tailieunhanh - Coal America’s Energy Future phần 4

và giảm phát thải NOX tới mức mà trong một số trường hợp cạnh tranh với các đơn vị hiện đại nhất. Những thách thức đáng kể, cho rằng các đơn vị cũ đã không được xây dựng với bất kỳ suy nghĩ thêm thấp NOX hệ thống trong tương lai. Low NOX | Two-Stage Direct Coal Liquefaction Processes Process Developer HTI Coal Process or Catalytic Multi-Stage Liquefaction CMSL DOE and HTI subsidiary of Headwaters Inc. USA Catalytic Two-Stage Liquefaction CTSL DOE and HRI predecessor of HTI USA Liquid Solvent Extraction LSE British Coal Corp. UK Brown Coal Liquefaction BCL NEDO Japan Lummus Integrated Two-Stage Liquefaction ITSL Lummus USA Chevron Coal Liquefaction CCLP Chevron USA Kerr-McGee ITSL Kerr-McGee USA Consol Synthetic Fuel CSF Consol USA Mitsubishi Solvolysis MHI Japan Pyrosol Saarberwerke Germany Close-Coupled Two-Stage Liquefaction CC-TSL Amoco USA Supercritical Gas Extraction SCE Figure British Coal Corp. UK A report was issued in July 2001 by the . Department of Energy summarizing the results of its direct coal liquefaction development program. Following are excerpts from the conclusion of that report The DOE direct liquefaction program produced a surprisingly mature technology. The intensive effort between 1976 and 1982 Phase I when 90 of the program funds were expended resulted in a demonstration of the technical feasibility of the major process components. The Phase I processes however were deficient in terms of product yield and quality. This stimulated further research and development work between 1983 and 1999 Phase II . The Phase II work was significantly less costly than earlier demonstration projects but resulted in substantial improvements in process performance and economics. It now is possible to produce liquids of high quality at high yields that approach the theoretical maximum. At the same time the cost for a barrel of product dropped by 50 because of process optimization and increased yields. Economics and engineering studies conducted throughout Phase II have reduced the uncertainty and therefore the risk associated with commercial deployment of the technology. The current technology is well defined in terms of cost and performance. It represents a technically available option .