infrared heater technology utilizing landfill gas …infrared heater technology utilizing landfill...

INFRARED HEATER TECHNOLOGY UTILIZING LANDFILL GAS

IN THE UKRAINE

FINAL REPORT

Prepared for:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Landfill Methane Outreach Program

1310 L Street, NW, Suite 1013H Washington, D.C. 20005-4113

Prepared by:

Renewable Energy Agency (REA)

2A Zhelyabova str., of. 116, 03067

Kyiv, Ukraine

June 2010

Infrared Heater Technology Utilizing Landfill Gas in the Ukraine

2

INFRARED HEATER TECHNOLOGY UTILIZING LANDFILL GAS IN THE

UKRAINE 1. PROJECT SUMMARY The primary objective of this project is to support the U.S. EPA in achieving its goals to advance near-term, cost effective methane recovery and use as a clean energy source, and support the goals of the Methane to Markets (M2M) Partnership in Ukraine. To achieve this objective Renewable Energy Agency with the support of SCS Engineers implemented the infrared heaters technology at a landfill facility in the Ukraine. This technology was chosen because it is one of the most demonstrative, perspective and effective. Another positive factor is successful implementation of this technology in such countries as USA, Canada and Argentina. Infrared heating using LFG is ideal for facilities with space heating needs which are located near landfills. It’s creates a high intensity energy that is safely absorbed by surfaces that warm up, which in turn, release heat into the atmosphere to raise the ambient temperature. In such way LFG energy is converting into useful heat energy. The implementation of the infrared heaters technology demonstration project in the Ukraine landfill showed the following positive effects:

• Reduction of explosion and fire risk at the part of the landfill; • Reduction in ground water pollution; • Reduction of offensive odors, affecting public health and socio-economic status of the

surrounding communities; • Improved landfill operational procedures; • Trained local staff in operation and maintenance of a gas utilization plant and heaters; • Increased access to the alternative energy both on the local and national level; • Transfer of clean gas recovery technologies, building of local know-how about the

technology of LFG extraction and correct landfill site management after closure; • Demonstration of the practice of landfill gas recovery in Ukraine, facing at the moment a

number of market and legislation barriers; • Created a better environment for replicating similar investment projects.

The project team is completely fulfilled the project plan at that moment. The agreed project and operating plant are transferred to the procession of the landfill owner. 2. INTRODUCTION Today in Ukraine municipal solid waste landfills are associated with negative stereotype. The lack of modern landfilling practices, such as the use of daily cover, proper compaction techniques, leachate collection, and gas collection are all examples limiting the LFG collection and utilization capabilities at many landfills in the Ukraine. In such way the generated inside landfills LFG is released directly to the atmosphere.


3

By composition LFG is as a mixture of methane (app. 50%), carbon dioxide (app. 50%) and other components (less then 1%). Methane is a potent greenhouse gas. It is 21 times more effective than CO2 at trapping heat in the atmosphere over a 100-year time period. Methane is the second-most significant GHG after CO2, accounting for 16% of global GHG emissions (Fig. 1). This relatively short atmospheric lifetime makes it an important candidate for mitigating global warming in the near term.

Methane is also the major component of natural gas. Therefore it can be used as renewable energy source alternative to natural gas. Heat energy, electricity or their combination can be produced from LFG. It is used as alternative gas in annealing ovens, greenhouses, infrared heaters (IRH). One of the mentioned option LFG utilization in infrared heaters was implemented within the demonstration project at typical Ukrainian landfill. The project was implemented with support of the U.S. EPA Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP), as part of the Methane to Markets Partnership (M2M), an international initiative to assist partner countries to reduce global methane emissions into the atmosphere. Purpose of the Report The basic purpose of the report is to show the advantages of LFG utilization technologies by the example of implementation infrared heater project in the Ukraine. This purpose is achieved through the pursuit of the following activities:

• Providing training for the Ukrainian team members on landfill gas operations; • Identifying candidate landfills within the Ukraine during a site visits; • Evaluation of the available technical information for project capabilities; • Designing of the project; • Installation of the LFG wells, heaters and flare; • Presentation of project outcome at a different conference and magazines on energy.

Another purpose of this project was to reduce negative ecological influence of the landfill, stimulate landfills owners for landfill gas projects implementations, training landfill owner and operator and explain importance of LFG technologies.

Figure 1. Global greenhouse gas emissions


4

In report one could find information about landfill gas status, waste disposal practice in Ukraine, gas mitigation technologies, infrared heating technology and its advantages, technical information about design, construction and installation stages of this project, results and future perspectives Data Sources The available information about candidate landfills was collected during site visits made by REA together with SCS Engineers. The available technical information about IRH technology was collected during site visits to operating landfill gas projects in the U.S. and literature observation. As the result of these activities the following information was gathered and used for the preparation of the report:

• Waste disposal practice in Ukraine; • Landfills description and conditions; • LFG generation and composition; • IRH technology descriptions; • IRH technology technical, economical and ecological operation data.

3. LANDFILL SELECTION For project implementation the appropriate landfills should be identified. The landfill should be complying with the following requirements:

• Legal possibility of the project implementing at the landfill; • Sufficient quantity of disposal waste and LFG generation; • Presence of buildings for heating; • Availability of electricity at the landfill.

Waste Disposal in Ukraine In spite of the 2005 regulation, waste disposal in Ukraine is, in many cases, carried out at landfills and dump sites that are improperly located, mainly in terms of hydro geological conditions and distance to water bodies, wells and aquifers. A major portion of the MSW generated in Ukraine (approx. 96%) is disposed at landfills and dumpsites, 4% is incinerated. There are approx. 900 registered landfills in Ukraine and more than 2000 uncontrolled dump sites with the total area of 5312 ha. Most officially registered landfills have started operations as unmanaged dumps and are operated without any environmental protection measures Furthermore, the vast majority of the landfills and dumpsites of a similar age to the Project Sites (20 – 40 years old), are not properly designed with regard to surface water diversion, leachate collection and treatment and also landfill gas management. The operation of many landfills and dumpsites is not carried out with a view to minimize the adverse impacts on environment and human health. Waste is often disposed over large areas rather than in small well-defined cells and without proper soil cover, resulting in wind dispersal of waste and odour nuisances and enhanced


5

leachate generation. Proper operation of leachate collection and treatment systems as well as gas management systems is uncommon. The Table 1 below presents information regarding a representative sample of landfills throughout the Ukraine. The sample represents 40% of the major landfills servicing large cities with number of inhabitants of more than 200 thousand persons. Table 1. Representative sample of landfills throughout the Ukraine

Landfill site

Number of inhabitants serviced by

landfill

Annual waste amount

(uncompacted)

Total amount of waste

collected to 2009

(uncompacted)

Starting year of landfill

site operation

Total landfill

area LFG control

- thousand 1000 m3 million m3 yr ha - Mariupol (Primorskyi) 300 2.56 1967 14.3 None

Mariupol (Ordzhonikidze)

500 400 2.54 1976 17.6 None

Zhytomir 300 300 8.0 1957 18.7 None Vinnitsa 385 340 5.1 1985 5 None Khmelnitsky 250 490 14.8 1956 8.8 None

Chernivtsi 260 340 2.7 1995 25 Passive venting

Ivano-Frankivsk 230 260 3.0 1992 22.4 None Lutsk 215 340 3.6 1991 9.9 None Rivne 245 400 12.2 1959 24.5 None Kirovohrad 280 260 10.9 1949 23 None

Cherkassy 310 360 4.8 1992 9 Passive venting

Kremenchuk 245 290 12.3 1965 28 None As the table indicates, landfills in Ukraine either have: a) no system for collecting, venting or flaring LFG, or b) passive system for venting LFG only. One demonstration project on LFG collection and flaring was implemented at the Lugansk landfill in 2002 supported by EcoLinks grant and USAID. The project was aimed at demonstration of LFG control practice, thus promoting development of clean technologies and renewable energy sources. Three LFG extraction wells, collecting pipe and a flare were installed at the landfill and monitored for a year, however this work has not had any follow-up activities upon project completion. Development of LFG projects was started in the JI framework only, specifically: project design documents for Kyiv, Donetsk and Kharkiv landfills were developed by Danish Environment Protection Agency (DEPA, Copenhagen, Denmark) in the beginning of 2004 and letter of approval was obtained for Kharkiv landfill. Several LFG JI capture and flaring were recently started at Yalta/Alushta, Lviv and Mariupol landfills by Ukrainian companies “Gafsa-Skhid”, “Gafsa”, “Tis Eco”, and SEC Biomass.


6

Candidate Landfills According to the requirements presented below project team began to collect information on potential candidates. First, the project was announced at Ukrainian conferences “Municipal Solid Waste Landfills. Management Problems and Environmental Regulation”, February 25-29, 2008, Yaremche, Ukraine. Second presentation was done at the 5-th International Conference “Cooperation for Waste Issues”, April 2-3, 2008, Kharkiv, Ukraine. One more presentation was done at all-Ukrainian seminar “Sanitary cleaning-2008” organized by the Ministry of the housing and communal service: During all these conferences the possibility to install infrared heaters at Ukrainian landfills were discussed with landfill owners and operators. Consequently several candidate landfills were contacted to determine an interest in developing such a project, as well as developing a list of candidate facilities in general proximity to the landfill that have space heating needs. All candidate landfills having facilities for heating were contacted and suitable landfills were visited. The list of contacted or/and visited candidate landfills are following:

• Cherkassy; • Kiev; • Sevastopol; • Mariupol; • Khmelnitskiyi; • Kharkiv.

From the beginning of the project there were two top candidates expressed interest for the project among these landfills – Kiev and Sevastopol. Kiev had higher priority in comparison with Sevastopol because:

• Short distance from the capital – it is good for the demonstration purpose and convenient for project implementation;

• Presence of the heat consumer – garage which has not any space heating at the moment (Fig. 2a).

Figure 2b. Satellite view of the closed section of the landfill

Figure 2a. Garage building


7

The disadvantage for the IRH project at Kiev landfill connected to the presence of the leachate. REA believed that wells could be installed at section 1 closed in 2004 (Fig. 2b). The difference between upper point of the surface and leachate pond level is about 7-10 meters. Unfortunate during the agreement negotiation and discussion of the practical matters of the project implementation the management of the landfill did not finally express high interest to the project. Therefore it was decided to change the location for the project. Another candidate landfill (Sevastopol) was visited in August 17, 2008. Sevastopol is one of two largest cities in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. It has a population of approximately 380 thousand inhabitants. Since Sevastopol is popular resort destination, during the summer time its population increases up to 600-700 thousand inhabitants. Landfill is situated 25 km from the central part of the city and approximately 3.5 km from the sea coast. There is a waste sorting plant at the location of the landfill which could be potential heat consumer during the winter period (Fig. 3a). Unfortunate during the mission it was discovered that the site has severe problems with sub-surface fire. The signs of the fire can be visible at the different locations of the surface (Fig. 3b). This sub-surface fire could be a consequence of the big fire event happened during the summer 2007. As a result it was decided to reject this landfill as a candidate for the project implementation.

A Primorskyi sanitary landfill owned by the Mariupol City State Administration was next candidate for the project. It accepts domestic and commercial waste from Mariupol and the surrounding area (about 500,000 inhabitants). The site opened in 1967 and received approximately 172,300 tones of waste in 2006. The landfill is closed in 2008 with an estimated capacity approximately of 2.5 million tones of waste. Preliminary biogas modeling estimates 753 m3/hr of biogas at 50% methane in 2008. There is a brick factory next to the landfill. It could be heat consumer in the winter period. The general view of the work shop of the brick factory and possible area of the landfill gas wells location can be seen in the Fig. 4a and 4b. Several meeting were prepared and executed with the management and owners both landfill and the brick factory. In the beginning all local players were interested in the implementation of the project. Therefore it was preliminary decided to implement project in Mariupol landfill to install IRH in the workshop of the brick factory.

Figure 3b. Landfill sub-surface fire Figure 3a. Sorting plant


8

Unfortunate in November 2008 the project team discovered that it is hardly possible to implement the project in Mariupol. The brick factory faces severe economical problem due to economical crisis and was not interesting in the project anymore. So it was decided to move project again to another location. In February 2008 REA visited Khmelnitskiy landfill. REA was lucky to establish good relation with landfill management and city authority and convince them to cooperate. Landfill operator has big garage close to the landfill (230 m2) suitable for space heating (see Fig. 5a). Landfill operator also agrees to allow us to work at the certain part of the landfill (see Fig. 5b).

After signing a formal agreement, other candidate landfills were not considered. The preliminary, designing and construction works are finally started at the Khmelnitskiy landfill. 4. KHMELNITSKIY LANDFILL DESCRIPTION Khmelnitskiy is the city with a population of about 250,000 inhabitants. It is located in the western part of the country, about 375 km southwest of Kiev. Location of Khmelnitskiy is shown on the map at Fig. 6.

Figure 5b. Satellite view of the certain part of the landfill with wells location

Figure 5a. The general view of the garage

Figure 4b. Satellite view of the landfill area with wells location

Figure 4a. The general view of the work shop of the brick factory


9

The landfill is located into the city border in north-west direction from its center. The coordinates of the landfill entrance and central part are shown in the Table 2 and the satellite view of the landfill is shown in the Fig. 7a below. Table 2. Landfill locations

Point Parameter GPS Coordinates N 49027’32’’ Landfill entrance E 26057’48’’ N 49027’40’’ Central part E 26057’52’’

The owner of the landfill site is the Khmelnitsky City State Administration; the responsible body is the Department for Municipal Services. The operator of the landfill site is communal company “Spetskommuntrans” (SKT). SKT is 100% in communal ownership having 165 employees. The main activity of the company is sanitary cleaning (municipal waste management including collection, transportation and disposal of the solid waste, and landfill operation). Physical Characteristics Khmelnitskiy is serviced by the only one landfill, which started operations in 1956. The landfill was established as uncontrolled dump where the previous clay pit used to be. Currently the landfill covers the area of 8.8 ha. The shape of landfill resembles cut pyramid with steep slopes. (Fig. 7b).

Figure 6. Map of Ukraine


10

Total waste amount disposed, at the landfill as reported by landfill operator, is about 14.3 million m3 (uncompacted). The average depth of waste is approximately 20 m. According to the official information the landfill is overfilled by waste and further waste delivery will result in land area increase. Therefore landfill closure is planned to occur during the nearest years. Solid Waste Management Waste disposal at the landfill started from the southern part (see Fig. 7а) and is expanded to the north in the process of its accumulation. Waste is disposed through the whole active area of the landfill and is leveled using two bulldozers. Waste compaction is realized by heavy compactor. Therefore the average waste density can be evaluated as at least 0.75 t/m3 through the whole landfill area. Regular waste covering is not practices at the landfill site. Daily covering by soil or clay layer is also not applied. As reported by landfill operator, occasionally the landfill receives construction debris which is used for covering purposes. From 2008 the closure of the southern and southwestern part was started. These activities include soil delivery to the landfill and its flattening through the surface. Figures 8 and 9 below demonstrate the view of the closed area and disposal area. As the landfill has no top covering, stormwater enters to the landfill body, which results in the great leachate volume generation. Accumulated leachate is draining through the landfill body and gathering at the pond in the northern part of the landfill. Leachate is pumped out of pond to the landfill surface and recirculated through the landfill body during summer time. LFG emission control system and underground water pollution control is absent. During warm seasons landfill fires in the northern slope can happened. Fire suppression takes from 1 to 3 days.

Figure 7a. Landfill satellite view Figure 7c. Landfill western part view

Figure 7b. Landfill northern part view


11

Such incidents attract public attention to the landfill, which result in interest increase to the LFG collection system construction.

Khmelnitsky landfill is relatively well equipped as compared to other Ukrainian landfills. Landfill territory has protecting fence. The courtyard with guard is situated near the landfill entrance. Personnel service room and repair shop are located in the territory of courtyard; there are also power supply, water supply and gas supply in its territory. Courtyard and landfill entrance are illuminated in the nighttime. Climatic Conditions The feature of Khmelnitskiy region is a great amount of precipitation as compared to neighboring regions. The climate of Khmelnitskiy region and Khmelnitskiy city is characterized by temperate continental climate with mild winter and warm damp summer. The average annual temperature is about 7 0С, January is the coldest month with -5.6 0С, and July is the hottest one with +19.4 0С. The length of the coldest season with the temperature of -17 0С is 8 days a year. Heating season lasts for 190 days at the most with an average temperature of -1.5 0С. Average annual precipitation is 600-640 mm; precipitation occurs mostly during the warm season, sometimes as storms. Snow depth is about 200 mm. Depth of frost penetration varies from 200 to 600 mm. Table 3 presents monthly data about Khmelnitskiy climate conditions for the period of more than 10 years. Table 3. Khmelnitskiy weather conditions

Parameter I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Year Average T-re, 0C -5 -3 0 8 13 17 17 17 13 8 3 -3 7 Average High T-re, 0C -3 -1 3 13 18 23 23 22 19 13 5 -1 11 Average Low T-re, 0C -8 -6 -3 3 8 11 12 12 8 4 1 -5 3 Precipitation, mm 40 50 30 30 50 60 110 50 50 20 40 40 640 Geological Conditions Khmelnitskiy city is located in the prong of Prydniprovska Elevation (320-380 m). Relief is presented mostly by elevated woody plain deeply dismembered by river valley and gullies. Such geologic structure caused the mineral resources of the territory. These resources are presented by non-metallic minerals: granite, kaolin, limestone, brick clay, loam, sand, chalk, marl, sandstone, gypsum, bentonite clay.

Figure 8. Landfill closed area Figure 9. Landfill disposal area


12

Soil under the landfill body is presented by clay which contains more than 50% of physical clay parts with less than 0.01mm diameter. Therefore clay density is very high and is 1700 kg/m3 in average. Another feature of the clay is its plasticity caused by high content of small particles. That is why clay swells a lot and is weakly pervious to water. Clay flow capacity is determined by porosity and filtration factor. Representative value of clay porosity factor is 0.45 and filtration factor is >0.001 m/day. In consideration of data described above, bottom waterproofing of Khmelnitsky landfill is assumed to be rather good. Disposal History Information about waste amount annually disposed at the landfill had been received from the landfill operator. These data are estimated based on the capacity and number of incoming trucks (and are reported in volume). Waste filling data is available for 2001 through 2010 and is summarized in Table 4. Landfill operator also estimates that at the end of 2003, approximately 14.3 million m3 of waste had been filled. Table 4. Waste disposal rates

Year Waste disposed, m3 2001 271 200 2002 326 400 2003 410 000 2004 491 500 2005 539 000 2006 591 500 2007 696 550 2008 740 550 2009 728 300

2010 (first six months ) 345 500 Landfill was started from the southern part. Waste is disposed evenly through the working surface. According to the official information the landfill is overfilled by waste and further waste delivery will result in land area increase. Therefore landfill closure is planned to occur during the nearest years. Waste composition data Waste disposed at the landfill is mostly municipal solid waste. As reported by landfill operator, construction debris is not delivered to the landfill except covering purpose. Waste morphological content, reported by landfill operator, confirms this information (see Table 5). Table 5. Waste morphological content

Waste Component Mass Portion, % Food waste 40-49 Paper, cardboard 22-30 Wood 1-2 Textiles 3-5 Bones 1-2 Leather, rubber 1


13

Waste Component Mass Portion, % Ferrous metal 2-3 Non-ferrous metal 0.5-1.5 Glass 2-3 Stones 1 Plastic 3-6 Other 3-4 Residual (less than 15 mm) 6-8

5. LFG GENERATION AND RECOVERY On June 2009 project participant SCS Engineers prepared a preliminary estimate of the potential LFG recovery rate based on its in-house LFG model. The SCS Engineers model employs a first-order decay equation identical to the algorithm in the U.S. EPA’s LandGEM emissions model. This LFG model was developed by modifying U.S. EPA’s model input variables (amount of methane waste produces L0 and rate of waste decay k) to account for the differences in the disposal practices and waste composition in Ukraine. For model input modification SCS Engineers considered climate conditions and composition of wastes disposed in the Khmelnitskiy landfill. Consequently the following values for model input were assigned:

• L0 total = 69 m3/ton; • k (fast-decay) = 0.180/year; • k (medium-decay) = 0.036/year; • k (slow-decay) = 0.009/year.

Figure 10 show the model results for three different scenarios by varying the collection system coverage from low, medium and high. SCS Engineers considers that the mid-range collection system coverage results are the most likely to be achieved.

Figure 10. LFG recovery projection Khmelnitskiy landfill


14

Considering the installation of a collection and flaring system in 2009, LFG recovery under mid-range scenario is estimated to be approximately 716 m3/hr (422 cft). The corresponding total emission reductions achieved for 2009 through 2012 through the combustion of this captured methane would be about 175,984 tonnes CO2-eq. Based on the preliminary modeling results for the mid-range scenario, REA concluded that the Khmelnitskiy landfill has sufficient LFG recovery rate for both full-project and especially IRH project implementation. 6. IRH TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION An infrared heater is a body with a higher temperature which transfers energy to a body with a lower temperature through electromagnetic radiation. Depending on the temperature of the emitting body, the wavelength of the infrared radiation ranges from 780 nm to 1 mm. No contact or medium between the two bodies is needed for the energy transfer. A rough classification of infrared heaters is connected to wavelength bands of major emission of the energy: near infrared (NIR) or short wave for the range from 780 nm to 1400 nm, these emitters are also named bright because still some visible light with glare is emitted; carbon (CIR) and medium infrared for the range between 1400 nm and 3000 nm; far infrared (FIR) or dark emitters for everything above 3000 nm. NIR or short-wave infrared heaters operate at high filament temperatures above 1800 °C and when arranged in a field can reach high power densities of several hundreds kW/m2. Their peak wavelength is well below the absorption spectrum for water, making them unsuitable for many drying applications. They are well suited for heating of silica where a deep penetration is needed. CIR and medium-wave infrared heaters operate at filament temperatures of around 1000 °C. They reach maximum power densities of up to 150 kW/m2 (CIR) and 60 kW/m2 (medium-wave) respectively. Infrared heaters are commonly used in infrared modules (or emitter banks) combining several heaters to achieve larger heated areas. By design there are two basic types of infrared heaters:

• Luminous of High Intensity; • Tube Heaters.

Luminous Heaters Principles The more uniform the gas-air-mixture of the infrared heater is, the better the radiant heat production can be achieved. Figure 11 show the process description of Luminous heaters. The process of Luminous heaters begins with the delta-mixing-chamber (1) where fuel and air enters. The venture (2) takes the precise proportions of gas and air and delivers a combustible gas-air-mixture that is pre-heated, pressurized and evenly distributed in the delta-mixing-chamber. Through this gained boost in fuel delivery the energy is evenly distributed at each and every point of the ceramic tiles (3), even at low gas-pressures. From the delta-mixing-chamber the gas-air-mixture streams through thousands of small passages in the ceramic tile burner (4), the heart of each gas-infrared-heater. On the surface of the ceramic tile, the gas-air-mixture combusts and


15

generates thousands of small flames (5). Comfortable radiation-heat (6) is set free at a surface-temperature of approximately 950 °C (1750°F). The special construction of gas-infrared-heaters makes possible the conversion of convection heat into radiant heat: the reflectors (7) are warmed up to 500°C (930°F) and the additional radiant output (8) increases the efficiency significantly. Therefore our gas-infrared-heaters work on the basis of two radiation-mechanisms: ‘high’ and ‘low’ intensity – this unique technology is called “combined intensity”.

Additionally, the unique surface structure and the exclusive formulated recipe of the ceramic tile optimize the radiation-exploitation. Due to the fast heat transfer in the ceramic tile, combustion is “cooled down”. This means that controlled combustion of natural gas (or LFG) results in significantly low emissions NOx values are below 10 ppm. Radiant Tubes Principles The process description of Radiant Tubes heaters is presented on Figure 12. The process begins from creating gas-air-mixture in burner. This mixture is forced through a ceramic tile and is ignited at the surface by an electrode. With this construction, gas is combusted in a laminar flame that reaches a length of up to 5 meters (16 ft). The tube is heated by the long flame and combustion gasses and emits comfortable infrared radiant heat. An integrated turbulator ensures even temperature distribution over the total length of the tube. The flue gas of the radiant tube is carried through a four inch exhaust vent system to the outside. The combustion air can be taken from the inside the building or from the outside through an air intake duct. Besides the exhaust vent system for individual heaters, it is possible to indirectly vent our tube heaters with a central flue fan. The tubes consist of aluminized and heavy gauge emissive coated steel to provide corrosion-resistant durability and withstand high temperatures. The radiant-optimized Focus Shield reflector traps convection heat for conversion to radiant heat that is directed to the area where it is needed. This additionally increases the radiant performance and increases the level of comfort.

Figure 11. Luminous IRH process description


16

Infrared radiant tube heaters are ideal for a wide range of heating applications, including those with average to low ceiling heights. Infrared radiant heaters are sometimes used outdoors to improve the comfort of people at outdoor events or on patios. Firing rates from 12 to 60 kW (45,000 Btuh to 200,000 Btuh), tube lengths from 3 to 20 meters (10 to 70 ft) in “U”-tube or straight tube configuration, and an optional modular 90° elbow kit. Radiant Tubes heaters have next adventures:

• Ceramic burner creates a long and laminar flame in the tube system. This leads to a uniform transfer of heat to the tube, ensuring even distribution of the radiant heat. This makes tube heaters extremely energy efficient;

• The position of the fan, high quality motor bearings and the optimized flow properties of the burner make the system very quiet - as quiet as a whisper;

• 2-stage feature improves comfort. This technology, known from boilers, is now available for tube heaters. The 2-stage feature allows controlling the heat output according to the actual heat requirement. This improves heating comfort and can save energy;

• A pressure burner system achieves reliability. Important burner components, such as the fan and bearings, are not exposed to the heat and moisture of the exhaust flue gas. This considerably increases the lifetime of the system and reduces life-cycle costs.

7. IRH SELECTION Nowadays in Ukraine IRHs market is not very developed. Limited number of manufactures and distributions companies presented on the market. Main demands for IRHs in Ukraine are presence of natural gas for heating projects and possibility of alternative using of IRHs that operated on others gas fuels. Project partner company SCS Engineers shared with REA of their experience in this sector and recommended two companies witch widely presented in this sector in USA. Summarized all recommendations and analyze results two companies - “Schwank” and “Roberts Gordon” were chosen.

Figure 12. Radiant Tube IRH process description


17

Company “Schwank” is world IRH leader producer. “Schwank” is also inventor of IRHs. It has more than 75 years experience in this sphere. Nowadays they install more than 2 million IRHs all over the world. IRHs are producing in more than 20 countries including Russia, USA, Germany and others. “Schwank” is producing luminous and tube heaters. For the project REA is focusing on tube heaters (dark heaters). The types of heaters are differentiating by power and application area. Table 6 below summarizes the basic information about the most widespread types of “Schwank” IRH. Table 6. Widespread types of “Schwank” IRH.

Type Heating capacity, Btu/hr

Heating system

length, ft Application area Picture

Ultra Series 60,000 to 200,000 20 to 70

Industrial factories, sports facilities, show

rooms

STS-JZ Series 45,000 to 200,000 10 to 70


rooms

S100/U Series 45,000 to 200,000 10 to 70

Churches, Industrial

factories, sports facilities, show

rooms

STW-JZ Series 45,000 to 200,000 10 to 70

Car wash & harsh environment,

Industrial factories.

SPW-JZ Series 45,000 to 200,000 10 to 70



STR-JZ Series 45,000 to 60,000 10 to 30


rooms Another company that REA investigated was “Roberts Gordon”. It is well known company with more than 50 years producing history of IRHs. It is producing IRH in two countries in USA and UK. In Ukraine “Roberts Gordon” has more than one hundred successful projects. Nowadays more than five hundreds IRHs already install in Ukraine. In the Table 7 different types of IRHs which are producing by “Roberts Gordon” are presented. REA has contacted two local offices of listened above companies and got their commercial proposal for designated garage. After comparing commercial proposals REA chose “Roberts Gordon”. That choice was done by several reasons:


18

• “Roberts Gordon” company IRHs was cheaper than “Schwank”; • “Roberts Gordon” was recommend by project partner SCS Engineers whose

recommendation based on their exploitation experience of IRHs; • “Roberts Gordon” IRHs are more applicable for landfill conditions and easy maintained

for LFG. Consequently four infrared heaters “Roberts Gordon” Black Heat U30 (heat capacity 30 kW each) were chosen and purchased for project implementation (see Tab. 7 row 2). The heat calculation and installation works were completed by subcontractor – Ukrainian energy service company “ESCO-Centre”. Table 7. Types of “Roberts Gordon” IRHs.

Type Heating capacity, Btu/hr

Heating system

length, ft Application area Picture

Europe

BHST 52,000 to 170,000 21 to 52

Industrial factories, sports facilities, show rooms, car wash

& harsh environment

BHUT 52,000 to 170,000 11 to 30

Industrial factories, sports facilities, show rooms, car wash

& harsh environment

USA/Canada

Vantage HE 40,000 to 160,000 10 to 60

Churches, Industrial

factories, sports facilities, show

rooms

Gordon Ray BH 40,000 to 200,000 10 to 60



Vantage NP 40,000 to 200,000 10 to 50



Caribe 30,000 to 50,000 8 to 11,6 Sports facilities, show rooms


19

8. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT Project development was conducted during the period of April-October 2009. The objective of the project was erection of gas collection and treatment system, horizontal pipelines construction and IRHs installation. For these purposes accomplishment the following activities had been performed:

• signing of the contractor's agreements; • designing of technical documentation and performance specifications; • manufacturing of gas treatment station; • construction of gas collection wells, pipelines, foundation; • installation of gas treatment station and IRHs; • starting-up and operating of full system.

Several subcontractors participated at that stage of project implementation. The gas collection and treatment system was designed in cooperation with SEC “Biomass”. The IRHs was designed and installed by “ESCO-Centre”. The manufacturing and installation of the gas treatment station was done by Ukrainian engineering company “Soyuzpostachzbut”. The horizontal piping and internal garage piping was done by Ukrainian engineering company “Technomontazh-Yukom”. Design Work The designing work was performed in several stages with involvement of two different companies. First stage of design work includes LFG extraction from the landfill and supplying of treated gas to the garage. This stage was executed by SEC “Biomass” and it’s consists of the following parts:

• gas extraction wells; • individual gas pipelines; • condensate removing system; • gas treatment station with open flare; • automatic control; • electricity scheme.

Three vertical gas collection wells are the source of LFG in the project. The number of wells was chosen for normal continues work of all IRHs. Each collection well consist of HDPE pipe (SDR-17,6) with 110 mm diameter. The bottom portion of the pipe is perforated with boreholes (diameter 14 mm) approximately two-third of the total depth. The upper portion of the pipe is solid. The slotted interval is surrounded with gravel; bentonite and clay are used as plug. Figure 1 Appendix A shows the construction of collection well. The branched piping system is used in project. Individual pipe connects individual well with wellhead on gas treatment station. The PE-80 (SDR-17,6) pipe with diameter 63*3.6 is employed for landfill gas connection pipeline. Connection pipe placed under the landfill ground surface (in landfill body) in header trench. The connection pipes which flows under the road are protected with guard PE-80 pipe (diameter 110*10 mm). For condensate to be removed out all pipeline has angel of slope of 3 degree. Figure 2 Appendix A shows topographic map with pipeline placement and construction.


20

Collected condensate from pipeline is removing by traps. They are located in the lower point of collection system close to gas treatment station. Pipe PE-80 (SDR-17,6) with diameter 50 mm is used for traps construction. Configuration “J” is employ for condensate traps. Figure 3 Appendix A shows the configuration of condensate trap. The objective of gas treatment station is to purify and divide the collected LFG into two streams. One stream of LFG is delivered to IRHs, other one delivers LFG to open Flare. The automatic control system allows the dividing of the LFG flow into two separate streams. To achieve this objective the following equipment parts were used:

• wellheads; • gas collector; • blower; • condensate separator; • moisture removing system; • hydrogen sulfide removing system; • mechanical gas filter; • flame arrestor; • open flare; • automatic pressure valves; • gas counters; • orifice plates; • gas analyzer; • pressure and temperature indicators.

The material of all external pipes of gas treatment station is standard carbon steel. The diameters of connection pipes are 50 mm. Block valve and bypass available for gas around the equipment during the repair work. Figure 4 and 5 Appendix A shows the general layout of the gas treatment station. Second stage of design work includes LFG utilization in IHRs for garage heating. It was executed by “ESCO-Center”, an official distributor of Roberts Gordon Company in Ukraine. This stage includes only IRH installation project in garage. For designing of this stage the following equipment was used:

• cut-off valve; • tube infrared heaters; • automatic and control system; • security system.

As mentioned before four infrared heaters “Roberts Gordon” Black Heat U30 was chosen for project design based on heat loses calculation made by “ESCO-Center”. The IRHs technical parameters are presented in the Table 8 below.


21

Table 8. IRH parameters

Title Roberts Gordon, USA IRH type Black Heat (BH) – 30 Tube type «U» – type Power capacity, kW 30 Nominal heat capacity, kW 27 Inlet pressure, mbar 20-50 Electricity supply, W 200 Gas consumption, m3/h 3.12 Heat performance,% 92-95

The standard carbon steel pipeline with 40 mm diameter was used for LFG distribution inside the garage. Individual steel pipe with 25 mm diameter connects distribution pipeline with IRH. The exhaust gas from IRHs is dumped through the outlet pipe outside of the garage. Automatic and control system was installed inside the building for reliable operation of heaters. The scheme of internal pipelines and location of IRH are shown on Figures 6 and 7 Appendix A For safe operation of working staff the security system “Varta” had been installed inside the garage. The system is designed to analyze the possible leakage of LFG and leakage of exhaust gases from IRHs. In cases of possible leakage security system shut down the LFG delivery by cut-off valve. Consequently the total structure of the project was develop and the project contractors received technical requirements for construction. The general layout of the designed system is shown in Fig. 13. The process description of the designed system is listened below.

Figure 13. General scheme of LFG extraction and utilization system


22

LFG is transported from the extraction wells thought the individual pipelines to the wellhead. Gas condensate, which collects at a lower point of pipelines is drained into traps and stream down into plastic tank. Then LFG flow through orifice plates and measured equipments which are uses for monitoring and control of gas quality and parameters. After individual measurement equipment all LFG well flows mixed in gas collector. Then mixed LFG passes through liquid separator. Separated LFG condensate sent back into the plastic tank. Dry LFG continued through one of two branches with moisture removing tank (zeolite filters) and hydrogen sulfide removing tank (activated charcoal filters). When one branch is under operation as a cleaning system the other one can be manually maintained. The valves and pressure indicators are available for control purpose. The replacement of the branches could be carried out manually by system operator. Then LFG passes thought mechanical gas filter and compressed by blower. The blower provides from 100 to 120 mbar outlet pressure. Suction vacuum is up to -100 mbar. After blower LFG goes through the gas counter for flow measurements and then divided into two gas stream by automatic pressure valve. This valve is butterfly valve fitted with electric actuator. The automatic pressure valve works in common with pressure indicator and controller. At the initial time all LFG delivered to the IRHs. If IRHs could consumed only the part of delivered LFG the rest of LFG is return to the open Flare. The pressure before open Flare is growing. This pressure is measured by pressure sensor and signal sends to the controller where the fix pressure is set (50 mbar). If the set pressure on the controller below the measured pressure before the Flare the controller transmits a signal to the electric actuator of the valve. The valve is opening as long as the pressure measured before the Flare will be equal to set pressure. The one gas flow travels to a flame arrestor which located just before open Flare. Then LFG arrives at an open Flare where it is burned. The second gas stream travels through individual gas counter to the garage. Inside the garage LFG passes through cut-off valve and sent to the IRHs. The IRHs are completely automatic system which burn LFG and produce radiant heat energy. This energy absorbed by surfaces that warm up (bulldozers, spare parts, worktable and others), which in turn, release heat into the building to raise the ambient temperature. Gas Treatment Station Manufacturing Gas treatment station construction started in July 2009. Manufacturing of gas treatment station was performed by private company «SoyuzSnabByt». Gas treatment station construction consists from three principal units manufacturing: moisture removing system, hydrogen sulfide removing system and LFG flaring system. For moisture removal from LFG «SoyuzSnabByt» constructed two cylindrical columns. In the lower part of each column there was placed small metal lattice. Internal volume of the column was filled with zeolite. LFG flow contacts with zeolite, drained LFG leaves the column and the moisture is absorbed by zeolite. After draining stage completion saturated zeolite is being removed for regeneration. Therefore each column has to be demountable which enables easily retrieve the used zeolite by gas treatment station operator. During regeneration stage of one column, another one is under operation. Switching between two columns is executed using shutoff valves.


23

Hydrogen sulfide removing unit consists of two similar cylindrical filters, which operate by turns. Filter structure is similar to draining column structure. The difference consists in filling of filter by activated charcoal. During the operation stage hydrogen sulfide is being removed from LFG flow, and during regeneration stage the filter is being demounted and activated charcoal retrieved. Open flare was designed and manufactured by «SoyuzSnabByt» company and consists from the following components:

• self-supporting base plate with reinforcing gussets and predrilled anchor bolt holes; • flare stack of 63 mm stainless steel pipe; • inlet flange; • flare tip; • Venturi tube of 80 mm stainless steel pipe is sized to provide an air mixture at the tip; • pilot tip with a propane fuel nozzle and electric spark plug igniter; • flame monitoring electrode.

«SoyuzSnabByt» company has also designed flare automatic control system. Flare high is 6 meters. It was divided into two equal parts using flanges junction with the view of ease transportation (see Fig. 14а). Figure 14b demonstrates gas treatment station manufacturing in the workshop. Completed system was assembled on a skid.

Construction Work Construction works had been performed at Khmelnitskiy landfill from May to September 2009. Before starting REA obtained construction permit from Khmelnitskiy City State Administration. Works began from areas selection and concurrence for wells drilling and gas treatment station installation. After area preparation, subcontractors stated works at the landfill site.

Figure 14b. Piping of gas treatment station Figure 14a. Open candlestick flare


24

Construction was realized according to the following stages:

• well drilling; • piping and platform constructions; • IRH installation; • piping connection; • gas treatment station installation; • system starting-up and operation.

Wells Drilling Wells drilling lasted from May 19 until May 23, 2009. Figure 1 Appendix В demonstrates wells schematic layout and distances between them. Drilling had been performed by boring machine with auger diameter of 300 mm to the depth of under 18 m. At first well 2 was bored. Drilling indicated that cover layer was absent. At a depth of 2 meters from the surface there observed partially decomposed waste mixed up with plastic and polyethylene. From the 4-th meter below the surface waste presented as a uniform mass. Leachate level was observed at a depth of 8.6 from the surface. While wells 1 and 3 drilling there were obtained similar waste composition results. Leachate level for both wells differed from the level in well 2. This is due to the fact that upper surface of the landfill in drilling area is uneven. Well 1 is located in the lowest part and well 3 is located in the highest part. Average leachate level was 8.7 m (see Table 9). Wells mounting had been performed according to the drawings just after drilling works. Polyethylene pipes with diameter of 110 mm and length of 10-12 m was installed into the bore hole. Length of perforated section was selected due to bore hole depth and leachate level measurement results. Pipe junction was executed using thermo resistor joint fittings. Figure 15а shows well drilling process and Figure 15b demonstrates well mounting.

Figure 15a. Wells drilling Figure 15b. Wells construction


25

After pipe mounting the space between its perforated section and bore hole was filled with gravel (fraction 30-40 mm). After filling up with gravel there was mounted bentonite plug 700 mm height. Remained space between solid tube and well was compacted by clay. Table 9 presents wells construction parameters. Table 9. Wells construction parameters

Well number Boring depth Installed pipe

length Perforation

length Solid pipe

length Leachate level

- m m m м m from surfaceWell 1 13.2 10 4,5 5 7,0 Well 2 12.4 11 5 6 8,6 Well 3 13.4 12 6 6 10,5

Piping and Foundation Construction The next stage after wells drilling was pipelining from wells to gas treatment station. Works were executed by local assembly organization “Technomontazh-Yukom” at the period from June 22 till July 3, 2009. Works consisted of the following activities:

• foundation pit around well for concrete rings installation; • pipe trench construction; • pipeline construction; • condensate traps installation; • foundation construction.

Works started from pits preparation around wells for concrete rings installation. Bottom of each pit was filled with gravel (fraction 50 mm) and there was made the foundation. Two concrete rings with height of 1 m were installed on the foundation. The upper section of the rings had been closing by concrete cover with manhole. Rings were installed with the aim of upper well section protection from mechanical damage. Works on trenches preparation inside the waste mass had started after rings installation. There were constructed individual trench from each well which connected to one general trench. The depth of the trench was 1.2 m, but under the road the depth of the trench was above 2 m. Trench bottom was filled with sand layer; polyethylene header pipes with 63 mm diameter were installed over the layer. Thermo resistor joint fittings were used for pipes, wells and plastic valve connection. Pipe inclination angle was no less than 30 with the view of condensate drain to the lower pipe section. Under the road header pipeline was inserted to the polyethylene case with 110 mm diameter. After the installation header pipeline was dust with sand. Remained upper section of the trench was compacted with waste. Figure 16а shows trench construction works. Trenches were constructed so that the lowest point located in front of the gas treatment station installation point. At this place there were installed condensate traps to the pipes through thermo resistor tee-fitting. Pipe free end was inserted to the plastic tank which served as condensate storage. In turns, tank was installed deeper than trench installation level. Automatic pump which


26

pumped condensate to the landfill body was installed inside the tank. For access to the tank and pump there was constructed a pit from two concrete rings. Figure 16b demonstrates tank and traps installation works.

Three header pipes were taken out to the surface after pipelining and condensate removal system installation. Near the pipe outlet there was prepared a yard for foundation of gas treatment station construction. In the issue of this stage the foundation with dimensions of 4*5 m was constructed. The foundation was left for few days till concrete solidify. IRH Installation IRHs were installed in the garage by assembly department of “ESCO-Centre” company. Parameters of the building presented in the Table 10 below. Table 10. Description of the project building design

Area Volume Minimal height Window area Building m² m³ m m² Garage 120,19 499,0 4,15 2,3

Table shows that minimal height of the building enables IRHs installation. Additionally landfill operator was recommended to winterize walls and roof of the building. These arrangements enable more effective use of heat produced by IRH. According to the project under the roof of the building there was mounted metal support system for IRH installation. IRH assembly followed the metal support system mounting. Each heater consisted of four straight tubes and 1800 bend connected by special metallic fittings. Above the pipes top there were installed reflecting barriers using special cramps. At the end of mounting process automatic burner was connected to one end of IRH tube and exhaust fan connected to other. Four assembled IRHs were hung to prepare metal support system under the roof. Exhaust gas pipeline assembling followed the IRHs installation in the garage. Pipeline with diameter of 110 mm was made from steel. Pipeline was connected to the exhaust fan of each heater. Separate

Figure 16a. Trench construction Figure 16b. Traps and condensate plastic tank installation


27

discharge pipe from IRH pair connected to common pipeline brought out of the building. Results of IRHs installation works are presented in the Figures 17а and 17b.

IRHs installation work package took two full days. In the issue of these works full-scale heating system has been installed inside the garage. Heating system operating regime is discrete which allows maintaining constant temperature inside the building twenty-four hours by minimal fuel consumption. IRH and GRP Piping Connection Refined LFG is supplied to IRHs using connection header pipeline between gas treatment station and repair shop. Junction pipelining was performed by “Technomontazh-Yukom” company from August 3 till August 8, 2009. Connection pipeline was installed in trenches with depth of 1.2 meters. Trench was constructed from gas treatment station to repair shop using excavator. Polyethylene pipeline with 40 mm diameter was placed to the prepared trench bottom. The connection pipes which flows under the road was protected with PE pipe case (diameter 90*5.2 mm). The thermo resistor joint fittings were used for separate pipeline sections assembling. Placed to the trench mounted pipeline was covered. Signal band applied for pipeline positioning was set on the coverage top. Remained trench space was filled with soil. As the result metal joint pipes were laid near gas treatment station and repair shop. Figure 18а below demonstrates connection pipeline construction works. Distribution pipeline construction works inside the repair shop followed after connection pipeline construction. Header pipeline was installed trough the inside wall of garage. For header pipeline there used steel tube with 40 mm diameter. From header pipeline to each IRH there was installed pipe lateral with diameter of 25 mm. Direct IRHs connection with inlet pipe was performed using flexible metal pipe. There was performed threaded connection which enabled easy detachment of each IRH from header pipeline in the case of repair work. Purging pipeline was installed in parallel to header pipeline. Purging pipeline was applied for the following goals achievement:

• purging of all pipes after distribution pipeline assembling is necessary for dust and scale removal and prevention of its ingress into the IRHs burners;

Figure 17a. IRHs installation Figure 17b. Exhaust gas pipe assembling


28

• pipes need to be filled with LFG and displace oxygen before system start-up; • during IRHs shutdown for maintenance, residual gas needs to be released from inlet

pipes. Purging pipeline free end was brought out of the building. Distribution pipeline construction is presented in the Figure 18b. Upon completion of distribution pipeline construction all metallic surfaces were painted.

The final stage of these works was automatic control and security system installation. Automation system provides IRHs operation control. It consists of temperature sensor (T), installed under the IRHs control panel. Security system “Varta” consists of two carbon monoxide sensors (СО) and two methane sensor (СН4) and two alarm sensors. Carbon monoxide and methane sensor was installed by ones in the opposite corners inside the building. One alarm sensor was installed inside of the building and another was installed outside. Such sensors disposition provides safe IRH operation and signalizes about methane or exhausted gases possible leakages. All equipment was connected to one control panel by branched network of electric cables. Also, there were located IRHs start and stop button and automatic control and security system. Such localized scheme enables remote control of all equipment realization by operator. Gas Treatment Station Installation Manufactured gas treatment station was delivered to the landfill on September 16, 2009. Gas treatment station transportation and its installation on the foundation were realized using loader and crane. Assembling of the plant and its final configuration were performed in the period from September 16 till September 19, 2009 by «SoyuzSnabByt» company.

Figure 18a. Connection pipeline construction

Figure 18b. Distribution pipeline construction


29

During the first working day gas treatment station was assembled and set on the foundation. Supplementary equipment (pump, manometers, pressure gauges, thermometer etc) was installed. For the purpose of gas treatment station defense from vandalism it was surrounded by protecting fence. During the second day there was constructed the roof above gas treatment station. Wells were connected with wellheads from collector be header pipeline. LFG supply pipeline to the IRHs was connected to the connection pipeline. Electric cables were laid to the plant control desk. After it there started works on cable configuration and equipment connection. When electrical part had been completed there started open flare assembling works. Flare was mounted from two parts and complemented with flame monitoring electrode and pilot tip. Electrical cables and additional fuel (propane) supply tube were installed in separate plastic jackets through flare length. Mounted flare was installed on self-supporting base plate and connected to LFG supply pipeline through flame arrestor. Additional fuel was supplied from tank by installed semiautomatic valve. After flare installation the entire gas treatment station was tested. During the second day minor works on supplementary equipment and lighting installation, equipment operation test and electric circuit test, pipes and fence painting etc were executed. Figures 19а and 19b present gas treatment station assembling and installation.

System starting-up and Operation Commissioning and system stating-up was performed sequentially for gas treatment station and IRH heating system. First of all gas treatment station operating capacity checkout was carried out. Tests were conducted by manufacturer «SoyuzSnabByt» company on the last working day after equipment installation. Gas treatment station commissioning was accomplished due to the schedule in the following succession:

Figure 19a. Gas treatment station installation

Figure 19b. Gas treatment station assembling


30

1. Purging of equipment and connecting pipe of gas treatment station; 2. Pressure checkup in pipeline and system equipment; 3. Possible LFG leakages checkup; 4. Voltage checkup in the equipment automation system; 5. Preliminary system and flare start-up; 6. Control of parameters and LFG compound; 7. Filters operation control; 8. Pressure checkout in the flare; 9. Automation system operation checkout; 10. Automation system programming; 11. 72-hours system test.

After automation system adjustment, wellheads faucets and pipeline of LFG supply to the flare were opened. Compressor and flare were put into operation. System parameters and LFG compound at wellheads were measured during operation. Measurements were conducted by gas analyzer LandGEM 500. Pressure differential and hydrogen sulfide compound after filters was controlled. Gas analyzer Drager was used for hydrogen sulfide control. Pressure was controlled by indicating pressure gauge. Additionally there was tested automatic LFG flux distribution system. Supervisory panel and system pressure regulator were programmed on working pressure (max 50 mbar). Gas treatment station in active mode was devolved to REA personnel. During 72 hours REA measured LFG flow and compound, tested pressure in pipeline and equipment, observed flare operation and system in general. Table 1 Appendix C presents gas treatment station regime-running parameters. The next stage after gas treatment station start-up was IRHs commissioning. Heating system commissioning was carried out by “ESCO-Centre” personnel in the presence of REA representatives. Heating system commissioning was held according to the schedule in the following succession:

1. Distribution pipeline purging; 2. Possible LFG leakages checkup; 3. Working pressure checkup in distribution pipeline; 4. Checkup of voltage presence on the equipment and automation security system readiness; 5. Checkup of foreign objects absence in exhaust gases pipeline; 6. Preliminary start-up; 7. Working pressure checkup in IRHs burners; 8. Automation and security system operation checkup; 9. Automation control programming; 10. Warming up of the building; 11. Exhaust gases emission control; 12. 72-hours system testing.


31

Commissioning started from distribution pipeline purging. REA personnel had launched gas treatment station compressor and LFG was supplied inside the building by automation system. Purging pipeline was opened inside the building. Over few minutes LFG was supplied to the distribution pipeline and displaced the air. After purging “ESCO-Centre” personnel checked pipeline tightness using special device. Working pressure in distribution pipeline was additionally checked. Portable manometer Testo 511 was used for pressure measuring. As inspection results were positive the next stage was heating system start-up. Voltage was supplied from the control panel to installed equipment. Voltage indicators lighted on the installed equipment. That was the evidence of equipment launching readiness. Before equipment start-up “ESCO-Centre” personnel disconnected pipeline of exhaust gases from exhaust fan. Foreign objects absence in pipeline was checked. After that heaters were preliminary started-up. Unfortunate heating system based on IRHs energy utilization didn’t work during preliminary start up. LFG was not ignited in burner inside IRHs. Therefore commissioning was suspended. Problem of flame absence had being solved by the personnel of both companies “ESCO-Centre” and REA. “ESCO-Centre” on its part discussed this problem with IRHs manufacturer Roberts Gordon company. REA personnel discussed this problem with their partner, SCS Engineers. As the result REA ascertained that ignition and flame absence was caused by poor fuel delivery to IRH burner with significant excess air. Therefore IRH burner was updated. Fuel delivery jet was removed from burner. Damper valve was additionally installed before exhaust fan. Damper valve was used for air quantity control in IRH. After burners modernization IRHs were easily put into operation. Commissioning was continued. “ESCO-Centre” personnel adjusted pressure in IRHs burners. System of automation and security was checked and programmed on inside temperature keeping at the level of 18 0С. After warming up the building there was measured harmful substance presence in exhaust gases using gas analyzer “Multilyzer NG”. Measurement results were presented in “ESCO-Centre” technical report. Table 2 Appendix C demonstrates heating system regime-running parameters taken from this report. Heating system was left for 72 hours. Over this period all possible system operating defects had being tracked and eliminated. Working system was ready for operating after passing through complete commissioning complex. Project developing companies prepared service manual of gas treatment station (SEC “Biomass”) and heating system (“ESCO-Centre”). By turns, REA personnel sent the manuals to system operator, communal company “Spetskommuntrans” and trained two workers. After all adjustments “Spetskommuntrans” personnel got down to system operation. Project official opening with Khmelnitsky city mayor, design and public organizations and press participation, took place on February 26, 2010. During opening ceremony designed project was hand over to city administration and operational heating system using IRHs was demonstrated.


32

Figures 20а present project handing to city mayor and 20b demonstrate the operation of heating system.

9. IRH PROJECT RESULTS Project implementation in Khmelnitskiy MSW landfill has positive effect for local community and at the regional level. LFG utilization technology for heating of the building with IRHs use was demonstrated for the first time in Ukraine. There were obtained the following results from such energy source utilization technology appliance:

• Technical; • Ecological; • Economical; • Social.

Technical results As the rule heating of industrial premises depends on production specific character. Therefore engineering design plays a significant part in this process. Heating system selection directly depends on heat source availability and feasibility study. In Khmelnitskiy project heating system has to provide workplaces situated in small area of garage with heat energy. The most functional option for garage heating is IRHs use. IRHs provide local heating of workplaces. Other local heating systems (air-heating or electrical) provide direct air heating. As the building has considerable heat loss, such system application is ineffective. LFG was used as a fuel source for IRHs. There is also natural gas available in the courtyard territory which was considered as alternative fuel in this project. As estimated LFG generation rate from the part of the landfill is much higher than IRHs consumption, only LFG supply from wells had been considered in the project design. Operating and design characteristics were obtained while continuous running using LFG at the first time in Ukraine. Design characteristics include burner nozzle diameter that provides required fuel quantity supply for IRHs steady-state operating regime. Operating characteristics include air consumption necessary for combustible mixture and combustion chamber pressure.

Figure 20a. Project handing Figure 20b. Heating system operation


33

Additionally exhaust gas components findings were obtained and IRHs efficiency factor was calculated. Findings suggest good operability of heating system using IRHs. On the other hand, additional investigation needs to be carried on with the view of IRHs operating capabilities optimization and IRHs maximum operating efficiency attainment. Therefore REA and “ESCO-Centre” personnel will keep on system operation assisting in future. Ecological results First of all ecological results are associated with the landfill. In the issue of project implementation the part of the landfill was closed and covered with soil. Methane releases into the atmosphere, odor spread were decreased. Methane emission reduction resulted in fires termination in the part of the landfill. By turns there decreased emission from combustion products of plastic, rubber, tags, foam plastic and other inorganic components. Ecological results are also related GHG emission reduction because methane is one of the most harmful GHG. Methane capture and flaring or burning in IRHs leads to its emission reduction. Emission reduction achieved by project implementation is calculated below. Project foresees that heating system based on IRHs will operate for all heating season over 190 days (4 560 hours). During the rest 4 200 hours in warm period open flare will operate. Thereby emission reduction value was calculated as follows:

yFFsyHsy ERERER ,, += ERy Emissions reduction (in year y), tCO2-eq ERHs,y Emissions reduction during heating season (in year y), tCO2-eq ERFFs,y Emissions reduction during free-frost season (in year y), tCO2-eq During the heating period IRHs operates discrete regime. Therefore IRHs operational time was assumed to constitute only 50% (2 280 hours) from the entire heating season duration. When IRHs operating one LFG stream is delivered to flare (47,16 m3/hour), another one delivered to IRHs (12,84 m3/hour). When heaters do not work all LFG stream is flared (60 m3/hour). The following expression was used for emission reduction estimation:

[ ] jiECjFlareiFlareiIRHsyHs PEERERERER ,,,,,, −++= ERIRHs Emission reduction from infrared heaters (in period i), tCO2-eq ERFlare,i Emission reduction from flare (in period i), tCO2-eq ERFlare,j Emission reduction from flare (in period j), tCO2-eq PEEC,i,j Emissions from consumption electricity (in both i and j period), tCO2-eq Emission reduction from Infrared heaters during its working period i is calculated as follows:

( )1000

1 42280

144,,

CH

hIRHCHCHiIRHiIRHs

GWPDWLFGER ×−×××= ∑=

η


34

LFGIRH,i The quantity of landfill gas fed to the IRH during the working period i of IRHs, m3/hr WCH4 The average methane fraction of the landfill, m3 CH4 / m3 LFG (accepted 50%) DCH4 The methane density expressed, tCH4/m3CH4 ηIRH IRH efficiency, (accepted 86%) GWPCH4 Global warming potential value for methane tCO2eq/CH4 (accepted 21) Emission reduction from Flaring during the working period i of IRHs is calculated as follows:

( )1000

1 42280

144,,

CH

hFlareCHCHiFlareiFlare


η

LFGFlare,i The quantity of landfill gas fed to the Flare during the working period i of IRHs,

m3/hr ηFlare Flare efficiency, (accepted 50%) Emission reduction from Flaring during the non-working period j of IRHs is calculated as follows:

( )1000

1 42280

144,,

CH

hFlareCHCHjFlarejFlare


η

LFGFlare,j Total quantity of landfill gas fed to the Flare during the non-working period j of

IRHs, m3/hr Emissions from consumption electricity during i and j period are calculated as follows:

.

2280

1

4560

1,, electr

h hFlareIRHsjiEC CEFEPEPPE ×⎥

⎦

⎤⎢⎣

⎡+= ∑ ∑

= =

EPIRHs IRH electricity consumed, MWh EPFlare Flare electricity consumed, MWh CEFelectr. Grid emission factor, t CO2-eq/MWh During warm period (about 4 200 hours) all LFG volume will be flared (60 m3/hour). Therefore emission reduction was calculated as follows:

rECrFlareyFFs PEERER ,,, −= ERFlare,r Emission reduction from flare (in period r), tCO2-eq PEEC,r Emissions from consumption electricity (in period r), tCO2-eq Emission reduction from Flaring during the free-frost season is calculated as follows:

( )1000

1 44200

144,,

CH

hFlareCHCHrFlarerFlare


η

LFGFlare,r Total quantity of landfill gas fed to the Flare during the free-frost season, m3/hr


35

Emissions from consumption electricity during r period are calculated as follows:

.

4200

1, electr

hFlarerEC CEFEPPE ×= ∑

=

Emission reduction was estimated for the period of September 2009 to December 2012. This period includes heating season and warm season. Table 11 shows emission reduction estimation results. Table 11. Results of emission reduction calculations in tCO2-eq

Heating season Free-frost season Year ERIRHs,i ERFlare,i ERFlare,j PEEC,i,j ERHs,y ERFlare,r PEEC,r ERFFs,y

Total project

emissions 01.09-31.12

2009 12.7 166.1 211.3 1.7 388.5 238.4 0.6 237.8 01.01-31.08

2010 18.2 238.5 303.5 2.4 557.8 715.3 1.8 713.5 1897.6

01.09-31.12 2010 12.7 166.1 211.3 1.7 388.5 238.4 0.6 237.8

01.01-31.08 2011 18.2 238.5 303.5 2.4 557.8 715.3 1.8 713.5

1897.6

01.09-31.12 2011 12.7 166.1 211.3 1.7 388.5 238.4 0.6 237.8

01.01-31.08 2012 18.2 238.5 303.5 2.4 557.8 715.3 1.8 713.5

1897.6

01.09-31.12 2012 12.7 166.1 211.3 1.7 388.5 238.4 0.6 237.8 662.3

Assuming that collected LFG quantity is constant over three years, LFG system operation using IRHs will reduce 6 400 t CO2-eq for the period of September 2009 to December 2012. Economical benefits Economical parameters were calculated for heating system of garage using IRHs. As alternative fuel for IRH there were considered natural gas supplied to courtyard territory. Therefore project economical parameters were calculated for two fuel types utilization (LFG and natural gas). For project costs calculation REA estimated only investment costs consisted from IRHs and connection pipeline design and installation costs. Meanwhile costs of connection pipeline from LFG source and from natural gas source were assumed to be the same. Costs estimation was made based on actual costs of works and equipment according to the contractual prices. Table 12 presents a summary of the cost items for heating system. Table 12. Investments costs for IRH heating system

Item IRHs, USD Equipment

Four infrared heaters and control system 7 428.10 Security system “Varta” 632.91

Project designing “ESCO-Centre” project 1 518.99

Construction works


36

Item IRHs, USD Infrared heaters assembling 1 447.85 Piping connection (PE pipe including) 6 329.11 Security system “Varta” assembling 632.91 Infrared heaters starting-up and operation 626.08

TOTAL 18 615.95 During heating system operation REA estimated annual expenditures associated with heating system and connection pipeline maintenance. Operating costs additionally included consumed electricity costs and local staff salary. Electricity tariff for communal company “Spetskommuntrans” was 0,024 USD/kWh. Table 13 summaries the annual operational costs items for heating system. Table 13. Annual operational costs for IRH heating system

Item IRHs, USD Maintenance of the Infrared heaters (5%) 371.41 Maintenance of the connection pipeline (2%) 28.96 Consumed electricity costs 40.49 Local staff salary 202.53

TOTAL 643.39 REA estimated profit from natural gas displacement. Profit was estimated based on natural gas value and its flow rate, which can be potentially used in IRHs instead of LFG during heating season (4 560 hours). Natural gas prices were obtained from landfill operator - communal company “Spetskommuntrans”. In 2009 average natural gas price amounted to 0.24 USD/m3. As the result of calculation profit was equal to 3 514.87 USD. Table 14 below presents basic engineering-and-economical project parameters. Table 14. Basic engineering-and-economical performance for IRH heating system

Financial parameters IRHs, USD Internal rate of return (%) 10 Net present value (USD) -23 335.4 Simple payback period (years) 6.9

Note: Discount rate – 17.0 % Amortization – 5% Obtained parameters showed that implementation and operation of heating system based on IRHs are characterized by relatively low financial indicators. REA additionally analyzed other possible heating system schemes for the project. In the current project only minor part (12,8 m3/hour) of all captured LFG (60 m3/hour) is utilized as IRHs fuel. If there is installed a few additional IRHs for adjacent houses heating than the financial indicators will increase significantly. Additionally the natural gas price has a significant influence on project financial indicators. As the price on natural gas in Ukraine is constantly growing, the project financial indicators will be increasing. Figure 21 presents simple payback period estimation subject to IRHs capacity for different natural gas prices.


37

Estimation results shows that the project of all collected LFG utilization and maximum possible heaters capacity installation has acceptable payback period of less than 4 years. Meanwhile all the rest of financial indicators demonstrate project implementation feasibility. But if the natural gas price will increase by factor 2, the project payback period is 2.5 years. Overall conclusion is the following: with natural gas price and/or IRHs capacity increasing (more than 450 kW), projects of heating systems using IRHs are economically sound for implementation in Ukrainian conditions.

Social effect This project became the first one of this kind in Ukraine. Project start up was attended by regional and local authority representatives and mass media. Project results demonstration helped at the local level to overcome negative stereotype associated with Khmelnitskiy landfill. Situation with the landfill slightly improved and relieved the pressure of neighboring settlement representatives into landfill owner and operator. Additionally the results issued by project implementation were presented in international and local conferences in Kiev and Kharkiv. These results provide an opportunity to attract local investors for full-scale LFG collection and utilization systems in Ukraine.

Figure 21. Relation between simple payback period and IRH capacity for different natural gas prices


38

10. CONCLUSIONS Infrared heaters technology implementation for the first time in Ukraine resulted in technical, ecological, economical and social effects from LFG use for building heating. In the issue of project implementation there was designed and adjusted technical documentation. Gained experience facilitated development of similar projects. From the technical point of view there were obtained specifications and IRH burner design for LFG utilization. During project operation there were obtained all system operating parameters. These parameters proved such heating systems functionality and enabled development of new systems. Ecological and economical calculations demonstrate good project characteristics. Harmful substances and greenhouse gases emission reduction determines such project as ecological. Low investment costs and short payback period demonstrates appropriateness of such project implementation for large working areas heating. Working results demonstrated the simplest option of alternative fuel source utilization for at the regional and state level. Local investor attention increase promotes implementation of similar LFG collection and utilization projects in Ukraine.


39

APPENDIX A

PROJECT SYSTEN DRAWINGS


40

Figure 1. General view of gas collection well


41

Figure 2. Topographic map with pipeline placement and trench construction


42

Figure 3. Configuration of condensate trap

1

1

Condensate returns to the landfill body

Pipes PЕ-80, Ǿ63*3.6 mm

Condensate removing from knockout

Flexible pipe Ǿ63 mm

Flexible pipe Ǿ75 mm

Concrete ring diameter 1 m

Concrete cap

Trench for plastic tank and traps installation, depth 2-2,5 m.

Traps PE-80, Ǿ 50 mm

Plastic tank 100

View1-1

Header trench, depth 1-1,2 m.


43

Figure 4. Axonometric schematic drawing of gas treatment station


44

Figure 5. Drawing of the gas treatment station


45

Figure 6. Axonometric schematic drawing of internal pipelines


46

Figure 7. Drawings of the building with infrared heaters


47

APPENDIX B

WELLS LOCATION SCHEME


48

Figure 1. Wells location scheme and distances

Gas extraction well 2 L=12,4


26 25

25

Marks: Distance between Gas extraction wells Pipes Distance in meters Bore hole dept

L



49

APPENDIX C

SYSTEM STARTING-UP AND OPERATION PARAMETERS


50

Table 1. Gas treatment station regime-running parameters

Measurement data/time Parameter Dimension 18.09.09

17:10:00 19.09.09 12:30:00

19.09.09 13:45:00

19.09.09 15:00:00

20.09.09 12:50:00

CH4 content Vol. % 53.6 57.9 53.9 50.9 50.0 CO2 content Vol. % 37.6 37.7 36.7 35.2 32.0 O2 content Vol. % 2.0 1.4 1.9 2.2 2.5 LFG flow m3/hr 21.0 12.0 11.5 15.0 15.0 LFG temperature 0C 33.5 31.0 31.5 32.5 29.5

Wel

l 1

Pressure Pa -0.8 -1.12 -1.5 -1.5 -1.5 CH4 content Vol. % 67.7 71.6 69.5 62.1 53.0 CO2 content Vol. % 31.9 28.1 30.0 34.5 37.5 O2 content Vol. % 0.6 0.3 0.3 1.0 1.7 LFG flow m3/hr 12.0 6.0 7.0 5.0 7.0 LFG temperature 0C 31.0 32.0 32.0 31.0 28.0

Wel

l 2

Pressure Pa -2 -0.75 -0.8 -0.8 -0.8 CH4 content Vol. % 69.5 70.5 69.4 56.3 55.0 CO2 content Vol. % 30.3 29.2 30.6 35.4 37.3 O2 content Vol. % 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.7 LFG flow m3/hr 17.0 14.0 13.0 10.0 8.0 LFG temperature 0C 32.5 32.0 31.0 30.5 30.5

Wel

l 3

Pressure Pa -0.7 -1.1 -0.79 -0.79 -0.8 CH4 content Vol. % 59.0 61.9 57.1 58.1 50.0 CO2 content Vol. % 35.0 36.7 36.2 34.4 36.0 O2 content Vol. % 2.0 1.3 1.9 1.7 1.7 LFG flow m3/hr 60.1 32.5 32.7 30.5 30.5 LFG temperature 0C 33.5 32.0 32.5 33.0 30.0 To

tal f

low

Pressure Pa -4.3 -2.2 -2.16 -2.2 -2.2 Inlet H2S content ppm 67 45 43 43 43 Outlet H2S content ppm 0 0 0 0 0 Inlet pressure Pa -5 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 Fi

lters

Outlet pressure Pa -4.5 -2.2 -2.2 -2.2 -2.2 Nominal flow m3/hr 86 Electrical capacity kW 0.55 Inlet vacuum Pa -5 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5 B

low

er

Outlet pressure Pa 5 3 3 3 3 Nominal flow m3/hr 100 Nominal pressure Pa 10 Flow m3/hr 60.1 32.5 32.7 30.5 30.5 Fl

are

Pressure Pa 50 30 30 30 30


51

Table 2. Infrared heaters regime-running parameters

Heater number Parameter Dimension 1 2 3 4

Hea

ter

Nominal power kW 30

Number of burner pcs 1 Inlet burner pressure Pa - LFG temperature 0C 11.00 LF

G

LFG flow m3/hr 3.21 Temperature 0C 14.00 Inlet burner pressure Pa 101300.00

Air

Pressure in a primary furnace Pa 80

CO2 content % 2.1 2.0 2.1 2.1 O2 content % 17.3 17.4 17.3 17.4 CO content ppm 69 63 65 71 NO content ppm 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NOx content ppm 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Excess air factor α 5.68 5.85 5.68 5.68 Ex

haus

t gas

Exhaust gas temperature 0C 96 97 97 96 Exhaust heat loss % 14.0 14.5 14.2 14.1 Chemical underburning heat loss % 0.00

Environment heat loss % 0.00 Heater efficiency % 86 85.5 85.8 85.9 Auxiliaries heat loss % 0.00

Tech

nica

l pa

ram

eter

s

Electricity capacity W 200

infrared heater technology utilizing landfill gas …infrared heater technology utilizing landfill...

Documents