See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/308696127

A Case Study on Monitoring Environmental Impact of Flue Gases to a Coal-

Fired Electrical Generating Station

Article · October 2011

CITATIONS READS

0 621

5 authors, including:

Nikos E Mastorakis Bulucea C.A

Technical University of Sofia
105 PUBLICATIONS   509 CITATIONS   
955 PUBLICATIONS   4,534 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Analysis and Synthesis of perturbed Duffing oscillators' View project

Mobility management model for global network View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Nikos E Mastorakis on 28 September 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Models and Methods in Applied Sciences

A Case Study on Monitoring Environmental Impact of Flue Gases

to a Coal-Fired Electrical Generating Station
CORNELIA A. BULUCEA1 ANDREEA C. JELES2 NIKOS E. MASTORAKIS3
CARMEN A. BULUCEA4 CORINA C. BRINDUSA4

1 Faculty of Electromechanical and Environmental Engineering, University of Craiova

ROMANIA
2 Technical College of Arts and Crafts “Constantin Brancusi” of Craiova
ROMANIA
3 Military Institutes of University Education, Hellenic Naval Academy
GREECE
4 University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova
ROMANIA

abulucea@gmail.com, andreee_83@yahoo.com , mastorakis4567@gmail.com, rinstalctin@yahoo.com

Abstract: The environmental impact of stack gas to Turceni coil-fired electrical generating station has been
carried out on basis of pollutant vector assessment. The environmental pollutants belonging to flue gases
vector, as sulfur dioxide SO2, nitrogen oxides NOx, particulate matter PM, and carbon dioxide CO2 have been
analyzed in this case study performed to Turceni power plant of Romania. Mathematical models of
environmental pollutant vector, estimating the emission factors specific to fossil fuel combustion process have
been applied for 3 distinct operation situations of the thermal units of 330 MW to Turceni electrical generating
station. For each stack gases component of pollutant vector, the results with regard to emission factor and
pollutant concentration are presented in this study. Projection in the Mirror of the flue gases pollutant vector
had allowed an evaluation of mass concentration of the ash in the combustion gases quill. In this case study to
Turceni power plant, for the thermoelectric units of 330 MW the nomograms of ash-particulate matter pollutant
have been simulated.

Key-Words: Coal fossil fuel, Electrical generating station, Environmental impact, Flue gases, Pollutant vector ,
Power plant, Sustainable Development

1 Introduction the human health impact of burning coal in

As it is widely accepted all across the world, within
the present industrial metabolism, electric and
thermal energy generation, as one of the main
consumers of fossil fuels, and coal in particular
[1,2,3,4], causes problems related to the
environmental releases in operation of the power
plants. The coal-fired electrical generating stations
represent the larger contributor to acid rain of any
industrial activity, since they are the larger source of
sulfur oxides. The coal-fired industrial applications
are also a significant source of nitrogen oxides, with
an impact comparable to that of transportation
[4,5,6,7]. Hence, the combustion of coal strongly
contributes to acid rain and greenhouse gas, having
been connected with global warming [5].
Unfortunately, beyond the environmental impact,
electrical generating stations represents a serious
concern. Being exposed to these toxic air pollutants
emitted by a coal-fired power plant, people are
experiencing heart diseases, respiratory illness and
lung cancer. Air pollution from coal-fired stations is
also associated with other health diseases, such as
infant death, chronic bronchitis, asthma, adverse
reproductive outcomes and other lung diseases
[6,7,8].
2 Process Flow to a Coal-Fired
Electrical Generating Station
Thermoelectric power generation in a coal-fired
plant consists in the conversion of thermal energy
into electrical energy, on basis of a coal-fossil fuel
source to heat a liquid to produce a high pressure

ISBN: 978-1-61804-044-2 90
 Models and Methods in Applied Sciences

gas (usually water is heated to produce steam) generating station with regard to the flue gases
which then is expanded over a turbine that runs an emission.
electric generator [4,9,10]. The driving force for this The steam boiler of type
process is the phase change of the gas to a liquid CA 330 MW is a main
following the turbine, and this is where the device of thermal units
requirement for cooling water arises. A vacuum is of 330 MW to Turceni
created in the condensation process which draws the coal-fired electrical
gas over the turbine, since this low pressure is generating station, as
critical to the thermodynamic efficiency of the well as to Rovinari and
process. Mainly, the water requirement in coal-fired Craiova power plants
power plants is as cooling water for condensing the from Oltenia region.
steam. The steam condensation typically occurs in a The steam boiler of type
shell-and-tube heat exchanger that is known as a CA 330 MW, with a
condenser. The operating parameters of the cooling flow rate of 1035 t/h
system are critical to the overall power generation (see Fig.1) is supplied
yield. with solid fossil fuel, of
At power plants, the combustion gases, which are type lignite coal.
called flue gases, are exhausted to the outside air [4,11,12,17].
Fig. 1 Schematic representation
through the chimney. Flue gas is usually composed of steam boiler Vulcan 1035 t/h
The main technical
of carbon dioxide, water vapor, as well as sulfur characteristics of a 330
oxides, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter and MW generator (see
carbon monoxide [11,12,13,14,15,16]. Fig.2), as device within a thermoelectric unit to
It must be noted that because the combustion flue Turceni power plant are depicted in Table 1.
gases inside the chimney are much hotter than the
environmental air, and consequently less dense than
the outside air, at the bottom of the vertical column
of hot flue gas the pressure is lower than at the
bottom of a corresponding column of outside air.
That means the driving force moving the
combustion air into the combustion zone, as well as
flowing the flue gas up and out of the chimney is
represented by that higher pressure outside the
chimney [3,4, 17,18].
This study deals with the assessment of flue gas
pollutant vector, since the most important Fig. 2 Thermoelectric block of 330 MW: Steam turbine
environmental and human health pollution caused FIC 330 MW + Turbo generator THA 330-2

by the coal-fired power plants comes from the Table 1

emission into the air of gases, that entail sulfur No. Technical characteristics Magnitude
dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter and 1 Apparent power 388 MVA
carbon dioxide. 2 Active power 330 MW
There are a serious of end-of-pipe technologies 3 Speed 3000 rpm
for treating and removing pollutants from the flue 4 Frequency 50 Hz
5 Voltage 24 kV
gases produced by burning coal in the electrical
6 Electric current 9334 A
generating stations. Still, aiming to the sustainable 7 Phase number 3
framework of Cleaner Production, these emerging 8 Phase connection Y
technologies for the treatment and removal of
pollutants from the combustion gases should be 3.1 Flue Gases Assessment with SEDD
accompanied worldwide by responsible monitoring Methodology
of the environmental pollutants. Flue gases monitoring during the operation of a
coal-fired power plant is an essential step in
3 Case Study. Flue Gases Pollutant assessing the environmental and human health
Vector to Turceni Power Plant impact of pollutants.
This study follows the operation of thermoelectric This case study deals with flue gases pollutant
units of 330 MW on lignite to Turceni electrical vector, and the assessment of the pollutant
emissions from Turceni power plant is based on

ISBN: 978-1-61804-044-2 91
 Models and Methods in Applied Sciences

SEDD Methodology, that is elaborated by the 3.1.2 Pattern of Pollutant NOx

Strategy and Economic Development Division Calculation of NOx emission is based on the
within Romanian Electrical Department as emission factors that are indicated on Table 2,
calculation method (PE-1001). The methodology is applying then an oxygen correction for a 100% load
based on the mathematical models that are depicting of the boiler.
the emission factors specific to fuel combustion Table 2
process [11,17]. e100
NO x
By definition, the emission factor represents the Fuel Thermal power of boiler [MWt]
pollutant amount evacuated in atmosphere per heat 50 - 100 100 - 300 >300
quantity unit produced by fuel combustion in the kg/kJ g/GJ kg/kJ g/GJ kg/kJ g/GJ
boiler [4, 11, 16,17]. Lignite 2*10-1 200 2,2*10-1 220 2,6*10-1 260
Coal 3,8*10-1 380 4,2*10-1 420 4,5*10-1 450
For distinct pollutants the emission factors are Oil 1,9*10-1 190 2,1*10-1 210 2,8*10-1 280
determined experimentally. They are depending on Natural 1,3*10 -1
130 1,5*10 -1
150 1,7*10-1 170
fuel characteristics, constructive type of the gas
combustion installation, as well on fuel calorific For the emission calculation at partial loads
power. Emission factors can be corrected in (>50%) the following correction it is applied:
accordance with the fuel composition and the L 50 [kg/kJ] (4)
x
eNO = e100
NO x [ a + (1 a ) ]
applied combustion technology. Fuel amount and x
50
x
according calorific power are determined by fuel lot. where: eNO [kg/kJ] is the emission factor at load x;
x
One could also notice that in case of several fuel
types utilization, the total amount of a certain e100
NO x [kg/kJ] is the emission factor at load 100%; L
pollutant is determined by summing the emissions [%] is the boiler load, and a is the fuel type
corresponding to each of them. coefficient (a = 0.5 for coal fuel).
The flow rate of the pollutant evacuated into the
atmosphere (the emission) is determined [11, 12, 14, 3.1.3 Pattern of Pollutant PM (ash and dust)
17,18] as: Calculation of emission factor specific to particulate
E Pol = B H iC e Pol [kg / h] (1) matter pollutant is determined as follows:
where: E Pol [kg / h] is the flow rate of pollutant (1 x / 100)(1 y / 100) * A / 100 [kg/kJ] (5)
e Pub =
H iC
evacuated into atmosphere; B[kg / h] is the fuel flow
rate; H iC [kJ / kg ] is the inferior calorific power of where: e Pub [kg/kJ] is the emission factor for ash;
A [%] is the ash content in the coal; x [%] is the
fuel, and ePol [kg / kJ ] is the emission factor.
retention degree of ash in the focus; y [%] is the
Mass concentration of the pollutant evacuated by yield of the installation for dust retention; H iC
combustion is determined as:
[kJ/kg] is the inferior calorific power of fuel.
C mPol = E Pol 10 6 / DGaze [mg / m N3 ] (2)
Table 3
where: E Pol [kg / h] is the mass flow rate of pollutant Parameter MU Lignite Coal Coal
(import)
evacuated into atmosphere, and DGaze [m N3 / h] is the A – ash content in [%] 40 30 20
volume flow rate of combustion gases. coal
x – retention degree [%] 15
of ash in focus
3.1.1 Pattern of Pollutant SO2 y – efficiency of [%] 94 – 99
The emission factor for sulfur dioxide is: dust retention depending on time interval
installation after each shaking
M SO2 S (electrostatic
M S 100 precipitator)
e SO2 = (1 r ) [kg/kJ] (3)
H iC
where: eSO [kg/kJ] is the emission factor for SO2; 3.1.4 Pattern of Pollutant CO2
2
Emission factors for CO2, according to European
M SO [kg/kmol] is the molecular mass of SO2;
2
Union regulation, are depicted in Table 4.
M S [kg/kmol] is the molecular mass of sulfur; Table 4
S[%] represents the sulfur amount into the fuel; eCO2
Fuel
H iC [kJ/kg] is the inferior calorific power of the kg/kJ g/GJ
Coal (lignite) 98*10-6 98000
fuel, and r is the retention degree of sulfur in slag
Oil 72*10-6 72000
and ash (r = 0.2 for lignite coal fuel). Natural gas 50*10-6 50000

ISBN: 978-1-61804-044-2 92
 Models and Methods in Applied Sciences

Calculation of emission factor specific to pollutant 350m

CO2 is determined as:

M CO2 C 300m

eCO2 =
M C 100 [kg/kJ] (6)
H iC 250m

where: eCO2 [kg/kJ] is the emission factor for CO2;

200m

M CO2 [kg/kmol] is the molecular mass of carbon; C

150m
[%] is the carbon content in the fuel; H iC [kJ/kg] is
the inferior calorific power of the fuel. 100m

3.2 Projection in Mirror of Flue Gases 50m

Pollutant Vector
The flue gases pollutant vector is depicted [11,
150m 100m 50m 0m
17,18,19,29,21] by origin, direction, sense and
Fig.4 Iso-mass curves:
magnitude: Iso600, Iso500, Iso400, Iso300, Iso200, Iso100
- pollutant vector origin is represented by the gases
evacuation chimney of the power plant; Table 5
- pollutant vector direction has a temporary No. Iso- Iso = Disom [m] = K[ mg / m N3 / m ]
mass Iso-mass distance on
character and it is defined mainly by the climate curves indicative iso-mass = linearization
factors, wind speed having been the most important; curve longitudinal
coefficient
- pollutant vector sense is defined by the evacuation 1 Iso600 600 50 100 / 50
chimney for the combustion gases; 2 Iso500 500 50 100 / 50
- pollutant vector magnitude is determined by the 3 Iso400 400 50 100 / 50
4 Iso300 300 50 100 / 50
content of pollutants, that is variable, decreasing as 5 Izo200 200 50 100 / 50
distance increased from the chimney. 6 Iso100 100 50 100 / 50
The Projection in the Mirror of the pollutant vector
allows the evaluation of the mass concentration of
ash in the flue gases quill, on distances of several 3.3 SEDD Methodology Applied to
hundred meters [11,20,21,22,23]. This projection is Thermoelectric Units of 330 MW to Turceni
based on the symmetry between the flue gases Electrical Generating Station
chimney and the combustion gases quill related to a This case study is performed in Turceni electrical
higher symmetry axis (see Fig.3). generating station. Subsequently there will be taken
into consideration three distinct situations:
(1) Operation of Turceni power plant at 33.33%
capacity of installed power (660 MW), that is
corresponding to 2 thermoelectric units (n=2) of 330
MW in operation for an hour on basis of lignite-
fired [10,15,16]; in this case, 1 chimney for flue gas
A-A
is evacuating the pollutants from the two
thermoelectric units mentioned as above;
(2) Operation of Turceni power plant at 66.66%
capacity of installed power (1320 MW), that is
corresponding to 4 thermoelectric units (n=4) of 330
MW in operation for an hour on basis of lignite-
Fig.3 Symmetry axis A-A: combustion
gas chimney – Combustion gas wedge Q=450
fired; ]; in this case, 2 chimneys for flue gas are
evacuating the pollutants from the 4 thermoelectric
This way the flue gases quill can be equated to a units mentioned as above;
body as symmetrical truncated cone (see Fig.4). One (3) Operation of Turceni power plant at full
could notice that the concentrations of ash and capacity of installed power (1980 MW), that is
combustion gases pollutants are inverse corresponding to 6 thermoelectric units (n=6) of 330
proportionally with truncated cone height (Table 5). MW in operation for an hour on basis of lignite-
fired; in this case, 3 chimneys for flue gas are

ISBN: 978-1-61804-044-2 93
 Models and Methods in Applied Sciences

evacuating the pollutants from the 6 thermoelectric Oil: SO2 emission kg/ oil 1,51*10-6
factor
ePSO2 kJ
units mentioned as above.
Mathematical models of the methodology SEDD Oil: SO2 pollutant kg/h oil 600n
EPSO
has been used for depicting the emission factors flow rate
specific to fuel combustion in the thermoelectric Total flow rate of kg/h all 6530n
units of Turceni power plant. The following SO2 pollutant
ESO2 fuels
operation conditions have been assumed in this case
Concentration of mg/ all 3840
study: SO2 pollutant
C mSO m3N fuels
a) fuel type is lignite coal with the inferior calorific
power H iL =6280kJ/kg, sulfur content S=0,8%, Case I Case II Case III
(n=2) (n=4) (n=6)
carbon content C=20%, ash content A=25,5%, total
wet W=45% ; 926 103 1852 103 2778 103
b) flow rate of consumed coal per a thermoelectric
units of 330MW is determined on basis of the 20 103 40 103 60 103
2,04*10-6 2,04*10-6 2,04*10-6
medium flow rate of coal pulverized by the 5 coal
11860 23720 35580
mills 5*92,6t/h, and accordingly the lignite flow rate 1,51*10-6 1,56*10-6 1,51*10-6
that is taken into consideration is BL =5*92,6 t/h 1200 2400 3600
=463 t/h = 463*103 kg/h; 13060 26120 39180
c) oil as fuel support has the inferior calorific power 3840 3840 3840
H iP = 39770kJ/kg, sulfur content S=3%, carbon
content C=76%; 3.3.2 Component CO2 of Pollutant Vector
d) the flow rate of consumed oil per a thermoelectric Based on the same methodology, in Table 7 there
unit of 330 MW is BP=10*103 kg/h; are depicted the resulting data for carbon dioxide.
The flue gases pollutant vector has four main Table 7
components: sulfur dioxide SO2, carbon dioxide Parameter CO2 Sym- MU Fuel Reference
CO2, particulate matter PM, nitrogen oxides NOx. bol type values
Lignite: fuel flow kg/h lignite
rate
BL 463 103 n
3.3.1 Component SO2 of Pollutant Vector Oil: fuel flow rate kg/h oil
BP 10 103 n
Taking into consideration the SEDD methodology
Lignite: CO2 kg/kJ lignite 116,8*10-6
there were resulting: the emission factor for SO2 by emission factor
e LCO2
lignite combustion eLSO [kg/kJ], the flow rate of
2
Lignite: CO2 kg/h lignite 33960n
pollutant SO2 evacuated by lignite combustion pollutant flow rate
E LCO
ELSO [kg/h], the emission factor for SO2 by oil
Oil: CO2 emission kg/kJ oil 70,1*10-6
e PCO2
2

combustion ePSO [kg/kJ], the flow rate of pollutant

2
factor

SO2 evacuated by oil combustion EPSO [kg/h], the Oil: CO2 pollutant kg/h oil 27880n
2
flow rate
E PCO
total flow rate of pollutant SO2 evacuated by
combustion ESO [kg/h], and the mass concentration of Total flow rate of kg/h all 61840n
2
CO2 pollutant
E CO2 fuels
pollutant SO2 evacuated by combustion
C mSO2 [mg / m ] . In Table 6 there are depicted the
3
N
Concentration of
C mCO mg/ all 36380
CO2 pollutant m3N fuels
data resulting in this case study for the component
SO2 of the gases pollutant vector. Case I Case II Case III
Table 6 (n=2) (n=4) (n=6)
Parameter SO2 Sym- MU Fuel Reference 926 103 1852 103 2778 103
bol type values
Lignite: fuel flow kg/h lignite
rate
BL 463 103 n 20 103 40 103 60 103
Oil: fuel flow rate kg/h oil
116,8* 116,8* 116,8*
BP 10 103 n 10-6 10-6 10-6
67920 135840 203760
Lignite: SO2 kg/ lignite 2,04*10-6 70,1*10-6 70,1*10-6 70,1*10-6
emission factor
eLSO2 kJ
55760 111520 167280
Lignite: SO2 123680 247360 371040
pollutant flow rate
ELSO2 kg/h lignite 5930n
36380 36380 36380

ISBN: 978-1-61804-044-2 94
 Models and Methods in Applied Sciences

3.3.3 Component PM of Pollutant Vector 3.4 Testing Validation of SEDD

Table 8 encompasses the resulting data for Methodology on Thermoelectric Units of 330
particulate matter component of pollutant vector. MW to Turceni Power Plant
Table 8 Under the above mentioned conditions, for an
Parameter Ash Sym- MU Fuel Reference
bol type values acceptable evaluation of the results of SEDD
Lignite: fuel
BL kg/h lignite
463 103 n methodology, it is necessary to joint and compare
flow rate the simulation result with experimental test [11,, 17,
Oil: fuel flow kg/h oil
rate
BP 10 103 n 18]. For this purpose we have proposed an
Lignite: PM
ePulb kg/kJ lignite 0,345*10-6 experimental validation of the mathematical pattern
emission factor evaluation of flue gas emission by recordings
Lignite: PM kg/h lignite 1003n
pollutant flow
EPulb achieved on Calcination Evaluation Stand together
rate with Chemical Laboratory – Coal Section within
Concentration
C mPulb mg/ all 590 Turceni electrical generating station (see Fig.5).
of PM pollutant m3N fuels

Case I Case II Case III

(n=2) (n=4) (n=6)
926 103 1852 103 2778 103

20 103 40 103 60 103

-6
0,345*10 0,345* 0,345*
10-6 10-6
2006 4012 6018
590 590 590

Fig.5.1.Planetary ball mill Fig.5.2 Calcination furnance

3.3.4 Component NOx of Pollutant Vector
Based on the same methodology, in Table 9 there
are depicted the resulting data for nitrogen dioxides.
Table 9
Parameter NOx Sym- MU Fuel Reference
bol type values
Lignite: fuel flow kg/h lignite
rate
BL 463 103 n
Oil: fuel flow rate kg/h oil
BP 10 103 n
Lignite: NOx 80 kg/kJ lignite 2,44*10-7
emission factor e LNOx
Lignite: NOx kg/h lignite 710n Fig.5.3 Drying oven Fig.5.4 Calorimetric bomb
pollutant flow rate
E LNOx The main devices of the testing station are: a
planetary ball mill of type PM 400 RETSCH with 4
Oil: NOx emission 80 kg/kJ oil 2,52*10-7
factor e PNOx grinding posts, a calcination furnace of type
NABERTHERM for calcining coal samples, an
Oil: NOx pollutant
E PNOx kg/h oil 100n oven of type ECOCELL 700 for drying the coal
flow rate
sample, and a calorimetric bomb of type 1KA
Total flow of NOx
E NOx kg/h all 810n C5003 that allows a controlled burning of coal
pollutant fuels samples, as well as coal calorific power and
Concentration of mg/ all 480
composition determining.
NOx pollutant
C mNOx m3N fuels The recorded data have been processsed using a
AMD multiprocessor computer system that allowed
Case I (n=2) Case II (n=4) Case III (n=6)
the StatSoft STATISTICA - Version 7.0 software
926 10 3
1852 103 2778 103
running, for date acquisition and processing. This
20 103 40 103 60 103
way the conecntrations of flue gases leaving the
2,44*10-7 2,44*10-7 2,44*10-7
1420 2840 4260 chimney. One could noe that the lignite coal fuel
2,52*10-6 2,52*10-6 2,52*10-6 taken into the case study has: the inferior calorific
200 400 600
1620 3240 4860
power H iL =6280kJ/kg; the sulfur content S=0.8%,
480 480 480 the carbon content C=20%, the ash content
A=22.5%, and the total wet W=45%. The resulting

ISBN: 978-1-61804-044-2 95
 Models and Methods in Applied Sciences

data for the flue gases pollutant vector component: 350m

sulfur dioxide SO2 , carbon dioxide CO2, particulate
matter PM and nitrogen oxides NOx are depicted in
300m
Tables 10, 11, 12 and 13, respectively.
Table 10
Parameter Symbol MU Sample I Sample II Sample 250m
III
SO2 kg/kJ 2.02*10-6 2.06*10-6 2.1*10-6
emission
eLSO2 200m
factor
Concentra- mg/ 3802 3878 3955
tion of
C mSO2 m3N 150m
pollutant
SO2
Table 11 100m
Parameter Symbol MU Sample Sample Sample
I II III
CO2 kg/kJ 114.5* 119.1* 120.3*10-
emission
e LCO2 10-6 10-6 6 50m
factor.
Concentra- mg/ 35652 37108 37471
tion of
C mCO2 m3N 150m 100m 50m 0m
pollutant
CO2 Fig.6 Iso-mass curves: Iso600,
Table 12 Iso500, Iso400, Iso300, Iso200, Iso100
Parameter Symbol MU Sample Sample II Sample
I III For the determination by calculation of the mass
PM kg/kJ 0.335* 0.355*10- 0.359*10- concentration evolution according to the projection
emission
ePulb 10-6 6 6

factor in the mirror of the smoke quill have been

Concentra
C mPulb mg/m3N 572 608 614 developed patterns of diffusion prognosis
tion of
pollutant
[11,17,19,] for an appropriate comparison with
PM experimental data and laboratory tests.
Table 13 In this paper, for modelling the ascendant smoke
Parameter Symbol MU Sample I Sample Sample quill according to the projection in the mirror on a
II III
NOx emission eLNOx kg/kJ 2.41* 2.49* 2.51*
300 meters distance, it has been adopted the pattern
factor 10-7 10-7 10-7 of probability density function (PDF), elaborated by
Concentration
C mNOx mg/ 475 490 495 Weil [19,21,23]. This model allows entailing the
of pollutant m3N
NOx
input parameters of the phenomena that govern the
pollutant dispersion into the atmosphere.

Function = 590*Exp(-x*x*y )
3.5 Numerical Validation on Basis of PDF
Model Applied to Thermoelectric Units of
330 MW to Turceni Power Plant
In this case study, for the thermoelectric units of 330
MW to Turceni electrical generating station, the
projection in mirror is developed for distances of
300 meters (see Fig.6 and Table 14).
Table 14
No. Iso- Iso = Cm[mg/m3N] k[m-2] = z-zc [m]
mass Iso-mass = correction = 500
400
curves indicative maximum factor distance 300
concentation on iso- 200
100
mass
curve
Fig.7 Overall nomogram of mass concentration
1 Iso500 500 590 0,00002 85
ash-particulate matter to Turceni power plant (n=2)
2 Iso400 400 590 0,00002 135
3 Iso300 300 590 0,00002 185
4 Iso200 200 590 0,00002 235
5 Iso100 100 590 0,00002 300 Accordingly, in Fig. 7 it is depicted, as example,
Distribution of iso-mass curves in case of projection the overall nomogram of mass concentration ash-
in the mirror for isomorphic curves of order 100 particulate matter to Turceni power plant when two
mg/m3N in the smoke quill is depicted in Fig.5. thermal units are in operation (n=2), the physical

ISBN: 978-1-61804-044-2 96
 Models and Methods in Applied Sciences

parameter being the mass concentration, and in 4 Discussion and Conclusion

Fig.8, Fig.9 and Fig.10 there are presented the The analysis in Section 3.4 was carried out on
nomograms of ash-particulate matter pollutant for basis of three samples extraction, and according to
different values of correction factor k, with the mass the data depicted as above, for each component of
concentration as physical parameter, under the same the flue gas pollutant vector caused by burning of
assumed case study. lignite coal fuel the following average values have
( )
Function = 590*Exp(-0,000019*x*x) been illustrated:
a) for sulfur dioxide SO2 : the emission factor.
eLSO2 = 2.06*10-6 kg/kJ; the pollutant concentration
C mSO2 = 3878 mg/m3N ; the average error Rmsd S
1%; the maximum error Rmax S 3%.
b) for carbon dioxide CO2 : the emission factor.:
e LCO2 = 118*10-6 kg/kJ; the pollutant concentration
C mCO2 = 36744 mg/m3N ; the average error : Rmsd S
550
450 1%; the maximum error Rmax S 3%.
350
250 c) for particulate matter PM: the emission factor
eLPulb = 0.35*10-6 kg/kJ; the pollutant concentration
150

Fig.8 Mass concentration nomogram for

k = 1,9*10-5 m-2 (n=2) C mPulb = 598 mg/m3N ; the average error Rmsd S
( ) 1.5%; the maximum error Rmax S 4%.
Function = 590*Exp(-0,00002*x*x) d) for nitrogen oxides NOx : the emission factor
eLNOx = 2.47*10-7 kg/kJ; the pollutant concentration
CmNOx = 487 mg/m3N ; the average error Rmsd S
1.5%; the maximum error Rmax S 3%.
One could conclude that flue gases monitoring
during the operation of a coal-fired electrical
generating station is an essential step in assessing
the environmental and human health impact of
550
pollutants. Procedures should impose worldwide the
450
350
estimation of yearly emissions of primary
250 particulate matter, sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides
150
on the total megawatt-hours generated by each
Fig.9 Mass concentration nomogram for power plant. Further on, since the emissions from
k = 2*10-5 m-2 (n=2)
coal-fired power plants are dispersed over a large
( ) area, the population living around every power plant
Function = 590*Exp(-0,000021*x*x)
should be included in specific databases and a
mapping program, aiming that it could be medically
useful.
Compliance with Sustainable Development
imposes on each existing coal-fired electrical
generating station to be installed and activated both
modern pollution control technology and
depollution equipment, assuming that these end-of-
pipe treatments would reduce the environmental and
500 human health impacts and will slow the process of
400
300 degradation of life on Earth. Further on, investing in
200
100 cleaner production to prevent pollution and reduce
coal-resource consumption should be a responsible
Fig.10 Mass concentration nomogram for
k = 2,1*10-5 m-2 (n=2)
approach, more effective than continuing to apply
the end-of-pipe solutions in the coal-fired power
plants.

ISBN: 978-1-61804-044-2 97
 Models and Methods in Applied Sciences
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to express their heartfelt
gratitude and deep appreciation to the WSEAS
Research Institute, for the dedicated efforts in
creating an appropriate scientific environment, with
an endless moral support for the scholars
worldwide. The authors are also deeply appreciating
the important support of the colleagues of Turceni
Power Plant in achieving this study.
References:
[1] S. Penney, J. Bell, J. Balbus (2009), “Estimating the
Health Impacts of Coal-Fired Power Plants
Receiving International Financing”,. Report at
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE FUND, 2009.
Available:
http://www.edf.org/documents/9553_coal-plants-
health-impacts.pdf
[2] A.J. Cohen, H.R. Anderson, B. Ostro, K.D. Pandey,
M. Krzyzanowski, N. Kunzli, K. Gutschmidt, A.
Pope, I. Romieeu, J.M. Samet, K. Smith (2005), “
The global burden of disease due to outdoor air
pollution”. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental
Health, Part A, 68: 1301-1307, 2005.
[3] U. C. Mishra, “Environmental impact of coal
industry and thermal power plants in India”. Journal
of Environmental Radioactivity, Vol.72 No.(1-2): 35-
40, 2004.
[4] M. Istrate, M. Gusa, Impactul producerii,
transportului si distributiei energiei electrice asupra
mediului. AGIR Publishing House, Bucharest, 2000.
[5] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
“Inventory of US Greenhouse Gas Emissions and
Sinks: 1990-2004,” April 2006.
[6] A. Lockwood, K. Welker-Hood, M. Rauch, B.
Gottlieb, "Coal's Assault on Human Health".
Physicians for Social Responsibility Report,
November 2009.
[7] C.A. Pope, “Epidemiology of fine particulate air
pollution and human health: Biologic mechanisms
and who’s at risk?”. Environmental Health
Perspectives, 108: 713-723, 2000.
[8] Source Watch, Health effects of coal, 2011 (online).
Available :
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Health_
effects_of_coal.
[9] S. Ehrenfeld, “Industrial Ecology: A new Framework
for Product and Process Design”. Journal of Cleaner
Production, Vol. 5 (1-2), 1997.
[10] S. El-Haggar, Sustainable Industrial Design and
Waste Management. Cradle-to cradle for
Sustainable Development. Elsevier Academic Press,
2007.
[11] C.A. Bulucea, A. Jeles, N.E. Mastorakis, C.A.
Bulucea, C. Brindusa, “Assessing the environmental
pollutant vector of combustion gases emission from
coal-fired power plants”, ”, RECENT RESEARCHES
in GEOGRAPHY, GEOLOGY, ENERGY,
ENVIRONMENT and BIOMEDICINE, Proceedings
ISBN: 978-1-61804-044-2
View publication stats
of the 5th NAUN International Conference on Energy
and Development- Environment - Biomedicine
(EDEB’11), Corfu Island, Greece, July 14-16, 2011,
ISBN: 978-1-61804-022-0.
[12] N.E. Mastorakis, A. Jeles, C.A. Bulucea, C.A.
Bulucea, C. Brindusa, “Evaluating the environmental
impact of coal-fired power plants through
wastewater pollutant vector”, RECENT
RESEARCHES in GEOGRAPHY, GEOLOGY,
ENERGY, ENVIRONMENT and BIOMEDICINE,
Proceedings of the 5th NAUN International
Conference on Energy and Development-
Environment - Biomedicine (EDEB’11), Corfu
Island, Greece, July 14-16, 2011, ISBN: 978-1-
61804-022-0.
[13] R. Erikson, Environmental Impact Assessment.
Academic Press Inc. San Diego, Ca.USA, 1994.
[14] E. Hnatiuc (Dir.), Procedes electriques de mesure et
de traitment des polluants. Editions TEC&DOC,
LAVOISIER, 2002.
[15] B.W. Berger, K.J. Davis, C. Yi, P.S. Bakwin and
C.L. Zhao, “Long-Term Carbon Dioxide Fluxes
from a Very Tall Tower in a Northern Forest: Flux
Measurement Methodology”. Journal of
Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology, 18(4): 529-
542, 2001.
[16] J.M. Breuil, “Input-output analysis and pollutant
emissions in France”. The Energy Journal, July 1st,
1992.
[17] A. Brîndu[a , J. Kovacs , Thermoenergetic block on
coal. Pollution vector: burning gas, ANNALS OF
THE UNIVERSITY OF PETROSANI, Vol..9, :218-
221, UNIVERSITAS Publishing House, Petro[ani ,
ROMÂNIA. 2007.
[18] A. Brindusa, “Research concerning the
environmental pollution vectors specific to the
thermoelectric power plants on coal”, Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Petrosani, 2009.
[19] J.C. Weil, “A diagnosis of the asymmetry in top-
down and bottom-up diffusion using a Lagrangian
stochastic model”. Journal of the Atmospheric
Sciences, 47(4): 501-515, 1990.
[20] P.K. Misra, “Dispersion of non-buoyant particles
inside a convective boundary layer”. Atmospheric
Environment, 16(2): 239-243, 1982.
[21] J.C. Weil and T.W. Horst, “Footprint estimates for
atmospheric flux measurements in the convective
boundary layer”. In: S.E. Schwartz and W.G.N. Slinn
(Editors), Precipitation Scavenging and Atmosphere-
Surface Exchange. Hemisphere, Washington, DC,
1992.
[22] A.K. Luhar, “The influence of vertical wind direction
shear on dispersion in the convective boundary layer,
and its incorporation in coastal fumigation models”.
Boundary-Layer Meteorology, 102(1): 1-38, 2002.
[23] J.C. Weil, L.A. Corio, and R.P. Brower, “A PDF
dispersion model for buoyant plumes in the
convective boundary layer”. Journal of Applied
Meteorology, 36(8): 982-1003, 1997.
98