Method Injected energy per meter of heating element Eﬃciency Energy needs (per m³ of soil) Gas Burners ~ 2 kW ~ 50% 619 -894 kWh/m³ Electrical Resistance ~ 1 kW ~ 90-99% 300-400 kWh/m³ Source of electricity production Yield Power needed to create 1 kW of electricity (kW) Thermal conventional plants 35 – 40 % 2.5 – 2.85 Thermal plants with combined cycles Up to 50 % 2 METHOD SOURCE NATURAL GAS POWER CONSUMPTION Gas Burners Direct 619-894 kWh/m³ Electrical Resistance Thermal conventional plans 570 – 1140 kWh/m³ Thermal plants with combined cycles 400-600 kWh/m³ Source: Trüby 2014 Source: Heron et al. 2015 ; J. Bukowski et al. 2018 Source 2 images: TerraTherm Source image: HT Simulation Fluent Simulation Fluent THERMAL DESORPTION: Is a remediation technology Uses heat to increase volatility of contaminants (organic & inorganic) to remove them from soil matrix Is a two steps process: extraction of contaminants and recycling or des- troying of extracted pollution Heat Conduction Vapor Extraction Heating Well Heating Well Conductive Heating General Principle Heron, G., K. Parker, S. Fournier, P. Wood, G. Angyal, J. Levesque, et R. Villecca. 2015. « World’s Largest In Situ Thermal Desorption Project: Challenges and Solutions ». Ground- water Monitoring & Remediation 35 (3): 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwmr.12115. J. Bukowski, Robert, James P. Galligan, Ken Parker, Courtney M. Duteau, Myron Kuhlman, et Edward H. White. 2018. « IN-SITU THERMAL DESTRUCTION (ISTD) OF MGP WASTE IN A FORMER GASHOLDER: DESIGN AND INSTALLATION », septembre. Saadaoui, Hatem, et Jan Haemers. 2015. « La désorption thermique pour les sols pollués ». Trüby, Johannes. 2014. « Thermal Power Plant Economics and Variable Renewable Energies ». International Energy Agency Insight Series: 38. United States. Army. 2009. Engineering and design : design, in situ thermal remediation /. Washington, D.C. : U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,. Bibliography Vapor Cap Temparture and Pressure Monitoring Holes Extraction Well Power Distribution System Heat Exchanger Knockout Pot Blower Vapor Treatment Treated Vapor to Atmosphere Water Treatment Pump Discharge Heater Wells Treatment Area Foot-Print Example Process System Electrical Resistance Gas Fired Burner Thermal Desorption Heating Stages Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 TIME 100°C Temperature gradient with interdistance and heating element wall temperature: GAS TEMPERATURE GRADIENT BETWEEN GAS FIRED HEATING TUVBES IN DRY SOIL Thermal Conductive Heating (TCH): comparison of power consumption to heat the soil between electrical resistance and gas ﬁred burners J. DE GRUNNE, H. SAADAOUI, J. HAEMERS. HAEMERS Technologies 2018 © Temperature gradient with interdistance and heating element wall temperature: ELECTRICAL RESISTANCE TEMPERATURE GRADIENT BETWEEN RESISTIVE HEATING TUBES IN DRY SOIL The energy consumption to heat the soil depends on the type of thermal electricity production (thermal, nuclear, etc). Depending on the current sources of electricity production, the power consumption in terms of natural gas will vary. Conclusion A high electrical power supply is needed for the resistive heating method, therefore it requires more time and power (reduction of heating elements – interdistance increase). Easier to handle with gas burners, as fuel can be supplied more easily. Thermal Desorption Power Consumption Conclusion

THERMAL DESORPTION - Haemers Technologies · Source: Heron et al. 2015 ; J. Bukowski et al. 2018 Source: Trüby 2014 400-600 kWh/m³ Source 2 images: TerraTherm Source image: HT Simulation

Download PDF Report

Upload
others
View
2
Download
0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: THERMAL DESORPTION - Haemers Technologies · Source: Heron et al. 2015 ; J. Bukowski et al. 2018 Source: Trüby 2014 400-600 kWh/m³ Source 2 images: TerraTherm Source image: HT Simulation

MethodInjected energy

per meter of heating element

Efficiency Energy needs (per m³ of soil)

Gas Burners ~ 2 kW ~ 50% 619 -894 kWh/m³

Electrical Resistance ~ 1 kW ~ 90-99% 300-400 kWh/m³

Source of electricity production Yield Power needed to create 1 kW of electricity (kW)

Thermal conventional plants 35 – 40 % 2.5 – 2.85

Thermal plants with combined cycles Up to 50 % 2

METHOD SOURCENATURAL GAS

POWER CONSUMPTION

Gas Burners Direct 619-894 kWh/m³

Electrical Resistance

Thermal conventional plans 570 – 1140 kWh/m³

Thermal plants with combined cycles 400-600 kWh/m³Source: Trüby 2014Source: Heron et al. 2015 ; J. Bukowski et al. 2018

Source 2 images: TerraTherm Source image: HT

Simulation Fluent Simulation Fluent

THERMAL DESORPTION:Is a remediation technology

Uses heat to increase volatility of contaminants (organic & inorganic) to remove them from soil matrix

Is a two steps process: extraction of contaminants and recycling or des-troying of extracted pollution

Heat Conduction Vapor Extraction

Heating Well Heating Well

Conductive Heating General Principle

Heron, G., K. Parker, S. Fournier, P. Wood, G. Angyal, J. Levesque, et R. Villecca. 2015. « World’s Largest In Situ Thermal Desorption Project: Challenges and Solutions ». Ground-water Monitoring & Remediation 35 (3): 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/gwmr.12115.

J. Bukowski, Robert, James P. Galligan, Ken Parker, Courtney M. Duteau, Myron Kuhlman, et Edward H. White. 2018. « IN-SITU THERMAL DESTRUCTION (ISTD) OF MGP WASTE IN A FORMER GASHOLDER: DESIGN AND INSTALLATION », septembre.

Saadaoui, Hatem, et Jan Haemers. 2015. « La désorption thermique pour les sols pollués ».

Trüby, Johannes. 2014. « Thermal Power Plant Economics and Variable Renewable Energies ». International Energy Agency Insight Series: 38.

United States. Army. 2009. Engineering and design : design, in situ thermal remediation /. Washington, D.C. : U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,.

Bibliography

Vapor Cap

Temparture and PressureMonitoring Holes

ExtractionWell

PowerDistribution

System

HeatExchanger

KnockoutPot

Blower

VaporTreatment

Treated Vaporto Atmosphere

WaterTreatment

Pump

Discharge

HeaterWells

Treatment AreaFoot-Print

Example ProcessSystem

Electrical Resistance Gas Fired Burner

Thermal Desorption Heating Stages

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4

TIME

100°C

Temperature gradient with interdistance and heating element wall temperature: GAS

TEMPERATURE GRADIENT BETWEEN GAS FIRED HEATING TUVBES IN DRY SOIL

Thermal Conductive Heating (TCH): comparison of power consumption to heat the soil between electrical resistance and gas fired burners

J. DE GRUNNE, H. SAADAOUI, J. HAEMERS. HAEMERS Technologies 2018 ©

Temperature gradient with interdistance and heating element wall temperature: ELECTRICAL RESISTANCE

TEMPERATURE GRADIENT BETWEEN RESISTIVE HEATING TUBES IN DRY SOIL

The energy consumption to heat the soil depends on the type of thermal electricity production (thermal, nuclear, etc).

Depending on the current sources of electricity production, the power consumption in terms of natural gas will vary.

ConclusionA high electrical power supply is needed for the resistive heating method, therefore it requires more time and power (reduction of heating elements – interdistance increase). Easier to handle with gas burners, as fuel can be supplied more easily.

Thermal Desorption Power Consumption

Conclusion