Simply put, we use
pulverized coal technology, which grinds the coal to the consistency of talcum powder before it's used as fuel to heat the boiler that produces steam.
Not exact matches
I've talked a lot about my published work in (1) carbon sequestration soil work (trees and sorghum); (2) co-firing test burns in every major type of
coal technology (cyclones,
pulverized coal, IGCC) for SO2 and NOx reductions; (3) ethanol (for octane requirements not using lead or MTBE).
It is possible to capture CO2 emissions at these
pulverized coal units, but the CO2 capture
technology currently has performance and cost drawbacks.
Today the prevailing
coal - based generation
technology in the United States is
pulverized coal, with high - temperature (supercritical and ultrasupercritical) designs available to improve efficiency.
The levelized cost of new
coal plants already exceeds that of new NGCC plants, and «today's CCS
technologies would add around 80 % to the cost of electricity for a new
pulverized coal (PC) plant, and around 35 % to the cost of electricity for a new advanced gasification - based (IGCC) plant,» according to the EPA (77 FR 22415).
Unless something happens soon to tilt the balance toward more environmentally benign alternatives, nearly all of those power plants will use the old - fashioned, intrinsically dirty
technology known as
pulverized coal.
A company called TXU has said it will build 11 new power plants in Texas use the old
pulverized coal model
technology, which is much dirtier than alternatives easily available in the United States, but is much more profitable.
An alternate way to estimate reductions is to look at the incremental cost of a particular carbon - abating
technology, e.g. building an IGCC
coal plant and sequestering instead of building a
pulverized coal plant.
For example, according to the National Energy
Technology Laboratory (NETL), a new
pulverized -
coal plant (operating at lower, «subcritical» temperatures and pressures) reduces the emission of NOx (nitrogen oxides) by 86 percent, SO2 (sulfur dioxide) by 98 percent, and particulate matter by 99.8 percent, as compared with a similar plant having no pollution controls.