KOSEN 한인과학기술자네트워크

(SBIR) DOE - Advanced Power Systems And Control Devices Primary Sponsor: Department of Energy Deadline: 2/20/2001 The efficient and environmentally safe utilization of our most abundant fossil energy resources, coal and natural gas, is needed to sustain economic progress. The Department of Energy (DOE) is supporting the development of advanced technology power plants that offer higher efficiency, lower emissions, and reduced capital and operating cost. The "Vision 21" concept is a new approach to the production of energy from fossil fuels in the 21st century. It will integrate advanced concepts for high-efficiency power generation and pollution control into a class of fuel-flexible facilities capable of co-producing electric power, process heat, and high value fuels with near zero emissions. The approach includes a variety of configurations to meet differing market needs, including both distributed and central generation of power. The DOE is interested in innovative research related to coal and biomass gasification, fuel cells, and high pressure fluidized bed combustion systems that will benefit these advanced technologies and the Vision 21 concept. Grant applications are sought only in the following subtopics: a. Co-Feeding of Biomass with Coal for Gasification in Power Generation¾ Most entrained gasification systems, currently being developed for power production, process coal with water to make a coal-water slurry, which is fed into a gasifier. The gasifier operates at high temperatures and pressures (about 400 psi) to produce a fuel gas, which is then burned in a turbine to make electric power. As the disposition of biological waste has become an increasing environmental concern, a recurring idea has been to gasify biomass in place of some of the coal. This co-feeding would offer cost savings from not having to dispose of the biomass waste, reduced environmental pollution associated with the waste, and a relatively cheap source of energy. However, disadvantages include unreliability in the quantity and quality of the biomass feedstock, the potential need for different feed systems for different forms of biomass, and industry reluctance to use biomass. One approach to reduce industry reluctance is to reduce the percent of biomass in the co-feed so that a new feed system is not required. Therefore, grant applications are sought to develop a system to gasify biomass with coal, without requiring the creation of a new feed system. The most appealing biomass feedstocks would have high BTU content, would have consistent composition characteristics, are not currently being made into an economically viable product, and have current disposal methods that are expensive and/or cause environmental concerns. Sewage sludge, sawdust, and municipal waste are already under investigation; therefore, preference will be given to grant applications for other biomass materials. By the completion of the Phase II project, the proposed system must be evaluated in terms of feeding performance, gasifier performance, and the economics of the power plant that would use the co-feed slurry. Proposed systems must be tested with biomass-coal slurries with at least four different coals, depending on the origin of the biomass. If the biomass is available in only the East or the West, use only eastern or western coals, respectively. If the biomass is available in both the East and West, use two eastern and two western coals. Each of the four coals should be tested separately as a coal/biomass slurry, with varying biomass percentages, up to at least 20 percent biomass. For each coal/biomass combination, the following parameters must be determined: solids loading, viscosity, and heating value. b. Power Electronics for Solid-Oxide Fuel Cells¾Fuel cells offer a distinct advantage over power conversion technologies that use conventional fossil fuels due to the inherently high efficiencies associated with their direct conversion of electrochemical energy to useful work without the intermediate production of heat. Accordingly, the National Energy Technology Laboratory's Solid State Energy Conversion Alliance (SECA) program is attempting to develop low-cost, broadly applicable, 5 kW solid-oxide fuel cell (SOFC) systems to encourage commercialization of this important technology. However, cost-effective, compatible power electronics remains an issue in fuel cell system commercialization. Therefore, grant applications are sought to improve the cost, compatibility, and performance of fuel cell power electronics in the range of 5kW. Areas of research interest include the development of: (1) board or chip modules that maintain compatibility between fuel cell electronics and power electronics while being amenable to mass production manufacturing techniques; (2) thermally resistant power electronic components that would help alleviate the need to insulate or cool the components (note that SOFCs currently operate between 800oC and 1000oC); and (3) cost-effective switching algorithms to reduce electrical loss during DC to AC conversion while minimizing complexity. Grant applications may focus on power electronic requirements for single or multiple applications such as stationary, transportation, or military. c. Mercury Control¾ There have been numerous debates on the need for mercury control in the utility industry, and the Environmental Protection Agency has delayed any determination on regulation till December 2000. In the meantime, several mercury control systems are under investigation. Wet flue gas desulfurization systems, designed for sulfur dioxide, are being investigated for the removal of not only oxidized mercury but also non-soluble elemental mercury. Novel regenerable techniques have been investigated for both forms of mercury. Perhaps the most investigated technology has been the use of fine particulates of activated carbon (AC), injected upstream of particulate control devices that are already in place. After adsorbing the mercury, the AC is collected by the particulate control device along with fly ash and other particles of combustion. The activated carbon approach has shown promise at pilot-scale, with 30 to 90 percent mercury removal, depending on such factors as speciation of the mercury, temperature, vapor-phase flue gas conditions/constituents, particle size of the AC, and the dynamics of the particulate control device (i.e., whether it is an electrostatic precipitator or a fabric filter). However, in order to achieve satisfactory mercury removal, the AC approach requires carbon-to-mercury mass ratios as high as 100,000-to-1, with estimated costs for the utility industry in the range of $2 to 5 billion per year (or more, for nominal mercury removals of 80 percent using powdered AC). In addition, the collection of AC with the fly ash increases the concentration of carbon in the fly ash, leading to an estimated 20 percent loss from current fly ash sales. Grant applications are sought to develop alternative adsorbents (i.e., not using activated carbon alone) for the capture of elemental and oxidized mercury from the combustion of coal, in the flue gas upstream of the particle control devices (i.e., electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) and fabric filters) utilized in the coal-fired utility industry. The novel adsorbents must be capable of capturing both forms of mercury at temperatures between 230o and 320o Fahrenheit, within 0.5 to 1.5 seconds (typical residence times upstream of existing utility ESPs), at a cost that does not exceed 25 cents per pound of adsorbent, and with mercury capture efficiencies between 60 and 90 percent. (The mercury capture efficiency may apply to the two forms of mercury individually or to total mercury, and does not include the natural capture of mercury by the fly ash.) In addition, the captured mercury species must be in a stable form, so that there would be no re-emission or escape of the mercury to the environment if the absorbent were disposed in a landfill or used with fly ash or other by-products. Also, there should be no adverse impact on the performance of products and processes associated with mixtures of the absorbent and by-product (e.g., fly ash or the pozzolon process for concrete). Please note: (1) The technical topics are to be interpreted literally; DOE personnel are not permitted to further interpret the narrative description of the technical topics. (2) The award selection process is extremely competitive. Last year, only 1 out of 6 grant applications were awarded. Only those applications with the highest scientific/technical quality will be competitive. References 2000 Solid State Energy Conversion Alliance (SECA) Workshop, Baltimore, MD, June 1-2, 2000. (Will be available in August 2000 on CD ROM at Website: http://www.netl.doe.gov/) (Click on "Publications" and then "CD ROM Ordering System")* 1998 Fuel Cell Seminar Abstracts, Palm Springs, CA, November 1998. (Available from Courtesy Associates, Inc., 2000 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036. Telephone: 202 973-8671)* Hirschenhofer, J. H., et.al., Fuel Cell Handbook, Fourth Edition, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy, Federal Energy Technology Center, November 1998. (Available from National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA. Telephone: 703 487-4650. Web site: http://www.NTIS.gov)* Overend, R. P. and Chornet, E., eds., Biomass, A Growth Opportunity in Green Energy and Value-Added Products: Proceedings of the 4th Biomass Conference of the Americas, Aug. 29-Sept. 2, 1999, Kidlington, Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science, Ltd. (ISBN: 0080430198)* Proceedings of the 1999 Review Conference on Fuel Cell Technology, Chicago, Illinois August 3-5, 1999. (CD Rom available on the Web at: http://www.netl.doe.gov/) (Click on "Publications" and then "CD ROM Ordering System")* * All reference for the above can be obtained from a 100 page document. (Mercury measurement and Its Control: Brown, T.D., Smith, D.N., Hargis, R.A., and O'Dowd, W.J., "What We Know, Have Learned, and Need to Further Investigate," Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 1999 Critical Review, June 1999.) The document can be obtained from the A&WMA from their website http://www.awma.org or from Thomas D. Brown at brown@netl.doe.gov. NOTE: The Solicitations listed on this site are copies from the various SBIR agency solicitations and are not necessarily the latest and most up-to-date. For this reason, you should always use the suggested link below. This will take you directly to the appropriate agency information where you can read the official version of the solicitation you are interested in. The official link for this page is: http://sbir.er.doe.gov/sbir/Solicitations/FY%202001/2001.htm. Solicitation closing date is February 20, 2001.