# r
I l

j ·f 

### I

,



# . ! 

### ., CURRENT STATUS OF SCR IN JAPAN by: Yasuyuki Nakabayashi and Rikiya Abe Research and Engineering office, Thermal Power Department Electric Power Development Co., Ltd. Tokyo, Japan 100

ABSTRACT Selective Catalytic Reduction of NOx is widely applied to utility and industrial boilers in Japan. Among utility boilers, 99 units of them (approx. 110 million Nm3/h) have been**equiP~ed** with SCR including 22 units of coal firing boilers (approx. 20 l1\illion Nm /h). Among industrial boilers, 31 units of them (approx. 3.3 million Nm3/h) have also been applied with SCR (as of April 1986). SCR installation started in 1977 for oil and gas and in 1979 for coal firing boilers. These operating experience suggested- us that the cost and performance of SCR should be discussed again, because the catalyst itself (life, volume requirement, etc.) had been improved remarkably. This paper will try to describe those facts from the utility standpoint. 1. Introduction The selective catalytic reduction (SCR) method is one of the methods for NOx reduction. The method is rather new and expensive, and most American utilities have shown a hesitation to the employment of the method. The method, however, has many merits that the equipment is simple, no byproduct is produced and it is a dry process causing low temperature loss, and there has been a strong desire for clarifying some of its characteristics represented by the catalyst life, reduction of equipment cost and solutions to secondary troubles. SCRs were installed early in Japan. As of April 1986, the experience in SCR operation is 6.5 years for coal firing boilers, 8.5 years for oil firing boilers and 8 years for LNG firing boilers. At EPDC, SCRs have been used for A and 

### B trains of Takehara No.1 unit (250 MW) and for Takehara No.3 unit (700 MW) among EPOC's 11 coal fired thermal power units, and they are operating since June 1981 and March 1983, respectively (that is, they are operating for the last 5 years and 3 years, respectively).
25-1 

## IPHAB005183What we found about the catalyst from these experiences are described below. <Catalyst life> The definition of catalyst life is rather difficult. We therefore studied the period during which the SCR is operated without any additions or replacements to the initially loaded catalyst. Although there are some exceptions, it can be said that SCRs have been operated for more than 3 years for coal firing boilers, more than 4 to 7 years for oil firing boilers and more than 6 years for LNG firing boilers without any additions or replacements. These values are much larger than the value of 1 to 2 years which has conventionary been thought to be life of catalyst. In addition. these values are different from the so-called mean life of catalyst either. and the mean life would be much longer. According to the experience at EPOC, it is known for the train A of Takehara No.1 unit that the mean life of its catalyst (coal firing low dust. system) is at least more than 4 years. <Catalyst cost> The method of cost calculation employed in Japan is different from that used in the U. S•• the method of EPRI (CS-3603 Project 1256-7 Final Report October 1984 uSCR for coal fired power plants: feasibility and economics"*I) is used as the base.For the case of 80% denitrification on inlet NOx of 500 ppm. the EPRI calculation results in 11.7 mills/kWh for low sulfur coal and 8.8 mills/kWh for high sulfur coal. the EPOC calculation. on the other hand. results in 5.9 mills/kWh for low sulfur coal and 4.9 mills/kWh for high sulfur coal. which are about one-half of those of EPRI. This is a result of simple calculation where [POC used the catalyst life of 4 years while EPRI used the catalyst life of 1 year. <Catalyst performance> According to the development in the method of catalyst production. the pitch of honeycomb catalyst reduced from 10 mm to about 6 mm, and the effective catalytic area per unit volume (AP value) is much greater now. Therefore. the app'arent catalyst requirement in volume has been reduced to about two-thirds. The cost has also become lower correspondingly. and it is 5.2 mills/kWh for low su1fur coa1• In addition. we used to have problems of A/H troubles which came from ammonium bisulfate caused by slip NH3 and 503. but such troubles as A/H clogging are fewer now due to the recent progress in the development of low 502 oxidation rate catalysts. 2. SCR App1ications 2.1 Application to Utilities All SCRs used at utilities in Japan are listed in Table 1. As of April 1986. 22 SCRs for coal firing boilers. 55 SCRs for oil firing boilers and 13 SCRs for 

### LNG firing boilers are operating. It is considered that the reliability of SCR is demonstrated by the use of so many SCRs at Japanese utilities.

25-2 

## IPHAB0051842.2 Japanese SCR Manufacturers Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI), Hitachi, Ltd. (HTC) (representing Babcock. Hitachi (BHK)), Ishikawajima Harima Heavy Industries (IHI), Kawasaki Heavy Industries (KHI) and Hitachi Zosen (HZC) are the five Japanese manufacturers of SCRs for utilities. Among other manufacturers, KHI may be known in the U. S. as it supplied SCRs to the Arapahoe Test Site of [PRI, Southern California Edison and City of San Diego in addition to contributing information to previous EPRI report IOSCR for coa1 fi red power plants: feasibility and economics."*l Table 2 shows the supply of SCRs to Japanese utilities, and Figure 1 shows the shares for coal firing boilers and those for all types of utility boilers. However, these shares do not represent the quality of the SCR because it is common that the boiler manufacturer receives an order of SCR since it 'is considered as a part of the boiler. 3. Catalyst Life 3.1 First Replacement or Addition It is very difficult to define the life of catalyst. If more catalyst than needed is charged initially. no replacement will be needed for a very long time. We should therefore look at the trend of deterioration in catalyst activity instead of the concept of life. This point will further be discussed later. A rough rreasure we applied to consider the life of catalyst is to look at the period between the initial charge of catalyst and the subsequent catalyst replacement or addition. Figures 2 to 4 show the starting time of operation and time of catalyst replacement or addition for all SCRs operating in Japan as relations between time on the abscissa and individual units on the ordinate. For each unit. the X-mark at the left end of the horizontal solid line corresponds to the starting time of SCR operation, and the length of the solid line corresponds to the period during which the SCR was operated without catalyst replacement or addition. The right X-mark on the solid line indicates the time of catalyst replacement or addition and a dotted line follows the solid line after the X-mark. X-marks on dotted line indicate that the catalyst was replaced or added at such points. Solid lines up to April 1986 indicate that no catalyst replacement or addition took place for the unit. It can roughly be said from these figures that SCRs for coal firing boilers are operated for 2 to 3 years. those for oil-firing boilers are operated for 4 to 7 years, and those for LNG firing boilers are operated for IOOre than 6 years without catalyst replacement or addition although there are some exceptions. The catalyst life is 100M! than expected considering the manufacturers' guarantee period of 1 year at that time. In Japan. it is an obligation to carry out a periodic inspection almost every year, and catalyst replacement or addition is carried out also during such
25-3


## IPHAB005185I

inspection if necessary. If there were no such restriction, the catalyst could be used much longer. For the cases of coal firing boilers, the catalyst of first full capacity high dust SCR unit was replaced after about 2.5 years, but the high dust catalyst had been improved since then for longer life. In addition, the first full capacity low dust SCR units are the two units for the Aand 

### B trains of Takehara No.1 unit. The catalyst of these units have been replaced or added for various test purposes, and it may be appropriate not to include these units in the statistics. When these cases are excluded, SCRs for coal firing boilers are operated with the first catalyst for more than 3 years. 3.2 Concept of Mean Catalyst Life In considering the concept of mean catalyst life. it is necessary to understand the catalyst activity. overall activity of multi-layer catalyst. actual trend of activity deterioration and the method of catalyst replacement. <Catalyst activity> As shown in Figure 5. the denitrification efficiency is expressed by the following formula. when the NH3/NOx molar ratio is 1 and the reaction is a linear reaction of NOx concentration:
II = 1 - e-let where. II denitrification efficiency k catalyst activity t reaction time <Overall activity of multi-layer catalyst> (1)

As shown in Figure 6. the overall activity of multi-layer catalyst is equivalent to the sum of catalyst activities of component layers. and expressed by the following formula: K = leI + k2 + ••••• + len (2) where. K: overall activity of n-1ayer catalyst kl.K2.···.kn: catalyst activity of individual layers When the catalyst consists of some catalyst layers of low activity and new catalyst layers, the overall denitrification efficiency can exceed a target value so far as the overall catalyst activity is greater than the design value. <Actual trend of activity deterioration> Figure 7 shows the trend of activity deterioration observed at Takehara No. lA and 3. We could not obtain data on other power plants, but the trend can be similar. <Method of catalyst replacement and addition> To maintain an overall performance of catalyst layers is to maintain the overall activity above a certain level. With notion in mind. a variety of methods
25-4


## IPHAB005186for catalyst replacement and addition are considerable. For the purpose of discussion here, we consider two cases shown in Figure 8. It is assumed that the amount of catalyst of which overall activity would drop to a target value in one year is charged in four layers. Case 1 is a method where all catalyst is replaced every year, and Case 2 is a method where another layer is added after one year. Figure 8 indicates that the annual catalyst consumption is 4 x 

### Vfor Case 

### I, and 1 x 

### Vfor Case 2. From the concept of mean catalyst life, the life for Case" 2 is four years if the life for Case 1 is one year. The catalyst activity has been measured up to only five years. The life at sixth and subsequent years is therefore an estimation, but the mean life can be extended IllJch longer by employing a more intricate replacement rrethod. In addition, the rrean life can be made longer by reducing the amount of annual replacement by increasing the number of catalyst layers. <Mean catalyst life> The concept of mean catalyst life becomes extremely difficult to grasp formulti-layer catalyst. It may be better therefore to consider the catalyst as a simple reagent, and think about its rrean annual consumption in a certain period. For this purpose, however, it is necessary to acquire data on the trend in activity deterioration for a much longer term. We do not have such data at present, and the rrean life of four years obtained for Case 2 is used for calculation of economy in this paper. 4. Economy of SCR 4.1**Econo~** of SCR in the U. S. As discussed in Section 1 Introduction, the lyvelized cost for 30 years reduces to about one half based on the EPRIreport* when the mean life is change from one year to four years. According to the report, the SCR cost as of December 1982 is as shown in Figure 9. Among these, the case of inlet NOx of 500 ppm**(3~** 02 dry) and denitrification efficiency of**80~** is 'a1so shown in Figure 9 for the case where the catalyst cost was reduced to one quarter. For consideration of economy, other factors such as reduction of catalyst volume due to greater AP value (see <Catalyst performance> in Section 1 Introduction) and re-examination of the contingency factor due to increase of commercial applications, but it is found that the economy of SCR have greatly improved even when these factors are ignored. 5. Catalyst Performance 5.1 Performance Improvement by Change in Shape The standard external dimensions of honeycomb type catalyst is 150W x 150l x 500H or x 1000H. The number of cells has increased along with the improvement in the manufacturing method. The cell configuration was 13 x 13 cells at first, but it has been improving to 15x15, 17x17, 20x20 and 21x21 cells. It is said that sorre manufacturers are developing a cell configuration of 35 x 35 cells.
25-5 

## IPHAB005187It can be thought that the denitrification reaction is proportional to the area to which the flue gas makes contact with the catalyst in the direction of flow, and the area divided by the apparent volume becomes an important factor. This value if called the AP value. AP 

## = 4 x P x n 2 x H 2. x 2. x H
2. 

## =np + (n+1)t



# .. n(p+t) Thus. AP

.. 4P (p+t)2 In Figure 10. AP is expressed as follows: (1)

(2)
(3) The AP value of each catalyst is shown in Table 3. If the performance of catalyst itself remains unchanged, the (apparent) required volume of catalyst changes when the number of cells is increased as also shown in Table 3. That is, the required volume of 2lx.21-cell catalyst can only be 62% of that of 13x13-cell catalyst. This fact not only allows to reduce the cost of catalyst itself but also those for reactors and other related devices. Catalyst of finer cells may be more vulnerable to such problems as clogging and pressure loss, but EPOC replaced all pipe-type catalyst of Takehara No. 18 1n November 1985 with 21x21-cell honeycomb catalyst and the SCR unit is operating in good condition since then. 5.2 Problem of A/H Clogging The slip NH3 is limited to 5 ppm or below at almost all plants for the purpose of avoiding the increase of differential pressure in A/H by acid ammonium sulfate. At the same time, improvement of catalyst material is also going on to reduce the oxidation rate of S02. Figure 11 shows the correlation between the slip NH3 and frequency of A/H washing observed at the 1atest low dust coal fired thermal power SCR (Takehara No. 3: 700 

### MW). The fuel coal mainly used at the power plant is low sulfur imported coal with a sulfur content of 0.6 to 0.8%. (S03 is 2 to 5 ppm.) The abscissa represents the A/H washing interval (in months) and the ordinate represents the value of slip NH3. It is clear that the A/H washing interval gets longer when slip NH3 is lower. 6. Conclusions As discussed above, the results of long-term SCR operation indicate unexpectedly long life, low cost and high performance. EPDC intends to continue every effort for reduction of NOx.

25-6


## IPHAB005188

# Figure1. Share of SCR manufacturesfor utility coal firing boilers

- "'U 

### I 

# » OJ 

## a a 0'1 

### ex> <0 

## KHI 

## 0.5

N V1 I

...... 

### ""- 3 

## \ I \ / IHI MHI 

# I 

# r18 """*'i 

## lilY } MHI 

## 9 41 

## HTC -\ 

# ) 

# \ Hle 

## 9.5 28.5

,

## Figure 2 Operation experience of SCR 

### applied at all Japanese

## coal fired boilers (as ofApr., 1986) 

# I 

# I I 

# I 

# I I SCRoperation without catalystadditionor replacement(Highdustcase) SCRoperation without t) catalystadditionor replacement(Low**du~t** ease) I : I DemonstrationTest )4 • • • • • •• Firstadditionorreplacement ofcatalyst

I" I I i I H·· • ••• 

# 1 i 

# i**F~** 

# ···\"··r

..**t~~r~~** Highdustease: 2.2-3.2 years LowdustcaSfl: 1.] ·5.5 years Lifeofcatalystloaded initially

<Referrence> 1. All dataarefull rapacity. 2. Average catalyst life shall be differentashasbeendiscussed. unitA unitB unite 

# .

# .. -:)(

# .. ..

# .....

..

# ...

# ... .

# .. ()(

# ..**,~** I**IIC'.~** ••• 

## e I 

# *,

...

N U'I I ex:>

Ii--

I ,

Yearofoperation "'U 

### I 

# » OJ 

## a a 0'1 <0 

## a 1978 4 1979 4 1980 4 198] 4 1982 4 1983 4 1984 4 1985 4 1986 4



### ,<Referrcnce> 

# ..... t I I

I I I I I I I I 

### Figure 3 Operation experience ofSCR applied at all Japanese

### oil fired boilers (as ofApr.• 1986)**X''---+--'--I--'--+_':'--+--'-~ x~--!--'---+-"';"'-I**  x......;--+-...;...--!----;--I x-+-'----I**:x-~""";--l** x' x+--':""--I"';"'''';'-4--':''''--I :x-+---'--t-

.......-+--'----1 x
...

· -+--'----1-"';'-4--':""--1



### .....:...-**.-~-+--"---1f-~** Lire of c:al.alysL loaded**~_+--1** initially are in a seLof2.2 La t----:_-+_-:-_+--I8

.5yenrs. ,.i.- 

### .....:...- -'---**~_-+---11.** 1\11 units are Cull SCR ..i..- 1,...--:-_-+_-;-._+--lc:npac:iLy except one daLum ..i..- >oj--.;.---1f--l asisindicaLc:dabove. ..i..- ,....._-+---1 2.l\veragec:aLalysllifesh:1l1 J...- --;-.-+-......:.--+-1 be differenl as has been..i..-**~_-!---;_-+-Idiscussed.** ,.i.- -i-- 

### -'--- IIniL II uniL ij uniLe

Thisdal.., isone "- quarLerSCRcapac:ity

.

••••, ••••••••; •••••••)4: ••• :"**_':'--+--';"'--+--";~-+---";~-+--'** 

### ...**>+-~-!--~+oo** ": 00 ' -+---+---1-----1

:I---:---+--:---!----,--+-----I

.......**,........--+----'~+__:__+-,**... 00"'" x· •.••

x-- firsLadditionor replaccmentof cal.alysl

sen opcraLitlll \Yithnlllcal..,lysl

additionor rc:pl:lccl1lcnl

1977

4 1978 4 1979 4 1980 -I 1981 4 1932 1\ 1983 4 1984 4 1985 4 1986 4 Y

C:lrofop<lratiull


### 25-9 

## IPHAB005191

# I I 

# I I 

# I I Figure 4 Operation experience ofSCR applied at all Japanese

## LNG fired boilers (as ofApr., 1986) SCRoperationwithout catalystadditionor replacement

)C • • • • • • • Firstadditionorreplacement ofcatalyst

, I I I ii' I I j Ik·
. N l.1'1 I 

# - o**)I~** I I I i I I; I IC- • 

### !
... 

# . .

;- unitA unitB unitC Lifeofcatalystloaded initialIy maybemorethan 5.8years. <Rererrence> 1. Average catalyst life sh<lll he differentashasbeen**di!lcll~sed.**

1978

4 1979 4 1980 4 1981 4 1982 4 1983 4 1984 4 1985 4 1986 4 "'U 

### I 

# » OJ 

## a a 0'1 <0 I\J Yearoroperation



### ,

## * About 11 

# =1 - 

# e-kt



## +[NOx] in IZZZZ!, 

## [NOx] 

## out
When the NH3/NOx 

## molar ratio is 1, 

## the reaction is a linear reaction of concentration: d[NOx] 

# = -k [NOx] dt



## NOx concentration catalyst activity : reaction time where, [NOx] : k 

## t Integrating the equation: [NOx] 

# = Ae-kt


## 11 

# = [NOx] in
- [NOx] out 

# = A - Ae-kt 

# = 1 _. e-kt 

## [NOx] in A
Thus, 

# 1 - 

# e-kt Figure 5. Catalyst activity and DeNOx efficiency

25-11 

## IPHAB005193

## Catalyst Layer 1 Catalyst Layer 2 Catalyst Layer n 

# + No
• • 

### • • 

# ·....... • 

### • 

# · . +N1



# · . • • ••••••••• 

### • • • • 

### • 

## t N2



# · · · • • • • 

### • 

# ·

# ..

# ....

# ..

• • • 

### • 

# +Nn Vol. 

## Reaction 

## Catalyst DeNOx 

## Time Activity efficiency V 

## t k1 

## 111 V 

## t k2 112



# · 

# · · · · · V 

## t kn 

## 11n
Overall 

## V Ni: NOx concentration 

## t 

## K

<Overall Activity> <Each Activity> Nn 1 -111 = 

## N1 = 

# e-k1t 1-11=-
- 

## No No N1 N2 Nn 

## 1 -112 = N2 = e-

## k2t =-x-x···x 

## - No 

# N1**Nn~** 

## N1



# · = (1-111) X 

## (1-112) X ••• 

## x (1-11n) 

# · · · = e-(k1+k2+

... +kn)t 

# · 

# · Nn = 

# e-knt =e-

## Kt 1 -11n = Nn-1
Then 

# K

# =k1 

# + k2 + ... + 

# kn Figure 6. Overall activity in case of 

# multiple layer

25-12 

## IPHAB005194

### '. 

### -.,..**~.** ,...,.".. ' 

# . ...-..-...--.-......-._.".'.

- 

# _,--

# _- ,.,-_.-

. 

# ,

I 

## 0.85



# - 0


# -
- .- > 

# .- 0 

# «

N Q) U1 

## > I 

# .- 

# - W Q) 

# a: 0.8 J

# 0.6 J

## 0.41-



## 0.2 J- 

### • 

## 88 

## No. 1A unitNo.3 unit 

## J

• 

## 0.82 Aug. 1986

• 

## 0.79 0.

# 76 

# 1**w=~ ~~:~**  3°1c

- Nov. 1986 of 

## year



# o I 

## 1 I 

## 2 I 

## 3 I 

## 4 I 

## 5 I 

## 6 I 

## 7

"'U 

### I 

# » OJ 

## a a 0'1 <0 0'1 

# Figure 7. Operating Time (year),' 

# Deterioration of relative activity of catalyst (Takehara No.1 A and 3)

### »



## <Replacing Method> Initial charge of catalyst Number of layers 1-year requirement 4 or5 

# (Case 1) Initial Replace**char~** 

# l.a! 

# r-T++ 1st Layer 1.0

........

## ~~~~6IlIiOA_ 

## 2nd Layer 1.0

### ~~~~~ __ 

## 3rd Layer 1.0

.........

### ~~~~~_ 

## 4th Layer (year) 

# (Case 2) 20 V 

# =4 V/year 5years (Mean life: 1 year)

K

# =3.52



## 5V 5years 

# =1 V /year

. (Mean life: 4.0 years)

K

### =3.83 

## Additional charge Initial charge



# t1.0 

## Additional Layer 1st Layer 2nd Layer 1.0

### ~~""""""'~~ _ 

## 3rd Layer**~~~...-.....: ~_**  1.0 

## 4th Layer

## ~~~~.,.,.,..,.. 

# Figure 8. Catalyst life v.s. replacing 

# method

25-14 

## IPHAB005196

### 15 CATALYST 

### 15

... 

### 12.5 (4 YR LIFE)

· ..IC/l · . 0ol: ...**o~** 

### 10 0::': w- NC/l**I-~** _-I 

### 7.5 C/lW -1-1 >!: w- >:E -1-1 W 

### 5 <ta: -I**~>** · .. 

### o=. 2.5 

# . ·.. 2.5



# . ·.. 

# ·

# .. ·

# .. ·

# .. ·

# .. ·.. ·

# .. ... ·

# .. ·

# .. ·.. ·.. 

# ·.. ·

# .. ·

# .. 

# ·.. CAPITAL 

# ... 

# ·.. ·

# .. ·

# .. ·

# .. 

# ·.. ·

# .. ·

# .. 

# ·.. NOx 

# · . 

# · . ·.. ·

# .. · . CHARGES REMOVAL 

### 60 80 90 60 80 90 60 80 90 

# , ¥ I 

# , ¥ I 

# , Y I % 

### 200 500 800 INLETNOx CONC. (PPM) 

### A. Low SulfurCoal Application Total Levelized Cost Components

CAPITAL CHARGES 

### 15 12.5 MISC. 

### 10 POWER & AMMONIA 

### 7.5CATALYST 

### 5 REPLACE· MENT



# ·

# .. ·

# .. ·

# .. ·.. 80 90

• I 

### 800 CATALYST (4 VR LIFE)



# · . 

# ·.. ·.. 

# ·

# ·. ·

# .. ·

# .. 

# ·.. 

# ·.. ·

# .. ·

# ·. 

# ·

# .. 

# ·.. ·.. ·.. ·.. ··

# . · . 

# ·.. ·

# .. 80 90 60 80 90 60 

# • I 

# , Y I 

# , 200 500 2.5

15

NOx 

### 60 REMOVAL ,"--_---...

__-J % INLET NOx CONC.(PPM) 

### t; 

### 12.5 O.c

.**~~** 

### -10wNC/)

### ~~ 7.5 >:E W -I 

## 5

B. High Sulfur Coal Application Total Levelized Cost Components (EPRI CS-3603 Project 1256-7 Final Report October 1984 "Selective Catalytic Reduction for Coal-fired Power Plant: Feasibility and Economics") 

# Figure 9. 

# seR economics based on 4 year's life of catalyst

25-15 

## IPHAB005197

# =

CAPITAL CHARGES 

### 7.5 CATALYST 

### 5 REPLACE· MENT



### 80 90 ¥ I 1--.**--I"!.-.~.**

### -2.5



# ·

# .. .., 

# ·.. .., 

# ·

# ., .. , 

### 800 60 

# " 1--- en w >!!:: ...1...1 

### <a:**~>** 

### u=..



# · ., 

# .. , 

# ·., .. , 

# ·., 

# .. , 

# ·

# .. .., 

# ·

# .. 

# ·.. ·

# .. 

# ·.. ·

# .. · . 2.5 NOx REMOVAL 

### 60 80 90 60 80 90



# ..

# "---

.....

# -



# __ ' "'""---

.....

# ---' 200 500 % INLETNOx CONC. (PPM) 

### 15 12.5 en OJ:: 

### 10 UJ elll:**~Cii** _...J 

### 7.5 ...J...J w- 

## >== w 

### 5 ...I

CAPITAL CHARGES 

# ·

# .. ·

# .. ·

# .. ·.. L.-....J---f"'2.5 

# ·

# .. ·.. ·.. 

# ·..**~-­** (/)w**>~** ...1...1 <a::**~>** 

### O=.. 80 90 60 80 90

• I \0..."-

__..... ' 

### 500 800 60 

# ·.. ·

# .. 

# ·

# .. " 

# · ., 

# .. ' 

# ·., 

# .. , 

# · ., 

# .. , 

# .. low SulfurCoal Application Totallevelized Cost Components 15 12.5

__**-S-~** MISC. 

### 10 POWER & AMMONIA 

### 7.5CATALYST 

### 5 REPLACE· MENT

NOx 

### 60 80 90**REMOVAL","~** .....__**~I** 

### 200 % INLETNOx CONC. (PPM) 

### A. 15 12.5 en OJ:: UJ elll: 

### w.... Nfl) _...I ...1...1 w- 

## >== W ...I 

### 5

8. High SulfurCoal Application Totallevelized CostComponents (EPRI CS-3603 Project 1256-7 Final Report October 1984 "Selective Catalytic Reduction for Coal-fired Power Plant: Feasibility and Economics") 

# Figure 9. 

# seR economics based on 4year's life of catalyst

25-16 

## IPHAB0051981 

# i

# ,

, 

## Catalyst surface area Catalyst outward volume 

## p: pitch t: wall thickness n: number of cells Left drawing shows n 

## x n cells honeycomb

. type catalyst

4

## x p x n2

## x H 

## (m2) 

# ! x! x H (m3)



## AP

# =4 

## x 

## Px n2 

## x H 

# l xl x H



# Figure 10. 

# AP value and catalyst configuration

25-17 

## IPHAB005199

## 12

.. 

# - en J: 

# - C 

# o 10- :5


# - - aJ 

### :>**8~** 

# ... Q) 

# - c 

# .- C) 

## 6 

## c 

# .- J: 

## o aJ 

## 3:**4~** 

### J: 

# - < 

# .........



# ........

IIInll"111

111111111111

I 

## Control value (5 

## ppm) 

# I

11111/"11/11"""1/ 

# • 

# •

I I 

## Takehara

, No.3 unit

...



## 2 4 6 Leak NH3 

## (ppm, 02 

## 6% dry)

• • Primary A/H (Primary air heating area: 

## 10,000 m2)

111111111111111111 

## Secondary A/H (Secondary air heating area: 

## 50,000 m2) 

# Figure 11. Interval of scheduled A/H 

# water washing v.s. slip 

# NH3

25-18


## IPHAB005200"'U 

### I 

# » OJ 

## a a 0'1 I'V 

## a N (J'1 I



### .... U) . H.,.·

.....' .

__**~.** _



### Table 1-ill listof DeNOx Facilitiesfor Utility Boilerin Japan (As of 1986,4)

Commi- Treated CommissUnit Output ssioning DeNOx TreatedGas frotal Manu- DeNOx ioningDate No. Company PIS No. (MW) Fuel Dote Facility Vol. (m"N/h) Gos factuerer Emi- ofDeNOx (Plan- Rotio deney Facility ning) (%)
1 Hokkaido Tomatou- 1 350 Coal 10/80 5CR 280,000 25 HTC 80 10/80 Alsuma (Plate) 2 Touhoku Sendai 2 175 Coal 11160 SCR(Plate) 549,000 100 HTC 60 5183 3 Touhoku Sendai 3 175 Coal 6162 SCR (Plate) 549,000 100 HTC 60 2183 4 Tohoku Higashi- 2 600 LNG 6183 SCR 1,700,000 100 IHI 62 6183 NiiCata (Honeycomb) !5 Tohoku Hig8lhi- 3-1- 109012 LNG 10/85 5CR 100 MHI 80 12184 Niigat. 3-3 Combined (Honeycomb) 7,700,00012 6 Tohoku Higashi- 3-4- 109012 LNG 10/85 SCR 100 MHI 80 10/85 Niigata 3-6 Combined (Honeycomb) 7,700,000/2 7 Tokyo Yokohama 1 175 Crude, Heavy 8162 SCR (Plate) 531,000 100 HTC 4181 Oil =-30 LNG 8 Tokyo Yokohama 3 175 Crude, Heavy 4163 SCR (Plate) 100 HTC 3/85 Oil 531,000 :0030 LNG 9 Tokyo Ohi 2 350 Oil 2172 SCR 1,020,000 700 IHI =-30 4/81 (Honeycomb) 10 Tokyo Yokosuka I 265 COM 10/60 SCR 875,/)00 100 MHI 70 2185

, HeavyOil (Honeycomb) , 11 Tokyo Yokoauka 2 265 COM 9/62 SCR 875,000 100 MHI 70 5/85 He.vyOil (Honeycomb) 12 Tokyo Yokosuka 4 350 Crude. 7/64 SCR 1,076,000 100 MHI =-10 8181 HeavyOil (Honeycomb)

Reference; FacilityofThennal PowerPlants inJapan- EngineeringDept,The Federation ofElectric PowerCompanies 

# ----,

### "'U 

### I

# » OJ 

## o o 0'1 N 

## o N N U1 I N o 

### Table 1-0 

### Listof 

### DeNOx Facilitiesfor Utility

### Boilerin Japan 

### (As of1986,4)

Commi- Treated CommissUnit Output ssioning DeNOx TreatedGas !fotal Manu- DeNOx ioning Date No. Company PIS No. (MW) Fuel Date Facility Vol. (m'N/h) Gas factuerer Effii- oCDtNOx (Plan· Ratio ciency Facility ning) (%)
13 Tokyo Futtsu 1·1-1·7 1000 LNG 12185- SCR 8,000,000 100 HZC 80 12185- 11/86 (Honeycomb) (11186) 14 Tokyo Fultsu 2-1-2·7 1000 LNG (2188)- SCR 8,000,000 100 HZC SO (2188)- (11188) (Honeycomb) (ll/8S) 15 Tokyo Higashi. 1 1000 LNG (9/87) SCR 2,770,000 100 HTC SO (9/87) Ohgishima 16 Tokyo Higashi. 2 1000 LNG (9/89) SCR 2,770,000 100 

### . SO (9/89) Ohgishima 17 Chubu Shin-Nagoya 2 220 Heavy Oil 2160 SCR 670,000 100 MHI 33 4/81 (Honeycomb) 18 Chubu Shin-Nagoya 3 220 Heavy Oil 3/61 SCR 650,000 100 MHI 33 9/80 (Honeycomb) 19 Chubu Shin-Nagoya 5 220 Heavy Oil 1/64 SCR 640,000 100 MHI 33 9/81 (Honeycomb) 20 Chubu Shin-:-Iagoya 6 220 HeavyOil 7/64 SCR 640,000 100 MHI 29 5/81 <Honeycomb) 21 Chubu Chita 1 375 Crude, Heavy 2/66 SCR 1,100,000 100 MIH 48 12182 Oil Oloneycombl LNG 22 Chubu Chitll 2 375 Crude, 1/67 NCR 1,036,1100 100 MHI 40 1m Henvy Oil

LNG , 

### , 23 Chubu Chita 4 700 Crude, 3174 SCR 1,960,000 100 MHI 80 3i80 Heavy Oil (Honeycomb)

LNG 24 Chubu Chito 5 700 LNG 3178 SCH(Pellet! 1,910,000 100 HTC 80 3178 25 Chubu Chilo 6 700 L:'-IG 4178 SCI{ (Pellet! 1,910,000 100 IITC 80 4178 Helerence : l"acllitv 0 Thermal t'owert'lants In Jaoan· J:o;nl!lneennl! Ueot.The l"ederatlOn 01**~Iectrlc** t'ower Comosnles t,.,.."

# ,

Table 1-@) listof DeNOx Facilitiesfor Utility Boiler in Japan (As of 1986,4}

p Comm;· Treated CommissUnit Output ssioning DeNOx TreatedGas frotal Manu· DeNOx ioning Date No. Company PIS No. (MW) Fuel Date Facility Vol. (m'N/h) Gas factuerer Emi· ofDeNOx (Plan. Ratio dency ning) ('l.) Facility

26 Chubu Nishi·Nagoya 3 375 Crude, Heavy 7n2 SCR(Ptate) 1,000,000 100 HTC 80 12181 Oil 27 Chubu Nishi·Nagoya 4 375 Crude, Heavy 9n2 SCR (Plate) 1,000,000 100 HTC 80 3/8t Oil 28 Chubu Nishi.Nagoya 5 500 Crude, Heavy 10no4 SCR 1,360,000 100 MHI 70 (10/86) 011 (Honeycomb) 29 Chubu Nishi·Nagoya 6 500 Crude,Heavy 4n5 SCR 1,340.000 100 IHI 80 7/80 Oil (Honeycomb) 30 Chubu Atsumi 3 700 Crude, Heavy 5/81 SCR 1,900,000 100 MHI 80 5/81 Oil (Honeycomb) 31 Chubu Atsumi 4 700 Crude,Heavy 6181 SCR 1.900,000 100 MHI 80 6181 Oil (Honeycomb) 32 Chubu Chita·Daini 1 700 LNG 9/83 SCR 1,910,000 100 HTC 80 9/83 (Pellet) 33 Chubu Chita.Daini " 2 700 LNG 11/83 SCR 1,910,000 100 IHI 80 11/83 (Pellet) 34 Chubu Yokkaichi 4-1- 560 LNG (7/88) SCR 4,300,000 100 Toshiba 80 (7/88) 4-5 LPG (Honeycomb) 311 Chubu OW8l1·Mil.a 3 1100 Crude, (3/87) SCR (Plate) 1,370,000 100 HTC 80 (3/87) HeavyOil 36 Hokuriku Toyama· 2 500 Crude, 11/81 SCR 1,350,000 100 1111 80 11/81 Shinkou HeavyOil (Honeycomb) 37 Kansai Sakai·Kou 1 250 Crude, 12164 SCR 800,000 100 MHI 75 9/80 HeavyOil (Honeycomb)

LNG 38 Kansai Sakai-Kou 2 250 Crude, 1lI65 SCR 800,000 100 MHI 75 1/82 HeavyOil (Honeycomb) 

### ,

LNG Kelerence ; l'"aclIIty 0 ThermalPowerPlants In Japan· EnJ;tJneennlt Uept, The l'"edera Ion or t.lectflc .t'owerI.,;om • "

.. N <.n I N

"'U 

### I 

# » OJ 

## a a 0'1 I'V 

## a 

## w**'~**



### Table 1-@ 

### listof DeNOx Facilitiesfor

### Utility Boiler in Japan (Asof 1986,41

t",.-, p g Commi- Treated CommissUnit Output slioning DeNOlit TreatedGas trotsI Manu- DeNOx ioningDate No. Company PIS No. (MW) Fuel Date Facility Vol-(m"NIh) Gas factuerer Emi- otDeNOx (Plan- Ratio ciency Facility ninc)**(~)** 39 Kansal Sakai-Kou 4**2~0,** Crude, Heavy 3187 SCR 800,000 100 MHI 75 7/81 Oil (Honeycomb) LNG 40 Kansai Sakai-Kou 5 250 Crude, Heavy 10/67 SCR (Plate) 800,000 100 HTC 75 8180 Oil LNG 41 Kansal Sakai-Kou 6 260 Crude, Heavy 2168 SCR 800,000 100 MHI 75 7/80 Oil (Honeycomb) LNG 42 Kansai Sakai-Kou 7 250 Crude,Heavy 10nO SCR 800,000 100 MHI 75 9/81 Oil (Honeycomb) LNG 43 Kansai Osaka 1 158 Grude. 4159 SCR 530,000 100 MHI 30 10178 HeavyOil (Honeycomb) 44 Kanlai Osaka 2 156 Grude. 10/59 SCR**~30,OOO** 100 MHI 75 8181 HeavyOil (Honeycomb) 45 Kanlai Osaka 3 156 2160 SCR 530,000 100 MHI 75 9/80 HeavyOil (Honeycomb) 46 Kansai Osaka 4 156 3160 SCR**~30,OOO** 100 MHI 75 6/80 HeavyOil (Honeycomb) 47 Kanllli Tanogawa 3 156 Crude, Heavy 4/63 SCR 520,000 100 MHI 75 818\ Oil (Honeycomb) 48 Kansai Tanagawa 4 158 Crude, 10/63 SCR 520.000 100 MHI 75 3/81 I HeavyOil (Honeycomb) I 49 Kansai Kasullade I 156 HeavyOil 10/63 SCR 470.000 100 IHI 30 5/80 (Honeycomb) 50 Kanaai Kaaugade 2 156 HeavyOil 1164 SCR 470,000 100 IHI 30 8/81 (Honeycomb) 

## , 51 Kanaai Tanagawa- 2 600 Crude, 8177 SCR (Plate) 1.520,000 100 HTe 15 8181 Daini HeavyOil t<elerence ; l'aellltv0 lnermalPowert'lants In JaDan- t;nl1'lneerln 

## .
_.... - N U1 I N N



### ""0 

### I ):> 

### OJ 

## o o (]'I N 

## o. -:""



### Table

# 1-rn List of DeNOx Facilitiesfor Utility Boiler in Japan (As of 1986,4)

p guep Commi- Treated CommissUnit Output Ilioning DeNOx TreatedGas /Total Manu- DeNOx ioning Date No. Company PIS No. (MWI 

### Fuel Date Facility Vol. (m'NIh) Gas factuerer Effii- ofDeNOx (Plan· Ratio cieney Facility ning) (%)
52 Kansai Amazaki- 1 156 9/65 SCR(Plate) 470,000 100 HTC 30 Ions Higashi HeavyOil 53 Kansai Amazaki· 2 156 10/66 SCR (Plate) 470,000 100 HTC 30 41S0 Higashi HeavyOil 54 Kansai Amazaki- 1 156 Crude,Heavy 1/63 SCR (Plate) 470,000 100 HTC 30 8ISl Daisan Oil 55 Kansai Amazaki- 2 156 Crude,Heavy 5/63 SCR (Plate) 470,000 100 HTC 30 7/S0 Daisan Oil 56 Kansai Amazaki- 3 156 Crude, Heavy 9/69 SCR (Plate) 450,000 100 HTC 30 2JSO Daisan Oil 57 Kansai Kainan 1 450 Crude, Heavy 5nO SCR (Plate) 300,000 25 HTC 75 9/77 Oil 58 Kansai Kainan 3 600 Crude, Heavy 4174 SCR 1,640,000 100 MHI 75 11S2 Oil (Honeycomb) 59 Kansai Kainan 4 600 Crude,Heavy 6n3 SCR(Plate) 1,645,000 100 HTC 75 6ISI Oil 60 Kansai Himeji- 1 33 HeavyOil 9/55 SCR 160,000 100 IHI HeavyOil 75 9/82 Daiichi (Honeycomb) Coal so 81 Kansal Himeji. 5 156 HeavyOil 7/62 SCR 490,000 100 IHI 30 IOnS Daiichi (Honeycomb) 62 Kansai Himeji. 6 600 Crude, Un3 SCR 1,620,000 100 IHI Crude, Heavy 8181 Daini HeavyOil (Honeycomb) I Oil 75 LPG 

### , LNG so 63 Kansai Aioi 1 375 Crude, 9/82 SCR 1,060,000 100 IHI 75 9/82 HellYYOil (Honeycomb) 64 Kansai Aioi 2 375 Crude, ll/S2 SCR 1,060,000 100 !HI 75 11IS2 Heavy Oil (Honeycomb) 

## , Helerence: l"acll11V 01 Tnermal t'owert'lants an .Japan- EnR:aneerlDR: Uept, The l"ederation 01**~lectTlC** t'ower l om - -- N U1 I N W

"'U 

### I 

# » OJ 

## a a 0'1 I'V 

## a 0'1

### ""0 

### I

# » OJ 

## o o 0'1 N 

## o (j) N U1 

### , N .t::o 

### Table 1-(§) Listof DeNOxFacilitiesfor Utility 

### BoilerinJapan (As of1986,4>'

Commi· Tr.atad Commi.s· Unit Output .aioning DeNOx TreatedGaa /Total Manu- DeNOx ioning Date No. Company PIS No. (MW) Fuel Date Facility Vol. (m'NIh) Gas factuerer Emi- orDeNOx (Plan- Ratio ciency Facilily ning) ('II)
65 Kanni Aioi 3 375 Crude, Haavy 1/83 SCR 1,060,000 100 !HI 75 1/83 Oil (Honeycomb) 66 Kanaai Nan-Kou 1 600 LNG (11/89) SCR 1,759,000 100 

## - 80 (11189) (Honeycomb) 67 Kanaai Nan·Kou 2 600 LNG (5190) sca 1,759,000 100 

## - 80 (5/90) (Honeycomb) 68 Kanaal Nan·Kou 3 600 LNG (11190) SCR 1,759,000 100 

## - 80 (11/90) (Honeycomb) 69 Kanaai Gobou I 600 Crude, Heavy 9/8. sca 1,600,000 100 MHI 75 9/84 Oil (Honeycomb) 70 Kansal Gobou 2 600 Crude, Heavy 11/8. sca (Plate) 1.600,000 100 HTC 75 11/84 Oil 71 Kansai Gobou 3 600 Crude, Heavy 3185 SCR 1,600.000 100 MHI 75 3/85 Oil (Honeycomb) 72 Kensai Akou 1 600 Crude, Heavy (8187) SCR 1,600,000 100 MHI 80 (8187) Oil (Honeycomb) 73 Kansei Akou 2 600 Crude.Heavy (12187) SCR 1,600.000 100 IHI 80 (12187) Oil (Honeycomb) 74 Kansal Miyazu 1 375 Crude. (8189) SCR 977.400 IDa MHI 80 (8189) Energy HeavyOil (Honeycomb) I Lebo.tory 75 Kansai Miyazu 2 375 Crude. (12189) SCR 986,100 lao KHI 80 (12189) Energy HeevyOil (Honeycomb) Lnbortory 76 Cyugoku Mizushime I 125 Cool 11/61 SCR (Plale) 450,000 

### , 100 HTC 65 7/84 77 Cyugoku Mizushima 2 156 Coal 8163 SCR(Plate) 540,000 100 HTC 65 5/84 Helerence: l'acl1ltv 0 Thermal .t'ower.t'lants In Jacan· .t.mnneerlnl!' Uect. The l'"ederal1on 01 .t.lectrlc .t'owerl,;omcantes 

# ,"'U 

### I 

# » OJ 

## a a 0'1 I'V 

## a -......J N (J1 I N (J1 

## --..

# _---------_.

Table 1-0 List of DeNOx Facilitiesfor Utility Boiler in Japan (As of 1986,4)

Commi- Trealed Commisso Unit Output ssioning DeNOx TrealedGas Irotal Manu- DeNOx ioning Date No. Company PIS No. (MW) Fuel Date Facility Vol. (mON/h) Gas factuerer Emi- ofDeNOx (Plan- Ratio ciency ning) (%) Faeility

78 Cyugoku Mizushimll 3 350 Crude, Heavy 2/73 SCR(Plate) 950,000 100 HTC 80 6183 Oil 79 Cyugoku Tamashima 1 350 Crude, Heavy 3171 SCR (Plale) 950,000 100 HTC 80 8183 Oil 80 Cyugoku Iwakuni 2 350 Crude, Heavy 4172 SCR 980,000 100 MHI 80 4181 Oil (Honeycomb) 81 Cyugoku Iwakuni 3 500 Crude, Heavy 9/81 SCR 1,400,000 100 MHI 80 9/81 Oil 3/82 (Honeycomb) LPG 82 Cyugoku Kudamatsu 2 375 Crude, Heavy 7173 SCR 1,050,000 100 IHI 80 9179 Oil (Honeycomb) 83 Cyugoku Kudamal9u 3 700 Crude, Heavy 9179 SCR 1,900,000 100 IH1 80 9179 Oil (Honeycomb) 84 Cyugoku Shin·Ube 1 75 Coal 8158 SCR 300,000 100 MHI 65 5182 (Honeycomb) 85 Cyugoku Shin-Ube 2 75 Coal 5/59 SCR 300,000 100 MHI 65 3182 (Honeycomb) 86 Cyugoku Shin·Ube 3 156 Coal 6162 SCR 580,000 100 MBI 65 2182 (Honeycomb) 87 Cyugoku Shin-Onoda 1 500 Coal 4/86 SCR 1,600,000 100 IH[ 80 4/86 <Honeycomb) 88 Cyugoku Shin-Dnoda 2 500 Coal (2187) SCR 1,600,000 100 , IHI 80 (2/87) (fIoneycombl I 89 Cyugoku Shimonoaeki I 175 Coal 3/67 SCR 550,000 100 MHI 50 3/81 (Honeycombl 90 Shikoku Saijo 1 156 Coal 11/65 SCR 550,000 100 MIH 65 7/83 (lfoneycomb) 

### , Reference; FacilityofThermal PowerPlants inJapan- Engineering Dept,The Federation ofElectricPowerCompanies 

# ---,

### "'U 

### I

# » OJ 

## o o 0'1 N 

## o ex> N U'1 I N O"l 

### Table 1-00 Listof DeNOx Facilitiesfor Utility Boilerin Japan (As of 1986,4)

- Commi. Treated CommissUnit Output ..ionin, DeNOx TreatedGas rrotal Manu- DeNOx ioningDate No. Company PIS No. (MW) Fuel Date Facility Vol. (m'NIh) Gas factuerer Effii· ofDeNOx (Plan· Ratio ciency Facility ning) (,,)
91 Shikoku Saijo 2 2110 Coal 1/84 SCR 800,000 100 IHI 611 1/84 (Honeycomb) 92 Kyuellu Shin·Kokura 1 1118 LNG 10161 SCR 442,000 100 MHI SO 7/S2 (Honeycomb) 93 Kyulhu Shin·Kokura 2 1116 LNG 11162 SCR 484,000 100 KHI 80 4/83 (Honeycomb) 94 Kyulhu**Shin.Kokur~** 3 600 LNG 9nS SCR (Pellet) 1,690,000 100 MHI SO 9nS 96 Kyulhu Shin·Kokura 4 800 LNG 8179 SCR (Pellet) 1,890,000 100 MHI SO 6179 98 Kyushu Shin.Kokura 5 600 LNG 7/83 SCR 1.820,000 100 MHI SO 7/S3 97 Kyu.hu Minato 1 156 Coal 9/60 SCR 516,000 100 MHI 110 4/83 (Honeycomb) 9S Kyulhu Matluura I 700 Coal (7189) SCR 2,207,000 100 

## - SO (7/89) (Honeycomb) 99 Kyulhu Shin·Ohita 1·1- 690 LNG (7/91) SCR (Plate) 5,400,000 100 

## - SO (7/911 1·6 100 EPDC Takehara I 2110 Coal 7/67 SCR Sll1,OOIl 100 HTC SO 10/82 (Plate,Pipe) KHI 101 EPDC Takehara 3 700 Coal 3183 SCR (Plate) 2,320,000 100 HTC SO 3183
I SO (7/90) 102 EPDC Matluura 1 1000 Coal (7190) SCR 3,029,000 100 

### - 103 Sakata Sakata 1 350 Coal 9/84 SCR 1,140,000 100 MHI 28 9/84 (Honeycomb) Kelerence :jl'aCl11ty0 Thennal Yower.t'lants In Japan- t;nlOneermlllJep •Thejl·ed.eratlonol./!;lectrlCYower(.;ompanles 

### , --**-~ ._--~** "'U 

### I 

# » OJ 

## a a 0'1 I'V 

## a <0 N tTl I N

....... 

### Table 1-(2) list of DeNOx Facilitiesfor Utility Boiler in Japan (As of 1986,4}

Commi- Treated CommissUnit Output Isioning DeNOx TrealedGas /Total Manu- DeNOx ioningDate No. Company PIS Fuel Date Gas Emi· No. lMW) (Plan- Facility Vol. (m'N/h) Ratio factuerer ciency ofDeNOx ning) (%) Facility

104 Sakall1 Sakata 2 350 Heavy Oil 10n8 SCR 1,140,000 100 MHI 28**~/A** (Honeycomb) 105 Joban Nakoso 8 600 Coal 9/83 SCR 1,800,000 100 MHI 60 9/83 HeavyOil (Honeycomb)

106 Joban Nako80 9 600 Coal 12/83 SCR 1,800,000 100 IHI 60 12/83 HeavyOil (Honeycomb)

107 Toyama Toyama 1 250 Coal 9nl SCR(Plate) 690,000 100 HTC 60 11/84 Sinkou 108 Toyama Toyama 2 250 Coal 6/72 SCR(Plale) 690,000 100 UTC 60 12/84 Sinkou 109 Tobata Tobata 4 375 NllturalOaa 3/78 SCR 1,563,800 MHI 60 6/81 from Coke, (Honeycomb) Blastand Converting Furnace Reference;Facility ofThermalPowerPlantsinJapan- EngineeringDept,TheFederationofElectricPowerCompanies

, I



## , 

# ----,

# - ""0 

### I

# » OJ 

## o o 0'1 I'V 

## o N t.1l I N CXl 

# Table2 SCRmanufacturersforutilityboilersinJapan (units: as ofApril 1986)


# MHi 

# HTC IHI KHI 

# HZC Total
coal 

# 9 9.5 

# 3 0.5 0 

# 22



# oil 26 16 13 0 

# 0 55

LNG 

# 6 

# 3 2 

# 1 1 13

, 

# Total 

# 41 28.5 18 1.5 1 90

,

....---'---}..._**_~.~,,....,** -.<1-'",**"I'~;"''''''''''''''''** ..,, ,**'I"-".~"'** •.• " •.

__, ••

_ ••_. __•



# Table 3 Required catalyst amount in relation with configuration improvement 

# ---,

- "'U 

### I 

# » OJ 

## a a 0'1 I'V N 111 I N 1.0 

### 13 x 

### 13 cells 15x 15 17x 17 20x20 

### 21 x21 

## p(mm) 

# 9.8 8.0 

# 7.4 

# 6.0 6.0

t(mm) 

# 1.8 1.8 1.4 1.4 1.0

AP(m2/m3) 

# 291 321 382 

# 427 470 catalyst

, 

## Amount 

# 100 % 

# 90% 

# 76% 686 

# /0 620/0 Required (Base) 

## (% ) 

## ,