No.

1935

A ROAD MAP FOR CO-GENERATION IN

THE SOUTH AFRICAN SUGAR INDUSTRTY
A WIENESE
Date 28 June 2004
SMRI Technical Report No. 1395 Road map co-generation

Technical Report

No. 1395

A ROAD MAP FOR CO-GENERATION IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN

SUGAR INDUSTRY

A WIENESE

Date 28 June 2004

SUMMARY
The sugar industry has various options to increase its power generating capacity. Reducing process steam results
in a potential export of 29 kWh/tc. Improving steam and power generating efficiencies raises this to about 93 kWh/tc.
Increasing the fuel supply with trash and tops provides a total export capacity of 262 kWh/tc and the use of
Combined Cycle technology might increase this even further to well over 400 kWh/ tc. While the successive options
provide an increasing export capacity the cost per kWh increases as well.

Keywords
Major: Co-generation
Minor:
Distribution
Printed Copies: E-mail Copies:
Full Copies: Technology Manager, Tongaat-Hulett TEG
Files (3) Ass. Gen. Manager, Manuf. Division, UCL
Librarian, SMRI (1) Factory Managers, SA and Affiliated Mills
All Members of the Advisory Research Committee
Summaries: Librarian, Tongaat-Hulett Sugar Ltd
General Managers, SA and Affiliated Mills (27) PM de Robillard, Illovo Sugar Ltd

-1-
SMRI Technical Report No. 1395 Road map co-generation

INTRODUCTION
In line with international trends the South African government is looking for renewable energy sources for
power generation in an attempt to reduce levels of carbon dioxide emission. The following energy sources
have been identified:
1. Wind energy
2. Mini-hydro
3. Landfill gas
4. Biomass (bagasse, wood and pulp)
5. Solar water heating
6. Bio fuels (ethanol)
From an economic point of view, most of these sources of energy are not a viable option. However,
environmental considerations might well change this point of view. To make power generation from
renewable sources more attractive, all sorts of incentives are being put in place such as carbon trading,
the green energy concept and government subsidies. Most factories are designed to use all the bagasse
and only a minimum of additional fuel. However, the sugar industry certainly has the potential to generate
electricity from bagasse in excess of its own requirements. At the present moment only a few factories
contribute some electricity to the national grid. This can be increased substantially by various means such
as reducing process steam requirements, increasing boiler and turbine efficiencies, increasing the fuel
supply with tops and trash and combined cycle technology (Figure 1).

Water Fuel
Boiler

Steam

Prime Mover Back Pressure Condensing Let Down

Turbine Turbine Altern Turbine Altern

Steam

Process Blow off

Steam

-2-
SMRI Technical Report No. 1395 Road map co-generation

Figure 1. Steam and power generation

Present situation

The crushing season is eight to nine months long and usually starts in April and finishes in
November/December. During that period the delivery of cane to the sugar factories is in the order of 22
million tons. This is divided between 15 factories varying in size between 90 and 550 t/h with most of them
operating around an average of about 300 t/h or 1.5 million tons of cane per annum. At this throughput
the required boiler steam is just over 160 t/h. This steam is typically at a pressure of 3000 kPa(a) and a
temperature of 400°C and is normally exhausted through steam turbines and turbo alternators to 200
kPa(a). The exhaust steam is used in multiple evaporation and clear juice heating. Although most factories
are operating quintuple evaporation stations, others are still using quadruple evaporation. Pan floors are
predominately using vapour-1 steam and syrup brix is rather low at 65%. Mixed juice is heated in two
stages using vapour-2 and vapour-1 steam and scalding juice heaters are operating on vapour-2 steam.
Appendix A shows a mass and energy balance for a typical raw sugar factory. Table 1 lists existing
equipment which might become obsolete because of changes for the purpose of co-generation. Most of
this equipment has a long life expectancy in excess of 30 years.

Table 1. Capital cost - Obsolete existing equipment

Capital cost 34 year life span Million R

- Three batch pans 13.00

- One 3000 kPa(a) / 400°C / 160 t/h boiler 70.00
- Three 40% efficient / 15.04 t/MWh / 1 MW steam turbines 7.00
- One 65% efficient / 9.26 t/MWh / 9 MW back pressure turbo alternator 30.00

- Additional 25% 30.00

Total 150.00

The need for additional fuel (mostly coal) varies from factory to factory and from time to time. It depends
mainly on factory and process design, the steadiness of operation and the fibre content of the cane. Most
raw sugar factories are designed to use a minimum of coal to avoid the need for a costly bagasse disposal
system. Other factories are fitted with a back-end refinery (ML, PG, UF, GH and NB) or are exporting
bagasse (ML, FX, GH, MS and SZ) and burning significant amounts of coal. At the present moment only
KM, FX and MS are doing a little co-generation. The selling price varies significantly and ranges from 3
to 49 c/kWh and depends on the time of year, the time of day and the electricity buyer. Maidstone delivers
power to Durban Metro while most other mills supply power to ESKOM (See Table 2).

-3-
SMRI Technical Report No. 1395 Road map co-generation

Table 2. The selling price of electricity

Peak Standard Offpeak

c/kWh c/kWh c/kWk

Maidstone (Jun, Jul, Aug) 49.43 15.14 7.71

Maidstone (Sep-May) 14.26 10.02 4.38
Other Factories 8.46 7.56 3.28

Reducing process steam consumption

At the present moment the process steam as a percentage on cane is in the order of 60%. This is high
by international standards and is mainly due to the high imbibition rates of over 350% on fibre. These high
imbibition rates, typically associated with diffuser operations, result in a high extraction and overall
recovery but are detrimental to the steam economy. An arbitrary reduction from 350 to 250% on fibre
results in an estimated loss in sugar production of about 0.6%. For a 1.5 million tons of cane factory with
a cane to sugar ratio of 8.6 this equates to 1000 tons of sugar per annum. Further savings can be achieved
by converting from quadruple to quintuple evaporation if this is not already in place. Although the reduced
imbibition should free up some evaporator capacity it is assumed that an additional evaporator is required.
Other savings can be made by using vapour bleeds at lower effects. It is certainly recommended to replace
the existing batch pans with continuous pans and switch from vapour-1 to vapour-2 pan steam. Some
continuous pans are already being used and allowance is made for the replacement of three batch pans
by two continuous pans. The continuous pans have the additional advantage that they reduce swings in
process steam demand. With some additional minor changes it should then be possible to reduce the
process steam on cane from 60 to 45% by the following measures:
1. Reduce imbibition from 350 to 250% on fibre.
2. Convert from quadruple to quintuple evaporation.
3. Replace vapour-1 steam with vapour-2 steam for the vacuum pans.
4. Increase syrup brix from 65 to 68% or higher.
5. Reduce pan movement water.
6. Optimise vapour flashing.
7. Reduce steam and heat losses by improved housekeeping.
To turn these savings into power requires an increase in boiler capacity of 3.5 tons of steam per hour, an
additional 10 MW condensing turbo alternator and electrical switchgear and transformers for the export

-4-
SMRI Technical Report No. 1395 Road map co-generation

of 8.60 MW or 28.69 kWh/tc. The total capital costs are estimated at R 84 million. A breakdown of these
costs is given in Table 3.

Table 3. Capital cost - Reduced process steam consumption

Export power 8.60 MW or 28.69 kWh/tc

Capital cost 34 year life span Million R

- One Roberts evaporator of 1000 m2 6.00

- Two continuous pans of 100 m3 each 15.00
- Increase boiler capacity by 3.5 t/h 2.00
- One 80% efficient / 4.8 t/MWh / 10 MW condensing turbo alternator 40.00
- Additional cooling tower capacity 20 t/h 2.00
- Switchgear and transformers for 8.60 MW export power 2.00

- Additional 25% 16.75

Total 83.75

For a sugar factory the average operating and maintenance cost is in the order of 7.5%. However, this
figure is lower for individual components and specially the equipment under consideration has a relatively
low operating and maintenance cost compared with other equipment in the factory. It is estimated that the
additional operating and maintenance cost is 3% of the above capital cost minus the cost of the three
existing batch pans. The financial loss per annum due to a loss in sugar production is 1000 tons of sugar
times the marginal sugar price of R 1300 per ton. The annual costs are given in Table 4.
Table 4. Annual cost - Reduced process steam consumption
Export power 8.60 MW or 28.69 kWh/tc

Annual cost Million R

- Operating and maintenance cost 2.12

- Cost of loss in sugar production 1.30

Total 3.42

The above process changes have very little or no consequences for the quantity or quality of the
maintenance and operating staff.

Increased steam end power generating efficiencies

Most boilers in the South African sugar industry are operating at pressures of 3000 kPa(a) producing
superheated steam at a temperature of 400°C. This steam is exhausted through steam turbines and turbo

-5-
SMRI Technical Report No. 1395 Road map co-generation

alternators at a back pressure of 200 kPa(a). The exhaust steam is used for process heating
requirements. Because of swings in process demand the overall boiler efficiency is often below 70%.
Steam turbines for prime movers are mainly single stage turbines with efficiencies as low as 40% and
backpressure turbine alternators operate at efficiencies of around 65%.
One way to increase potential export power is to increase steam and power generation efficiencies. This
requires the replacement of the 3000 kPa(a)/400°C boiler with a high pressure boiler such as an 8000
kPa(a)/480°C boiler. When operating at a constant load independent of process demand this boiler should
be able to achieve an efficiency as high as 85%. This results in an increase in high-pressure steam from
160 to 200 tons per hour. Because single stage steam turbines for prime movers are inherently inefficient
they should be avoided and be replaced with electric or hydraulic drives. The replacement of inefficient
steam turbines requires a different mix of backpressure and condensing turbo alternators to meet process
steam needs. This means replacing the existing backpressure turbo alternator with 80% efficient 24 MW
turbo alternator and installing a 80% efficient 18 MW condensing turbo alternator. This results in a
potential power export of 27.88 MW or 92.94 kWh/tc. The total capital costs are estimated at R 380
million. A breakdown of these costs is given in Table 5.

Table 5. Capital cost - Increased steam and power generation

Export power 27.88 MW or 92.94 kWh/tc

Capital cost 34 year life span Million R

- One Roberts evaporator of 1000 m2 6.00

- Two continuous pans of 100 m3 each 15.00
- One 85% efficient 8000 kPa / 480°C / 200 t/h boiler 140.00
- One 80% efficient / 5.59 t/MWh / 24 MW back pressure turbo alternator 55.00
- One 80% efficient / 3.82 t/MWh / 18 MW condensing turbo alternator 75.00
- Additional cooling tower capacity of 40 t/h 5.00
- Electric motors with a combined power of 3 MW 4.00
- Switchgear and transformers for 27.88 MW export power 4.00

- Additional 25% 76.00

Total 380.00

The operating and maintenance cost is 3% of the above capital cost minus the cost of the existing batch
pans, 3000 kPa(a) boiler, steam turbines with a combined capacity of 3 MW, 9 MW back pressure turbo
alternator. This cost is about R 6.90 million. The cost of loss in sugar production is the same at R 1.30
million. The annual costs are given in Table 6.

-6-
SMRI Technical Report No. 1395 Road map co-generation

Table 6. Annual cost - Increased steam and power generation

Export power 27.88 MW or 92.94 kWh/tc

Annual cost Million R

- Operating and maintenance cost 6.90

- Cost of loss in sugar production 1.30

Total 8.20

Above a pressure of 4500 kPa(a), boiler temperatures are getting so high that there is a step increase in
complexity in both boiler design and operation. Changing from 3000 kPa(a)/400°C to 8000 kPa(a)/480°C
boilers therefore requires higher skilled operators.

Increased fuel supply with tops and trash

Cane as it stands in the fields consists of the stalk, trash and tops. The trash and tops contain little
sucrose and are high in fibre and impurities (Table 7). From a sugar processing point of view the trash and
tops are therefore undesirable. During the harvesting process, they are removed and only the stalks are
delivered to the factories. In South Africa most of the harvesting is done manually. The trash is usually
removed by burning (80%) and the tops are cut by hand and left in the field. Leaving some trash and tops
in the field is seen by many agronomists as beneficial because of its nutritional value, contribution to weed
control, protection against erosion and retaining moisture in the soil.

Table 7. Composition of sugar cane

Stalk Trash Tops

Mass (t/h) 300.00 30.45 55.15

Purity (%) 88.00 6.60 54.10

Fibre (%) 14.50 85.50 26.40
Brix (%) 15.00 2.20 3.80
Water (%) 70.50 12.30 69.80
Ash (%) 1.50 2.00 2.00

-7-
SMRI Technical Report No. 1395 Road map co-generation

Source De Beer et al., 1989.

In a conventional sugar factory the only fuel from cane is bagasse. The amount of bagasse from 300 tons
of cane is about 90 tons. The trash and tops combined is very similar to bagasse in both quality and
quantity and has the potential of doubling the amount of fuel (See Table 8).
Table 8. Bagasse, trash and tops as boiler fuel

Bagasse Trash & Tops Total

Mass (t/h) 88.94 85.60 174.54

Purity (%) 55.27 42.59 46.72

Fibre (%) 48.50 47.43 47.98
Brix (%) 1.50 3.23 2.34
Water (%) 50.00 49.34 49.68
Ash (%) 3.00 2.00 2.51

NCV (MJ/t) 7314.99 7580.68 7445.29

The harvesting and transport cost of unburnt cane is high at approximately R37 per ton of cane. Bringing
in the whole sugar plant including tops and trash will make this even higher. Experiments in South Africa
showed an increase in harvesting and transport cost of between 30 and 40% (De Beer et al., 1989).
However, with the increasing interest in co-generation, it is considered by many as a possible way to
increase the fuel supply. In Australia the separation of trash and tops at the factory is being investigated.
In Brazil tests are being conducted with the baling of trash and tops in the field. The total fuel can produce
almost 400 tons steam per hour requiring two 200 ton of steam 8000 kPa(a)/480°C boilers and three 22
MW condensing turbo alternators in addition to the 24 MW back pressure turbo alternator. At the factory
an expensive facility for the separation of the tops and trash is required. The total power for export is 78.55
MW or 261.83 kWh/tc requiring electrical switchgear and transformers. The total capital cost is estimated
at R 831 million. A breakdown of these costs is given in Table 9.

Table 9. Capital cost - Increased fuel supply with tops and trash
Export power 78.55 MW or 261.83 kWh/tc

Capital cost 34 year life span Million R

- One Roberts evaporator of 1000 m2 6.00

- Two continuous pans of 100 m3 each 15.00
- Two 85% efficient 8000 kPa / 480°C / 200 t/h boilers 270.00
- One 80% efficient / 5.59 t/MWh / 24 MW back pressure turbo alternator 55.00
- Three 80% efficient / 3.82 t/MWh / 22 MW condensing turbo alternators 220.00

-8-
SMRI Technical Report No. 1395 Road map co-generation

- Additional cooling tower capacity of 234 t/h 23.00

- Electric motors with a combined power of 3 MW 5.00
- Switchgear and transformers for 78.55 MW export power 23.00
- Tops and trash separation facility 60.00

- Additional 25% 166.25

Total 831.25
The operating and maintenance cost is 3% of the above capital cost minus the cost of existing batch
pans, 3000 kPa(a) boiler, steam turbines with a combined capacity of 3 MW, 9 MW back pressure turbo
alternator. This cost is about R 20.4 million. At an additional harvest and transport cost of 40% the annual
increase in these costs is R 22.2 million. The cost of loss in sugar production is again R 1.30 million. The
annual costs are given in Table 10.

Table 10. Annual cost - Increased fuel supply with tops and trash
Export power 78.55 MW or 261.83 kWh/tc

Annual cost Million R

- Operating and maintenance cost 20.44

- Cost of loss in sugar production 1.30
- Harvesting and transport of trash and tops 22.20

Total 43.94

The high pressure 8000 kPa(a)/480°C boilers again require higher skilled operators and it is expected that
the harvesting and transport of trash and tops increases the need for unskilled labour .

Biomass Integrated Gasification / Combined Cycle (BIG/CC)

Without trash and tops, the conventional steam power plant is incapable of increasing electricity-
generating rates much beyond 120 kWh/tc and new technologies are being explored. The most promising
of these new technologies is the Biomass Integrated Gasification / Combined Cycle (BIG/CC) which has
been the subject of many publications (Wienese, 1999). It is based on the gasification of bagasse to form
a combustible gas that can be used in a gas cycle on top of the steam cycle currently employed. To make
full use of Combined Cycle technology the process steam on cane has to be brought below 40%. The
projected yield of this combined cycle is in excess of 200 kWh/tc. When trash and tops were included
this could even be as high as 460 kWh/tc. The estimated cost, excluding fuel, is in the order of 40 c/kWh,
which is split about equally into capital, and operating and maintenance, cost.

-9-
SMRI Technical Report No. 1395 Road map co-generation

SUMMARY

An accurate estimate of the potential power generation capacity of the sugar industry requires a detailed
study of each of the 15 sugar factories. This is a complicated and lengthy exercise. Due to time
constraints the present work was limited to an average raw sugar factory of 300 tons of cane per hour or
1.5 million tons of cane per annum. Four scenarios were considered: reduced steam demand, improved
steam and power generation efficiency, increased fuel supply with tops and trash and combined cycle
technology. The power and energy available for export for the different scenarios is summarised in Table
11.
Table 11. Export power and energy for different scenarios
for a 300 t/h factory

Power Energy Energy

MW KWh/t GWh

Reduced process steam demand 8.60 28.69 43.00

Improved steam and power generating efficiency 27.88 92.94 139.40
Increased fuel supply with tops and trash 78.55 261.83 392.75
Combined Cycle technology >120.00 >400.00 >600.00

Power and energy for export

The capital, operating and maintenance cost and total cost associated with the different scenarios is given
in Table 12. The annualisation of the capital cost is based on a life span of 34 years and a discount rate
of 10%. This results in an annuity rate of 10.41%

Table 12. Capital cost, operating and maintenance cost and total cost
for different scenarios for a 300 t/h factory

Cap cost O&M cost Total cost

R`10^6 R`10^6/y R`10^6/y

Reduced process steam demand 84 3.42 12.14

Improved steam and power generating efficiency 380 8.20 47.75
Increased fuel supply with tops and trash 831 43.94 130.45
Combined Cycle technology - - -

-10-
SMRI Technical Report No. 1395 Road map co-generation

Operating and maintenance cost include the cost of loss of sugar

The energy cost for the different scenarios; reduced process demand, improved steam and power
generating efficiency, increased fuel supply with tops and trash and combined cycle is 28.23, 34.25, 33.21
and about 40 c/kWh respectively.

The reduction of process steam for the sake of co-generation is already done in South Africa on a limited
scale. Improved steam and power generation efficiency is done in other parts of the world such as Reunion
and Australia (AUS$ 100 million for 63 MW plant) with the erection of dedicated bagasse fired power
stations attached to the sugar factory. Increasing the fuel supply with tops and trash is being investigated
in Australia and Brazil but is as yet found to be uneconomical. Combined Cycle technology is very much
in a development stage and lacks detailed financial and technical information.

REFERENCES

De Beer AG, Boast MMW and Worlock B (1989). The agricultural consequences of harvesting sugarcane
containing various amounts of tops and trash. Proc S Afr Sug Technol Ass 63: 107 -110.

Wienese A (1999). Co-generation in the South African sugar industry. Proc S Afr Sug Technol Ass 73:
241-246.

-11-
MASS BALANCE (RAW HOUSE) - STANDARD (0 kWh/t) APPENDIX A

BOILERS
BAGASSE
87.10 7.31 MJ/kg
ALT FUEL
27.50 MJ/kg 0.00
BAGACILLO WATER
0.25 1.59 12.47

SHED FILTER STATION 100.00 %D 1.00 %S

FILTER CAKE
2.12 m3 87.36 %P 8.00 %B 91.50 %M 0.50 %F 87.36 %P 1.50 %B 74.50 %M 24.00 %F 5.78

MILK OF LIME FLOC FLASH

1.70 90.17 21.97 30.24 1.70 3.92 3.57

0.50
LIME MIXER CLARIFIER STATION 0.40 %S 0.80 %S
0.26
0.00 %P 100.00 kPa 88.56 %P 88.56 %P 88.91 %P RETURNS 93.00 %P 99.40 %P 99.97 %P EXPORT REF
LIME 0.00
0.00 %B 99.63 °C 11.30 %B 11.71 %B 11.75 %B 80.00 %B 99.50 %B 99.95 %B
1.45
85.00 %M 2673.84 MJ/t 85.20 %M 88.29 %M 88.12 %M 20.00 %M 0.50 %M 0.05 %M
WATER
15.00 %F 417.49 MJ/t 3.50 %F 0.00 %F 0.13 %F 0.00 %F 0.00 %F 0.00 %F
15.00
99.79 °C 105.00 °C
21.97 IMPORT RAW
11.80 %B 11.75 %B 0.00
388.51 MJ/t 409.10 MJ/t

0.00 0.00 372.37 372.37 372.37 392.28 0.00 0.00

EVAP CJH 1.00 %S

115.00 °C 115.00 °C 105.00 °C 0.00 %P 38.56 %P 99.40 %P EXPORT RAW
0.00 0.00 0.00
11.71 %B 11.71 %B 11.75 %B 0.00 %B 80.00 %B 99.50 %B
111.77 °C 95.00 °C 105.00 °C 0.00 %M 20.00 %M 0.50 %M
20.70 %B 11.71 %B 11.75 %B 0.00 %F 0.00 %F 0.00 %F

210.61 372.37 392.28 MOLASSES

0.00

210.61 0.00 392.28

EVAP MJH PANS, XTAL & FUGALS 1.00 %S

111.77 °C 90.00 °C 105.00 °C 88.56 %P 38.56 %P 99.40 %P EXPORT RAW
67.08 35.62 35.62
20.70 %B 0.00 %B 11.75 %B 65.00 %B 80.00 %B 99.50 %B
100.63 °C 80.00 °C 90.00 °C 35.00 %M 20.00 %M 0.50 %M
36.15 %B 0.00 %B 11.75 %B 0.00 %F 0.00 %F 0.00 %F

120.62 0.00 392.28 MOLASSES

9.72

120.62 750.00 392.28

EVAP SJH MJH 0.00 %S

100.63 °C 90.00 °C 90.00 °C 0.00 %P 38.56 %P 99.40 %P EXPORT RAW
0.00 0.00 0.00
36.15 %B 12.06 %B 11.75 %B 0.00 %B 80.00 %B 99.50 %B
87.46 °C 55.00 °C 60.00 °C 0.00 %M 20.00 %M 0.50 %M
45.91 %B 12.06 %B 11.75 %B 0.00 %F 0.00 %F 0.00 %F

94.97 750.00 392.28 MOLASSES

0.00

94.97 750.00 392.28

EVAP 0.50 %S
87.46 °C 60.00 °C 60.00 °C 0.00 %P 40.00 %P 99.40 %P EXPORT RAW
0.00 0.00 0.00
45.91 %B 12.06 %B 11.75 %B 0.00 %B 80.00 %B 99.50 %B
56.84 °C 50.00 °C 55.00 °C 0.00 %M 20.00 %M 0.50 %M
65.00 %B 12.06 %B 11.75 %B 0.00 %F 0.00 %F 0.00 %F

67.08 750.00 392.28 MOLASSES

0.00
MUD

67.08 750.00 0.00

EXTRACT 3.00 %A 350.00 %I IMBIBITION

150.98
56.84 °C 89.00 %P 55.27 %P 88.00 %P
65.00 %B 12.06 %B 1.50 %B 15.00 %B
750.00
56.84 °C SCALDING JUICE 87.84 %M 50.00 %M 70.50 %M CANE
300.00
65.00 %B 0.10 %F 48.50 %F 14.50 %F

88.94 0.00 67.08 30.24 392.28 67.08 362.04 88.94

FILTRATE

67.08
SYRUP

EXPORT
MIXED JUICE
0.00 m3 0.00

BAGASSE
STEAM BALANCE (RAW HOUSE) - STANDARD (0 kWh/t) APPENDIX A

BOILERS
165.97 116.00 °C
69.00 %E

7.75 5.82 5.12 161.13 4.83

HIGH PRESS STEAM 3000.00 kPa 400.00 °C 233.65 °C 3229.74 MJ/t 1007.12 MJ/t 2.54 6.94 MJ/t°K 0.00

32.71 45.12 83.30 0.00 0.00

LET DOWN PRM MOVER BACK TA BLOW DOWN COND TA MISCELL

1.13 3.00 MW 1.06 9.00 MW 3.00 %S 0.91 0.00 MW
87.78 40.00 %E 87.78 65.00 %E 63.96 85.00 %E
BLOW OFF 6.85 15.04 t/MWh 6.85 9.26 t/MWh #DIV/0! 0.00 t/MWh
2990 m 2841 m 2395 m
0.00 40.46 50.94 88.42 4.83 0.00
2631 l 2631 l 2248 l
4.83

EXHAUST STEAM 200.00 kPa 120.24 °C 120.24 °C 2704.48 MJ/t 504.65 MJ/t 2.27 7.12 MJ/t°K 0.00

0.00 0.00 166.13 13.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

FLASH EVAP CJH 10.00 %W MISCELL

5047 4000 m2 522 522 m2 0 0 m2 0.00 %B 70.00 %B 70.00 %B
30.00 3.00 kW/m2°C 10.00 1.26 kW/m2°C 30.00 0.00 kW/m2°C 93.00 %B 95.00 %B 97.00 %B
11.68 8.47 °C 10.00 12.73 °C 0.00 0.00 °C 1.00 %V 0.35 %V 0.25 %V

0.00 166.13 161.75 13.69 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

13.69

VAPOUR 1 STEAM 150.00 kPa 111.38 °C 111.38 °C 2691.51 MJ/t 467.11 MJ/t 2.22 7.22 MJ/t°K 0.00

166.13 2.80 89.84 0.00 10.67 10.53 55.05 0.00 9.00

FLASH EVAP MJH PAN MOVEMENT WATER 10.00 %W MISCELL

2906 2906 m2 0 0 m2 586 586 m2 65.00 %B 70.00 %B 70.00 %B
30.00 1.78 kW/m2°C 10.00 0.00 kW/m2°C 30.00 0.91 kW/m2°C 93.00 %B 95.00 %B 97.00 %B
30.00 10.75 °C 0.00 0.00 °C 30.00 12.41 °C 1.00 %V 0.35 %V 0.25 %V

163.32 89.84 90.00 0.00 10.67 35.81 10.90 8.35 55.05

229.04

VAPOUR 2 STEAM 100.00 kPa 99.63 °C 99.63 °C 2673.84 MJ/t 417.49 MJ/t 2.14 7.36 MJ/t°K 0.00

89.84 1.98 24.38 46.64 20.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

FLASH EVAP SJH MJH 10.00 %W MISCELL

1063 1063 m2 1579 1579 m2 763 763 m2 0.00 %B 70.00 %B 70.00 %B
30.00 1.18 kW/m2°C 30.00 0.81 kW/m2°C 30.00 0.81 kW/m2°C 93.00 %B 95.00 %B 97.00 %B
30.00 12.18 °C 30.00 22.83 °C 30.00 21.21 °C 1.00 %V 0.35 %V 0.25 %V

87.86 24.38 25.65 46.64 20.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.05

179.83

VAPOUR 3 STEAM 60.00 kPa 85.94 °C 85.94 °C 2652.70 MJ/t 359.84 MJ/t 2.02 7.53 MJ/t°K 0.00

0.00 0.00 25.65 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

FLASH EVAP 10.00 %W MISCELL

885 885 m2 0 0 m2 0 0 m2 0.00 %B 70.00 %B 70.00 %B
30.00 0.63 kW/m2°C 30.00 0.00 kW/m2°C 30.00 0.00 kW/m2°C 93.00 %B 95.00 %B 97.00 %B
30.00 29.10 °C 0.00 0.00 °C 0.00 0.00 °C 1.00 %V 0.35 %V 0.25 %V

0.00 25.65 27.89 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 55.05

25.65

VAPOUR 4 STEAM 15.00 kPa 53.95 °C 53.95 °C 2601.92 MJ/t 225.68 MJ/t 1.48 8.02 MJ/t°K 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

FLASH MISCELL
0 0 m2
30.00 0.00 kW/m2°C
#DIV/0! 0.00 °C

0.00 0.00 0.00 55.05

0.00

VAPOUR 5 STEAM 15.00 kPa 53.95 °C 53.95 °C 2601.92 MJ/t 225.68 MJ/t 1.48 8.02 MJ/t°K

0.00 0.00 2498 82.94 0.00

FLASH COND MISCELL

32.00 °C
3.00 °C

2581
0.00
0.00