REDUCING POWER PRODUCTION COSTS BY UTILIZING PETROLEUM COKE

Petroleum coke, a byproduct of the petroleum-refining process, is an attractive primary or supplemental fuel for power production primarily because of a progressive and predictable increase in the production volumes of petroleum coke (1, 2). Petroleum coke is most commonly blended with coal in proportions suitable to meet sulfur emission compliance. Petroleum coke is generally less reactive than coal; therefore, the cofiring of petroleum coke with coal typically improves ignition, flame stability, and carbon loss relative to the combustion of petroleum coke alone. Although petroleum coke is a desirable fuel for producing relatively inexpensive electrical power, concerns about the effects of petroleum coke blending on combustion and pollution control processes exist in the coal-fired utility industry (3). The Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC) completed a 2-year technical assessment of petroleum coke as a supplemental fuel. A survey questionnaire was sent to seven electric utility companies that are currently cofiring coal and petroleum coke in an effort to solicit specific suggestions on research needs and fuel selections. An example of the letter and survey questionnaire is presented in Appendix A. Interest was expressed by most utilities in evaluating the effects of petroleum coke blending on grindability, combustion reactivity, fouling, slagging, and fly ash emissions control. Unexpectedly, concern over corrosion was not expressed by the utilities contacted. Although all seven utilities responded to the question, only two utilities, Northern States Power Company (NSP) and Ameren, sent fuels to the EERC for evaluation. Both utilities sent subbituminous coals from the Power River Basin and petroleum shot coke samples. Petroleum shot coke is produced unintentionally during operational upsets in the petroleum refining process. This report evaluates the effects of petroleum shot coke blending on grindability, fuel reactivity, fouling/slagging, and electrostatic precipitator (ESP) fly ash collection efficiency