A Study on the Comparison Between FGD Operation Cost and Air Pollution Control Fee-Using Taichung Power Plant as a Study Case

• Main Authors: Nein-Fung Wu, 吳年芳
• Other Authors: 望熙榮
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2008
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/58266324008900892810

碩士 === 國立中興大學 === 環境工程學系所 === 96 === The Taichung thermal power plant of Taiwan, the greatest coal-fired thermal power plant of the world, needs to burn coal for 17,000,000 ton every year. In order to conform to the emission standard, the plant should pay attention to its emission. The SOx emitted into the atmosphere should be limited to a specific concentration so that it will not pollute the environment. Therefore, each unit is designed with the function of wet limestone flue gas desulfurization（FGD）.The process is the most widely used because of its high desulfurization performance and reliability. The plant can thus save a large amount of the air-pollution fee and gain from the byproduct, gypsum. However, the high cost for the operation of the flue gas desulfurization system makes the plant take some factors into measures, such as the annual air-pollution fee and the operation cost of the flue gas desulfurization system, and a stern set of pattern for calculation between the company’s finances and the environmental protection is to be sought. This study focuses on the comparison and the treatment between the two factors. Because the different calculation for the air pollution fee in the year 2006 and the year 2007, I chose the first, third, fifth machine for FGD to process the analysis and comparison. And the result showed that under the same rate of coal containing sulfur, the machine five to eigh had the higher efficiency on the rate of sulfur removal than the machine one to four. Therefore the loss and benefit of the FGD operation were higher. The air pollution fee on the FGD operation in 2006 was higher than that in 2007. As the same, the loss and benefit on the FGD operation were higher in 2006 than that in 2007.Besides, based on the operation in 2007, it couldn’t be available to promote the loss and benefit value of FGD if we added the machines for water-spraying to lower the emission of SOx concentration, and to lessen the air-pollution fee. Because the reductive number for lowering the loss-benefit value is five to ten times higher than the reductive air- pollution fee.