SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

Contents
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... 3
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 3
2. Standards of Emissions ........................................................................................................... 5
2.1. Global Emission Standards .............................................................................................. 5
2.1.1. United States of America .......................................................................................... 5
2.1.2. Europian Union ......................................................................................................... 6
2.1.3. Japan ......................................................................................................................... 7
2.2. National Emission Standards ........................................................................................... 7
2.3. Provincial Emission Standards ......................................................................................... 8
3. Clean Coal Technologies ........................................................................................................ 8
3.1. Review of Clean Coal Technologies ................................................................................ 8
3.1.1. Carbon Capture and Storage ..................................................................................... 8
3.1.1.1. Absorption ............................................................................................................. 9
3.1.1.2. Adsorption ............................................................................................................. 9
3.1.1.3. Membrane Gas Separation .................................................................................... 9
3.1.2. High Efficiency Low Emission Technology............................................................. 9
3.1.2.1. Subcritical Boiler Technology .............................................................................. 9
3.1.2.2. Supercritical Boiler Technology ........................................................................... 9
3.1.2.3. Ultra Supercritical Boiler Technology .................................................................. 9
3.1.2.4. Advanced Ultra Supercritical Boiler Technology ............................................... 10
3.1.3. Mineral Washing ..................................................................................................... 10
3.1.4. Wet Scrubbers/Flu Gas desulfurization .................................................................. 10
3.1.5. Low NOx Burners ................................................................................................... 10
3.1.6. Electrostatic Precipitators ....................................................................................... 10
3.1.7. Integrated Gassification Combined Cycle .............................................................. 10
3.1.8. Flu Gas Separation .................................................................................................. 10
3.2. Technologies Best-Suited for Pakitani Coal .................................................................. 10
4. Technical Evaluation of Using Pakistani Coal in Place of Imported Coal ........................... 12
4.1. Selection of Techology - Underground Coal Gasification combined with Integrated Coal
Gasification Combined Cycle (UCG-IGCC) ............................................................................ 12
4.2. Extraction of Coal Gas without Mining ......................................................................... 12

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 1 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

4.3. Transportation ................................................................................................................ 13

4.4. Utilization ....................................................................................................................... 13
4.5. CO2 emissions ................................................................................................................ 14
4.6. Pollution ......................................................................................................................... 14
4.7. Waste Removal .............................................................................................................. 14
5. Cost Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 14
6. Environmental Impact and Sustainability ............................................................................. 16
7. Social and Economic Benefits of Using Local Coal ............................................................. 16
8. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 16
References ..................................................................................................................................... 17

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 2 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

Review of Clean Coal Technology and Utilization of Local Coal in

Pakistan Coal Power Plants– Potential, Emissions, Economic and
Technical Analysis

Abstract
Pakistan is a country rich in coal resources with around 185 million tonnes reserves. But most of
the coal is of lignite quality and therefore not suitable for the coal power plants economically and
technically. The coal-based power plants in Pakistan work on imported coal despite the vast
reserves of local coal present. In this work, a brief review of the global, national and provincial
standards that define the emission limits of the coal power plants and the various clean coal
techniques are presented. A comprehensive study is conducted to determine the potential
utilization of local in place of imported coal. The underground coal gasification with integrated
coal gasification combine cycle (UCG-IGCC) is found to be a suitable alternate for the utilization
of local coal. The technology is able to use the local low-quality coal efficiently and in an
environmentally friendly way. The technology can be combined with carbon capture technology
to decrease the CO2 emissions to negligible amount. The technology is also able to keep the
emission under the national and provincial standards of Pakistan and possess economic benefits.
It eradicates the need of conventional mining procedures and enhances the safety of the process.

1. Introduction
Due to the increasing demand of energy, earth is being depleted of its natural resources. According
to the Energy Information Administration (US), the total energy demand increases by 56%
between 2010 to 2040. Fossil fuels will continue to fulfill almost 80% of the World’s energy
demand through 2040 [1] but contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gases absorb
incident solar energy and re-radiate it in the atmosphere leading to global warming [2]. At the
earlier time, man used to get heat by burning wood and stones but since most the burning was done
on small extent in open air, so the impact was small. With increase in population the extent of
burning fuels to get energy increased. The first episodes of smog were observed in Donora, USA
in 1948. The city got trapped under a thick layer of grey smog trapping the pollutants in it. The
14000 residents suffered from severe cardiovascular and respiratory syndromes and the death rate
rose to 40. The onset of smog was a clear indication of the rapid industrialization in the country.
The second most adverse effect was observed in London, UK. The industrial revolution of UL was
based on the utilization of coal in the 18th and 19th century. The greater London smog of 1952 was
observed by the whole world as an alarm to the health conditions, causing 4000 deaths [3].
Following the two incidents, the “Clean Air Act” of 1956 and 1968 was passed by the
governmental bodies to regulate the industrial pollution. It focused on the construction of higher
chimneys to disperse the pollutants in the upper atmosphere for their easy dispersal. In the second
world war, the extensive use of dispersion techniques relying on gaseous chemicals such as

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 3 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

Phosgene gas also elevated the environmental pollution. In 1980’s, the rapid expansion of
automotive industry became the prevalent cause of degradation of air quality. In 1995, “National
Air Quality Strategy” was released in UK targeting the local bodies to reduce the emissions by
2005 [3]. In general, the prevailing two standards are the “U.S. National Ambient Air Quality
Standards” and the “E.U. Air Quality Directive” that set the standards to control air pollution.
The thermal power plants work by converting the heat energy obtained from the
combustion of fuel to thermal energy. The major fuels used in such power plants are fossil fuels
comprising of coal, natural gas and petroleum. These fuels are hydrocarbons based and upon
reaction with oxygen, they give off carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, Sulphur
oxides and unburnt hydrocarbons depending upon the combustion environment and completion.
These gases are harmful, and they can further form more pollutants by reacting with each other
spontaneously or under the influence of sunlight. These pollutants then cause smog with different
mechanisms for winter and summer.
When there is absence of degradation through water and mud and the oxidization of the
remains of the dead plants occur then there is the formation of fossil fuels called coal. Coal is
formed in the absence of oxygen and moisture for a considerable amount of time under higher
temperatures and pressure. The more intense environment means the more maturity of the coal on
a physical, chemical and biochemical level. On the basis of maturity levels of coals, there are
different types of coals are present such as peat, lignite, bituminous, sub-bituminous, anthracite
and graphite [4].
Approximately 40% of world electricity is being produced by coal. In the above-mentioned
types, peat is a kind of soft and highly compressible type of coal that is used in countries as fuel
for food cooking and heating mode for household works. Lignite is the lowest-ranked coal and
used only in steam power generation mode fuel. Bituminous is a lump of dense coal that is
consumed for heat generation, steam power generation and power applications. Anthracite is the
black and the second last in the order of hardness and is used for space heating purposes for
residential and commercial both. In the end, the graphite is the hardest coal among all and that is
why it is gnarly to burn as well as not so commonly consumed as fuel [5].
The moisture content in the coal i.e. less mature coal has a higher level of moisture level
and the temperature at which the coal is being ignited. So at temperatures higher than 300°C, the
alkyl and ether linkages are taken out first and almost immediately the functional groups are taken
out in the form of gases such as CO2 , H2 O, NO2 , SO2 and CH4 . The temperatures lower than 300°C,
cause the volatilization of organic compounds and with the steam generated with the help of
wastewater converts the liquids organic compounds to the vapors and take them out this is also
called the steam stripping effect [6]. Coal-based power generation plants are the primary producers
of the pollutants like CO2 , NOx and SO2 . The SO2 is basically produced from the coals that have
higher Sulphur contents in the composition but NOx can be produced in two ways. It is generated
either from the nitrogen content trapped in the coal composition or from the thermal oxidation of
the diatomic nitrogen N2 present in the atmosphere to NOx . The CO2 is released as the carbon
content is burnt in the presence of excess air and it is considered as the greenhouse gas.

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 4 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

2. Standards of Emissions
In order to combat the pollution, several standards are set on different levels. Some of the major
global standards include Japanese, United States and European Union standards. While some
national standards and provincial standards also exist depending upon the countries and the
different regulatory bodies within the states.
2.1. Global Emission Standards
The most common global emission regulations that are followed by many countries of other
regions also; include the United States of America, European Union and Japanese standards and
are discussed below briefly.
2.1.1. United States of America
The very initial environmental act “The Clean Air Act (CAA)” was an American policy that
restricted the excessive emission in the clean air. The clean air act enforces the Environmental
Protection Agency (ETA) to define the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for
setting the safe amount of emissions from the various sources of pollution. The first rules on
defining the safe levels of Particulate Matter were established by Clean Air Act in 1971. The
primary annual level of PM2.5 (Particulate Matter of diameter less than 2.5 μm) was reduced from
15 μm/m3 to 12 μm/m3 in 2012. Particulate matter includes all the pollutants of a specific size
range. The current restrictions on SOx and NOx defined by the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) are presented in table 1. These restrictions are being applied more strictly to
the newly based coal-based power plants, as well as to the previously operational power plants.

Table 1 Environmental Protection Agency Current National Ambient Air Quality Standards for SO2 and NOx [7]
Final Rule Primary/Secondary Averaging Time Level Form
Primary 1 hour 100 ppb 98th percentile of 1-hour daily
maximum concentrations,
NOx averaged over 3 years
Primary and Annual 53 ppb Annual Mean
Secondary
Primary 1 hour 75 ppb 99th percentile of 1-hour daily
maximum concentrations
SOx averaged over 3 years
Secondary 3 hours 0.5 Not to be exceeded more than
ppm once per year

The New Source Performance Standards are presented in table below and are determined at 0℃,
101.325 KPa, and a time of average 24 hours.

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 5 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

Table 2 New Source Performance Standards for Coal Fired Power Plants [8]
Plant Age NOx SO2 Particulate Matter (PM)
1971-1978 300 ng/J Heat Input 520 ng/J Heat Input 43 ng/J Heat Input
Sep 1978-1997 Subbituminous: 520 ng/J Heat Input 13 ng/J Heat Input
210 ng/J heat input; 90% Reduction
Other (or 70% reduction
1978-Mar 2005 New Plant: where < 260 ng/J);
200 ng/J Gross Output; 180 ng/J Gross Output;
Reconstructed: 65 ng/J Heat Input
65 ng/J Heat Input
Commenced 130 ng/J Gross output; 180 ng/J Gross Output 18 ng/J Gross Output
Construction 95% Reduction 6.4 ng/J Heat Input
March 2005 - Or;
May 2011 13 ng/J Input
Commenced 130 ng/J Gross Output; 180 ng/J Gross Output 99.9% Reduction
Re-Construction 47 ng/J Heat Input; 65 ng/J Heat Input
March 2005 - 95% Reduction
May 2011
Modified 180 ng/J Gross Output; 180 ng/J Gross Output 18 ng/J Gross Output
March 2005 - 65 ng/J Heat Input; 65 ng/J Heat Input 6.4 ng/J Heat Input
May 2011 90 % Reduction Or;
13 ng/J Input
99.8% Reduction
Construction or 88 ng/J Gross Output; 130 ng/J Gross Output 11 ng/J Gross Input;
Reconstruction 95 ng/J Net Output 140 ng/J Net Input 12 ng/J Net Input
after 3 May, 2011 97% Reduction
Modified 140 ng/J Gross Output 180 ng/J Gross Output; 18 ng/J Gross Output
after 3 May 2011 90% Reduction 6.4 ng/J Heat Input
Or 13 ng/J Input
99.8% Reduction

2.1.2. Europian Union

The European Union standards apply to all the binding nations. The standards from the stationary
sources such as coal powered plants are regulated by Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control
(IPPC). The table 3 below shows the emissions values for SOx, NOx and dust particles (PM2.5)
from existing coal and lignite fired power plants. The table 4 shows the limits for new power
plants.
Table 3 Emission Limit Values from Industrial Emissions Directive for NOx, SO2 and Dust from Existing Coal and Lignite
Combustion Plants [9]
Total Rated Thermal Emission Limit Values (mg/m3)
Power (MW) NOx SO2 Dust
50-100 300 400 30
100-300 200 250 25
>300 200 200 20

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 6 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

Table 4 Emission Limit Values from Industrial Emissions Directive for NOx, SO2 and Dust from New and Retrofitted Coal and
Lignite Combustion Plants [9]
Total Rated Thermal Emission Limit Values (mg/m3)
Power (MW) NOx SO2 Dust
50-100 300 400 20
100-300 200 200 20
>300 150 150 10

The minimum rate of desulphurization from Industrial Emissions Directive for combustion plants
as defined by the European commission is given as:

Table 5 Minimum Rate of Desulphurization for Power Plants [9]

Total Rated Thermal Minimum Rate of Desulphurization (%)
Input (MW) Existing and in Operation Prior Other New and Retrofitted
to 2003 Existing
50-100 300 400 20
100-300 200 200 20
>300 150 150 10
2.1.3. Japan
The Ministry of Environment (MOE) in Japan, established in 2001 is responsible for the regulation
of environmental policies in Japan. The standards for PM2.5 for 24 hours are 35 μm/m3 and 15
μm/m3 annual. The emission standards for dust and soot emissions are as follows:

Table 6 Dust and Soot Standards from Coal Boilers [10]

Capacity General Standards Special Standards
m3/h mg/m3 mg/m3
≥200,000 100 500
40,000-200,000 200 100
<40,000 300 150
2.2. National Emission Standards
The National Environmental Quality Standards (NEQS) Pakistan sets the national emission
standards for Pakistan. The standards for SO2 and NOx emissions are as follows:

Table 7 Pakistan National Environmental Quality Standards for SOx [11]

Sulphur Dioxide Background Level (mg/m3) Standards
Criterion I Criterion II
Background Annual Maximum Max. SO2 Max. Allowable 1-Year Average
Air Quality Average 24-Hour Emissions Ground Level Increment to
(SO2 basis) Interval (TPD) Ambient (mg/m3)
Unpolluted <50 <200 500 50
Low 50 200 500 50
High 100 400 100 10
Very Polluted >100 >400 100 10

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 7 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

Table 8 Pakistan National Environmental Quality Standards for NOx [11]

Annual arithmetic mean of ambient air concentrations of 100 μm/m3 (0.05 ppm)
nitrogen oxides (expressed as NO2) should not exceed
Maximum emission levels for stationary sources discharges, before mixing with the atmosphere:
For fuel fired steam generators
Liquid Fossil Fuels 130 ng/J of Heat Input
Solid Fossil Fuels 300 ng/J of Heat Input
Lignite Fossil Fuels 260 ng/J of Heat Input
2.3. Provincial Emission Standards
Among the provincial standards of Pakistan, Punjab Clean Air Action Plan is the most developed
in terms of the documentation. Firstly, the standard imposes to change the brick kiln design to
zigzag one. This zigzag design has the potential to reduce the emissions by 70% and enhance the
efficiency by 40%. The proposed action is as follows:

Table 9 Punjab Clean Air Action Plan [12]

Policy Measure Proposed Action Approx. Cost Responsibility
Technology 200 brick kilns Rs. 800 M Lead:
diffusion upgraded to more World Bank Funds Environment
through efficient Induced Partner: Industry,
Elaboration in Draft Zig-Zag Brick Chambers of
most polluting Kiln technology Commerce and
areas through Energy conservation, Rs. To be Decided Industry,
similar grants process improvement World Bank Funds respective
and end of pipe industrial
treatment of (TBD) associations
furnaces
Commercial Rs. To be Decided
application of fly ash World Bank Funds
from boilers and
power plants
Dust control and process Rs. To be Decided
improvement in stone World Bank Funds
crushing units

3. Clean Coal Technologies

3.1. Review of Clean Coal Technologies
Coal is the biggest and the oldest source of power generation but burning coal releases a lot of
harmful pollutants so in order to make the use of coal suitable for environment, clean coal
technologies are introduced that focus on the reduction of emissions caused by coal power plants.
3.1.1. Carbon Capture and Storage
Carbon Capture is the technique to capture the CO2 in the flu gases and then string it into a storage
mostly underground. Carbon capture is achieved by the following techniques:

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 8 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

3.1.1.1. Absorption
In absorption, the atoms, ions and molecules get inside the bulk volume of absorbing material
fully. Such absorption is useful to capture the required atoms/molecules in a medium then
separating them with physical separation techniques.
3.1.1.2. Adsorption
Adsorption is the name for phenomenon in which the atoms/ions/molecules get attached to the
surface of the adsorbent. It is clearly a surface phenomenon and results because of the surface
energy resulting from the forces of the surface molecules of the adsorbent.
3.1.1.3. Membrane Gas Separation
CO2 separation is also possible by synthetic membranes. Such membranes make it possible to
extract and separate the CO2 from the flu gases. Membranes can only separate the desired
compounds when the permeability matches to the desired results such that membrane permits the
passage of the compound to be separated from it while restricting the rest of the mass flow.
Membrane technology although has a good potential but it is till now an expensive technique for
carbon capture.
3.1.2. High Efficiency Low Emission Technology
High Efficiency Low Emission (HELE) technologies are used to increase the efficiency of the
system by decreasing the fuel consumption and the emissions associated. The HELE Technologies
can increase the efficiency from 33 to 40% and can reduce the emissions of CO2 by 2 Giga Tons
annually [13]. These technologies are further divided into the following types:
3.1.2.1. Subcritical Boiler Technology
This technology is the most commonly applied one due to its easier and less costly features. It has
efficiency up to 30% but no restriction no restriction on the emissions of CO2.
3.1.2.2. Supercritical Boiler Technology
This technology comprises of 22% of the total coal fired power plants. It has thermal efficiency of
around 40% and operates at high temperature and pressure. It has relatively higher capital cost but
emits 20% less CO2 than the subcritical technology [13].
3.1.2.3. Ultra Supercritical Boiler Technology
These plants have thermal efficiency of around 45% and operate at higher temperatures and
pressures as compared to supercritical plants. This technology comprises of 3% of the total coal
fired power plants. This technology is able to reduce the emissions of CO2 by a third as compared
to the subcritical counter parts. But it has a high capital cost, higher than the supercritical plants
and operates only on the high quality, low ash coal only. They can operate at steam temperatures
of 620 ℃ and pressure ranges of 25-29 MPa [13].

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 9 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

3.1.2.4. Advanced Ultra Supercritical Boiler Technology

These plants have 50% thermal efficiency and are even more expensive as compared to ultra-
supercritical boiler technology. The have the potential to reduce the emissions by 20% less than
the supercritical plants.
The comparison of the above presented HELE technologies is given in table below:

Table 10 Comparison of the Clean Coal Technologies [13]

Technology Efficiency Reduction in CO2 Emissions
Subcritical Boiler Technology 30% -
Supercritical Boiler Technology 38% 21%
Ultra-Supercritical Boiler Technology 45% 33%
Advanced Ultra Supercritical Boiler Technology 50% 40%
Carbon Capture and Storage - 90%
3.1.3. Mineral Washing
In this technique, cola is prepared before utilization by washing call initially with a washer liquid
which removes the impurities from coal and therefore the amount of emissions is reduced due to
lesser impure content burned.
3.1.4. Wet Scrubbers/Flu Gas desulfurization
Wet scrubbers work by removing the harmful emissions from the waste generated by the coal
power plants. Wet scrubbers or the flue gas desulfurization works by passing the emissions from
the spray of water and lime. The mixture reacts with the flue gases to remove the sulphur dioxide.
3.1.5. Low NOx Burners
These burners reduce the amount of NOx produced by reverting the combustion process and
limiting the supply of oxygen for the combustion of Nitrogen.
3.1.6. Electrostatic Precipitators
Electrostatic precipitators work by charging the collector plates and introducing electric field in
the passage of the emissions. The charged plates induce opposite charges on the targeted particles
and catch them by electric force before being emitted to the environment.
3.1.7. Integrated Gassification Combined Cycle
The integrated Gasification combined cycle works by burning the coal in steps. First, the steam
and hot pressurized oxygen is reacted with coal to form a mixture of carbon monoxide and
hydrogen. This mixture is then cleaned, and combustion takes place in gas turbine. This form can
provide as much as 50% of fuel efficiency.
3.1.8. Flu Gas Separation
Flu gas separation works by removing CO2 from the emitted gases by mixing it with a solvent.
CO2 is removed with steam and the steam is then condensed to recover the CO2.
3.2. Technologies Best-Suited for Pakitani Coal
The classification of coal is presented in the figure below:

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 10 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

Table 11 Classification of Coal [14]

 Low Rank →  High Rank →
Rank Lignite Subbituminous Bituminous Anthracite
% Caron 65-72 72-76 76-90 90-95
% Hydrogen 5 ------------------------------decreases------------------------- 2
% Nitrogen  --------------1-2-------------- →
% Oxygen 30 ----------------------------decreases-------------------------- 1
% Sulphur 0 -------------increases----------------- ~4 -----------decreases---------- ~0
% Water 70-30 30-10 10-5 5
Heating value
7000 10,000 12,000-15,000 15,000
(BTU/lb)

The summary of coal reserves present in Pakistan is presented below:

Table 12 Pakistan Coal Reserves Data by NEPRA [15]

Province Resources Present in Million Tonnes Heating Value (BTU/lb)
Sindh 184,623 5219-13,555
Baluchistan 217 9637-15499
Punjab 235 9472-15801
NWFP 91 9386-14217
Azad Jammu and Kashmir 9 7336-12338
Total 185,175

Since the greatest amount of coal lies in Sindh, so the detailed resources are presented in table
below for completeness.

Table 13 Sindh Coal Reserves Data by NEPRA [15]

Coal Field Resources Present in Million Tonnes Heating Value (BTU/lb)
Thar 175506 6244-11045
Lakhra 1328 5503-9158
Sonda-Jherruck 5523 5219-13555
Meting-Jhimpur 473 5219-8612
Indus East 1777 7782-8660
Badin 16 11415-11521
Total 184,623

Clearly the larger amount of Pakistani coal lies in the Lignite and Sub-Bituminous range but the
Thar coal is found to be present in greater proportion of lignite form [16] with higher levels of
water, followed by sulphur; so, the techniques applied for the lignite coal will be considered here.
The indigenous coal of found to be inadequate for Sahiwal Coal Power Plant and coal imported
from South Africa and Indonesia is used as fuel [17]. The composition of the coal found from Thar
field of Sindh is presented in table below:

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 11 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

Table 14 Composition of Coal Obtained from Sindh Thar Field [18]

Moisture (% by weight) 46.77
Volatile Matter (% by weight) 23.42
Fixed Carbon (% by weight) 16.66
Ash (% by weight) 6.24
Sulphur (% by weight) 1.16
Heating value (dry) MJ/kg 11.48
From the author’s point of view, in order to utilize the indigenous coal specifically the vast coal
reserves of Thar, Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) seems to be a potential way as described
in [16]. In this technology, coal is gasifier in underground and wells are build. One is the injection
well through which low-pressure high-volume air is injected and the second is the production well
through which the formed gas is extracted for purification. The gas purified, can then be used for
power production like natural gas. This technology has the potential to reduce the cost, emissions
and can well utilize he low ranked coal including the lignite and the sub-bituminous coal. This
technology is even more efficiency then the surface integrated coal gasification combined cycle
(IGCC). UCG has safety advantages as well as it does not require the excessive pressure chambers
and it has less heat losses due to the ground insulation. The UCG can also be combined with carbon
capture technology to further decrease the CO2 emissions and practically bring them to zero. Since
Pakistani coal is rich in sulphur and nitrogen content, flu gas desulphurization and electrostatic
precipitators should also be installed after carefully monitoring the emission content.

4. Technical Evaluation of Using Pakistani Coal in Place of Imported Coal

4.1. Selection of Techology - Underground Coal Gasification combined with
Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle (UCG-IGCC)
Selected technique for utilization of Pakistani coal in place of imported coal is the Underground
Coal Gasification (UCG) combined with integrated coal gasification combined cycle (IGCC)
resulting in the “UCG-IGCC” technique. This technique is environmentally friendly, safe, reliable
and has the potential to utilize the low rank coal which otherwise was not possible technically and
economically. It also possesses high thermal efficiency as it has less heat transfer losses due to its
underground nature.
4.2. Extraction of Coal Gas without Mining
The conventional mining procedure involves the mining of coal at the site then cleaning the coal
to remove the impurities, transporting the cleaned coal to the plant site and then storing it in the
stock, then utilizing coal as per the procedure i.e. either gasification (IGCC), or liquifying or
pulverizing the coal (in case of fluid bed combustion process). However, in case of the UCG-
IGCC, the conventional mining methods and the associated wastes are not present. The process
involves the drilling of two wells deep down to the coal seam. One well is the injection well
through which oxygen/air is injected towards coal seam and the other is the production well
through which the product gases come out. The injected air/oxygen combusts the coal inside and
the product gas comes out of the production well due to the inherent property of coal seam to
transmit gases through it. In this way the conventional mining operational cost and the associated

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 12 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

safety risks are absent in UCG-IGCC. The coal which is too deep or is not of good quality so not
economically feasible to mine can be utilized also by this technology [19].
4.3. Transportation
With UCG-IGCC, the heavy transportation of coal is also not required. If the plant is at the coal
seam site, then no transport is required but if the plant cannot be build on the site and is further
apart then, the gas can easily be transported through gas pipelines which is relatively easier than
the vehicular transmission of coal from seam to the plant site. The transport of gas through
pipelines needs a setup requiring capital cost only and very little maintenance cost. Considering
the pressure constrains enough to ensure the transmission of gas through pipelines, gas could also
be transferred through tanks and carriages.
4.4. Utilization
In the UCH-IGCC system, the synthesis gas is used to burn in a gas turbine producing the primary
power through gas turbine. The flu gases are hot enough and a large amount of energy is wasted if
their heat energy is not recovered. The heat energy from the gas turbine flu gases are used to
provide heat to run the combined steam turbine. This makes combined gas and steam turbines
cycle with thermal efficiencies in range of 42 - 44%. The synthesis gas is then cleaned particularly
with the acid gas removal to remove the H2S and COS products formed from Sulphur. During the
cleaning, the desulphurization and the dehydration is specifically important. Both the composition
of this syngas before and after cleaning is given in tables below:

Table 15 Composition of Raw Syngas [18]

Syngas Components Composition
H2 15-20%
CO 10-15%
CO2 20-25%
N2 40-60%
H2S 1%
H2O 0.4 kg of water/kg of syngas
Total Hydrocarbons < 20 mg/Nm3
Tar < 1 mg/Nm3
CH2 1-2%
Table 16 Composition of Purified Syngas [18]
Syngas Components Composition
Particulate Content ≤50 mg/Nm3
Moisture Content ≤50 mg/Nm3
Tar Content ≤50 mg/Nm3
H2S ≤50 mg/Nm3
NH3 ≤ 20 mg/Nm3
Impurity Grain Size ≤5 μg
Impurity Contents ≤ 30 mg/Nm3
Product Gas Temperature < 40℃
H2 15-20%
CO 10-15%

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 13 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

CO2 20-25%
CH4 1-2%
4.5. CO2 emissions
The CO2 emissions can be reduced by either pre-combustion techniques or post combustion carbon
capture and storage techniques. In the pre-combustion techniques CO2 is removed in the syngas
purification plant and re injected into the empty cavity of coal seam. The CO2 that evolves after
the combustion can again be injected into the empty coal cavity. The empty coal cavity serves as
a potential feature of carbon storage in UCG-IGCC technologies.
4.6. Pollution
During gasification the sulphur present is converted to Hydrogen sulphide (H2S) and carbonyl
sulphide (COS) and these products can be easily removed by commercially available systems such
as the acid gas removal system. SOx are removed by installed Flue Gas Desulphurization systems
which prove to be much economical in UCG-IGCC systems. It has been reported that flu gas
desulphurization takes about 3% of the auxiliary power from the system in case of solid coal
combustion but the value is practically negligible in case of UCG-IGCC [18]. NOx is not formed
in considerable amount due to the fact that combustion of gas takes place at lower temperatures as
compared to combustion of coal which takes place at higher temperatures [19]. The particulate
matter can be removed by the water scrubbing techniques.
4.7. Waste Removal
Practically, all the solid waste including the particulate metal like Mercury, Arsenic and ash
remains underground so the waste problem and the associated waste burning problems are
eradicated and there are no cost expenditures associated.

5. Cost Analysis
UCG requires 75% less capital cost as compared to surface integrated coal gasification [16]. A
detailed cost analysis is provided by [20]. In the cost analysis presented 3 coal samples were
considered for the Underground Coal Gasification technology. The properties of the samples are
provided below:
Table 17 Composition of the Samples Analyzed [20]
Sample A Sample B Sample C
(Lignite) (Lignite) (Sub-Bituminous Coal)
Moisture 5.01 13.42 9.53
Volatile Matter 27.39 45.51 20.23
Fixed carbon 51.25 23.15 6617
Ash 16.01 17.89 4.05
C 64.72 50.84 75.47
H 3.72 5.38 1.89
N 1.10 0.33 0.02
O 8.47 18.33 6.80
S - 0.83 -
Gross Calorific value (MJ/kg) 19.22 16.57 20.96

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 14 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

The different parameters of the plant are mentioned in table below:

Table 18 Process Parameters [20]

Sample A Sample B Sample C

Coal
(Lignite) (Lignite) (Sub-Bituminous Coal)
Gas Heating value (MJ/m3) 4.07 5.14 3.35
Gas Yield (m3/ton) 2798 3281 2628
MW Power per Module 4.44 6.56 3.43
Number of Modules for 100 MW 23 15 29
Life of 500m x 500m block (years) 3.52 5.4 2.79

The summary of the capital and operating costs of 100 MW operating UCG plant is presented in
table below:
Table 19 Summary of the capital and Operational Cost of 100 MW UCG Coal Power Plant [20]
Sample A Sample B Sample C
Capital Cost ($)
(Lignite) (Lignite) (Sub-Bituminous Coal)
Drilling 869000 5670000 10.962000
Air Compressor 12163646 10355703 13462448
Dust removal 7400654 6300658 8190876
Gas Cooling 6680012 5687129 7393286
Gas Cleaning 7915800 739236 8761028
Sour Water stripper 8385906 7139468 9281331
Acid Gas Removal and Sulphur Recovery 30402076 25883267 33648331
Gas Turbine and HRSG 100340115 100340115 100340115
Offsite and Auxiliaries 41051248 34949600 45434594
Buildings 8200116 6981292 9075703
Total 231233572 210046468 246549713
Operating Cost ($)
Drilling per year 8694000 5670000 10962000
10 %UCG Cost 869400 567000 1096200
4.6% of total plant 10636744 9662138 11341287
Total 20200144 15899138 23399487
Unit Cost of Production
Syngas ($/GJ) 1.34 0.9 1.73
Electricity ($/MWh) 21.27 19.1 28.11

As compared to the Sahiwal Coal Project, where the cost o the coal is as follows:
Table 20 Coal Cost for Sahiwal Col Power Plant [17]
Year Average cost of Coal Coal Purchase Cost Total Cost of Coal (including transport)
(USD/ton) (Million USD) (million USD)
2017 87.69 403 521
2018 95.53 439 582
2019 71.23 332 502

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 15 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

It is inferred that the coal technology UCG-IGCC will be more beneficial for the country as it can
utilize the country’s vast coal resources while remaining clean and efficient. The addition of
combined cycle further decreases the unit cost of electricity and makes the process even more
efficient. The addition of Carbon Capture and Storage will add a bit to the capital cost, but it will
greatly reduce the CO2 emissions and will make the process environmentally friendly.

6. Environmental Impact and Sustainability

The underground coal gasification is by far the most environment friendly technology of utilizing
coal. It reduces the conventional mining problems, reduces surface activities and also utilizes less
landscape. The associated emissions from the mining procedures are also removed this way. The
waste of ash, mercury and tar is also removed this way because most of the matter stays inside the
coal cavity and hence the waste removal problems area so avoided this way. Nitrogen oxides are
already not a problem in this scenario as discussed earlier in section 4.6. The sulphur compounds
can be removed by the added processes of gas desulphurization and acid removals. CO2 emissions
are also controlled by the pre combustion purifying techniques and the CO2 emission is practically
removed to 90 % by added carbon capture technologies. The sustainability is well-observed in this
technology as it can better utilize the local coal, which was of low rank and possessed unprofitable
mining, or the coal was thin, or too deep to mine.

7. Social and Economic Benefits of Using Local Coal

Pakistan has vast reserves of around 185 million tonnes of coal in Thar field but the absence of
appropriate economical and efficient technology hinders its utilization and the country in turn
relies on the imported coal which is way more expensive and adds added cost of the transport from
the sea ports to the plant location. It leads to the consumption of oil to power the vehicles that
transfer the coal to site location. Since oil prices are subjected to extreme fluctuation, the cost
analysis is a bit difficult to made posing risks on the sustainability of the process. Utilization of
local coal, however, reduces these transportation causes, and the emissions associated with the
transport. It makes the coal free of charge. It also possesses the possibility of the development of
such coal sites that are previously undeveloped. The development could lead to the construction
of roads to far off places, building and official places at far of ends and the supply of the necessities
such as water and natural gases to the places that previously did not had any facilities. It can bring
the employment facilities to the residents and can prove to be a key factor in the development of
overlooked areas and towns.

8. Conclusion
Pakistan has vast reserves of around 185 million tonnes of coal in Thar field, but the absence of
appropriate economical and efficient technology hinders its utilization and the country in turn
relies on the imported coal which is way more expensive. UCG-IGCC is an environmentally
friendly technique that minimizes the pollution and can be combined with carbon capture and
storage to reduce the CO2 emissions as well. It does not require the conventional mining practices
and is safer than other technologies, uses less land area and less surface disturbances. The

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 16 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

utilization of local coal can prove beneficial for the country as it can provide a sustainable solution
to the coal demand and power sector.

References
1. IEA, International Energy Outlook 2013 With Projections to 2040. 2013.
2. Kirk-Davidoff, D., The Greenhouse Effect, Aerosols, and Climate Change, in Green
Chemistry, B. Török and T. Dransfield, Editors. 2018, Elsevier. p. 211-234.
3. Enviropedia. 2020 29/02/2020]; Available from:
http://www.enviropedia.org.uk/Air_Quality/History.php.
4. Gaffney, J.S. and N.A. Marley, The impacts of combustion emissions on air quality and
climate–From coal to biofuels and beyond. Atmospheric Environment, 2009. 43(1): p. 23-
36.
5. Oros, D. and B. Simoneit, Identification and emission rates of molecular tracers in coal
smoke particulate matter. Fuel, 2000. 79(5): p. 515-536.
6. McKerall, W., W. Ledbetter, and D. Teague, Analysis of fly ashes produced in Texas. Texas
Transportation Institute. 1982, Research Report.
7. Agency, U.S.E.P. Particulate Matter (PM) Standards -Table of Historical PM NAAQS.
2020 10/06/2020]; Available from:
https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/pm/s_pm_history.html.
8. CCC, I. Emission standards database. 2015 10/06/2020]; Available from: http://www.iea-
coal.org.uk/site/2010/database-section/emission-standards.
9. Zhang, X., Emission standards and control of PM2. 5 from coal-fired power plant. IEA
Clean Coal Centre: London, UK, 2016.
10. Ministry of Environment, G.o.J. Regulatory Measures against Air Pollutants Emitted from
Factories and Business Sites and the Outline of Regulation. 2020 11/06/2020]; Available
from: http://www.env.go.jp/en/air/aq/air.html.
11. of, E.A. and S.P.M.C.C.P. Plant. National Environmental Quality Standards. 2020 June
11, 2020]; Available from:
https://www3.opic.gov/environment/eia/pakistanpower/110711%20R1V08STR-A%20-
%20Part%20III.pdf.
12. Punjab, E.P.D.G.o.t. The Punjab Clean Air Action Plan. 2020; Available from:
https://epd.punjab.gov.pk/system/files/Annex%20D2%20Punjab%20Clean%20Air%20A
ction%20Plan_0.pdf.
13. M. Anandan, S.R., Oil Economics. 2019: MJP Publisher.
14. Tong, C., Introduction to Materials for Advanced Energy Systems. 2018: Springer
International Publishing.
15. NEPRA. Pakistan Coal Power Generation Potential. 2004 June 13, 2020]; Available
from: https://nepra.org.pk/Policies/Coal%20Potential%20in%20Pakistan.pdf.
16. Imran, M., et al., Environmental concerns of underground coal gasification. Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2014. 31: p. 600-610.
17. NEPRA. Generation License Applicattion of Port Qasim. 2014 June 13, 2020]; Available
from:
https://nepra.org.pk/licensing/Licences/Licence%20Application/2014/Generation%20Lic
ense%20Application%20of%20Port%20Qasim.pdf.
18. Bhutto, A.W. and S. Karim, Coal gasification for sustainable development of the energy
sector in Pakistan. Energy for Sustainable Development, 2005. 9(4): p. 60-67.

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 17 of 18

SAMPLE CEP Assignment 2016-ME-000

19. Burton, E., R. Upadhye, and S. Friedmann, Best practices in underground coal
gasification. 2017, Lawrence Livermore National Lab.(LLNL), Livermore, CA (United
States).
20. Khadse, A.N., Resources and economic analyses of underground coal gasification in India.
Fuel, 2015. 142: p. 121-128.

Power Plants 8th Semester Page 18 of 18