) power, either gas turbine (WPL), using facility as a supplemental private funding. will fuel in a nearby power plant subsidiary product system constructed by Enserv, a The bybe consumed by adjacent of Wisconsin steam produced from the waste heat of the gasifier coal upgrading which will a subbituminous be located to the gasifier. The K-Fuel. plant will be constructed and operated by Enserv strictly with private funding; no DOE cost-share funds will be used. Locating the water the K-Fuel. process plant next to the MTCI gasifier feed enhances the environmental project, water because water from for process steam a sources. Since this performance K-Fuel. is generation, significant by flashing the fluidized gasifier, process. and economics of the PCASGC demonstration can be used as boiler to the gasifier of the gasifier's at ,elevated recovered thus eliminating the need for water from other delivered portion this temperature from this to and pressure, can be provided process steam requirement In addition providing facility water. Any hydrocarbons water are sent to steam to will the produce upgrading Figure 2 is with bed to be gasified. high-pressure the heat recovery system within Thus. the gasifier and K-Fuel. the gasification processes integrate enough export steam to supply the needs of the K-Fuel. well. project a block diagram other facilities. showing how the PCASGCdemonstration interfaces 8 Caballo Cabello Gillette, Rojo Mine * Rojo .Incorporated WY / WYOMING FIGURE 1. PCASGC DEMONSTRATION PROJECT LOCATION. 9 .~. E a W 5 f i m 00 W C r- r 5 3 E - .2°C 02 L: ! 5: Y a,0 10 3.1.1 Project Proposer: Project Location: Title: Project Summary Demonstration of Pulse Combustion in Application for Steam Gasification of Coal ThenaoChem. Inc. Cabal10 Rojo Mine Gillette, Wyoming Campbell County an Technology: Application: Type of Coal Used: Product: Project Project Project Size: Start Date: End Date: 3.1.2 Project Estimated Estimated Distribution: Sponsor: Project Cost Cost: Project Indirectly Production steam heated coal gasification as the heat source of medium-Btu fuel process using pulse combustion gas and by-product coal Powder River Low-sulfur. 428 ton/day August 1996 Sponsorshio Basin subbituminous medium-Btu fuel (300 ton/day gas on a dry basis) September 1992 and Cost ThermoChem, Inc. $37,333,474 Participant Share I%) 50 DOE gwLp3.l 50 3.2 Pulse Combustion in an Aoolication for Steam Gasification 3.2.1 of Coal Develoament this demonstration pulse The development of project: Overview of Technoloov are incorporated into Two technologies combustion and indirectly heated steam gasification of coal. these technologies and their integration is described below. 11 Pulse include transfer combustion involves combustion-induced flow oscillations produced heat intentionally rates by the design of the equipment. in the resonance tubes. can be divided naturally, device, into The benefits of pulse combustion enhanced heat release rates in the combustion chamber and increased Pulse combustors pulsations maintain belongs referred further occur the to into which require two general classes: those in which the and those due to combustion-induced instability, an external pulse combustion such as a spark plug or a flapper valve, to The combustor used in this project process. ,This class Schmidt, of combustors, combustors, and Rijke which can be can be divided of the to the first three of these classes. types, Helmholtz, as self-induced or resonating-pulse tube type combustors, depending upon the configuration oscillations. of the combustor and the characteristics The pulse combustor type employed by the MTCI and ThermoChem equipment design is the Helmholtz consists (or because it resonance configuration tube). This (see Figure air inlet combustor (flapper 3). The basic Helmholtz is configuration reliable, suitable for erode of an aerodynamic valve, a combustion chamber, and a tailpipe inherently It is especially configuration valves). fuels, has no moving parts the combustion valve surfaces. The efficiency diffuses of combustion particles concentration as the burning oscillatory of coal and other solid since these fuels can quickly of a coal-burning (water and furnace depends upon the rate at which 'oxygen a boundary layer important and of products and oxygen of the motion as the coal the builds more up around the particle to the coal surface. During combustion. barrier. vapor and carbon oxides) become smaller and acts as an oxygen diffusion burn T~his is particularly ash-laden, In a Helmholtz relative in the surrounding coal particles increases velocity gas decreases. pulse combustor, flow down the resonance tube. and causes vigorous the amplitude oscillatory between the burning particle and the surrounding gas. This causes the diffusion barrier around the burning particle to be swept away, thus permitting access of oxygen to the particle release rate. and resulting in high carbon burnout and a high heat 12 0” ZW =ei 3 OtVW is h az In 1982, DOE's Pittsburgh the development commercial, The initial the development and industrial Energy Technology Center (PETC) began actively coal-fired market sectors. Under a DOEcontract, program was conducted pursuing andtesting,of combustion systems for the residential. MTCI initiated in three phases. of pulse combustion. of a new combustor, based on the principle pulse combustor development Phase I included a review of the prior art on pulse combustion and the This work indicated potentially development of pulse combustor design concepts. favorable fired coal economics for replacement combustors. should of oiltype and gas-fired indicated rather rate) that equipment with pulse combustors tube) coalfor and pulse Work in Phase II be Helmholtz air inlet Btu/hr valves firing applications (chamber and resonance and testing burning should employ aerodynamic Phase III involved valves. pulse combustor (1 million (CWM). The Phase III at heat release burners. rates than the more common flapper of a laboratory-scale a coal-water mixture the fabrication results up,to showed that coal can be burned in a pulse combustor 10 times higher than those achieved in conventional Based on the success of the initial initiated the development pulse combustor development pulse coal combustor Btu/hr) (100,000 for program, for MTCI of a slagging industrial residential industrial retrofit applications and a smaller unit applications, both under DOE sponsorship. Under the program for retrofit applications, a slagging tandem pulse coal combustor system with dry coal fuel was developed and optimized at the laboratory scale (2 million Btu/hr). This unit was subsequently tested million scaled up to a 3.5 to 5 million Btu/hr firing rate and extensively with CWM. Recently, the design and construction of a 15 Btu/hr system was completed. In 1989, MTCI was awarded a DOE contract operate, Btu/hr and demonstrate a completely integrated and automated 5 system for market evaluation. is providing heat for the steam to fabricate, to 6 million One application gasification oxygen into the process. for the use of pulse combustion of coal. Most commercial processes for coal gasification introduce the gasifier and burn part of the coal to provide the heat needed by The attractiveness of the in-situ heat transfer aspect of these partial-oxidation gasification processes has been their relative simplicity compared to the complexity and high cost of indirectly heated systems. Some 14 indirectly other heated systems require large heat transfer two vessels and complex solids circulation; coefficients. heat on the require areas due to poor heat transfer The low heat transfer fluidized-bed reactors flue rate of conventional fire tubes used to indirectly is a result of the low heat transfer coefficient tube; the heat transfer is reasonably coefficient coefficient high. material gas side of the fire between the fire resulting tube and the fluidized-bed in an increase In conventional in overall In a pulse combustor, significantly, of 3 to 5. all the heat the flue gas side heat transfer is increased heat transfer rate by a factor combustor and fire tube arrangements. essentially the highest temperature is at is released in the combustion chamber. Therefore, the inlet to the fire tubes. The temperature of the flue gas monotonically decreases combustion along the length In pulse tubes) duty, of the tube, as heat is transferred combustion. however, for not all persists flue a significant from the flue length gas to the reactor. the fuel environment. burns in the down the Thus. for chamber, and combustion resonance tubes (fire the same heat transfer in an oscillating the inlet flow field gas temperature to the resonance tubes is lower than in conventional fire tube 'systems. However, the continued heat release from burning fuel in the resonance tubes maintains a higher bulk flue gas temperature than in the conventional in an appreciably case. Thus. the use of a Helmholtz heat transfer area requirement. rate is the ability of the and the in very in the High in an pulse coal combustor results coefficient. An important reactor a high heat flux, benefit enhanced convective and a reduced surface of an enhanced heat transfer to support highly carbon-steam reaction. high rates of devolatilization formation of char particles rates viable reactor heat transfer economically Several are: endothermic reactions, such as devolatilization Rapid heat transfer in the fluidized bed results and pyrolysis. that are extremely to support with a reasonable This, in turn, results reactions porous with high reactivity. such endothermic throughput. are essential carbon consuming reactions occur in the gasifier. the two most important 15 c + H,O = CO + H, c + co, = 2co A third reaction of importance is the water-gas-shift reaction: CO + H,O = CO, + H, Generally, the steam-carbon gas. pulse-enhanced, indirect, steam gasification technology during was to an reaction controls the rate at which carbon is consumed (gasified), of the product and the water-gas-shift reaction determines the composition MTCI's proprietary first investigated under Phase I and Phase II DOE/SBIR grants 1984-1986. Under Phase II of this DOE/SBIR grant. testing of the gasifier was limited biomass feedstocks. In early 1987, Weyerhaeuser Paper Company expressed interest Preliminary gasifier further liquor, California in testing tests the MTCI gasifier were conducted technology funding using black liquor verified the feedstocks. which feasibility of the MTCI In order to including black to process black liquor develop this MTCI secured feedstocks'safely from DOE, the and effectively. Weyerhaeuser for biomass waste gasification, Energy Technologies included technology, Company, and the and verification of ofgasifier in early the for confined technology Energy Commission's of these projects liquor Advancement Program (ETAP). of a broad spectrum were completed The objectives process development testing of the MTCI black biomass feedstocks scaleup recovery under varying process conditions. and verification to feed rates of 100-200 lb/hr. These projects 1989 and yielded extremely successful commercialization potential of the indirectly biomass and waste gasification. A series 1030°F to feedstock. of process Gasifier characterization performance included tests, using results which heated gasifier covering the temperature black during range of liquor the test 1160°F. was conducted a 67% solids-containing test 16 run. met or exceeded expectations program which also a 40-hour ThetmoChem, MTCI, 75 ton/day mill. tubes, black supported ESI, liquor and Weyerhaeuser gasifier by a DOE cooperative are fabricating and installing a for Weyerhaeuser's exchanger module. project: New Bern, except for North Carolina, the number of of the number in part agreement. however, The New Bern project scaleup uses the same pulse combustor/heat of tubes is a critical Over the indirectly feedstock. element being used in the demonstration in the demonstration. for the biomass last two years. MTCI has been testing various feedstocks heated gasification reactor. In addition to the early MTCI has now tested a wide variety of materials, including wastewater refuse derived fuel (RDF), lignite. subbituminous coal, and mild sludge, gasification char. All these tests were conducted using the gasification system located rated at MTCI's Santa Fe Springs, at a nominal low-rank coal 40 lb/hr for other California, laboratory. of 15-30 lb/hr The gasifier bed. The gasifier (as received) is and the gas throughput feedstocks. combustor. approximately heat exchanger resonance fuel. The discussion is heated by means of using natural tubes immersed in the fluidized These tubes comprise component of the pulse which is fired above shows that gasifier both the pulse combustor and the indirectly heated fluidized-bed for demonstration. 3.2.2 This project an innovative, will have undergone extensive development and are ready Process Descriotion demonstratetheMTC1 fluidized-bed clean, gasifier, fuel which incorporates steam gasification gas without the need the by the MTCI multiple indirect-heating The indirect process forthethennochemical medium-8tu heat transfer is provided reactor. of coal to produce a hydrogen-rich, for an oxygen plant. heat exchanger resonance tube pulse combustortechnology with the resonance tubes comprising immersed in the fluidized-bed The high heat transfer coefficient (3 to 5 times greater than for indirectly heated gasifiers not using pulse combustion) exhibited by the MTCI multiple resonance tube pulse combustor minimizes the required heat transfer surface. 17 A simplified Appropriately fluidized bundles, hot flue bed. flow diagram of the MTCI' gasifier provides is shown in Figure 4. sized coal and steam are fed to the fluidized-bed from waste heat recovery, Immersed in the fluidized gas from the gasifier through flue the the endothermic gas flows bed are a series gasifier. Steam, which is supplied the fluidization gas for the Part of the and the the leaving heat the of heat exchange tube which serve as resonance tubes for the pulse combustors. gas passing to sustain the heat exchange bundles reactions. provides After cleaned product necessary generated, is burned in the pulse combustors. gasification heat exchangers, to a waste heat boiler. where steam is and then to a stack. gas from the gasifier goes first to a heat exchanger. where it The hot product superheats the gasifier process steam. It then passes through a cyclone for char removal and a waste heat boiler for steam generation. The cooled gas is then scrubbed SulFerox elemental with water process sulfur in a venturi scrubber to remove ammonia. Company. This Finally, process the gas produces as a to power goes to a desulfuri.zer for removal of hydrogen sulfide. by Dow Chemical from hydrogen sulfide. of the product It is planned to use the is discharged developed directly The sulfur cake containing production 10% to 15% moisture. The remainder uses. Part of the clean gas is sent as fuel gas is sent to electric the pulse combustor. or other 3.2.3 ThermoChem will demonstrate Inc.'s with producing Caballo recoverable Aoolication construct of Technoloqv a 300 ton/day in ProDosed Project coal gasification be located This is at Caballo a surface the project will unit to (dry basis) will Wyoming. the PCASGCprocess. 12-14millionton/yr reserves The gasifier ofsubbituminous Rojo, mine, will be Rojo Mine near Gillette, Wyodak (Powder River Basin) coal, Feed coal for coal handling facilities of 448,600,OOO tons. come from the mine, and some of the existing used to transport coal to the project site. Enserv will construct a coal upgrading (K-Fuel.) plant at the same site, but using private funds with no DOE cost share. The steam requirements of the K-fuel plant will be supplied by by-product steam from the gasifier, and high18 4.Y 3 ‘-L. ;c,I-+~ -D ! 0 = 1 m 50 .g L CT ;;=I 0.N 25 ni r_, I /--. )A-7 temperature. gasifier. high-pressure Also, coal fines process water from, the K-Fuel. from the K-Fuel. plant will unit be flashed will be fed to supply the boiler to the gasifier. The net electricity product feed water (BFW) and some of the process steam needs of the coal preparation gas from will build the gasifier will either with be burned private to produce gas. at an existing power station, a gas turbine of the Project or Enserv, generator funds and no DOE cost share, 3.3 to burn the product General 3.3.1 Features Evaluation of Develoomental Risk project recovery. since pulse gasifier tested, is a factor and installed of 6 at Although greater the throughput than the unit for the demonstration now being for black duties require liquor fabricated, Weyerhaeuser's of the pulse fabricated project. New Bern mill combustors the size and heat load combustors have been no scaleup. and tested at higher than will be used in the demonstration The resonance tubes that from 72 tubes scaled also act as the heat exchanger will The heater bundles require a scaleup been They have to 252 tubes per bundle. have already up from 1 to 2, 2 to 8, 2 to 12. 8 to 61, and 8 to 72 tubes. been fabricated and tested in these sizes for many gasification applications. Pulse tubes have also been scaled up from 3/8-inch to 1 5/8-inch inside diameter; an increase factor by a factor of almost 20 in flow area. extremely Pulse combustor firing Btu/hr, sufficient that rates scaleup, to ensure have been scaled of 1,500. development, up and tested ThermoChem feels level from 10,000 to 15.000.000 confident experience an overall testing. and hardware fabrication is available success at the operational of 300 ton/day. Although heat exchanger (resonance) tube fouling is a potential problem, this has Therefore, fouling is not not been a problem in the units tested to date. anticipated to be a problem in the demonstration plant. 20 3.3.1.1 Similaritv of the Project to Othw Efforts in commercial operation or in Demonstration/Commercial A number of coal gasification processes are either These processes are generally divided into three major the development stage. classes: fixed-bed processes, fluidized-bed processes. and entrained-flow processes. each type. Fixed-bed The Lurgi grate processes process have been used extensively uses a stirred, the coal. fixed-bed in coal gasification. units gasifier equipped with The Lurgi a rotating with The following discussion is limited to representative examples of process is in commercial to support use, and a large number of Lurgi Gasification of coal have been built. by reaction takes place steam and oxygen~ under high pressure, and coals of all In addition to the synthesis gas product..tars and light products. The Mineraloeltechnik preparation, treatment. discharging million ft'/min Lurgi process Gmbtl. Frankfurt, ranks can be gasified. oil are produced as'by- gasification, The reactor ash. for earlier was developed by the Lurgi Kohle and Germany. Major process steps are coal gas purification, by-product recovery, and liquor is provided with lock-hoppers for feeding coal and capacity per unit ft'/min. is typical of entrained-flow slurry. gas without The any has increased from 0.3 units to 3.5 million Inc., The gas production The Texaco process, gasifiers. liquid process Texaco process gasifies by-product. gasification, developed by Texaco, Coal is fed to the gasifier coals of all in the form of a coal-water slurry ranks and produces synthesis Major process steps are coal preparation, at commercial scale. coal gasification preparation, The Texaco water quench, gas purification, and waste disposal. has been demonstrated process is The Winkler a fluidized-bed process that has achieved commercial acceptance. All types of coal can be gasified using the Winkler process, but caking coals require pretreatment. Crushed coal (3/8" x 0) is fed into the fluidized bed where carbon reacts with steam and oxygen to produce a gas containing hydrogen. carbon monoxide. carbon dioxide, and methane. A gas with a heating value of 275 Btu/SCF can be produced if the gasifier is 21 oxygen blown. a temperature essentially The Winkle gasifier of no tars or hydrocarbons. operates at near atmospheric upon the feedstock. pressure It and at produces 1500°F to 1850°F depending The KRWprocess is typical dried reactor air coal and limestone through vessel of pressurized are introduced the fluidized-bed into gasifiers. Crushed and fluidized bed by injecting nozzles. water quench. The KRWprocess the pressurized, The bed is fluidized zone through a lock hopper system. combustion or oxygen and steam into special Process steps include coal and limestone preparation, gasification, calcium sulfite oxidation. gas purification, and waste disposal. is being demonstrated Indirectly gasifiers heated for by a CCT-IV project. have a major applications, air separation advantage over gasifiers in order partial-oxidation gasifiers For a typical Most gas they air-blown gas. industrial-scale operation, simple utility. since partial-oxidation is usually gas. uneconomic. Although the fuel must be oxygen-blown industrial-scale industrial systems produce gasifiers requiring is gasifiers are relatively of limited to produce a medium-Btu fuel are air blown and produce a low-8tu and reliable Several ~.indirectly gas producers, heated. fluidized-bed Ash were under development in the 1970s to produce a medium-Btu gas without an oxygen plant. process. These systems, steam-carbon the gasifier. circulation such as Battelle's process. reaction Agglomerating Conoco's CO,-Acceptor and the COGASprocess, a hot solids two vessels cost of the heat, the and cost, Coal Gasification supply heat for the endothermic stream from a combustor and a fairly into complex hot solids by circulating These processes require system, and the capital plants is fairly.high. Also, since process char is burned to provide flue gas may have to be desulfurized. Because of their complexity these systems have not yet achieved commercialization. The MTCI Pulse Coal Gasification process. which is designed mainly low-rank coals. uses an alternative approach to heat a fluidized-bed heat transfer tubes immersed in the fluidized bed. simplifies the process configuration, since it requires and no complex solids circulation such as that other gasifiers, to process reactor-greatly vessel. This approach only one reactor system is involved. However, as employed in developed by the University of Missouri for 22 gasification of reactive biomass feedstocks. the heat transfer coefficient inside the tubes is so low that a very large surface area is required. The use of pulse combustion coefficient, relatively in the MTCI process significantly enhances the heat transfer which enables high temperatures. pressurized generation the technology to be applied to systems requiring such as coal gasification. have merit for synthesis gas or combined- Oxygen-blown, cycle power gasifiers at large scale: but, for smaller applications not requiring high-pressure gas, the cost of an oxygen plant and the complexity of feeding solid fuel into a pressure vessel are major deterrents to industrial acceptance. systems also have a disadvantage product, gasifiers since by-product typically entrained-flow in any application hydrocarbon liquids hydrocarbons in which fuel are produced. areproduced; liquids unless a sufficiently The fixed-bed gas is the desired In high-temperature, and fluidized-bed operated systems, no liquid do not produce hydrocarbon (around 12OO'F). at mild gasification temperatures A major drawback of entrained-flow the gasifier. not stopped the gasifier, reliable disruption entrained with combustion developed. required. slurry immediately, possibly systems is the very low carbon inventory even temporarily, with and oxidant in If coal feed is disrupted, oxygen can react resulting flow is hydrogen and carbon monoxide in Due to the use of a fairly is not prone to this beds are inherently carbon inventory interrupted. problem; safer than to react major damage duetothe in an explosion. feed system, the Texaco gasifier gasifiers however, other entrained-flow of coal feed. in the beds, because there event gasifier have experienced Fixed beds and fluidized is always a sufficient coal feed is risk. that oxygen The MTCI pulse processes have been gas is (PCG) does not have this Thus, although many coal because no oxygen is supplied medium-Btu to the gasifier. gasification the MTCI PCG has advantages when low-pressure, 23 3.3.1.2 The project technology; integrated section liquor size Technical Feasibilitv on the basis of the ~maturity of the has been established 15 million Btu/hr pulse combustors have already been fabricated, into fire-tube boilers, and tested successfully. The major facet of that requires the technology than four scaleup is the number of tubes in the resonance Although the required number of tubes is less of the pulse combustor. times the number already gasifier this risk scaleup liquor. fabricated and field tested for the black Also, to be installed is a critical Gasifier is involved at a Weyerhaeuser mill factor throughput in New Bern, recovery North Carolina, a greater gasification of 10. in the demonstration. will technical of black in the gasification of coal than in the be scaled up by a factor There do not appear to be any critical addressed mitigated combustor, is expected start-up in the design by the fact and testing that design issues that of the 30 ton/day is limited unit. have not already Technical risk to been is in It the new technology plant the gasifier/pulse items available prototype. during with the balance of plant The demonstration it will,~with be replicated 3.3.1.3 that equipment being standard is a commercial-scale modifications market sale. the marketplace. period, whatever are required for the first Resource Availability for this project over the 4bmonth dedicated demonstration the personnel Adequate resources period. necessary are available in Section cost. this As discussed to conduct 6.'1, ThermoChem has committed ThermoChem has also program. funds adequate to cover the proposed project demonstration Sufficient space is available at the Caballo Rojo Mine site for installation of the equipment required for the demonstration. Arrangements have been made to provide project the necessary needs. quantity and quality of coal from the Caballo Rojo Mine. to meet Adequate utilities (water and electric power) are available at the site 24 3.3.2 Relationshio and Projected Between Project Size Scale of Commercial Facility a plant rated at 300 ton/day range, to involve (dry basis). rather The demonstrationproject This plant than utility, 3.3.3 size is well version market for this involves within the commercial facility since the major of the technology is likely industrial. applications. Role of the Project Feasibilitv in Achievinq Commercial of the Technoloqv is crucial to achieving commercialization of the The demonstration project technology, as it will demonstrate, at full commercial scale, the integrated operation of the pulse combustor and the indirectly heated coal gasifier. This project providing will confirm plant that operability, is vital Aoolicabilitv will will test all will product quality, and process effort. costs, information to the commercialization 3.3.3.1 The demonstration scale, and will collection, performance. applicable fired scale project of the Data to be Generated aspects of the technology for electric be performed during thermal will Although be directly the data will at commercial Data phase to the so that and the product analysis, include be burned reliability, power production. the operations applicable efficiencies, and reporting on-stream gas-fired data will and equipment not be directly The data that will to coal-fired be generated design of other the performance of facilities. combustors, there are enough design similarities pulse combustors. operation, efforts be useful in providing guidance in the scaleup of coalFurthermore, demonstration of pulse combustion at this regardless of all of fuel, will greatly facilitate the pulse combustors. commercialization 25 3.3.3.2 Identification the Potential of Features that Increase for Commercialization furnaces it to reduce SO, emissions. is combusted. One The CAAA require option gasifiers, requiring large efficient technology applications. gasifiers. essentially product heat for existing coal-burning this accomplishing whether either is to produce a clean gaseous fuel gas before in order fluid-bed or under development, by gasifying of coal and desulfurizing the product commercial solids area Other available fuel gas, a have the disadvantage vessels, an oxygen plant in the to produce a medium-Btu two reaction gasifier. coal gasifier complex circulating transfer flow scheme involving or a very MTCI PCG costs, for the ~many Because the using air capital of that. choice unlike produces medium-Btu gas in a single-vessel pulse combustor/heat being demonstrated advantage Another no tars should and a highly exchangersystemthatminimizes be the process of the MTCI PCG is of. Also. fixed-bed very few hydrocarbons or oils steam is produced, heavier than methane are produced. a considerable well and there are amount of bywith processes to dispose so the MTCI PCG should integrate which use large amounts of steam. 3.3.3.3 Comparative and Proiection [conomics Merits of the Proiect Commercial of Future and Market Acceotability medium-Btu fuel gas by gasifying coal in an reactor. By-product steam will also be the process has advantages over competing make it economically advantageous in many This project will produce a clean, indirectly heated. fluidized-bed produced. processes applications. The MTCI pulse combustion technology As discussed that are above. to expected has a.wide range of potential applications, including utility steam and power generation. use of pulse combustion for steam gasification gas and by-product steam in conjunction with that will utilize the by-product steam. This project will demonstrate the of coal to produce medium-Btu fuel a low-rank coal upgrading process 26 Other provide' potential fuel applications gas for include producing applications. medium-Btu gasification fuel gas as a substitute for natural gas in industrial gas turbines As fuel cells The process the could also MTCI pulse in integrated combined cycle (IGCC) power generation. combustion application fuel gas. hydrogen rich In addition related mills results become commercial, for steam gasification of coal could be used to provide to these applications, there is a substantial alone. potential in a closely of pulp liquor, application in the pulp and paper industry in the United States of about 88 million produced practice ton/yr which has more than 350 pulp The processing black of by-product and 600 paper mills in the production the dark-colored liquid The current processes. produce steam and electricity gasifiers would significantly market for MTCI gasifiers Thus, because of its PCG technology industrial applications. when pulp is made by the sulfate and soda of using black liquor recovery boilers to Replacing these boilers with MTCI efficiency. The estimated annually. the MTCI for is inefficient. in this application improve the conversion alone is 28 units and high quality acceptance, simplicity achieve of operation ready product, particularly should market 27 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS procedure, cited analysis; in Section 2.2, contains (PEIS); three major The NEPA compliance elements: . project-specific environmental a Programmatic analysis. Environmental Impact Statement a preselection. site-specific in November 1989 environmental and a post-selection, PEIS to the public DOE issued the final derived from the Regional Emissions (DOE/EIS-0146). In the PEIS, results Database and Evaluation System (REDES) were used to estimate the environmental impacts compared conventional flue The expected with the to occur no-action in 2010 if each technology were to reach full commercialization and capture 100% of its applicable which alternative. through 2010 with market. These impacts were assumed continued use of using conventional Standards. review, focusing on coal technologies new plants gas desulfurization preselection, to meet New Source Performance project-specific environmental environmental issues pertinent to decision-making, was completed for internal DOE use. This review summarized the strengths and weaknesses of each proposal in compliance to the reasonably of required with the environmental possible, available permits. to the offeror, This analysis evaluation of practical criteria alternative mitigating for in the PON. It included, sites land processes and a list of the measures, extent a discussion was provided the consideration Source Selection Official in the selection of proposals. the Participant Volume specified will prepared (ThermoChem) will in the PON. This for the NEPA with the As the final element of the NEPA strategy, submit to DOE the Environmental Information detailed siteand project-specific by DOE. documents prepared information form the basis These documents, in compliance Council on Environmental Quality regulations for implementation of NEPA and the DOE regulations for NEPA compliance, must be approved before Federal funds can be provided In addition of the for detailed design, construction, outlined sufficient and operation activities. must prepare The purpose and site to the NEPArequirements to ensure that above, the Participant technology, project, and submit an Environmental EMP is Monitoring Plan (EMP) for the project. 28 environmental information Air pollutants data are collected for use in subsequent resulting project are gas in to provide commercial health, safety, and environmental of the technology. applications from burning expected the venturi to the medium-Btu be low. scrubber, gas produced about in matter this is of demonstration scrubbed particulates desulfurization SO,/million Gasifier permitted will site. stripped Most particulate and only from the 1 ton/yr is expected system. Btu. ash is classified landfill. to be emitted. and sulfur Most of the sulfur are expected is removed in the to be about 0.07 lb emissions as nonhazardous sulfur will waste and will be sold, be disposed of in a it By-product if possible; otherwise. be landfilled. from this Wastewater will water before be discharged determine to an evaporation pond at the Test work planned for Phase I will disposal. whether ammonia needs to be 29 5.0 PROJECTMANAGEMENT 5.1 Overview will of Management Oroanization be managed by a ThermoChem Project contact with DOE for matters Manager. regarding This individual The project will be the principal the administration The DOE Contracting of the Cooperative Officer Officer's Agreement between ThenaoChem and DOE. is responsible for all contract matters, and the DOE Contracting Technical Project Officer (TPO) is responsible for technical liaison of the project. of Resoective Roles and Resoonsibilities and monitoring 5.2 Identification DOE shall be responsible for monitoring all aspects of the project and granting or denying approvals required by the Cooperative Agreement. The DOE Contracting, Officer is DOE's authorized Agreement. Officer all which may: of the Cooperative which assist Agreement effort, recommend a will appoint matters a TPO who will and will be the authorized to issue representative for all matters related to the Cooperative The DOE Contracting representative "Technical for Advice" technical have the authority Suggest ' shifting of certain Work. redirection lines of work emphasis between work areas or tasks, of inquiry in accomplishing or suggest pursuit the Statement of Approve all technical reports, plans, by the and items of technical Participant to the information the required to be delivered Cooperative Agreement. DOE under The DOE TPO does not have the authority to issue technical advice which: 30 Constitutes Work. an assignment of additional work outside the Statement of In any manner causes an increase or the time required or decrease in the total of the Cooperative or specifications estimated Agreement. cost for performance conditions, Changes any of the terms, Agreement. Interferes conditions All technical with the of the Cooperative Participant's right to perform the terms and of the Cooperative advice shall Agreement. by the DOE TPO. be issued in writing Particioant The following from conceptual organizations will interact effectively to meet the intent of the PONand to assure timely and cost-effective implementation of the PCASGC project design to start-up and operation: ThermoChem. Inc. Manufacturing Enserv, RMT, Inc. Weyerhaeuser Paper Company ThermoChem will be primarily responsible for the for reporting all to and interfacing with Inc. and Technology Conversion International, Inc. (MTCI) DOE. ThermoChem will The overall necessarily project be limited project be responsible approach to, of phases of the project. will include, but not Participants the following: be responsible phases. to DOE and all project A single Participants manager will three project for all 31 ThennoChem will other be the primary liaison between the Government and all 5. Project pulse Organization. system. technical organizations. design during ,as shown in Figure and fabricate the MTCI will conduct support combustor/gasifier and provide the system startup the project. and shakedown testing, Enserv will demonstration demonstration RMT. together engineering obtain plant plant. with the necessary with other permits, facilities, handle the interfacing and operate of the the and maintain an A&E firm plant, serve to be selected, technical advisory will service. handle design and of of the balance of the plant, procurement and construction the demonstration Weyerhaeuser will evaluate 5.3 All and provide in a technical and review capacity and the technology for pulp and paper industry and Control Procedures applications. Proiect Imolementation work to be performed These phases are: under the Cooperative Agreement is divided into three phases. Phase I: Phase II: Phase III: As shown in Figure Design and Engineering Construction Operations (14 months) (24 months) project (10 months) 6, the total encompasses 48 months. Consistent reports with P.L. dealing aspects with 101-512. the DOE will technical, will be Two budget periods will obligate funds sufficient Throughout the course be established. to cover its of this project, share of the cost for each budget period. of the project management, cost. and environmental prepared by ThenaoChem and provided monitoring to DOE. 32 _’ I I : n 1 I 1 I j I ! ZGI i ’ g , ~-- I r- i =kz / 5 33 L 1. 34 5.4 y Ke A r ement Im act'n Information Reoortinq respect to patents are included, unlimited and data are: giving rights, the Government the right all technical data first to The key agreements with Standard produced Proprietary data provisions have delivered and use, with in the performance data, with certain of the Agreement. exclusions, may be required to be delivered to the Government. and non-proprietary the project Rights its if The Government~has obtained rights to proprietary data data sufficient to allow the Government to complete withdraws. and background data of ThermoChem and all to assure commercialization of of the the Participant in background patents are subcontractors included technology. ThermoChem will make such data, as is applicable interested and non-proprietary, and the public. available to the U.S. DOE, U.S. EPA, other 5.5 The Procedures agencies, for Commercialization strategy of the Technology is based however, on control of the ThermoChem connnercialization applications, manufacturing industrial of the pulse combustor equipment; ThennoChem will license for utility and large the balance of the plant. ThermoChem will retain the right to design. manufacture, and sell industrial and commercial coal-fired retrofit systems both in the U.S. and overseas. ThermoChem will also retain plants the right to manufacture gasifiers liquor for moderate size gasification etc. (up to 1000 ton/day) low-rank for black recovery, paper mill sludge gasification, coal steam reforming, sewage sludge gasification, 35 In addition to this that direct within utility and industrial K-Fuel. market for PCASGC, a potential such as K-Fuel.. of could achieve a 5% penetration market also exists Enserv believes in conjunction with coal upgrading processes, 20 years, the U.S. coal market. ThermoChem's strategy for penetrating this potential market is to grant to Enserv an exclusive license for the MTCI PCG used in conjunction by identifying warrant with beneficiation the utility technology. and industrial and obtaining Enserv plans to market aggressively coal consumers whose immediate commitments for long-term needs purchases. the use of K-Fuel. 36 6.0 PROJECTCOST AND EVENT SCHEDULING 6.1 Project estimated Baseline cost Costs for thi,s project is $37,333,474. The Participant's project are as follows: Percent % 50 50 Share The total share and the Government's share in the costs of this Dollar Share I$) Pre-Award Government Participant Phase Government Participant Phase II Government Participant Phase III Government Participant Total Project 18.666.737 18,666.737 50 50 5,771.475 5,771,475 :: 11.388.685 113388,685 :i 1,258.287 I,2589287 50 50 248,290 248,290 Government Participant Budget Period 1 will Phase II obligate include Pre-Award and Phase I; Budget Period 2 will At the beginning of each budget period, share of expenses for that include DOE will and Phase III. funds sufficient to pay its budget period. 37 The project will be co-funded by DOE and ThermoChem, as follows: BP2 $17.160.160 $17.160.160 $34.320.320 Total $18.666.737 $18.666.737 437.3X.474 DOE ThenoChem TOTAL 6.2 The overall Milestone project BP1 %1,506.577 $1.506.577 $3.013.154 Schedule will be completed in 48 months. 6. will of The project schedule, by phase and activity, Phase I, Phase II, operations, 6.3 which will ReDaVment is shown in Figure design will 24 months. Plan policy involves last and engineering, last a total continue for 10 months. construction, 14 months, and Phase III, In response to DOE's stated contribution in accordance to the project, with to recover an amount up to the Government's has agreed to repay the Government which is consistent with the model the Participant the Repayment Agreement, in the CCT-IV PON. repayment agreement 38