CHEMICAL PROCESS DESIG N 2

TO: PROFESSOR RONALD WILLEY

FROM: EDGAR HUERTA, MOHAMMED METTEDENANDADAM SOBEL
SUBJECT: PROPOSAL FOR BOSTON PLASMA ARC WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY
DATE: 7/20/2011

Municipal solid waste management is of growing concern within the Boston

Metropolitan area. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that 4.5 lbs of solid waste is

produced per capita every day within the United States[1], a value that has nearly doubled over

the past 50 years. This trend is expected to continue. The 2008 census estimated the population

of Boston as 608,352 residents[2]. This number is expected to increase by 9,000 people by

2015[3]. This equals a 40,500 lb increase in waste generated per day, yielding a total 1,389 tons

of solid waste per day. Currently there are two options available to the state of Massachusetts

regarding this waste; send it to a dwindling number of domestic landfills or export it to another

state for incineration, as in-state incineration is unlawful. Tipping fees for landfills range from

$25-$75 per ton for non-hazardous waste and several hundreds of dollars per ton for hazardous

waste. Exportation of waste requires payment to the receiving state while incurring

transportation costs of shipping by non-government agents. The fact that the receiving state

likely allows incineration negates the environmental benefit of the domestic ban. Both of these

options cost the state a phenomenal amount of money.

Plasma arc waste disposal differs from incineration by thermally disintegrating waste in

an oxygen-free environment, as opposed to combusting waste in an oxygen-rich environment.

c
Y


This has a major effect on the chemical compounds produced by processing. Incineration tends

to produce volatile hydrocarbons, NOx molecules and compounds of significant health concern,

such as dioxins and furans. The plasma arc processes solid waste by breaking down compounds

into their respective atomic forms, then thermally controlling how these atoms recombine.

Organic matter, such as plastic, wood and paper produces inert gases and synthesis gas, which is

composed of CO, CO2 and H2. This synthesis gas is burned as fuel to generate power. Inorganic

solid waste, such as glass and metal, forms various types of slag depending on the cooling

method; air-cooled slag forms large crystalline structures resembling obsidian, compressed-air

cooled slag forms rock wool and water-cooled slag forms small crystalline structures resembling

sand.

The ability to handle metal, hazardous and radioactive waste makes plasma arc waste

disposal much more versatile than incineration, which is reserved for organic waste. This is very

important as electronic waste becomes more prominent. Currently all discarded cathode ray

televisions and computer monitors must be carefully disposed of to prevent heavy metals from

leeching into ground water.

Plasma arc waste disposal is an effective, environmentally friendly approach to handling

Boston¶s increasing solid waste production. It will greatly reduce the phenomenal cost of

exporting waste to other states as active landfills in Massachusetts are becoming scarce. This is

the answer to Boston¶s growing waste problem.

c
6


Proposal References:

[1] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7: Ú


 .
http://www.epa.gov. Web. Last visited Feb. 24, 2010

[2] Mayor¶s Office.

      

    
    
 Released December, 2009.Web. http://www.cityofboston.gov. Last Visited Feb. 24, 2010.

[3] The Boston Indicator¶s Project.   Web.www.tbf.org. Last visited Feb. 24, 2010.

c
 


NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING
SPRING 2010

Waste Disposal via Plasma

Adam Sobel
Edgar Huerta
Mohammed Metteden
4/20/2010

c
è


Table of Contents:
1. ABSTRACT««««««««««««««««««««««««««..«««.6
2. INTRODUCTION«««.««««««««««««««««««««««««7
3. PROCESS DESCRIPTION«««««««««..««««««««««««««8
4. ENERGY BALANCE AND UTILITY REQUIREMENTS««««««««««15
5. ECONOMIC SUMMARY«««««««««««««««««««««««..22
6. SAFETY, HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS«««««25
7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS««««««««««««««28
8. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS«««««««««««««««««««««««..30
9. BIBLIOGRAPHY«««««««««««««««««««««««««««31
10.APPENDIX«««««««««««««««««««««««««««««..32

Table of Figures:
FIGURE 1. PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM OF PLASMA ARC GASIFICATION PLANT«««««..9
FIGURE 2. CUSTOM ROCK WOOL SPINNER DESIGN«««««««««««««««««...20

Table of Tables:
TABLE 1. TYPICAL SLAG CHEMISTRY«««««««««««««««««««««««..12
TABLE 2. HEAVY METALS DISTRIBUTION BETWEEN PYROLYSIS AND PLASMA ARC««13
TABLE 3. WASTECARE SHREDDER SPECIFICATIONS«««««««««««««««...«17
TABLE 4.SUPERMAX HEAT EXCHANGER SPECIFICATIONS««««««««...««««....18
TABLE 5.BRIGDE BREAKER OPEN HOPPER PUMP SPECIFICATIONS««««««««««19
TABLE 6.SIEMENS STEAM TURBINE SPECIFICATIONS««««««««««««««««19
TABLE 7.SIEMENS GAS TURBINE SPECIFICATIONS«««««««««««««««.««.20
TABLE 8. CUSTOM GAS SYNTHESIS COMPRESSOR SPECIFICATIONS«««««««..««20
TABLE 9. CUSTOM ROCK WOOL SPINNER SPECIFICATIONS««««««««««««..«.21
TABLE 10. PROCESS ECONOMICS SUMMARY««««««««««««««««««««..22
TABLE 11.EQUIPMENT COSTS«««««««««««««««««««««««««««.23
TABLE 12. FIXED CAPITAL INVESTMENT SUMMARY«««««««««««««««««23
TABLE 13. TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT SUMMARY««««««««««««««««..24
TABLE 14. HAZOP ANALYSIS««««««««««««««««««««««««««««26

c




 1.Abstract

Plasma arc gasification is a method of processing large volumes of municipal solid waste in
an efficient manner that has less environmental impact and health hazards than incineration and
landfill dumping respectively. Solid waste enters a gasification chamber and travels through an
electrically generated arc. The arc vitrifies the organic component of the waste to synthesis gas,
forcing it out of the gasification chamber, while the inorganic component becomes molten and
flows out the bottom of the chamber. The slag is pulled onto a porous rotary drum and cooled
using compressed air, forming useful rock wool. The synthesis gas is cooled using a heat
recovery system, filtered to a clean stream and combusted in a gas turbine engine. The exit
stream from the turbine consists of CO2, with trace amounts of uncombusted CO and NOx from
the working air of the turbine, which are scrubbed. The overall energy recovery system produces
enough energy to meet consumption needs of the process with enough left over to sell to the grid
for profit. This combined with the revenue from the rock wool and tipping fees gained from
accepting solid waste yields a profitable system. While the CO2 amount emitted by the process is
about half the amount emitted by a 500MW coal plant (when processing 4000 tons of solid waste
per day), the process does not emit toxic ash, SOx, dioxins, furans, heavy metal particulates or
any other hazardous material associated with incineration.

c
r


 2.Introduction
In recent years, the quantity of municipal solid waste (MSW) generated has increased
significantly in the Boston metropolitan area. The proper management of waste is a crucial issue
due to the increasing amount of waste generated from residential and municipal buildings. It is
estimated that in 2009 the City of Boston collected 259,680 tons of municipal solid waste[6],
which was predominantly exported to other states or dumped in landfills. The Department of
Public Works has little control over waste disposal technology, but has the belief that most of it
is incinerated. The current method of waste management employed by the City of Boston fails
to address factors such as population growth, environmental implications and increasing costs
associated with the exportation of waste.

Clearly this current system is not a sustainable or environmentally friendly method of

waste management. The number of landfills available for waste disposal is gradually
diminishing; by 2015 it is estimated that there will be only 8 active landfill sites in the entire
state of Massachusetts[7]. Furthermore, the incineration of MSW generates fly and bottom ashes
and releases leachable toxic heavy metals, dioxin, furans and volatile organic compounds that are
harmful to the environment [1]. It is therefore imperative that an alternative method of MSW
management is found that is reliable, cost effective, sustainable and environmentally friendly.

Waste management systems include waste collection and sorting followed by one or
more of the following options: recovery of waste materials (i.e., recycling), biological treatment
of organic waste (i.e., production of marketable compost), thermal treatment (i.e., incineration to
recover energy in the form of heat and electricity) and finally land filling [1]. In more recent
times, the incineration of combustible waste to generate energy has become the most common
method of dealing with MSW effectively as it decreases its volume and mass significantly. As
mentioned earlier, incineration has some environmentally harmful byproducts. One such
alternative that has shown great potential is the gasification of MSW. There are several studies
that focus on an innovative technology called plasma gasification. This technology has been
demonstrated as one of the most effective and environmentally friendly methods for solid waste
treatment and energy recovery [3].

Plasma arc gasification is a method of waste management that has been employed in a
host of cities around the world. The process uses electrical energy to generate high temperatures
created by an arc. This arc breaks down waste primarily into carbon gas and inorganic molten
waste (slag), in a device called a plasma converter. The gases produced, called synthesis gases,
are then used as fuel for a gas turbine engine to generate electricity. The slag is used as raw
material for construction and insulation. The process is a net generator of electricity, and reduces
the volume of waste sent to landfill sites.

c
3


3. Process Description
3.1 Plasma Arc Gasification

In a plasma arc gasification plant, waste is first pretreated with a shredder (? ). The
shredded waste is then loaded in the solid feeder, where it is fed into the gasification chamber or
plasma furnace. Commonly, graphite electrodes with male-female threads have a high current
directed through them in order to generate a plasma arc. The arcing generates a large amount of
heat (up to 3000oC) which is used to heat the waste and subsequently vitrify the inorganic part of
the waste and convert the organic part into useful syngas.

The syngas generated from the organic portion of the waste is compressed in an
explosion proof gas compressor and then transported to heat exchangers, where the temperature
is reduced. The gas compressor keeps the pressure within the gasifier low, while keeping the
pressure within the heat exchanger high, dramatically improving heat transfer. The gas is cooled
to 250oC, below the temperature required for toxic reformation, by water. The heat exchanger
causes the water to phase shift and generates steam at 500oC. The steam flows to a steam turbine,
generating power.

At this point the syngas is still dirty and needs to be filtered through an activated carbon filter.
Any heavy particulates and hydrogen sulfide will leach out onto the carbon filter leaving clean
syngas on the other side.

From here the clean syngas is sent to a gas turbine engine. Syngas burns exothermically
and is used as a fuel to expand the working gas of the turbine, generating power. If air is used as
the working gas then hazardous compounds such as NOx will form during the expansion
process. Scrubbers will filter out any NOx or trace un-combusted syngas from the turbine outlet
stream, leaving CO2 and water. Water is then condensed out of the process stream.

c
[


Figure 1. Process Flow Diagram of Plasma Arc Gasification Plant

3.2 Advantages of Plasma Arc Gasification

Plasma arc gasification of waste has many advantages when compared to other methods
of waste management. First, it is an environmentally friendly process, since all the waste is either
converted into syngas or solid inert rock. There is no risk of releasing all of the harmful toxins
associated with incineration.

Furthermore, this process significantly reduces the volume and mass of solid waste after
processing. This is of particular importance due to the fact that the city of Boston has limited
landfill availability. As the number of active landfills in the area gradually diminishes, a plasma
arc gasification plant would greatly facilitate more efficient disposal of waste.

Another important attribute of this process is the ability to process and handle hazardous
wastes. Private waste management companies charge exorbitant tipping fees for the handling of
hazardous waste due to the high costs associated with the methods they employ.

Finally, the plant operates as a net generator of electricity; the plant generates more
energy than it uses and therefore can sell this electricity back to the grid. Several studies have
been conducted that show that solid waste could be a viable alternative source of fuel [2][4].

c
‰


3.3 Detailed Design

The following section will discuss in detail the: i) pre-processing stage of waste, ii)
gasification process, iii) energy recovery and iv) utilization of solid by products (slag).
3.3.1 Waste Pre-treatment

The waste feedstock is delivered and discharged by truck or other means to the ³tipping
floor.´ The treated waste should have a maximum particle size of 2.5cm and a maximum
moisture content of 50%[2]. A pre-crusher compacts the waste into a specially designed
compaction container. The waste is compressed to about one fifth of its initial volume. The high
degree of compaction improves heat conductivity by reducing the residual air content[1]. Once
filled, the container is fitted with a metallic door that will be closed, thus preventing problems
with rodents and foul odors.

A conveyor system then moves the filled containers into the gasifier area. This will allow
efficient control of the process and will ensure that there is no chance that a filled container can
be ³forgotten´ (a major cause of rodent and odor problems in MSW facilities). It is important to
note that due to nature of MSW, it is not realistic to have an exact composition of the waste
being fed into the system. For the purpose of this investigation, the waste will be assumed to be
composed of 80% organic waste and 20% inorganic (e.g. soil, metals-bearing wastes, and fly-
ash, metals, etc.).This is a reasonable assumption as most of the inorganic waste is salvaged and
recycled before arriving at the plant.

Once the container reaches the gasifier, a small crane will load the contents into the
gasifier-feeding platform. The empty container is placed in a second conveyor that will return it
to the container area. The feeding platform is an articulated tilting ³table´ where the container
door is opened. Once the door is opened, the articulated ³table´ is inclined approximately 60
degrees directly over the compactor/extruder, which then feeds the MSW into the gasifier. The
compactor/extruder, in conjunction with the storage container, provides a unique advantage that
maximizes the benefits of plasma gasification of MSW. The system feeds the waste feedstock
into the gasifier after having extruded a significant portion of the entrained air in the waste
feedstock (the most important aspect to ensure the production of the highest quality synthesis
gas). Finally, the feed rate can be calibrated to equal the rate of dissociation and gasification
within the gasifier chamber.

The feed rate of waste going into the gasifier could be increased by; feeding the waste
from the top instead of the side, and placing a refractory cone to spread the waste evenly over the
surface of the molten bath[2].Keeping a layer of untreated waste on top of the molten pool served
as insulation to keep the chamber temperature stable[2].

Feeding the waste from the top ensures that the entire surface of the whole bath is used to
melt the waste, instead of a localized area which was found to occur when the waste was fed

c
Y


 from the side. Keeping a layer of untreated waste improves the stability of the arc and increases
the energy efficiency of the process, because the waste provided insulation for the molten slag.

The figure below shows the range of feed rates obtained from a pilot unit before and after
the change in feeding patterns. It can be seen from the figure that feed rates above 25 kg/h were
difficult to attain due to the waste not being able to melt fast enough [2]. Whereas when fed
evenly from the top, feed rates of up to 92 kg/h were obtained.

To satisfy the waste disposal needs for the City of Boston, the plant is designed to
process 4000 tons a day of waste. The plant will consist of 9 gasifiers in total which will be
discussed in further detail in the following section. 8 gasifiers will operate simultaneously in
order to process the large amount of waste. Therefore, each gasifier will have a feed rate of 20
tons per hour.

3.3.2 Gasification Process

The gasification of the organic component of MSW is dictated by 5 equilibrium
reactions:

 (  ) Å " 2  Å " 2 (Heterogeneous water gas shift reaction-endothermic)

 ( )  2 Ü 2 (Boudouard equilibrium-endothermic)

 ( ) Å 2" 2 " 4 (Hydrogenating gasification-exothermic)

" 4 Å " 2  Å 3" 2 (Methane decomposition-endothermic)

 Å " 2 2 Å " 2 (Waster gas shift reaction-exothermic)

These reactions require some explanation. The formation of products on the right side of
the equation relates to whether that reaction is categorized as endothermic or exothermic. The
high temperature of the plasma arc furnace, where recombination of molecules from atoms takes
place, favors endothermic reactions. This yields an effluent stream of mostly carbon monoxide,
some carbon dioxide and hydrogen gas, and trace amounts of methane.
The residence time of the syngas is on the order of seconds within the reactor; the general
range of time associated with most reactors is 3-5 seconds. The inorganic slag requires an hour to
become sufficiently molten, depending on distance from the electrical arc. Slag collects within
the gasifier, causing the slag at the top of the collection to heat quicker than the slag below it.
The molten slag overflows the breech in the reactor and is transported to the rock wool spinner.
The remaining slag within the gasifier acts as insulation and a heat source for the next batch of
solid waste.

c
YY


3.3.3 Energy Recovery
The high temperature of the syngas exiting from the gasifier stresses the importance of
thermal recovery. 33 Kg/s of syngas exiting at 1600°C is compressed to 200 bar by a gas
compressor. Increasing the pressure of the syngas improves the heat transfer coefficient of the
gas by a factor of 1000. This is very important as the temperature of the syngas must decrease
from 500°C to 250°C very quickly to eliminate the possibility of toxic reformation of the carbon
gases. This heat transfer requires 13 Kg/s of water on the cold side of the exchanger. The water
phase changes to steam at 500°C. The steam flows to a steam turbine that generates 9.3 MW of
power.
The cooled syngas passes through an activated carbon filter; the activated carbon absorbs
heavy metal particulates and sulfide compounds that may have been gasified and carried out the
gas exit. This leaves a stream of clean syngas consisting of approximately 17 Kg/s CO, 16 Kg/s
CO2 and 14 g/s H2. The clean syngas is transported to and used as fuel in the gas turbine engine.
The primary energy generating reaction is the oxidation of CO to CO2, generating 282,984
KJ/Kg-mol. This corresponds to a power generation of 65.8 MW with a thermal efficiency of
38%.
3.3.4 Solid By-products
Upon completion of the vitrification process, a molten inorganic pool of slag is tapped
out of the gasification chamber. Slag is a mixture of various inorganic compounds that are found
in MSW such as soil, metals-bearing wastes, and fly-ash, metals, etc. These attribute to
approximately 20% of the waste treated with respect to mass.
The composition of slag, as with the waste coming in to the plant is very difficult to
establish due to the varying composition of the waste being processed. From literature [8] [10], an
approximate composition was ascertained which will be used as a basis for this investigation.
The typical slag composition is shown below
Table 1. Typical Slag Composition

Composition (% by
Elements
Mass)

Silica 37.2

Alumina 19.5

CaO 19.5

Fe2O3 6.21

Na2O 3.87

MgO 2.31

MnO 1.7

c
Y6


 K2O 1.31

NiO 0.32

Cr2O3 0.26

CuO 0.26

ZnO 0.24

PbO 0.11

CdO <1

Specific Gravity Approximately 1.5

As shown in Table 1, Silica, Alumina and CaO are the main constituents of slag and can
be considered as the basis of the silicate melt. It can also be seen that trace amounts of heavy
metals can be found, these include zinc, copper, chromium, lead and nickel. When compared
with traditional methods of waste disposal such as pyrolysis, it can be seen from the Table 2
below that plasma arc gasification is far more environmentally friendly. The heavy metals from
plasma disposal were less than that of pyrolysis by an order of 10 or more [10].
Table 2. Heavy metals distribution between Pyrolysis and Plasma Arc

Dominant Trace Elements Pyrolysis (ppm) Plasma (ppm)

Zinc 7465 367

Copper 2002 257

Cromium 2055 184

Lead 637 12

Nickel 152 1

Slag has a variety of useful applications, such as asphalt mixtures for road construction,
insulation, and most importantly as a replacement for asbestos. The method of tapping and
cooling are the main factors in determining the physical characteristics of the slag produced.
Each method produces a different type of product, some being more valuable than others.

As feeding continues, the volume of molten slag in the gasifier increases and
consequently reduces the effective space of the gasifier. Therefore, the slag must be tapped out
once the level is to the maximum of the crucible. Tapping the slag produced into molds produces
solid ingots and slag granules when tapped into water [2].

c
Y 


 The most promising of these products as a commercially sellable commodity is rockwool.
Rockwool serves as a replacement to asbestos without any of the harmful side effects. Rockwool
is fabricated by passing the molten slag through a perforated drum that has air shooting out of it.
The slag is spun in this drum whilst simultaneously having jets of air steam past it. The end
product is an insulator with excellent properties. Its fibers are non-combustible and have a
melting point of well over 900oC [11]. Rockwool is also used as ceiling tile and sprayed fire
proofing, as well as sound control and attenuation.
In addition, the use of rockwool as a horticultural growing medium has increased in
recent years[12]£By slightly changing the mineral composition, rockwool has proven to be a
successful substrate for the cultivation of produce using hydroponics. This method of
horticulture has been implemented successfully in the Netherlands where of 3550 hectares of
vegetables, 2350 are on substrate [12].

c
Yè


 3.Energy Balance and Utility Requirements

Energy generation is a large component of the overall process and is one reason why this
process is successful. The method below shows how this process is capable of generating
sufficient power to be self sustaining with enough extra to sell to the electrical grid, even when
processing 4000 tons per day of solid waste.
The calculations were based on processing 4000 tons per day, with a synthesis gas
temperature exiting the plasma arc furnace at 1600°C. The gas must be cooled to a temperature
of 250°C to prevent the reformation of toxins. These flow rate and temperature requirements are
the basis of the heat recovery system. The energy needed to be removed by a heat exchanger to
achieve this was calculated using:



 M
Where;
Q = energy <KJ/s>
m = mass flow rate <Kg/s>
C = heat capacity <Kg/KJ-°C>
ǻT = temperature change <°C>

The overall heat capacity of the synthesis gas was calculated by taking the weighted average of
all the synthesis gas components.
The mass flow rate of the water entering the heat exchanger was determined using the
values from this equation and steam tables. The steam produced had to be of sufficient pressure
and temperature to drive the steam turbine, around 500°C. The size of the heat exchanger needed
for such a transfer of energy was calculated using the equation:

!
"

 
Where;
A = heat transfer area <m2>
Q = energy <KJ/s>
ǻT = temperature change <°C>
Ș = efficiency
U = heat transfer coefficient <KW/m2-°C>

The heat transfer coefficient was estimated using a value typical of compressed gases.
The energy generated by the steam turbine was calculated using enthalpies found in the
steam tables for the inlet and outlet conditions of the steam turbine. The equation used assumes
isentropic expansion factored by a standard turbine efficiency:

c
Y



 

( " « " )
Where;
Ws = shaft work <KJ/s>
m = mass flow rate <Kg/s>
Hi = enthalpy of inlet
Ho = enthalpy of outlet
Ș = efficiency

Once cooled by the heat exchanger and cleaned by the activated carbon filter, the
synthesis gas was combusted in a gas turbine engine to produce more energy. The energy
released by combustion was calculated using the difference of the heats of formation of the
components of the synthesis gas before combustion and the products post combustion:

2 Å 2  22

2 " 2 Å 2  2 " 2

This difference was factored by the mass flowrate of the respective reactants. The energy
generated by the gas turbine engine was calculated using a thermal efficiency typical of most gas
turbine engines.

c
Yr


 4.Equipment List and Unit Descriptions

4.1 Plasma Arc Reactor

The plasma arc furnaces are from Dutemp, and can process about 500 tons of MSW per
day. This tank includes the electrodes, the gas exhaust pipe and the conveyor belt for the bottom
slag. The plant design is to have 9 reactors installed with 8 working at all times and one as a
spare.

4.2 WasteCare S72-725 all purpose shredder

In order to have small uniform pieces of MSW the process requires an industrial grinder.
The grinder can process up to 45 tons per hour of MSW. One WasteCare S72-725 all-purpose
shredder is enough to supply 2 reactors with the waste to process. A total of 4 are required.

Table 3.WasteCare shredder specifications [15]

Standard Drive Motor - (HP ) 200 - 250 HP Standard

Highest Available HP 300 HP (Other Models up to 1,000 HP)

Lowest Available HP 60

MSW Production Rate (from reported facilities) 45 Tons / Hour (Other Models up to 65 TPH)

Tires Production Rate (from reported facilities) 1,000 / Hour (Other Models up to 2,000 / Hr)

Bulk or Metered Feeding from Reported Facilities Bulk

Length of Smallest Infeed Opening 72"

Width of Smallest Infeed Opening 72"

Maximum Design Infeed Opening 140"

Shaft Center Design Distance - Center to Center of 24"

Shafts

Shaft Size for Hex Shaft (Flat to Flat Distance) 12.5"

Cutter Diameter 32"

Cutter Thickness Up to 3" Stacked 1 x 1, 2 x 2, 3 x 3

c
Y3


Electric Drive Yes

RPM of Shafts on Standard Machine 4

Single or Dual Drive Dual

Shaft & Cutter Material 4140 Alloy Steel - Heat treated for Optimum
Strength

Spacers & Cleaning Fingers Material 4140 Alloy Steel - Heat treated for Optimum
Strength

Overall Length (Main Machine - Rounded) 23'

Overall Width (Main Machine - Rounded) 13'

Overall Height (Main Machine - Rounded) 17'

Main Machine Weight / Approx: - (lbs) 55,000+ lbs

4.3 Tranter Inc. SuperMax Heat and Plate Heat Exchange

In order to create steam for the steam turbine, a heat exchanger is needed. Two of these
are enough to provide the flow rate needed for the syngas to heat the water to produce steam.

Table 4. SuperMax heat exchanger specifications

Technology/Type

Technology Plate

Type Welded

Performance Specification

Working Pressure 600 psi

Temperature Range -20 to 600 F (Cold)

Liquid Flow Rate 825 GPM

Construction

Primary Material Steel

c
Y[


 Overall Dimensions 12.32" diameter

4.4 Bridge Breaker Open Hopper Pump

A pump is needed to produce a flow to the heat exchanger in order to produce the steam.
In order to reach a flow of 220 GPM we will be using two pumps; one for each of the heat
exchangers. Each pump will be running around half capacity, since each heat exchanger only
needs water flow of 110 GPM.

Table 5. Bridge Breaker Open Hopper Pump specifications

Flow/Pressure Specifications

Liquid Flow 200 GPM

Discharge Pressure 700 psi

Discharge Size 10 inch

Hp 250 HP

Max RPM 150 RPM

4.5Siemens Steam Turbine SST-200

The steam turbine is used to convert the steam from the heat exchanger to energy.

Table 6. Siemens Steam Turbine specifications [16]

Specifications

Power Output up to 10 MW

Inlet Steam Pressure up to 110 bar

Inlet Steam Temperature up to 520 C

Bleed up to 60 Bar

4.6 Siemens Gas Turbine SGT-200

c
Y‰


Another piece of energy generating equipment that we need is a gas turbine. Once the syngas
passes through the heat exchanger, it will be combusted in the turbine to produce the majority of
the energy.

Table 7. Siemens Gas Turbine specifications [16]

Specifications

Electrical efficiency 37.50%

Heat rate 9597 kJ/kWh

Turbine speed 6608 rpm

Compressor pressure ratio 19:1

Exhaust gas flow/temp 131.5 kg/s, 544 C

NOx emission capability less than 15 ppmV

4.7 Custom Synthesis Gas Compressor

The compressor needed for this project has specific requirements not readily available
from a standard vendor. The compressor must be able to withstand a working temperature up to
1600°C, the temperature of the syngas leaving the gasifier. Compressors able to do this exist on
the market, and are available from Haskel and Fluitron, however the available equipment cannot
keep up with the volumetric flowrate of the gasifiers.

The compressor, or compressor system, must be able to compress carbon monoxide up to

a pressure of 200 bar at a flowrate 11,000 SCFM. Hydraulic piston, centrifugal and screw
compressors are able to achieve pressures of 50 bar at the required flowrate, and are available
from Cameron¶s Compression Systems and Aerzen USA Corp. The large volumetric compressor
can act as a step-up to the high pressure compressor.

Table 8. Custom Synthesis Gas Compressor specifications

Specifications

Temperature 1600°C

Pressure 200 bar

Flowrate 11,000 SCFM

c
6


4.8 Custom rock wool spinner

The rockwool spinner is a machine that converts a steady flow of molten slag into
rockwool. The stream of molten slag flows down a channel onto a spinning, perforated rotary
drum. The drum itself must operate at a working temperature of 1600°C, which is the
temperature of the slag exiting the plasma furnace. Blasting molten slag with compressed air is
the principle method of producing rockwool from furnace byproducts. High pressure air is
continuously pumped into the center of the rotary drum. The air then escapes through the
perforations, cooling the slag into the fibrous structure of rockwool. The rockwool is scraped off
the rotary drum using a wedge at the end of the rotation.

Table 9. Custom rock wool spinner specifications

Specifications

Working temperature 1600°C

Internal working pressure 100 psig

Explosion proof Required

Molt
en S
lag Ú


Compressed
Air Rock Wool

Conveyer
System

Figure 2. Custom rock wool spinner design

 

c
6Y


 5.Economic Summary
The economics of the project are based on the assumption that 1,500,000 tons of municipal
solid waste per year will be processed.It wasthen determined how much electrical power, tons of
slag and tons of CO2 are produced from our process from literature available and process
calculations. A tipping fee is associated with accepting and processing MSW, which adds to the
process revenue. CO2 is the major component for gases recovered from this process. Carbon
dioxide can be recovered and purified to be sold. The other byproduct of this process is slag,
which can be converted to the versatile material rockwool. A market has already been
established for this material. Using the average price for products we are able to determine the
revenue of this process.

Table 10. Process Economics Summary

Unit Price
Electric Rates per MW $50.00
Tipping Fee Per ton of MSW $30.00
Sale Price of Rockwool per ton $175.00
Sale Price of CO2 per ton $90.00
Products
Tons of MSW processed 1,500,000
Tons of rock wool produced 300,000
Tons of CO2 produced 1,460,000
Net MW for sale per year 511,000
Revenue
MSW $45,000,000
Rock wool $52,500,000
CO2 $131,400,000
Electricity (MW) $25,550,000
Total Annual $254,450,000

c
66


 In order to calculate the total capital investment, the equipment cost was first determined
from quotations from various vendors. These values are an important factor needed for the
economic analysis. Estimations for the variables in the total fixed cost were calculated using the
total equipment cost as a basis andwere used as estimations for asolid-liquid process [17]. The
prices for our major equipment are shown in the table below.

Table 11. Equipment costs

Equipment
Grinder (MSW Processing) $9,120,000
9 Reactors $70,000,000
Scrubber System $23,600,000
Energy Recover System $92,000,000

In order to calculate the fixed capital investment (FCI), an estimate for the
instrumentation, piping, electrical and other variables was obtained by multiplying the total
purchased equipment by certain factors. These factors can be found in the Plant Design and
Economics for Chemical Engineers, for a solid-liquid process. A summary of these figures is
shown below.

Table 12. Fixed Capital Investment Summary

Total Purchased Equipment $194,720,000

Purchased equipment installation $75,940,800
Instrumentation $50,627,200
Piping $60,363,200
Electrical $19,472,000
Building ( incl. services) $29,208,000
Yard Improvement $23,366,400
Services facilities $107,096,000
Total Direct Cost $560,793,600
Engineering and supervision $62,310,400
Construction expenses $66,204,800
Legal expenses $7,788,800
Contractor's fee $36,996,800
Contingency $72,046,400
Total Indirect Costs $245,347,200
Fixed Capital Investment $806,140,800
Working Capital $146,040,000

The FCI is the sum of our total indirect investment and the total direct investment. From
the total equipment cost it was then possible to determine our working capital. Upon calculating
the working capital and fixed capital investment, it was then possible to determine the total

c
6 


capital investment (TCI). The TCI for the process was calculated to be $952 million, this is a
large value compared to our net cash flow of $150 million a year. This large difference can be
attributed to the significant costs associated with the necessary equipment, in particular, the
gasification chambers and energy recovery system. A summary of the TCI is shown below.

Table 13. Total Capital Investment Summary

Working Capital (W) $146,000,000

Total Fixed Cost $806,000,000
Total Capital Investment $952,000,000
Cost of Operation $28,000,000
Income (sales) $254,000,000
Depreciation $10,000,000
Gross Profit $226,000,000
Gross Profit
(depreciation) $216,000,000
Tax rate 0.35
Income Tax $76,000,000
Net Profit $140,000,000
Net cash flow $150,000,000

In order to determine the economical feasibility of this project a payback period, the net
present value and the internal rate of returnneeded to be determined. These three factorswill form
the basis of the economic feasibility of this process. The process is shown to have a payback
period of 6.8 years. Next, the net present value (NPV) of this process is assessed over the next 20
years, the lifespan of the project. The NPV, with a discounted factor of 10%,was found to be
$326 million. Another good indicator to look at is the internal rate of return; for this project it
was found to be 6%. The payback period and NPVboth indicatethat the process is economically
feasible.

The rate of return is a low value at 6%, a good value would be around 15%. This should not
be a reason to stop this project. The city of Boston will not be losing money in this endeavor.
Much land can be reclaimed in the process of solving Boston waste management problem. There
other options that we have, about start up. Starting a plant to handle less waste will be able to
lower the total capital investment.

c
6è


 6.Safety, Health, and Environmental Consideration

6.1Safety Considerations

As with any manufacturing process, safety precautions and considerations need to be

taken into account in order to conform to industry standards. It is imperative that the necessary
safety precautions are implemented in order to ensure the efficient running of the plant and the
general well being of all persons in the vicinity. In order to effectively identify all the possible
safety hazards it is necessary to carry out a HAZOP analysis and go through all the components
of the system.

Besides conducting a HAZOP analysis there are several other areas that have to be
considered with regards to safety, these include; the general layout of the plant, piping, venting,
equipment, instrument and electrical, safety equipment and raw materials. The plant is designed
to address each of these areas; the proceeding section will go into greater detail on each area.

The general layout of the plant plays a significant role in general safety. The plant floor
has to be fitted with adequate drainage, in order to avoid physical injury to employees. The plant
handles a significant amount of electricity, and due to the incompatible nature of electricity and
liquids adequate drainage is essential to prevent electrical shocks. Furthermore, proper drainage
would prevent accidents arising from a loss of balance. Sufficient aisle ways, guardrails and
platforms have to be in place to ensure for the safe operation of the plant by its employees. It is
also necessary for there to be adequate headroom for the employees from all the piping and
power lines. Finally, all emergency exits have to be fully visible, accessible and permit access for
emergency vehicles.

Safety considerations need to be taken when dealing with piping in a facility. These pipes
carry a host of fluids, the most significant for this process being high temperature fluids and
those that are under a high pressure. The syngas coming out of the gasification chamber is at a
very high temperature (1600oC) before going through a heat exchanger, and therefore the
following safety measures have to be in place:

I. Ensure all the steam lines and syngas pipes are well insulated and labeled.

II. Relief valves in place to prevent plugging and subsequently rupturing the pipe
line.

III. Drains to relieve pressure on suction and discharge on all process pumps

IV. All overflow lines directed to safe areas.

All the instruments in the plant require fail safe controls. They should be properly labeled
and grounded. The equipment should also be designed to permit lockout protection in the case of

c
6



 an emergency. Finally, all process equipment should be connected to a standby power source,
and emergency lighting put in place in the advent of a power outage.

General safety equipment required at the plant include fire extinguishers throughout the
plant, respiratory equipment, flammable vapor detection apparatus, safety alarms and a detailed
emergency evacuation procedure for all employees. There should also be a designated safe area
outside the plant where all employees assemble in advent of an emergency.

Any raw materials coming into the plant should be properly labeled and handled in the
appropriate manner. Any hazardous or toxic material should be treated with the correct personal
protective equipment, such as gloves, glasses and masks.

Finally, a detailed HAZOP analysis has been carried out to identify all the possible safety
hazards or risks that could arise from the process. The results of this analysis are shown below.

Table 14. HAZOP analysis

9


 

 

 
 


 Ã  

    

  
   

 
 
 


c 

   
    
 
 
  

       c  !


 
 
!
 

 
  !

 Ã "   
  # 

$    
 
 %

 

 #c&  '
   

 &  ( !



 

 c&#
 
    
 
 
 

 ) ! #c&&

  & &  (



& 
 &  &  

   
 % 
  &  '

  
9
 
 !
  


 
 #$ *& c         '

  
 
 
!
 !
  
  !
 

 
 #
& + 
Ã

 $ 
  
 *&   

  
 &  
 

 (

*
 Ã     
  Ã  
 
  c


 
 
    



   *
 % c 
   
  *&&




 
 


&  



 #*   &  +
  

&(Ã *    






 (Ã    &
 

 

  &

 

 &   


c
6r


 



6.2Health Considerations

The main health considerations that have to be taken into account for this process are the
formation of dioxins and furans when vitrifying MSW. Dioxins and furans can cause a
number of health risks, such as cancer and changes in hormone levels. Animal studies have
shown that animals exposed to dioxins and furans experienced changes in their hormone
systems, changes in the development of the fetus, decreased ability to reproduce and a
suppressed immune system [14].This is a very serious health risk if exposed to humans, for
that reason the process has been specifically designed to minimize the possibility of the
formation of these toxins.

Dioxin formation typically occurs if the temperatures produced by the combustion

process do not exceed 250oC throughout the entire combustion chamber. However, when the
chamber temperatures exceed the 250oC threshold, as will occur in the plasma gasifier, the
chlorinated materials will dissociate themselves of the chlorine atoms and the chlorine will
preferentially combine with hydrogen to form HCl (which is then removed in the gas
treatment system and removed in the scrubber with NaOH to form a benign salt).
Additionally, the rapid cooling of the syngas from 1600 oC to below 250 oC in the heat
exchanger will prevent the reformation of dioxins and furans from elementary molecules in
the syngas due to the de novo synthesis back reactions [1].

Finally, any residual particulates or mercury in the syngas stream will be removed using a
carbon filter to leave a clean syngas that is the fed to the gas turbine. The exhaust stream
from the turbine will have scrubber in place to take care of any trace amounts of NOx, SOx
and CO that may be left over.

6.3Environmental Considerations

The main environmental concerns that could potentially arise from this process are trace
metals and halides escaping into the air or soil. Carbon filters and scrubber are in place to
trap any of these potentially hazardous elements, and thus should not pose a significant risk
to the environment. Heavy metals could potentially leach into the soil through the slag that is
produced as a byproduct of the process. However, it has been found that the slag created
from the process contains trace amounts of these metals which are below regulatory limits,
on the order of less than 0.05 mg/L for most of the heavy metals [8].

c
63


 7.Conclusions and Recommendations
7.1 Conclusion

The proposed design of a plasma gasification plant to manage the MSW generated by the
city of Boston has been reported in this paper. From calculations and literature it has been
deduced that this process has satisfied the design goals specified. The following conclusions
were arrived at:

1) The plasma gasification plant was found to manage and treat the MSW generated by the
city of Boston. The proposed plant design has the capacity to handle the estimated 1400
tons a day of MSW generated by the city, with a net weight reduction of approximately
80%.

2) Ability to process MSW using an environmentally sound method. Waste treated with
plasma does not produce hazardous bottom or fly ash. The by-products (slag) do not
leach into the soil.

3) A positive net energy balance was obtained. From calculations conducted it was found
that the plant utilized approximately a third of the energy generated, and sold the excess
back to the grid.

4) Ability to handle a wide range of waste, such as hazardous and biomedical waste. This is
due to the robust nature of the plasma arc system which requires little or no modifications
to handle the various waste feeds.

5) Eliminates the need for landfills. The byproducts of the process are energy, slag and
CO2, all of which can be sold for a profit. The system could use landfills as a source of
fuel and thereby reclaim landfills that are no longer active whilst simultaneously
generating energy.

This process is economically feasible according to the real word data collected at other
plasma arc facilities. Our goals of being environmentally friendly, with a positive net energy gain
and being safe have a real potential of being achieved. The plasma arc technology put forth by
this report shows that it is the solution for Boston¶s solid waste problem.

7.2Recommendations

Based on the findings of the report, the following recommendations are proposed:

1) Branch out of handling only MSW, and look into processing hazardous and
biomedical waste. The process does not need significant modifications and would
generate more income in the form of tipping fees.

c
6[


 2) Design an isolated gasifier to handle biomedical waste that is generated from the
various medical facilities found in the Boston area.

3) Scale back the size of the facility, this is only due to the capital intensive nature of the
plant. Securing the funds required for this project might prove to be difficult whether
it be from private or government sources. At present the facility has been designed to
handle the waste generated by the City of Boston and also reclaim used up landfills.

c
6‰


 8.Acknowledgements
We would like to acknowledge the following for giving us the support we needed:

Dr. Ronald Willey, thank you for all the help and guidance you have given us throughout our
stay at Northeastern University. You were a large part of our experience here and we are
appreciative.

Dr. Jillian Goldfarb, thank you for all your help you have given us over the course of our project
and keeping us properly motivated during the tough parts. We couldn¶t have done it without you.

Dutemp Corporation, thank you for all real world data you have provided us. It was invaluable to
our project.

c
 


 9.Bibliography

1) Kwak, T.H., Maken, S., Lee, S. 9 # $ 
 ? ? ?  
$ 

    
 
 . Fuel 18 April 2006.
2) Moustakas, K., Xydis, G., Malamis, S., Haralambou, K-J " 
 ? 
 ? $
  ?  
 
$ ? % #?   ?  $&  
? $  Journal of Hazardous Materials 8 June 2007
3) Minutillo, M., Perna, A., Di Bona, D. P 

    ? $   
 ? 
  
$ ?  $'  
 ()*  
  Energy
Conversion and Management 20 July 2009
4) Mountouris, A., Voutsas, E., Tassios, D. Ú
  
$ ? +
9 
'$ $ 
#
$    ,  
 Energy Conversion and
Management 7 December 2005
5) Gomez, E., Amutha Rani, D., Cheeseman, C.R., Wise, M. $

$

 ?   $  ? + " 
# Journal of Hazardous
Materials 11 April 2008
6) City of Boston  P  ? $  -  .//0
http://www.cityofboston.gov/bar/PDFs/2009/PWD-
BTD_BAR%20FY09%20Q4.pdf
7) Bureau of Waste Prevention "# 1 ?

 web.
http://www.mass.gov/dep/recycle/actlf.pdf May 2009
8) Dutemp Corporation web. www.dutemp.com
9) Morgenthaler (Patent)
10)Saffarzadeh, A., Shimoka, T., Watanabe, K. &  ? #2
$
'    PÚ 
 Journal of Hazardous Materials 4 September
2008
11)N.A.I.M.A North American Insulation Manufacturers Association web.
www.naima.org
12)Grodan web. www.hydroponics101.com
13)Specific Heat of Gasses at Various Pressures. Engineeringtoolbox.com. web
14)EPA web.
http://www.epa.gov/wastes/hazard/wastemin/minimize/factshts/dioxfura.pdf

15)Wastecare web. www.wastecare.com

16)Siemens web www.siemens.com
17)Peters, M.S, Timmerhaus, K.D ³Plant Design and Economics for Chemical
Engineers´ Fifth Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York (2003)

c
 Y


 10. Appendix
10.1 MSDS

The following MSDS¶s were obtained from Sigma Aldrich and include all the hazardous
chemicals that are expected to be found in the process. Please refer to www.sigma-aldrich for
greater detail.

Alumina
Calcium Oxide
Cadmium Oxide
Chromium (III) Oxide
Copper (II) Oxide
Iron (III) Oxide
Lead (II) Oxide
Manganese (II) Oxide
Magnesium Oxide
Nickel (II) Oxide
Silica
Sodium Oxide
Zinc Oxide

c
 6


10.2 Energy Generation Calculations

c
 


 
9

 9  
  
   
  9   © 
 
    


Y
  Y
 
   
 ©

 

HEAT OF COMBUSTION

total mass (3200 ton basis) <Kg> Number of g mols heat of formation j/mol
H2 1219.25 609628 0
CO 1467171.7 52398987 -110525
CO2 (Adds nothing to combustion) Y

 32599270.45 -393509





Kg out Number of g mols heat of formation j/mol
H2O 10973 609628 -241818
CO2 2305555 52398987 -393509

g mol * J/mol J total 

 
H2 to H20 609628 * -241818 = -1.47419E+11 10973
CO to CO2 52398987 * (-393509+110525) = -1.48E+13 3739922.9

 YY



% H2O by Mass= 0.002925434 0.30% 10973

% CO2 by Mass = 0.997074566 99.70% 3739922.9

CO2 mass flow rate= 43.286 Kg/s

Energy released by combustion= 173327.4764 KJ/s
38% efficiency (Siemens) 65864.44103 KJ/s
Ú

Ú 
Exaust gas mass flow rate= 131 Kg/s
Exaust gas temperature= 544 C

c
 è


10.3 NPV calculations

c