Development of Underground Coal Gasification for Power Generation

Contract No.: C/07/00378/00/00 URN 09D/679

MAY 2009

UK CHINA TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER

DEVELOPMENT OF UCG FOR POWER GENERATION

CONTRACT NUMBER:

W/44/00658/00/00
URN NUMBER: 09D/679

Contractor Cranfield University

The work described in this report was carried out under contract as part of the DECC Emerging Energy Technologies Programme, which is managed by AEA Technology. The views and judgements expressed in this report are those of the contractor and do not necessarily reflect those of the DECC or AEA Technology.

First published 2009 Crown Copyright 2009

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Objectives The primary aim of this technology transfer project was to assess the potential technology needs for the introduction of industrial gas turbines and associated gas cleaning equipment in Chinese UCG, coke oven gas and blast furnace gas schemes. To achieve this aim, it was critical to resolve remaining technical issues, review potential sites, assess environmental and regulatory issues and review opportunities for financing the UCG/coke oven gas/blast furnace gas schemes. In addition, there was a need for reliable data from current field trials in China. As this information is fundamental in understanding the specification of gas clean up technology and the effects on gas turbine performance and operation, special attention has been paid to this issue. Background Coal is the most important energy source in China but its government is concerned about the pollution caused by burning coal and the environmental damage caused in mining. UCG is seen as a technology which may reduce these problems and also enable the energy to be recovered from residual pillars of coal in working or closed coal mines. Many trials have been carried out funded both from government and private sources. Technical uncertainties remain but with further investment in R&D, it is expected that these can be resolved. Full-scale commercial demonstration may soon be practicable. If successful, UCG is likely to be widely replicated throughout China. Summary UCG is a technology which can exploit the energy in coal while avoiding the environmental problems at the surface associated with coal mining, disposal of mining waste and coal combustion. In the UCG process, water/steam and air or oxygen are injected into a coal seam. The injected gases react with coal to form a combustible gas which is brought to the surface and cleaned prior to utilisation. There is considerable interest in the development of Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) in China as a result of measures taken by the Chinese Government to reduce pollution from small coal-fired power plants and the need to maximise coal resources. A preceding project investigating the potential for UCG in China, led by Wardell Armstrong, highlighted the opportunity for UCG schemes to provide a clean fuel gas for domestic/industrial use as well as for power generation. The project identified local power generation using small gas turbines as the preferred end use option for UCG product gas. Chinese researchers, in collaboration with the coal industry, have been developing several variants of the basic UCG concept to suit local Chinese conditions and available resources. The two main UCG approaches being developed in China are the under-surface gasification (UG) method and the Long tunnel, large section,

two-stage method. Significant progress has been made in construction and operation of these UCG schemes and efforts are being made to improve the quality and consistency of the resulting product gas. Technology transfer was achieved through reciprocal technical visits between the UK and China, joint research activity, a workshop in Beijing and dissemination materials. The principal participants in the project were Cranfield University, China Coal Research Institute (CCRI), China University of Mining Technology (CUMT), Alstom Power, Siemens Industrial Gas Turbines and Xinwen Mining Group. Conclusions and recommendations Performance, safety, environmental, process control, gas cleaning, market and financial issues will require further attention in China before commercialisation can become a reality. However, continuing laboratory and field research is aimed at addressing some of these issues. The main focus of this report is to assess the utilization of low CV coal-derived gases in gas turbines and related issues. This report presents a large amount of data on the production and utilisation of low calorific gases in China and the potential for their future utilisation in advanced applications such as gas turbines in CHP installations. The data on production and utilisation of UCG product gas, the COG and the BFG covered the whole China and further details are given on the example of Hebei province. It has been identified that one of the main constraints on the utilisation of gas turbines on either UCG product gas or other coal-derived gases is the often high concentration of hydrogen in the gas. Such gas cannot be used directly in existing gas turbines and significant modifications would be required. The recent trend in UCG development in China is towards the use of O2 and/or steam to improve the CV of the product gas. However this results in high concentrations of H2 in the product gas, and therefore makes the use of this gas in gas turbines more difficult. It may therefore be preferable to concentrate rather than on increasing the product gas CV on ensuring consistency in the gas quality, as gas turbines can handle lower quality gases, but require consistency in the quality. For the use of coal-derived industrial waste gases, the best solution seems to be blending of different gases, such as COG and BFG, in order to prepare a gas suitable for existing gas turbines. Potential UK beneficiaries of the UCG/BFG/COG developments in China include manufacturers and suppliers of gas burners, combustion equipment, gas turbines, power generation systems, corrosion resistant materials, gas flow and quality monitoring, oxygen plant, pipe-work and valves, gas conditioning equipment, process controllers, drilling equipment, safety equipment, sealing materials and emission control equipment.

ii

CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...i Objectives...i Background.i Summary.i Conclusions and recommendations...ii ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYM...1 FOREWORD....2 1. INTRODUCTION3 1.1 Background..3 1.2 UCG process4 1.3 Environmental aspects of UCG...5 Atmospheric and groundwater pollution6 Subsidence.7 2. THE STATUS OF UCG IN CHINA AND ITS POTENTIAL FOR POWER GENERATION.8 2.1 Policy...8 2.2 Coal resource...8 2.3 UCG site selection: geological and topographical factors ..9 2.4 Underground coal gasification technologies in China...13 Undersurface gasification (UG) method..13 Long tunnel, large section, two stage UCG method15 2.5 Options for improved UCG process control..16 2.6 Water ingress and its effects on the UCG operation.18 3. OTHER COAL-DERIVED GAS RESOURCES IN CHINA AND THEIR POTENTIAL FOR POWER GENERATION..20 3.1 Blast furnace gas (BFG)....20 Current status of BFG generation in China..22 Current status of BFG utilization.....24 Principles of selecting suitable BF sites for GT power generation..30 An example of the prospects of BFG utilization - the Hebei province....30 3.2 Coke oven gas (COG)....32 The generation and quality of COG.........................................................................................................32 Current status of COG generation in China.............................................................................................34 Current status of COG utilization in China..............................................................................................35 An example of the prospects of COG utilization - Hebei province.........................................................37 Conclusions..............................................................................................................................................39 4. GAS TURBINE OPERABILITY ON COAL-DERIVED GASES...................................................................40 5. ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF UCG, COG AND BFG UTILSATION..................................................40 5.1 Environmental issues in UCG operation...................................................................................40 5.2 Environmental issues in BFG and COG utilisation...................................................................41 5.3 Environmental standards relevant to UCG, BFG and COG power generation schemes..........41 6. REVIEW OF FUNDING AND INSTITUTIONAL OPPORTUNITIES AND BARRIERS............................42 7. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................................................43 7.1 UCG...........................................................................................................................................43 7.2 BFG...........................................................................................................................................43 7.3 COG...........................................................................................................................................43 APPENDIX A........................................................................................................................................................46 Chinese environmental standards..........................................................................................................................46 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD - GB 3095-1996 (PART)....................................................47 INTEGRATED EMISSION STANDARD OF AIR POLLUTANTS - GB16297-1996........................49 EMISSION STANDARDS FOR ODOUR POLLUTANTS - GB 14554-93 (PART)...........................55 EMISSION STANDARD OF AIR POLLUTANTS FOR THERMAL POWER PLANTS - GB 132232003 (PART)...........................................................................................................................................58 Standards for Drinking Water Quality - GB 5749 - 2005........................................................................62 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS FOR SURFACE WATER - GB/T 14848-93 (PART).....................................................................................................................................................67 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS FOR SURFACE WATER........................................69 GB 3838-2002 (PART)............................................................................................................................69 INTEGRATED WASTEWATER DISCHARGE STANDARD.............................................................72 GB 8978-1996 (PART)............................................................................................................................72

STANDARD OF NOISE AT BOUNDARY OF INDUSTRY ENTERPRISES.....................................76 GB 12348-90 (PART)............................................................................................................................76 STANDARD FOR POLLUTION CONTROL ON THE STORAGE AND DISPOSAL SITE FOR GENERAL INDUSTRIAL SOLID WASTES......................................................................................77 GB 18599-2001(PART)........................................................................................................................77 STANDARD OF ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE IN URBAN AREA...................................................81 GB 3096-93 (PART)..............................................................................................................................81 APPENDIX B.......................................................................................................................................................82 APPENDIX C.......................................................................................................................................................86 OUTWARD MISSION BY A UK TEAM TO CHINA JULY 2007..................................................87 INWARD MISSION BY A CHINESE TEAM TO THE UK NOVEMBER 2007............................88 INWARD MISSION BY A CHINESE TEAM TO THE UK PART 2 MARCH 2007...................89 OUTWARD MISSION BY A UK TEAM TO CHINA FINAL WORKSHOP IN BEIJING OCTOBER 2008.....................................................................................................................................90

ii

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYM

BFG CCRI CDM CH4 CO CO2 COG CUMT CV DTi GT H2 H2O H2S km m m3 m3/h MJ/kg MJ/m3 Mt MWel MWh N2 NH3 NOx O2 S SO2 SOx t UCG UG CBM Blast Furnace Gas China Coal Research Institute Clean development mechanism Methane Carbon monoxide Carbon dioxide Coke Oven Gas China University of Mining & Technology Calorific Value Department of Trade and Industry Gas Turbine Hydrogen Water Hydrogen sulphide kilometre metre cubic metre cubic metres per hour Megajoule per kilogram Megajoule per cubic metre Million tonnes Megawatt electrical Megawatt hours Nitrogen Ammonia Oxides of nitrogen Oxygen Sulphur Sulphur dioxide Oxides of sulphur tonne Underground coal gasification Undersurface gasification Coalbed methane

FOREWORD
The primary aim of this proposed technology transfer project was to assess the potential technology needs for the introduction of industrial gas turbines and associated gas cleaning equipment in Chinese UCG and other coal derived gas schemes. The specific objectives were to: Collect reliable fuel gas composition data Identify near term UCG power opportunities Identify other near term opportunities for coal derived gas utilisation (e.g., coke ovens, blast furnaces, coal bed methane etc.) Examine UCG process control options Assess the use of the product gas in gas turbine power generation systems Identify environmental impacts and relevant regulatory constraints Identify funding/institutional opportunities and barriers

The project comprised the following activities: (i) (iii) Start-up meeting with the principal collaborators in Beijing (ii) (iv) Literature review by exchange of published information and translations Reciprocal visits of experts between China and the UK (academics and manufacturers represented). Details of these visits are provided in Appendix C. A technology transfer workshop in Beijing Reports and dissemination material. In-house research and preparation of topic papers

(v) (vi)

The participants in the project were Cranfield University, China Coal Research Institute (CCRI), China University of Mining Technology (CUMT), Alstom Power, Siemens Industrial Gas Turbines and Xinwen Mining Group.

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background The UK-China technology transfer project was undertaken to assess the specific technology barriers to the further development of UCG and other coal derived gases (i.e., COG and BFG) for power generation using gas turbines. The overall aim was to assess the potential technology needs for the introduction of industrial gas turbines and associated gas cleaning equipment in Chinese UCG, COG and BFG schemes and thus promote production of cleaner local electricity and reduction of environmental pollution in many Chinese communities. Coal is the most important energy source in China but the government is becoming increasingly concerned about the pollution caused by burning coal and the environmental damage related to its mining. There is therefore a considerable interest in the development of Underground Coal Gasification (UCG) in China as a result of measures taken by the Chinese Government to reduce pollution from small coal-fired power plants and the need to maximise coal resources. UCG is seen as a technology which may reduce these problems and also enable the energy to be recovered from residual pillars of coal in working or closed coal mines. Many trials have been carried out funded both from government and private sources. Technical uncertainties remain but with further investment in R&D, hopefully these can be resolved. Full-scale commercial demonstration may soon be practicable. If successful, UCG is likely to be widely replicated throughout China. The current approach to UCG development in China is focused on coal seams at relatively shallow depth. Field trials, together with laboratory research work, lead by China University of Mining Technology (CUMT) has demonstrated the reproducibility of the UCG process, although control of the gasifier remains an issue. Due to the relatively shallow nature of the coal seams, geological setting and hydrological factors the field trials have experienced a number of technical difficulties. The inability to be able to operate at significant pressure (as is the case for the deep seam concepts developed elsewhere), hinders control of the gasification process resulting in a variable quality fuel gas in terms of temperature, pressure and CV. Improved gasifier monitoring and control methods are needed, possibly involving the use of oxygen or steam to adjust the gas CV. The fuel gas produced from the UCG process will inevitably be laden with contaminants originating from the coal as a result of the high temperatures involved in the gasification process. Tars, particulates, ammonia, hydrogen sulphide, hydrogen chloride and trace species (Cd, Hg, Pb, Zn, Na, K, etc.) will all be present in the gas as-formed, along with the usual major constituents (H2, CO, CO2, H2O, CH4, N2, etc.). A major technical concern affecting the commercialisation of the overall UCG gas turbine concept is the need to ensure that these contaminants are removed in an environmentally friendly, cost effective way so that gas turbine entry requirements are met.
3

The UCG fuel gas cools as it passes through the cavity (from which coal has already been consumed in the gasification process) and through the gas production well. During transit, a significant proportion of the contaminants will deposit or condense onto surrounding surfaces (including the production well pipework) and the gas-borne particulates. If the gas temperature leaving the production well cannot be maintained above the water dewpoint of the gas, condensed water vapour from the gas will collect at the base of the production well. This water and/or condensed tars from the fuel gas have the potential to cause blockages in the well. In such circumstances, the collected water will become heavily polluted by the contaminants, leading to a significant potential for groundwater pollution. Residual gas contaminants will pass up the well and will require cleaning from the gas prior to compression and use in the gas turbine. Where gas temperatures are maintained at higher levels, the mix of contaminants remaining in the gas will be different and the overall levels that need to be cleaned above ground will be much greater. These issues have to be addressed adequately before an economic case for UCG driven gas turbines in China can be made. The key technical issues, which will influence the development of UCG and specifically the use of gas turbines and related equipment for power generation, may be summarised as follows: Availability of reliable gas composition/yield data over extended periods Ability to maintain gasifier stability/CV of fuel gas is there a need for oxygen/steam injection to assist in this? Pollution of ground waters by condensed species from the gasification process Definition of optimum/economic above-ground gas cleaning strategies

There are also parallel technology opportunities in China for gas turbines and related gas cleaning equipment for power generation from other coal derived gases (e.g., coke oven gas, blast furnace gas) and it was considered relevant to include these in the assessment because of the similarity in process. 1.2 UCG process Gasification differs from conventional coal combustion which takes place when coal is burned in excess O2 to produce CO2 and H2O. Higher temperatures are generated during combustion than in gasification. Another important difference between coal combustion and coal gasification is in pollutant formation. The reducing atmosphere in gasification converts S from coal to H2S and N2 to NH3, whereas combustion (oxidation) produces SO2 and NOx.

The principal processes can be divided into two stages, namely pyrolysis (also known as carbonisation, devolatilisation or thermal decomposition) and char gasification. During pyrolysis, coal is converted to a char by releasing tars, oils, low molecular hydrocarbons and other gases. Gasification occurs when H2O, O2, CO2 and H2 react with the char. The main gases produced are CO2, CH4, H2 and CO. Methane (CH4) is essentially a product of pyrolysis, rather than gasification. Its formation is favoured by low temperature and high pressure. Although complex in reality, the basic reactions can be generalised to a simple empirical form: C + O2 CO2 + heat C + CO2 + heat 2CO C + H 2 O + heat H 2 + CO C + 2 H 2 CH 4 + heat Carbon oxidation reactions dominate at low temperature and pressure leading to a high CO2 content in the product gases and a low heating value. Such conditions are typical of shallow UCG operations, such as those constructed in China, using conventional mining methods. As a result, air-blown underground gasifiers in China produce gas with relatively low heating value (in the range 4 to 6MJ/m3)and a two-stage system can produce medium heating value gas of 12 to 14MJ/m3, by using oxygen enriched air. 1.3 Environmental aspects of UCG As a method of exploiting coal, UCG represents an environmental improvement on the combination of coal mining and surface combustion of coal. It is also safer and intuitively more efficient. In comparison with conventional coal mining and modern steam power plant, UCG with combined cycle power generation offers the overall environmental advantages of: Lower particulate emissions, noise and visual impact on the surface Less water used (this is important in many of the mining areas in China) Lower risk of surface water pollution Reduced methane emissions from coal mining by say 5m3/t in shallow seams and 20 to 75m3/t (specific emissions) in deep seams, reducing greenhouse gas emissions from around 0.02t/MWh in shallow coals to 0.4t/MWh in deep gassy seams (carbon dioxide equivalent per unit electricity generated) No dirt handling and disposal at mine sites No coal washing and fines disposal at mine sites No ash handling and disposal at power station sites Less SO2
5

Less NOx Less transport Smaller land area occupied No mine water recovery and surface hazard liabilities on mine abandonment.

Additional benefits of the UCG approach are: Lower occupational health and safety risks (the number of miners working underground would be reduced) Potentially lower overall capital and operating costs for coal-fired power generation Flexibility of access to mineral Larger coal resource exploitable.

The detrimental environmental impacts of the UCG process are perceived as being fairly low as the main product of the process is gas and any by-products are either left in the ground, or can be removed by conventional processes or even re-injected back into the coal seam. Hence, the environmental impacts of mining and also ash disposal are negated. Atmospheric and groundwater pollution However, there are some issues which still remain, particularly the possible effects of the process on surface and subsurface environments. These include: Leaching of organic substances from the gasifier, e.g., phenols Increased concentrations of inorganic salts near the gasification zone Dissolving of hazardous gases (H2, CH4, CO2, H2S, and NH3) in groundwater Leaching of heavy metals (Hg, As, Pb, Cr, Cd) Emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.

The main groundwater pollution concern is phenol residues but these can be flushed out due to their relatively high water solubility, and the water treated. If left in the ground, phenols would be dispersed naturally. No serious groundwater pollution problems have been detected in any trials. However, there is a need to continuously monitor groundwater quality as part of any UCG scheme and to design precautionary remedial measures which can be implemented should unacceptable pollution be detected. The UCG product gas will need to be cleaned to remove pollutants to minimise environmental emissions and to prevent corrosion and damage to the gas turbine. CO2 in the gas can be absorbed using waste alkaline solution and fixed into a high calcium coal ash for filling into the UCG cavity. Removal of the CO2
6

reduces the greenhouse emission impact and raises the heating value of the product gas per unit volume. Subsidence A cavity is created as gasification proceeds. As it widens, the roof collapses. The caving process will depend on the mechanical properties of the rocks, geological and thermal stresses. By analogy with shortwall and longwall methods of mining, subsidence will depend largely on the geometry of the cavity and depth. In general, as extraction depth increases, surface subsidence decreases. Waste residue, ashes, oxide, radioactive materials, and waste rock after gasification are left underground, which will eliminate the accumulation of waste on the surface and reduce the cavity space compared with mining. Surface subsidence per unit of energy produced will be less with UCG compared with conventional coal mining. CUMT have developed a thermoplastic-creep model which can predict the surface subsidence profile above an underground gasifier.

2. THE STATUS OF UCG IN CHINA AND ITS POTENTIAL FOR POWER GENERATION
The UCG technology development process in China can be divided into three stages. First is from 1958~1962. In 1958, China carried out the earliest UCG tests in Datong, Jiaohe, Hegang, Xinwen and Zaozhuang. For Hegang UCG, electricity threading method was used for channel link up. It was running continuously for about 20 days, producing fuel gas. In 1959, a UCG trial started to operation in Huainan. It was running for about one month and the product gas was used as a fuel for a combustion engine. The second stage was from 1962 to 1985 when the third stage started. The third stage is still ongoing. After 20 years work, a number of underground gasifiers have been set up and put into operation in more than 10 coal mining areas such as Tangshan, Xinwen and so on. The UCG process now used in China include the long-tunnel, largesection, two-stage process and the mining gasification process. 2.1 Policy The importance of UCG in China since 1984 is exemplified by its mention in national development plans: Chairman Jiang Zeming stated that UCG is worthy of further research due to its full use of coal resource and economic benefits. The former Premier Zhou Jiahua also remarked that the third step of coal mining should be underground gasification. In 1984 the UCG test at Mazhuang mine was listed as the seventh five-year key scientific and technological project of Jiangsu Province. The UCG semi-industrial test at Xinhe No.2 mine was rated in 1991 as the states eighth five-year key scientific and technological project and the UCG industrial test at Liuzhuang mine was listed as the key scientific and technological project of Hebei Province in 1995. The State Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) has included the project of Study on stable controlling technology of UCG in the S-863 hitech research and development plan of 2001. The tenth-five year energy resource development plan of the State Development and Planning Commission also emphasised UCG demonstration engineering in 2001. In 1991, the State Science Commission published medium and long-term objectives to 2020 which called for the completion of research and testing and the introduction of commercial UCG stations in China. 2.2 Coal resource The total coal resource of China is about 1 1012t. More than half of this coal lies below 1000m. Just over half of the total coal resource comprises lignite and low grade coals. The distribution of coal ranks is summarised in Table 1 (the coal rank classification in China is not directly comparable with that used in the UK but closest approximations have been inserted in the
8

table). Table 1. Distribution of coal rank in the explored coal resources

Lignite Lower-grade High Medium Coking Low vol. SubAnthracite Other bituminous vol. coal vol. coal coal coal anthracit Billion tonnes Percent (%) 129 12.78 432 42.5 132 12.9 38 3.8 68 6.7 42 4.2 56 5.5 120 11.8 0.02

According to the survey of Chinas coal resources in 1997, the total proven reserves were 604 x 109t, consisting of 75% bituminous, 12% anthracite and 13% lignite. Approximately, half of the coal reserves lie in Northern China. About 17% of the coal is used for coke production and surface gasification processes (mainly town gas plants), and 83% in thermal power stations. One of the major uses envisaged for UCG is for power generation. However, it will not be practical to transport the gases long distances unless costly cleaning is undertaken, so UCG power generation will rely on minemouth power plants. Only 1% of the coal is accessible for opencasting and of this 70% is lignite which implies that the number of shallow UCG sites may be relatively few. However, lignite is easily gasified due to its high porosity. Seam thickness should not be a limitation as 8% of total coal yield comes from seams with a thickness of less than 1.3m while 43 % comes from coal seams with a thickness greater than 3.5m. UCG is generally easier to sustain in dipping seams as tars and fluids will flow away from the gasification zone. Of the coal seams worked in China, 44 % have a dip greater than 12. Any coal use displaced by UCG could result in a significant reduction of methane emissions to the atmosphere as 46 % of the (large State-owned) coal mines worked release more than 10m3 of methane per tonne of coal mined. Access to the coal for UCG in China is gained using underground mining methods, usually developed from existing workings. A primary aim is to recover remnant coal from exhausted mines prior to total abandonment. The identified UCG resource in China consists of unworked coal and pillars in abandoned mines amounting to some 30Bt. However, the possibility of constructing dedicated UCG mines in virgin coal areas is under consideration. If the European deep drilling technology is shown to be feasible, the accessible UCG resource could be as high as 300Bt. 2.3 UCG site selection: geological and topographical factors From the experience of UCG test or commercial operation, both in China and abroad, we identified several factors that affect the construction and operation of UCG gasifier. One is the coal properties, for example: ash content, high reactivity (better for
9

gasification), good thermal stability, caking properties (higher caking is undesirable as it prevents the gasification agent to diffuse into the coal/char, thus decreasing the reaction rate). It is inadvisable if the ash content is too high. The second is the thickness of coal seam. In order to supply enough heat for gasification reaction, certain amount of coal is needed for combustion. Thus the coal seam thickness should be at least 2m. On the other hand, if the coal seam is too thick coal or roof subsidence is likely to occur. To some extent, it may results in lower gasification efficiency because some coal will not take part in the gasification reaction. The third is the surround conditions of UCG district, such as the coal seam depth and the roof/floor rocks lithologic properties. The roof or floor should prevent the gas or water from leaking to other areas where it could cause environmental pollution or endanger workers in adjacent active coal mines. The fourth factor is the ground water. During the UCG operation, heat is needed to sustain the gasification reaction. Therefore, if there is too much ground water entering into the UCG area, a large amount of heat will be consumed by water evaporation. This will cause energy loss and decrease the gasification rate. In extreme cases, it could even lead to complete shut down of the UCG operation. The fifth factor is the coal seam depth. Depending on the natural conditions, it can be divided into shallow coal seams and deep coal seams. At present, Chinese UCG projects are built in shallow seams, due to easier construction and suitability for operation at atmospheric pressure. Deep coal seam UCG operation is more complex due to the fact that it has to be operated under certain pressure, in order to prevent excessive inflow of ground water. The sixth factor that needs to be taken into account when planning a UCG project is the size of the available coal resources. The current experience from construction and operation of UCG in China is summarised in tables 2 and 3.

10

Table 2 Evaluation principles for selecting mines for shallow coal seam UCG (shaft gasifier)

Excellent Medium Poor Lignite, long-flame Coal ranks coal and non or Gas coal, Fat coal Lean coal and anthracite weakly caking coal Coal seam thickness 26m (>3m better) >6m <2m Coal seam trend length Coal seam slant length Coal seam embedding depth Coal seam inclination Ash content Roof/floor rocks lithology Structural environment Hydrogeological condition Resource exploration level Resource amount 100200m 2555
o

Items

(Single gasifier) at least 90m, (double gasifiers) at least 220m (Single gasifier) at least 120m 200400m 5590o >25% sandstone medium Medium intensity aquifer Medium 0.3-10 million tons >400m <25o <10% limestone complex High intensity aquifer low <0.3million tons

1025% mudstone simple No bigger aquifer High >10million tons

11

Table 3 Evaluation principles for selecting mines for deep coal seam UCG (no-shaft gasifier)

Items Coal ranks Coalbed thickness Coal seam trend length Coal seam slant length Coal seam embedding depth Coalseam inclination Ash content roof/floor rocks lithology structural environment Hydrogeological condition Resource exploration level Resource amount

Excellent Lignite, long-flame coal and non or weakly caking coal 820m

Medium

Poor

gas coal, Fat coal Lean coal and anthracite 48m>20m <4m

(Single gasifier) at least 100m, (double gasifiers) at least 200m (Single gasifier) at least 50m 5001000m 1025
o

10001500m 2590o >25% sandstone medium Medium intensity aquifer Medium 0.3-10 million tons

>1500m <10o <10% limestone complex High intensity aquifer low <0.3 million tons

1025% mudstone simple No bigger aquifer High >10 million tons

12

2.4

Underground coal gasification technologies in China

Construction of in-seam gasifiers in China involves the use of underground mining methods in contrast to the envisaged UK approach which will be fully remote relying on guided drilling to construct the injection boreholes, production wells and the in-seam gasifier. There are two distinct UCG approaches being developed in China: Undersurface gasification (UG) Long tunnel, large section, two-stage.

Undersurface gasification (UG) method

Undersurface gasification (UG) is an extension of mining in which gasifiers consist of either shortwalls, longwalls or room-and-pillar systems, each gasifier district being controlled independently from underground to ensure optimum performance. This technology was first proposed by Professor Chai Zhaoxi when he was a visiting scholar in America in 1995. The original infrastructure of shafts and mine roadways are used to access the gasifier and incorporate pipe-work to transport injection and product gases. Underground access is maintained at all stages of the operation. Large numbers of the producing districts are envisaged forming a gasification colliery. Such a colliery would be dedicated to UCG and could conceivably support a power plant generating in excess of 2000MWel. Future designs allow for the drilling of a series of injection wells along the gasifier from a rock gallery beneath the coal seam to improve gasifier control and ensure safety. The layout would be similar in concept to room-and-pillar mining (Figure 1) and could conceivably be used to extract energy from protection pillars beneath railways, water bodies and built development. However, the use of a rock gallery will increase the construction cost. A method of laying a series of injection pipes of different length to facilitate migration of the injection point has also been designed, effectively mimicking the CRIP process used in drilled gasifiers. A technology which enabled the injection pipe to be cut using a special downhole tool was examined but considered unnecessarily complicated for the relatively short lengths envisaged. Nevertheless, there is still strong interest in this technology.

13

1 - Injection Roadway, 2 - Injection Holes, 3 Gasification Drift, 4 - Gas way, 5 - Main Gas Roadway, 6 - Gasifier Figure 1. The room-and-pillar UG concept Tests of the UG method have generally involved air-blown systems producing gas with heat values in the range 4 to 6MJ/m3. Trials of 80 to 120 days duration have been undertaken at Yilan, Heilongjiang Province and Yima, Hebi and Xinmi in Henan Province (1998 to 2000) and further recent trials in Henan, Sichuan and Liaoning. Oxygen was introduced for a short period, due to limited availability of the gas on site, in a test in Liaoning Province yielding gas with a heat value of 8.6MJ/m3. Table 2. Summary of principal UG full-scale tests
Coal rank Anthracite Anthracite Bituminou s Bituminou s Bituminou s Anthracite Location Yilan Yima Hebi Xiazhuanghe Panzhihua Fuxin Duration (months) Heilongjiang 5 Henan 2 Henan 4 Henan 3 Sichuan 1 Liaoning 4 Province

The advantages claimed for the UG method include: Uses conventional well-proven mining technology Accurate gasifier control achievable Fewer men underground than conventional mining, and all mining and control operations separated from the gasifier by robust seals, especially if access is via rock galleries and staple shafts which are filled and sealed before the gasifier is bought into operation. The method would therefore be inherently safer than conventional coal mining in China on the basis of risk per Mt of coal exploited Groundwater can be pumped and treated to prevent pollution Low cost compared with mining coal for surface gasification or power generation (this is common to all the Chinese methods) Could operate gasifiers in series to achieve the two-stage process Can take full advantage of existing mine infrastructure in many instances Not technically limited by surface drilling constraints. The main disadvantages are: Men working underground while gasifiers are operating, hence a safety risk Extensive underground construction required to support a high output Applicable only at economic mining depths
14

Risk of blockage by tars and severe corrosion in long, product gas pipelines.

Long tunnel, large section, two stage UCG method

This method was developed by Professor Yu Li and the Underground Gasification Engineering Research Centre at the China University of Mining and Technology (CUMT), Beijing. Conventional underground mining methods are used to develop the gasifier. The layout is similar to a longwall district but with injection and production boreholes drilled at the gateroad ends (Figure 2). The system is monitored and operated remotely from the surface. Additional boreholes are drilled to enable the air injection point to be adjusted in an attempt to control movement of the gasification face. Long tunnel, large section refers to the structure of the gasifier which is a 3 -4m2 coal mine roadway around 200m in length. The two-stage process involves oxidation in an air-blown first stage to raise the temperature of the reactor then injection of steam which is decomposed on contact with the heated coal to form hydrogen and carbon monoxide. Following trials at Xinhe mine, Xuzhou (1994) and Liuzhang mine, Tangshan (1996) this method was shown to be capable of producing a gas with heat values in the range 12 to 14MJ/m3 and a hydrogen content of up to around 50%.

Figure 2. Schematic of the long tunnel, large section UCG arrangement The long gasification tunnel (>200m) aids heat transfer to the coal seam and the large section (>3.5m2) ensures sufficient coal in the reactor to maintain the stability of the process.Gas production difficulties may arise when the tunnel collapses but reverse air blast or injection through auxiliary boreholes can re-establish the gasifier. Different length pipes could be laid in the access roadways to enable the injection point to be moved and connected to the surface through a large diameter borehole to provide more flexibility than auxiliary boreholes and reduce drilling costs. Alternatively, retractable coil tubing could be used.

15

2.5

Options for improved UCG process control Most of the UCG trials in China have used air blown systems to produce low quality gas with varying degrees of success. Control is limited to increasing, decreasing, pulsing or reversing airflow and a stable gas quality can be difficult to maintain by remote control. The difficulty is compounded by a lack of suitable monitoring provision in the gasifier. Researchers in China appear to have reached a consensus that oxygen and steam injection is the way forward to achieving stable gasification conditions and work has been under way that studied the effects of increasing concentrations of oxygen and introduction of steam on the UCG process and the quality of resulting product gas. Experimental results from UCG trials with oxygen enriched air are shown in Table 3 and Figure 3. Table 3. Experimental results from UCG trials with oxygen enriched air

O2 conc. % 21 22. 8 31. 39 42. 82 50. 14 69. 85 84. 35 92. 89 H2 6. 64 13. 06 13. 42 15. 84 14. 53 15. 51 24. 79 24. 13 O2

% Gas component / N2 63. 47 57. 38 52. 33 42. 89 37. 23 26. 51 17. 04 3. 8 CH4 2. 87 5. 01 4. 12 4. 59 4. 32 3. 71 3. 28 3. 69 1. 08 0. 42 0. 69 0. 23 0. 17 0. 6 0. 65 1. 17 CO 2. 84 8. 27 11. 69 18. 14 19. 23 28 24. 51 24. 07 CO2 23. 1 15. 86 17. 75 18. 31 24. 52 25. 67 29. 73 43. 14

Gasification Calorific Productivity efficiency value 3 3 % K cal / m m / kg 543. 1 3. 7 32. 69 1090. 47 3. 66 64. 91 1115. 12 3. 19 57. 87 1407. 46 2. 62 60. 03 1401. 28 2. 25 51. 19 1638. 85 1. 89 50. 32 1773. 92 1. 88 54. 33 1784. 25 1. 53 44. 47

gas concentration [%]

30 25 20 15 10 5 0 20 30 H2 40 50 60 70 80 oxygen concentration [%] O2 CH4 90 CO 100

a)

16

calorific value [MJ/m ]

8.00 6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 oxygen concentration [%] 90 100

b) Figure 3. Dependence of the product gas a) composition and b) calorific value on the oxygen concentration

From these results, it can be seen that oxygen concentration strongly influences the composition of the product gas (strong increase in H2 conc.) and consequently enhances its calorific value. In addition, oxygen concentration has impact also on the productivity and gasification efficiency in the UCG. These effects can be seen in Figures 4 and 5.
4 productivity [m /kg] 3 2 1 0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 oxygen concentration [%] 90 100
3

Figure 4. Dependence of the productivity on the oxygen concentration

17

gasification efficency [%]

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 oxygen concentration [%] 90 100

Figure 5. Dependence of the gasification efficiency on the oxygen concentration It can be seen that the UCG gas productivity decreases with increasing concentration of oxygen and that the gasification efficiency reaches its maximum at around 40 % oxygen, followed by decreasing efficiency with increasing oxygen concentration. Besides the tests with oxygen enriched air, tests with oxygen enriched air and steam were also performed. The effects of increasing steam/O2 ratio on the product gas composition can be seen in Figure 6.

80 Gas content /% 60 40 20 0 1 1.5 2 2.5

3 -3

Ratio of steam to oxygen/m m H2 CO CH4 CO2

H2+CO

Figure 6. Dependence of the product gas composition on the steam/O2 ratio. 2.6 Water ingress and its effects on the UCG operation Problems have also been experienced with water ingress into the gasifier. While water ingress can be seen contributing to a two-stage process, its input in an uncontrolled manner has been shown to cause difficulties in controlling the stability of the product gas. This problem can be avoided by careful site selection, but this limits the available resource for exploitation.
18

me

60

Experimental results from laboratory tests at the CUMT, Figures 7 and 8, show the effects of water ingress on the composition and CV of the UCG product gas. Figure 7. Dependence of the product gas composition on the rate of water ingress.
8 gas heat value/MJ.Nm-3 6 4 2 0 30 50 100 150 200 250 Water supplying quantity g.h-1 500

Figure 8. Dependence of the product gas CV on the rate of water ingress. Several methods were proposed for dealing with excessive ingress of water into the gasification zone. 1) According to the hydrological conditions of coal seam, if excess water is present in the coal seam, the water must be removed before ignition. This can be achieved by drilling a hole from the surface to the coal seam, and pump water from the hole. 2) Construction on an underground sump (see Figure 9) for the water drainage and storage. The sump is linked to the gasification tunnels and when the sump contains sufficient amount of water, it can be pumped out. 3) The burned-out cavity has the capacity to store water; therefore formation of a burned-out cavity in the lower position of the coal seam would provide means of collecting and storing excess water. 4) Increase in the strength of gasification in order to evaporate the water that will then be emitted with the product gas.

19

Ground cleaning pool of collecting water

Well

Seal wall Gasification coal seam

Underground sump for the water drainage and storage Underground sump for the water drainage and storage Water pump

Figure 9. Schematic of an underground sump system for handling of excess water ingress.

3. OTHER COAL-DERIVED GAS RESOURCES IN CHINA AND THEIR POTENTIAL FOR POWER GENERATION

3.1

Blast furnace gas (BFG)

The generation and quality of BFG

BFG is a by-product generated during the iron-making process. It consists mainly of carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, nitrogen, hydrogen gas and methane. The major combustible fraction of the gas is formed by CO which accounts for about 25vol.%. The rest consists of CO2 (15%) and N2 (55%) with only minor concentration of hydrogen and methane. The composition and heating value of BFG are dictated by the fuel, the sort of pig iron and technical process of smelting. Usually, the heat value of BFG from small blast furnace is between 3344-3756kJ/Nm3, while in large scale blast furnaces it is only about 3000kJ/Nm3,due to adopting a series of advanced production process. Such low CV is a result of the high concentration of inert gases and makes the use of BFG difficult. The difficulties of using BFG stem from the low heating value, low combustion temperature, difficult to ignition
20

and low combustion a c n stability. . Example es of typic cal BFG c compositio on from d different Chinese ste eel works are a shown in Table 4. 4

Table 4 typical com mposition of BFG fro om Chinese e steel wo orks

H2 CH4 CO O2 N2 O2 H2O LHV CO item L [kJ/Nm3] average com mposing of 3200-3800 1.5-3.0 23-27 0.2-0.5 15-19 55-60 0.2-0.4 BF FG BFG generated a by large 1.5 26.8 sized blast furnace ( 0.2 13 3.9 57.2 0.4 4.24 3640 volume >1000m3) > BFG gen nerated by 0.3 4.8 3920 medium sized s blast 2.7 28 0.2 1 11 57.8 furn nace gasification of coke made it with w high content of carbon BFG genera ated by small Incomplete g monoxide an nd higher heat value v as well. sized blas st furnace

A typical scheme s of f BFG production in a steelwo ork is sho own in Figure 10. T The whole e process consists of o five sys stems including raw w material-supply, f fuel (coal supply), air-supply y, gas-cle eaning and recover ry and/sla ag iron p processing g.

Figure 10. Schematic F c of a BFG generation process in a steel works. BFG is s an import tant source of secon ndary ener rgy in the steel s and iron indust try. Approx ximately 39 9.8% of the total coa al energy exists e in th he form of gas, such as
21

BFG, coke-oven c gas and converter c g gas, whose e energy value v acco ounts for 34 4% of the ove erall steel and iron in ndustry en nergy cons sumption. The T full us se of these e gases is impo ortant for energy-sav e ving and emission re eductions from f steel and iron industr ry. Figure 11 shows a Sankey diagram of o energy flows f in a b blast furna ace. It shows that 34.7% % of energ gy is releas sed in the BFG, whic ch accounts for more e than 1/3 of the t whole emis w ssions. Th herefore, recovery and utilization of this energy plays an important role r in ene ergy saving g.

Figure 11. Sankey dia agram of energy flow ws in a bla ast furnace e.

Current sta atus of BFG G generatio on in China a About 40% A % to 50% of o BFG is typically consumed c d by hot ai ir stove (fu urnace) a and the su urplus gas s can be used u for other o purpo ose. Gene erally, one e ton of m melted pig g iron gene erates 390 00Nm3 of dry d BFG. This mean ns that assuming 3 5 50% gas recovery, r 1800Nm BFG could d be recov vered with h each ton n of pig iron. According to the stat A tistics data a, the over rall outputs s of pig iro on from ke ey large s sized and medium sized steel and iron corporation c ns were 30 07.05 millio on tons ( (in 2006) and 349.25 million tons (in 2007) in China alone, and the c correspond ding outpu uts of BFG G were 119 97.5 billion n m3 (in 2 2006) and 1362.1 3 b billion m (in 2007). . From this, the rec claimable volume o of gas pre esented 5 598.8 billio on m3 (in 2006) 2 and 681.1 billio on m3 (in 2007). 2 Det tailed infor rmation
22

is shown in Appendix B. The data indicate that 75% of the national pig iron output was produced by large and medium scale iron and steel corporations. The total production of pig iron in China has been 469.45 million tons and 407.51 million tons in 2007 and 2006, respectively. The Table 5 shows the output statistics of pig iron in individual Chinese provinces. According to this table, the iron and steel corporations were able to reclaim the total of up to 915.4 billion m3 of BFG in 2007 and 794.7 billion m3 in 2006. Table 5 The production of pig iron and BFG in Chinese provinces
No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 2007 2006 Pig iron BFG Percent Pig iron BFG Percent Hebei 10483.58 4088.6 22.33 8586.06 3348.56 21.07 Shandong 4841.22 1888.08 10.31 4257.89 1660.58 10.45 Liaoning 3963.51 1545.77 8.44 3711.15 1447.35 9.11 Jiangsu 3800.03 1482.01 8.09 3307.25 1289.83 8.12 Shanxi 3427.21 1336.61 7.3 3022.23 1178.67 7.42 Henan 1925.4 750.91 4.1 1532.96 597.85 3.76 Shanghai 1790.36 698.24 3.81 1639.52 639.41 4.02 Hubei 1679.42 654.97 3.58 1562.25 609.28 3.83 Anhui 1517.19 591.7 3.23 1153.76 449.97 2.83 Suchuan 1464.72 571.24 3.12 1311.3 511.41 3.22 Tianjin 1435.4 559.81 3.06 1168.89 455.87 2.87 Inner Mongolia 1253.42 488.83 2.67 1069.47 417.09 2.62 Hunan 1246.92 486.3 2.66 1095.71 427.33 2.69 Yunnan 1179.93 460.17 2.51 1027.81 400.85 2.52 Jiangxi 1045.3 407.67 2.23 949.41 370.27 2.33 Beijing 780.48 304.39 1.66 782.04 305 1.92 Guangdong 749.17 292.18 1.6 685.43 267.32 1.68 Guangxi 635.26 247.75 1.35 562.18 219.25 1.38 Gansu 592.78 231.18 1.26 545.34 212.68 1.34 Jilin 483.34 188.5 1.03 425.85 166.08 1.05 Fujian 471.83 184.01 1.01 422.03 164.59 1.04 Xinjiang 387.1 150.97 0.82 323.12 126.02 0.79 Heilongjiang 366.61 142.98 0.78 257.27 100.34 0.63 Shaixi 365.55 142.56 0.78 394.34 153.79 0.97 Guizhou 342.61 133.62 0.73 338.55 132.03 0.83 Chongqing 327.11 127.57 0.7 300.1 117.04 0.74 Zhejiang 237.78 92.73 0.51 232.43 90.65 0.57 Qinghai 90.09 35.14 0.19 49.64 19.36 0.12 Ningxia 42.51 16.58 0.09 27.69 10.8 0.07 Hainan 18.8 7.33 0.04 13.34 5.2 0.03 Total 46944.63 18308.41 100 40750.55 15892.71 100 Province

The recovery of BFG plays a significant role in reducing the energy consumption of the pig iron production system. According to the statistics from Chinese Iron and Steel Association Organization, the average emission rates of BFG from national key iron and steel corporations in 2004 and 2005 were 9.10% and 10.46% respectively, and several companies emitted even up to 33.8%. In general, small sized iron and steel corporations showed higher emission rates, from 25% to 40%. The detail statistics are showed in
23

Table 6 The production of pig iron and BFG in Chinese provinces

Item average advanced plants basic plants

COG release rate [%] BFG release rate [%] 5.76 0(11) 20.92 10.46 036 33.84

Note: Values in the bracket indicate the number of corporations; there are in total 78 national large sized and medium sized corporations in China.

During the Eleventh Five Years plan, according to the National Development and Reform Commission, the Development and Reform Commission of Hebei Province (the largest single producer of pig iron in China) has released the energy-saving requirement on iron and steel industries. According to this requirement, the release rate of BFG must reduce to 2.77% by 2010 from 12.32% in 2005, and reclaim 142.64108m3 of BFG in the five years, which corresponds to saving of 183.44104t of standard coal. The BFG release rates and production of iron and steel in Hebei province in the 11th five year plan period is shown in Table 7. Table 7 - The BFG release rates and production of iron and steel in Hebei province in the 11th five year plan period
Item BFG release rate [%] pig iron [104t] 2005 12.32 5816.1 2006 10.55 7744.85 2007 7.55 7987.88 2008 5.41 8180 2009 3.87 8510.96 2010 2.77 8586.96 46826.75 Total

Gas output [104m3] 10468980 13940730 14378184 14724000 15319728 15456528 84288150 Gas recovery [104m3] Gas saved [104m3] 9179202 12469983 13292631 13927432 14726855 15028382 78624484 246751 431346 315094 246073 187071 1426335

Current status of BFG utilization BFG, with its extremely low heating value is 3050-3470kJ/m3, which is equivalent to 60% of producer gas, 17% of coke oven gas, 9% of natural gas, and 3% of LPG), limited range of combustibility, low flame temperature, and unstable combustion are the main reasons why BFG has been rarely used. In the past, except for the use as fuel gas in the blast furnace preheat systems, most of BFG used to be wasted, at present only about 10% of BFG is being wasted. Top pressure recovery turbine (TRT) The top gas pressure from the blast furnace can reach up to 0.15 to 0.25MPa so the BFG contains a large amount of potential energy. The TRT converts this potential energy into power. According to the different top pressure, each ton of iron is able to generate between 20-40kWhel, which

24

could rise by c b another r 30% if dr ry dedustin ng (dust re emoval) tec chnique are used. T The TRTs s are now wadays widely w used in the medium and large e steel e enterprises s. Approxim mately 90% % of blast furnaces above 100 00m3 utilis se TRT, w which corresponds to a total annual a out tput of mo ore than 10 0 billion kW Whel. A s schematic of a typica al TRT syst tem is show wn in figur re 12.

Figure 12 - A schematic of a ty ypical TRT T system

Gas boiler for power generation n The power T r generatio on technolo ogy of burn ning BFG or o mixed g gas for gen neration o steam to of o drive stea am turbine e has been n applied since 1980s s in self-go overned iron plants. They hav ve been of f various se eries of ins stalled cap pacity: 10, 20, 35, 6 75 and 220 tons per hour with 65, w the correspondin ng steam turbine pow wer 1.5, 3 6, 12, 15 and 50 MW. And burning tw 3, wo types of o gas; one e is a mixe ed BFG a the oth and her is a pu ure BFG. An A example e of this technology i is the 220t t/h BFG b boiler in Ma aanshan steel plant in i Anhui pr rovince wit th following g paramete ers: boiler typ pe steam pa arameter commissioning yea ar BFG consumption eld steam yie the year availability a y NG-9.8/22 20-Q2 9.8MPa, 540 C Jul.2001 04Nm3/h 13~1510 130~170 t/h > 99 %

25

boiler thermal efficiency BFG consumption in 2003

92.13 % 12.8 108Nm3/h

Combined Cycle Power Plant (CCPP) The main principle of the CCPP technology is the combination of two thermodynamic cycles in one plant, namely the Bryton cycle (gas turbine) and the Rankine cycle (steam turbine), thus achieving higher overall efficiency. The efficiency of CCPP can reach up to 43% - 46%, which is 15% higher than for a steam cycle alone with a boiler of equivalent size. The first CCPP deployed in Chinese Iron and Steel industry was introduced by Baogang Group in 1995, using technology from KHI and ABB. It was also the worlds first big installation burning 100% low calorific value BFG, with the designed fuel heating value 3,265kJ/Nm3 and unit efficiency of 46%. Detailed parameters of the gas turbine deployed in the CCPP in Baogang Group is shown in Table 8 and The CCPP process is schematically shown in Figure 13. Table 8 - parameters of the ABB gas turbine deployed in the CCPP in Baogang Group

type ABB11N2LBTU fuel gas BFG 3 3265 BFG LHV[kJ/Nm ] 4 3 36.22 BFG flow [10 m /h] air flow [104m3/h] air inlet temp.[C] flue outlet temp.[C] efficiency [%] power [MW] 72.8 372 540 46 144

A recent example of successful CCPP deployment in iron and steel industry is the Hangang Group in Hebei province that adopted the technology in late 2006. By December, 2007, the four sets of power generators of Hangang Group had totally generated 307,54 GWhel, from which 256 GWhel were transmitted to an ASU station, thus saving 150,000,000 RMB for the group. The total consumption of BFG in this period was 606,359,000m3, wich is equivalent to 102,556.39 tons of standard coal. The gas composition at Hangang CCPP project is shown in Table 9.

26

F Figure 13 Schemat tic of the CCPP at Ba aogang Gro oup

T Table 9 The T gas co omposition of Hangan ng CCPP project p

Item N2 H2 CO2 CO CH4 LHV Dust P Pressure n normal min. max. Tem mperature n normal min. max

UNIT [%] [%] [%] [%] [%] [kJ/Nm3] [mg/m3] [Pa]

BFG COG 58.98 3.9 1 60.5 16 3 24.02 7 0 25.6 3140 16590 5 < 10 107000 1800 54400 1300 204000 2500 30 0 45 20 0 45

[C]

27

The CCPP project at Hangang Group is able to reduce the emissions of CO2 by 66104t /year, and therefore Hangang group applied for a CDM project and signed purchasing agreement of CO2 with Tricorona Carbon Asset Management (CAM), which meant the total profit would reach up to 200,000,000 RMB by 2012. This project has been registered in CDM council of United Nation on October 15th 2007. The CCPP of Hangang Group uses the Mitsubishi M251 gas turbine (see Table 10). The following two tables show the BFG composition and the gas turbine parameters of the Hangang Group CCPP. Table 10 The parameters of the M251 gas turbine at Hangang CCPP

Item value Power [kW] 28500 CC Efficiency [%] 38 Heat consumption [kJ/kWh] 15825 Type axis flow kind Rotating speed [rpm] 4905 Compression ratio 12:01 Combustion chamber type dividual tube number of combustion chambers 8 Turbine inlet temp. [C] 1100 Turbine outlet temp. [C] 568 Turbine outlet flowrate [t/h] 554
In general, there are two main technologies for burning low CV gas, one technology uses a single tube gas burner, such as the products from ABB and the other technology relies on several tube gas burners, such as products from GE and Mitsubishi. The types of low CV gas turbines and their parameters are shown in Table 11.

28

Table 11 - Types and parameters of low CV gas turbines in use in China

item Type Fuel Heat Value [MJ/m3] Inlet [C] Temperature Single cycle MW CC MW Efficiency of [%] single cycle Efficiency of CC [%] Exit temp. [C] User unit MS9001FA Natural gas 33.44 1327 255.6 390.8 36.5 56.7 610 GE PG6B Synthetic gas 8.36 1140 45 65 34.6 50.5 548 Jinan Iron & Steel GroupTonghua Iron & Steel Group Angang Group > 46 47.5 45.52 540 124.8 149 Mitsubishi MW-701D MW-251 BFG or COG mixed gas 4-5.8 2.9-7.5 1150 32 67.4 M701F BFG or mixed gas 4.4 1300 300 145 34.2 488 Nuovo Pignone GT11N2 PGT10B ABB BFG 3.26 1158 13 Synthetic 7.31

Hangang Group

Japan Junjin Baogang United Group Power Plant

29

Principles of selecting suitable BF sites for GT power generation Based on techno-economic considerations, there are five main criteria for selection of BF sites suitable for GT power generation. 1 The iron and steel corporations should have good achievements and conform to all the requirements of national, regional (local) and industrial policy and standards etc. regarding scale, safety, energysaving and environment. The iron and steel corporations facilities and output must be larger than limited scope. The government will eliminate some small sized iron and steel corporations according to the specific conditions in different provinces and regions. Generally speaking the blast furnace volume should not be smaller than 300m3. The corporations must be equipped with sufficient supporting infrastructure, such as complete BFG recovery system and relevant gas cleaning measures in order to reduce the investment required for the CCPP. Economical analysis must be performed for specific projects to ensure the project economical feasibility. The requirements of BFG quality will be dictated by the gas turbine manufacturer. The impurities present in a crude gas, such as dust, H2S, COS, halide, ammonia, alkali metal and tar etc. would not only pollute the environment, but also result in corrosion and attrition of the downstream equipment, including gas turbine and waste heat boiler(heat recovery steam generator). Furthermore, the larger dust particles would increase the wear of turbine blades and the flow path under high temperature. Smaller dust particles would deposited on blades, affecting its performance and reducing the gas turbine efficiency. The H2S/COS and alkali metal cause high temperature corrosion; halide and ammonia etc. can also corrode gas turbine and down stream equipment; tar will cause deposit and plugging.

4 5

The temperature of BFG discharged from the top of a blast furnace is 150 to 300C and contains about 40 100g/Nm3 of dust. The concentration of dust in the BFG must be reduced to max. 5-10mg/Nm3 before it can be used in a gas turbine. The BFG dust concentration of CCPP project of Baoshan I&S Group is 1mg/m3, relative humidity is 100% and temperature is around 50C. An example of the prospects of BFG utilization - the Hebei province Hebei province is the biggest iron and steel producing province in China and its steel production has ranked the first for several years in succession. In 2006 and 2007, the yield of pig iron in Hebei province reached 85,860,000 tons and 104,840,000 tons, which accounted for 21.07% and 22.33% of the national total output respectively. In addition, as a result of removing of the

30

Beijing Capital I&S Group, the proportion will go up. In the year of 2006, statistic data show 44 key provincial iron & steel corporations in Hebei province, the steel production of those corporations had accounted for 82.68% of the whole province. However, the gas utilization status of key iron and steel corporations in Hebei province is not good and is far behind the national key corporations level. With the exception of the CCPP at Hangang, all power generation schemes using BFG in Hebei province adopt the boiler-steam turbine generation sets with low conversion efficiency. Table 12 shows the emissions from Iron and Steel corporations in Hebei province in 2005. Table 12 The emissions from Iron and Steel corporations in Hebei province in 2005
Items Average state key company Advanced state key company Basic state key company Average Hebei key company Advanced Hebei key company Basic Hebei key company COG vent [%] 5.76 0(11) 20.92 3.53 0 37.42 BFG vent [%] 10.46 036 33.84 12.32 1.97 47.03 Converter gas 3 [m /t] 54 92 044 24.3215 6111 0(29)

Note: the number in the bracket is the statistic quantity of corporations; the national large sized and medium sized corporations mean the 78 corporations permitted by the China ISA organization and the key corporations of Hebei province mean the 44 corporations permitted by Hebei Metallurgical Association.

There are many iron and steel companies in Hebei province that could be eliminated due to obsolete design with minimum of modern equipment. In 2006, only 12 blast furnaces exceeded the volume of 1000m3, most of them were in the range of 300-1000m3. The emphasize on improved energy-saving, emission reduction and consumption reduction measures during the eleventh five-year plan in China, present a strong incentive to improve the performance of iron and steel corporations in Hebei province. The main problem of Hebei Iron and Steel Corporations include low level of overall equipment and gas utilization, which will need to be improved. This provides favourable conditions for deployment of gas turbines in a CCPP scheme. Information on selected key Iron and Steel corporations in Hebei province, showing the production of pig iron and current use of BFG is shown in Table 13.

31

Table 13 Information on selected key Iron and Steel corporations in Hebei province, showing the production of pig iron and the use of BFB.

BFG use No. Enterprise Location Yield of pig iron [104t/a] 1 Tanggang Tangshan 2080 2 Hangang handan 570 CCPP 250MW 3 Xuanhua steel zhangjiakou 500 TRT 18 MW 4 Chengde steel Chengde 160 Shijiazhuan 200 5 Shijiazhuang steel g 6 Xingtai steel Xingtai 280 7 Guofeng Tangshan 530 TRT 8 Jianlong Tangshan 760 5000 104kWh/a 9 Jinxi Tangshan 400 28MW 10 Xinxing handan 350 11 Wenfeng handan 300 12 Zongheng handan 260 TRT 13 Puyang handan 350 4 1200 10 kWh/a 14 15 16 17 18 19 Xinjin Jingye Delong Longhair Qianjin Baoye handan shijiazhuang xingtai xingtai langfang Tangshan 100 260 210 200 200 150 TRT, 9MW

26MW BFG 4 3 210 10 m /d

3.2

Coke oven gas (COG) The generation and quality of COG At present, there are many small scale coking plants in China, especially in the North China. Due to their location far from urban areas, the access to grid and therefore the supply of electricity is limited and has a great impact on their normal operation. At present, excess COG is routinely discharged into the atmosphere, resulting in serious air pollution and wastage of energy. Therefore, it is better to use a small scale gas turbines to generate power. Part of the power power generated be the GT could be used in-house and the rest could be fed into the electric network. Using COG for power generation is in line with the recent energy saving and emission reducing policies in China. COG consists of approximately 90% combustible gases, mainly H2 and CH4,

32

which results in a high calorific value and makes it a suitable fuel gas. The lower heating value of clean gas is between 16.72 and 18.81MJ/Nm3. Main products and typical COG gas composition are shown in Tables 14~18. Table 14 - The output rate of main coke oven products (mass percent of dried coal feed base)
Item Mass percent Coke Tar Pyrolysis Crude benzol Ammonia Purified gas 24 0.81.4 0.250.35 1519 Sulphur and others 0.91.1

7578 2.42.5

Table 15 Impurities in the crude COG [gNm-3]

Composition [%] Vapor Tar gas Crude Ammonia Hydrogen Cyanide Crude light Naphthalene Others benzol sulfide pyridine 812 620 12.5 0.40.6 10 22.5

250450 80120 3045

Table 16 Typical COG composition [vol.%]

composition % Heating value 3 MJ/Nm 19 5459 2130 5.57 35 13 23 0.30.7 H2 CH4 CO N2 CO2 CnHm O2

Table 17 - The distribution of coal sulphur and nitrogen in coking products and by-products [wt.%]
Item Sulfur in coal Nitrogen in coal Coke Crude gas Tar Ammonia 6070 3040 510 4555 4050 a few 34

Table 18 The distribution of sulphur and nitrogen in the COG [vol. %]

Item H2S Organic Free nitrogen Other products Cyanide sulfur + ammonia containing nitrogen 8090 58 610

Sulfur in gas 90 1020 Nitrogen in gas -

Note: 1.Organic sulfur mainly existed in following four products CS2, COS, R-SH,C4H4S. 2. Other products containing nitrogen are such as Pyridine, chinoline etc.

Due to the high content of impurities in the crude COG, a thorough gas cleaning is necessary for further use of the gas. A typical gas cleaning system for COG is schematically shown in Figure14. The changes in the content of inpurities in the COG as it passes through the gas cleaning system shown in Figure 14 are presented in Table 19.

33

COG Exit

Cooling and compressor 4

Electrostatic precipitator

NH3 removal and recovery 5 Final cooling and de-benzene

Desulfurization and recovery

Final de-naphthalene 7 to users

Figure 14 A flowsheet of a typical COG cleaning system.

Table 19 - The changes in the content of inpurities in the COG as it passes through the gas cleaning system [gNm-3].
1 2 Gas flow stage Temperature [C] 8085 3540 Pressure/Pa 7898 25000 Benzene 3038 30 Ammonia 812 610 620 Hydrogen sulfide 515 0.71 Cyanide 12.5 1.5 Tar 5560 0.52 Naphthalene 1012 11.5 3 3540 23500 30 610 5 6 7 2225 25 30 12000 7000 5000 30 2 2 0.050.03 0.050.03 0.050.03 0.020.3 515 0.020.3 0.020.3 0.020.3 0.71 1.5 0.070.15 0.060.10 0.060.10 0.060.10 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 1 1 0.10.05 0.40.5 0.05 4 1822 9000 30 610

Note: the data in this table are for reference only, as exact values strongly depend on the type of particular gas cleaning processes used.

Current status of COG generation in China The coking plants in operation in China can be classified into four main catgories, as follows: Subsidiary plants of steel & iron corporations Subsidiary plants of steel& iron corporations and town gas source coking plants are the two main forms of coking plants in China. Most coking plants belonging to steel & iron united corporations adopt a compound (reheating) coke oven heated by a blast-furnace gas. The clean COG is transported to users for making steel, smelting iron, steel rolling etc. Almost all of the COG produced by the subsidiary coking plant of steel& iron corporations in China is being used.

34

Coking plants for town gas production The main purpose for building these large scale mechanical coking plants is to produce town gas. As the town gas source, most of these coking plants use reheating coke oven. About 48% of COG produced from oven is used for selfheating and the remaining 52% of COG is, after gas cleaning, transported to city users and industrial users. Based on an overall consideration of various factors including economy, safety and environment, natural gas will be the first choice for town gas in 21st century. With the implementation of the West-East natural gas transmission project, most cities are switching from COG as town gas to natural gas. Therefore, the COG produced by coking plants for town gas is becoming an increasingly available resource. Autonomous coking plants Around 48% of the COG produced in the self-governed (autonomous) coking plants is used for self-heating of the coke oven, and 52% is left. At present, among the self-governed coking plants focusing on producing coke in Shanxi province, for example many plants have improved from the basic ones. Few of them produce gas to supply civil or industrial users, but most of them are used for power generation. In China, over 80% of the coking corporations are self-governed coking corp., their production has reached 67% of the national total capacity. Primitive improved coking plants The guideline opinion on speedup the mix-readjustment(structure adjustment) of coking industry states that all the primitive coking plants including the reformed ones would be completely eliminated by 2009. Current status of COG utilization in China In China, around 80% of total coke output is used by steel and iron corporations. However these corporations produce only 33% of the total coke and the other 67% is produced by autonomous management coking plants. Besides a few coking plants are used as town gas sources, most of them are located in rural areas where they are far from potential COG users. At present, over 80% of the coking plants in China are medium or small enterprises. In 2006, according to the statistics data only 57 coking plants in China had reached one million ton coking capacity, and most of the small scale coking plants were with the annual coke output less than 100,000 tons. By the end of 2007, there were in total 1400 coking plants in China with the overall capacity of 300,000,000 tons (see Table 20), among them more than 80% are of medium or small scale. Calculating from the output of coke in 2004 in China, the annual output of COG is 98 billion Nm3, in which 70.1 billion Nm3 is used and 27.83 billion
35

Nm3 is wasted. At present, 20.15 billion Nm3 is available for use and 7.68 billion Nm3 is potentially available. Table 20 The output of coke in Chinese provinces between 2004 to 2007 (unit: 104 tons)

Regions Beijing Tianjin Hebei Shanxi Inner Mongolia Liaoning Jilin Heilongjiang Shanghai Jiangsu Zhejiang Anhui Fujian Jiangxi Shanxi Henan Hubei Hunan Guangdong Guangxi Hainan Chongqing Sichuan Guizhou Yunnan Shaixi Gansu Qinghai Ningxia Xinjiang Total

2007 176.99 339.09 3938.86 9722.83 1436.84 1677.7 364.73 683.06 749.89 1073.05 52.53 684.15 90.89 557.11 2737.19 1938 696.18 490.45 94.39 256.32 0 283.11 1038.52 825.04 1032.24 1125.15 249.39 83.82 114.44 382.37 32894.33

2006 182.84 326.36 3070.04 8573.92 1017.59 1559.2 286.96 560.8 735.91 943.76 52.27 484.87 91.16 493.45 2321.62 1547.92 624.38 427.59 124.53 249.58 0 266.83 923.13 850.56 871.09 1027.53 258.17 34.44 82.57 295.04 28284.03

2005 344.36 360.24 2485.34 7151.21

2004 361.97 337.14 1774.3 5873.3

923.69 764.76 1237.89 1001.81 268.01 217.43 460.98 378.19 762.16 746.58 540.28 456.34 55.2 58.45 487.94 469.13 90.94 67.33 397.5 338.86 1705.98 1035.71 1317.27 947.59 678.4 530.08 418.16 385.39 124.58 90.76 223.46 152.17 0 0 219.95 192.86 827.94 752.18 466.11 494.81 780.37 527.55 370.41 357.25 268.39 160.05 1.59 0 117.08 85.08 196.29 153.35 23281.72 18710.42

With natural gas replacing COG gas in cities, another 5.13 billion Nm3 COG is available for use (for details see table 21)

36

Table 21 The utilization status of COG in China in 2004 unit: 100 million Nm3

Type of coking plant subsidiary coking plant of steel & iron corporation Town gas supplying coking corp. Self-governed coking plant Primitive improved coking plants Total

Coke output Gas resource used Available 6540 2099 9064 3140 20843 307.4 98.7 426 147.6 979.7 307 98.7 224.5 70.8 701 201.5 201.5

Available potentially 51.3 76.8 76.8 (including 51.3)

In recent years, coking plants in Shandong, Shanxi, Ningxia, Hebei, Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, Yunnan and Jiangsu have gradually started to use combustion engines for power generation. Based on the lower heating value of COG (16.72MJ/Nm3), 1m3 COG is able to generate 1.3kWhel.

An example of the prospects of COG utilization - Hebei province

Hebei province is the second largest coke producing and consuming province in China, only next to Shanxi province. The total coke output of 18 corporations conforming to the Permitting Condition of Coking Industry is around 17,806,000 tons, which is 55.64% of the whole province capacity. The Eleventh Five Year Coking Industry Mix Readjustment Plan of Hebei Province (shorted as Plan below) point out that the overall aim of the coking industrial readjustment of Hebei province is to rationally control the increase rate of the coke capacity, and make balance between market demands and supply in 2010, and eliminate small sized coking ovens with carbonization chamber height less than 4.3m (not included 3.2m rammed coking oven) by the end of 2007. More than 80% of the overall coke produced by Hebei province conforms to the permitting condition of coking industry until 2009. Chemical products recovery equipment and pollution treatment facilities in coking plants must be installed and put into operation until the end of 2007; to ensure that the pollutants emissions meet a set of standards for all of the overall coking plants in Hebei province until the end of 2008. Further more, to form two large scaled coke producing basesHandan and Tangshan and cultivate a group of competitive corporations or group co. on coking and coal chemical processing by the end of 2008. There are 72 coking plants in Hebei province, of which 17 are integrated steel & iron works and 55 are self-governed coking plants. During the first six months of 2006, 9.82 million tons of coke was produced by these coking

37

plants, which accounted 69.4% of the whole province total coke output. The integrated steel & iron works produced 4.85 million tons or 34.41% of the total productivity; 9.28 million tons were produced by self-governed coking plants, which was accounting for 65.59% of the total output. The total output of coke in Hebei province in 2007 was 39,388,600 tons. Supposed 65% of them were produced by self-governed coking plants, and calculated on the basis of producing each ton of coke along with 440Nm3 of gas and 52% COG used for oven heating, thus more than 5.4 billion Nm3 COG were produced by self-governed coking plants in Hebei province in 2007. Therefore, self-governed coking plants and town gas supplying coking plants are of great potential for power generation. Some detailed information on current coking plants in Hebei province is presented in Tables 22 and 23. Table 22 - The coking corporations conforming to the Permission of Coking Industry in Hebei province
No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Name Xuanhua Iron& Steel Group Limited Liability Co. Chengde Steel& Iron Co., Ltd, Coking Plant Hebei Jiantao Coking Co., Ltd Xingtai Risun Coking Co., Ltd Tangshan Jianlong Jianzhou Steel&Iron Co., Ltd, Coking Plant Handan Steel & Iron Group Limited Liability Co. Tangshan Dafeng Coking Co., Ltd Tangshan Steel Integrated Coking Liability Co., Ltd Tangshan Ganglu Coking Co., Ltd Hebei Xingyue Coking Co, Ltd Hebei Risun Group Hebei Risun Coking Co., Ltd Qianan Zhonghua coking CO., Ltd Hebei Huiyuan Coking Group Co., Ltd Shijiazhuang Coking Group Liability Co., Ltd Xiangtai Steel&Iron Liability Co., Ltd Hebei Huafeng coking and electric power Co., Ltd Power generation 300,000,000 kWh/a supply gas 200,000,000Nm3/a supply gas600,000,000Nm3/a COG output of 52,800 Nm3/h supply gas145,000,000Nm3/a supply gas 150,000,000 Nm3/a Usage of COG

18 Hebei jingpeng coking and shaft furnace industry CO., Ltd 19 Tangshan Jiahua Coal Chemical Co., Ltd 20 Tangshan Rongyi Coking Co., Ltd 21 Fengfeng Diggings Pengnan coking Co., Ltd 22 Shexian Tianli coking Liability Co., Ltd
38

supply gas 365,000,000 Nm3/a

Table 23 Detailed information on large-scale coking corporations in Hebei province

No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Height of coking number of Design capacity chamber [m] holes [ 10 4 t ] 2*JN60-82 4.3 Xuanhua Iron& Steel Group Liability Co., Ltd 170 150 2*JN43-804 6 Chengde Steel& Iron Co., Ltd JN4380 4.3 180 60 Xingtai Steel&Iron Liability Co., Ltd JN43804 4.3 65 86 Hebei Jiantao Coking Co., Ltd TJL4350D 4.3 176 95.6 Xingtai Risun Coking Co., Ltd JNDK4399D 4.3 168 62 Tangshan Jianlong Jianzhou Steel&Iron Co., Ltd TJL4350F 4.3 126 80 Tangshan Ganglu Coking Co., Ltd TJL80 4.3 152 100 JN4380 4.3 Handan Steel & Iron Group Liability Co., Ltd JN606 258 204 6 58II Tangshan Dafeng Coking Co., Ltd TJL4530D 4.3 100 65 THJ4350 4.3 120 60 Tangshan Zhengnan Coking Plant Co., Ltd Tangshan Steel Integrated Coking Liability Co., Ltd 5.5 130 130 Tangshan Steel & Iron Group Liability Co., Ltd 5.5 144 144 TAngshan Xinxing Coking Co., Ltd JN55 5.5 72 75 Chengde Lifei Coking Co., Ltd TJL4350 4.3 168 60 Hebei Xinyue Coking Co., Ltd JN43804 4.3 220 70 Tangshan Rongyi Coking Co., Ltd SK3240 3.2 160 56.3 Hebei Risun coking gruoup JNDK4399D 4.3 180 120 Hebei Risun Coking Co., Ltd JNDK4399D 4.3 180 120 Tangshan Desheng Coal Chemistry Co., Ltd JN558II 4.3 130 90 Tangshan Baoliyuan Coking Co., Ltd SXD9943 4.3 128 60 Tangshan Chunxing Coking Co., Ltd SK3240 3.2 160 60 Haocheng Jinxin Coking Co., Ltd JN4383 4.5 86 60 Handan Lushun Coking Co., Ltd JN4380 4.3 172 60 Qianan zhonghua coking CO Ltd JN6082 6 220 109 Hebei Yongshun Industry Group Co., Ltd SK4340II 4.3 100 80 Hebei Huyuan Coking Group Co., Ltd SK4330 4.3 120 90 Tangshan Luanhong Coking Plant JNDK4390D 4.3 92 70 Tangshan Huifeng Coking Plant JNDK4390D 4.3 184 120 Jianan Hongao Industry and Trade Co., Ltd JN4380 4.3 120 60 Qianan Lianwang Chemical Plant SG4399 4.3 100 70 Tangshan Lanhai Industrial Co., Ltd 58II 4.3 60 60 Corp. Name Oven type

Conclusions The COG produced by subsidiaries of steel & iron corporations has been predominantly used in-house as a fuel gas within the iron production process and as such is not available for use in power generation schemes. The primitive improved coking plants still in operation are facing a gradual phaseout and will be completely abolished in near future. Therefore, only the selfgoverned coking plants focused on production of coke and those focused on production of COG for town gas are of great potential. However, these plants still need to conform to the principles for selection of suitable sites, as identified in the above section.

39

4. GAS TURBINE OPERABILITY ON COAL-DERIVED GASES

The operation of gas turbines on coal-derived gases considered in this report (i.e., UCG, COG and BFG) is not a straightforward issue and requires special attention. Detailed analysis of problems related to the operation of gas turbines and their solutions was conducted and the results are summarised in this report. Due to confidentiality issues, the work on GT operability is not included in this public domain report. However, the main conclusions are summarised below: There are existing gas turbines for low CV and H2-content fuels. The major obstacle in utilisation of COG and some UCG product gases is their high concentration of H2. This issue however, can be resolved by dilution or blending with other gases, at the cost of additional equipment and system complication. It is technically viable to further develop the GT industry for this market. BFG and COG is important part of fuel flexibility for gas turbines and technology in hydrogen combustion helps to improve their usage. Commercially it is viable to broaden the GT applications to all coalderived gases because they are abundant and part of the solution to the fuel shortage.

5. ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF UCG, COG AND BFG UTILSATION

5.1 Environmental issues in UCG operation UCG potentially offers benefits to the environment over conventional coal mining in the form of: Lower surface environmental impact Reduced mine spoil and disposal A new energy source for declining mining areas in need of economic stimulation Reduction in emissions from coal burning Reduced greenhouse gas emissions from coal mining.

Despite these advantages, there remain several issues related to the

40

operation of UCG that need to be adequately addressed in order to avoid potential environmental damage. The main issues are as follows: Pollution of ground water resources by products of gasification leaking from the UCG operation. Ground subsidence Pollution of surface water by pollutants separated from the product gas Gaseous emissions from UCG product gas utilisation

UCG is inherently safer than coal mining where remote operational methods are employed and could be less hazardous than coal mining in China where underground control methods are envisaged provided suitable designs and management systems are employed.

5.2

Environmental issues in BFG and COG utilisation The utilisation of BFG and COG for power generation offers a number of benefits as compared to the current state, where large quantities of potential fuel gas are being released to the atmosphere or flared without harnessing its energy. These benefits are in the form of: Reduced greenhouse gas emissions from industrial processes, as compared to current practice of venting or flaring the gas. Reduced air pollution from industrial sources. Improved process efficiency, as the energy contained in the waste gasses is captured and utilised for on-site power generation.

5.3

Environmental standards relevant to UCG, BFG and COG power generation schemes There are a number of regulatory requirements that any future power generation scheme, utilising UCG, BFG or COG, would have to comply with. This work attempted to identify all the relevant Chinese environmental standards and gather them in one place, as a source of reference. The translated Chinese standards are attached to this report in Appendix A.

41

6. REVIEW OF FUNDING AND INSTITUTIONAL OPPORTUNITIES AND BARRIERS

There is a growing support for deployment of advanced CHP scenarios throughout China. The projected capacity growth in the next decades is from 70GW in 2005 to 200GW in 2015 and up to 500GW in 2030. The main areas of potential growth are in very large CHP units for district heating and industrial CHPs. This development is supported by both the CECIC (China Energy Conservation Investment Corporation) and the IFC (World Bank). Funding is more difficult for small-scale end-user applications. The deployment of CHPs is supported by a large number of policies and regulations that aim at its promotion. A few examples are listed below: Regulations for Encouraging Development of Small-Cogeneration Plants and Restricting Construction of Small Condensing Power Plants (1989) Regulations for Cogeneration Development ( 1998) Regulations for Cogeneration Development ( 2000) Temporary Regulation for Cogeneration and Power Generation of Integrated Utilization of Coal Tailings (2007 Preliminary Dispatch Rule for Power Generation of Energy Conservation (2007) Air Pollution Prevention Law (2000) The Cleaner Production Law( 2002) The Eleventh Five-Year Plan( 2006 to 2010) The China Renewable Energy Law ( 2006) Energy Development in the Eleventh Five-Year Guidance (2007) Urban Heat Tariff Interim Measures (2007) Temporary Measures for Dispatching Electricity Generated by Energy Conservation Projects (2007) Natural Gas Utilization Policy (2007)

Despite all these incentives for CHP deployment, certain improvements are still possible and necessary to ensure widespread application of the technology. Some suggestions for the way forward would be: Streamline rules for financial incentives and CDM approval for CHP Ensure that smaller industrial and commercial CHP projects have equal access to financing Create more consistent and predictable access to power and heat markets,

42

7. CONCLUSIONS
The main focus of this report was to assess the utilization of low calorific coalderived gases in gas turbines and related issues. The report has presented a large amount of data on the production and utilisation of low calorific gases in China and the potential for their future utilisation in advanced applications such as gas turbines. The data on production and utilisation of UCG product gas, COG and BFG covered the whole China, with further details provided for the example of Hebei province. 7.1 UCG It has been identified that major difficulties related to the use of gases from UCG in gas turbines are: the variability of the gas composition, low CV and often high H2 content. The variability of gas composition can be reduced by improved control of the gasification process. The researchers in China appear to agree that oxygen and steam injection is the way forward to obtaining a higher CV gas and achieving stable gasification conditions. Experimental results have shown that there exists an optimum O2 concentration in terms of gasification efficiency (approx. 40vol.% O2). However, the financial and technical implications and benefits of these advanced control techniques need further examination. One implication is the increased concentration of H2 in the product gas from oxygen/steam-blown UCG, which makes it more difficult to use in current gas turbines, due to problems with flash back. Use of product gas with high H2 concentration requires modifications to the turbine that would allow injection of steam and would result in additional system complexity. Therefore, the measures taken in order to improve the product gas CV do not necessarily benefit the utilisation of this gas for power generation by gas turbines. 7.2 BFG In this work, it has been identified that there are large resources of available BFG that has been traditionally vented to atmosphere. According to the requirements set for the 11th five year plan, Hebei province, the largest producer of pig iron in China, has to reduce its BFG release rate from 12.32% (in 2005) to 2.77% (in 2010). This means, reclaiming over 14 billion m3 of BFG in five years. Hence, there is a large potential for deployment of gas turbines utilising BFG. The main obstacle in utilising BFG as a fuel gas for gas turbines is its low calorific value which would require significant redesign of conventional gas turbines designed to burn natural gas. However, a number of manufacturers have already developed gas turbines specifically for this purpose (e.g., Alstom). Another way around this problem is to blend the BFG with other gases, e.g. COG and thus increase its calorific value. This strategy has been used for example by MHI for their LCV machines. 7.3 COG There are four main types of coking plants in operation in China: the autonomous coking plants, coking plants for town gas production, subsidiary
43

plants of Iron & Steel corporations and primitive improved plants. However, only the first two types are suitable for use in power generation schemes. Both the autonomous and the town gas producing plants consume part (48%) of the COG internally for heating of the coke ovens, the remaining 52% is then available for further utilisation. At present only part of the remaining gas is being utilised and large portion is being wasted. From the total Chinese production of COG of 98 billion Nm3 in 2004, 27.83 billion Nm3 was wasted. This presents a very large potential resource of fuel gas for gas turbine applications. The major issue with utilization of COG in gas turbines is its high concentration of H2 that poses a significant challenge to the combustion technology, due to the high flame speed and high temperatures associated with H2 combustion. At present, there are no commercial gas turbines operating on pure COG, but two possible approaches exist. One is the injection of steam that slows and cools the flame and the second approach is to blend the COG with other gases, such as the BFG, thus making it suitable for existing low or medium CV gas turbines. In conclusion, it has been shown that a large number of coal-derived gas sources, i.e. either waste gases from industrial processes or UCG that takes advantage of otherwise unavailable resources, are potentially available for power generation schemes using gas turbines (e.g. CHP plants). In addition, the current policy framework supports the deployment of CHP plants and a large capacity for growth is projected for the near future. There are financial opportunities available for large CHP installations from both Chinese and international sources, although it is more difficult to secure funding for smaller scale end-user applications.

44

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The generous assistance of many companies, organisations and individuals are gratefully acknowledged including: Alstom Power, CCRI, CUMT, Siemens Industrial Gas Turbines and Xinwen Mining Group.

45

APPENDIX A

Chinese environmental standards

46

NATIONAL STANDARD OF PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD - GB 3095-1996 (PART)
Effective from 1st October 1996 4 The classification and standard gradation of ambient air quality 4.1 Classification of ambient air quality standard functional area The first class district includes natural protection area, scenery or historical relics area and other area where need special protection; The second class district includes the area, decided by the city and town plan, where used as residence area, commercial/communication/residence blend area, culture/education area, normal industrial area and rural area. The third district is special industrial area. 4.2 Gradation of ambient air quality standard The ambient air qualities are classified to three grades: First class district execute the first grade; Second class district execute the second grade; Third class district execute the third grade. 5 Concentration limited value Table 1 - Pollutant concentration limits.
Concentration limited value First grade 0.02 0.05 0.15 0.08 0.12 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.04 0.08 0.12 4 10 0.16 Second grade 0.06 0.15 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.15 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.08 0.12 0.24 4 10 0.2 Third grade 0.1 0.25 0.7 0.3 0.5 0.15 0.25 0.1 0.15 0.3 0.08 0.12 0.24 6 20 0.2 mg/m3 (Normal condition)

Pollutants

Sampling time Annual average

Unit

SO2

Daily mean Hourly average Annual average Daily mean Annual average Daily mean Annual average Daily mean Hourly average Annual average

TSP PM10

NOx

NO2

Daily mean Hourly average Daily mean Hourly average Hourly average

CO O3

47

Table 1 (continued)
Pollutants Pb B[a]P Sampling time Mean season Annual average Daily mean Daily mean Fluoride F Hourly average Monthly mean Mean season of plant growth 2) 1) Appropriate for urban area Appropriate for the area where dominated by livestock area or semi-agriculture /semi livestock area which prior to livestock, silkworm mulberry area 3) Appropriate for agriculture and forestry area. 1.82) 1.22) Concentration limited value First grade Second grade 1.5 1 0.01 71) 201) 3.03) 2.03) g/(dm2d) Third grade Unit

g/m3
(Normal condition)

48

NATIONAL STANDARD OF PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA INTEGRATED EMISSION STANDARD OF AIR POLLUTANTS GB16297-1996
State Environment Protection Administration of China Effective from 1st January 1997 Preface Based on thePrevention law of air pollution of Peoples Republic of China, this standard is made. The environment air quality is graded to different types, based on the local air type of the pollution source; relevant grade of exhausting rate is carried out, that is: The pollution source located in the second air type executes the second grade rate. The pollution source located in the third air type executes the third grade rate. For coal chemical industry second-grade is appropriate. Table 2 Air pollutants emission limited value for new pollution sources
Permitted maximum rate of emission Monitor concentration limit value of in organization exhaust gas, kg/h Secondgrade 2.6 4.3 15 25 39 55 77 110 130 170 Concentration ( mg/m3) 3.5 6.6 22 38 58 83 120 160 200 270

No.

Pollutants

SO2

NOx

Height of exhaust (m) 960 15 20 (Production of 30 S/SO2/H2SO4 and other 40 50 sulfur compound) 60 70 80 90 550 100 (Use of S/SO2/H2SO4 and other sulfur compound ) 1400 15 20 Production of 30 HNO3/nitrogen fertilizer 40 50 /powder and explosive 60 70 80 90 240 100 (Use of HNO3 and other)

Permitted maximum concentration of emission gas (mg/m3)

Third-grade

Monitor site

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.4

0.77 1.3 4.4 7.5 12 16 23 31 40 52

1.2 2 6.6 11 18 25 35 47 61 78

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.12

49

Table 2 (continued)
Permitted maximum rate of emission Monitor concentration limit gas, kg/h value of in organization exhaust Secondgrade 0.51 0.85 3.4 5.8 1.9 3.1 12 21 3.5 5.9 23 39 60 85 0.26 0.43 1.4 2.6 3.8 5.4 7.7 10 0.008 0.013 0.043 0.076 0.12 0.16 1.5 2.6 8.8 15 23 33 46 63 0.1 0.17 0.59 1 1.5 2.2 3.1 4.2 Third-grade 0.74 1.3 5 8.5 2.6 4.5 18 31 5 8.5 34 59 94 130 0.39 0.65 2.2 3.8 5.9 8.3 12 16 0.012 0.02 0.066 0.12 0.18 0.25 2.4 3.9 13 23 35 50 70 95 0.15 0.26 0.88 1.5 2.3 3.3 4.7 6.3 Monitor site Site with the maximum concentration out the border Site with the maximum concentration out the border Site with the maximum concentration out the border Concentration ( mg/m3) Invisible by naked eye

No.

Height of exhaust (m) 18 15 Particulate matter Black carbon dust/dye 20 (dust) dust 30 40 2 15 60 20 glass wool dust/silica 30 dust/cinder wool dust 3 40 120 Other 15 20 30 40 50 60 15 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 15 20 30 40 50 60 15 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 15 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Pollutants

Permitted maximum concentration of emission gas (mg/m3)

HF

100

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.2

Mist of chromic acid

0.07

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.006

430 Powder and explosive plant 6 Sulfuric acid mist

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

1.2

45 other 90 General calcium industry

Fluoride

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

20 g/m

9 Other

Table 2 (continued) 50

No.

Pollutants

Permitted maximum concentration of emission gas (mg/m3)

Cl2

65

Pb and its compounds

0.7

10

Hg and its compound

0.012

11

Cadmium and its compound

0.85

12

Beryllium and its compound

0.012

Permitted maximum rate of emission Height of Secondexhaust Third-grade grade (m) 25 0.52 0.78 30 0.87 1.3 40 2.9 4.4 50 5 7.6 60 7.7 12 70 11 17 80 15 23 15 0.004 0.006 20 0.006 0.009 30 0.027 0.041 40 0.047 0.071 50 0.072 0.11 60 0.1 0.15 70 0.15 0.22 80 0.2 0.3 90 0.26 0.4 100 0.33 0.51 15 1.5*103 2.4*103 20 2.6*103 3.9*103 30 13*103 7.8*103 3 40 23*103 15*10 3 3 50 35*10 23*10 3 3 60 50*10 33*10 15 0.05 0.08 20 0.09 0.13 30 0.29 0.44 40 0.5 0.77 50 0.77 1.2 60 1.1 1.7 70 1.5 2.3 80 2.1 3.2 3 3 15 1.1*10 1.7*10 3 3 20 2.8*10 1.8*10 3 3 30 9.4*10 6.2*10 3 3 40 16*10 11*10 3 50 25*103 16*10 60 70 80 15 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 23*103 33*103 44*10 0.15 0.26 0.88 1.5 2.3 3.3 4.6 6.3
3

Monitor concentration limit Monitor site Concentration ( mg/m ) Site with the maximum concentration out the border
3

0.4

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.006

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.0012

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.04

35*103 50*103 67*103 0.24 0.34 1.3 2.3 3.5 5 7 10

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.0008

13

Nickel and its compound

4.3

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.04

51

Table 2 (continued)
Permitted maximum concentration of 3 emission gas (mg/m ) Permitted maximum rate of emission Monitor concentration limit gas, kg/h value of inorganization exhaust Height of exhaust (m) 15 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 15 20 30 40 15 20 30 40 15 20 30 40 15 20 30 40 50 60 15 20 30 40 50 60 15 20 30 40 50 60 15 20 30 40 50 60 Secondgrade 0.31 0.52 1.8 3 4.6 6.6 9.3 13 0.5 0.9 2.9 5.6 3.1 5.2 18 30 1 1.7 5.9 10 0.1 0.17 0.58 1 1.5 2.2 0.26 0.43 1.4 2.6 3.8 5.4 0.05 0.09 0.29 0.5 0.77 1.1 0.77 1.3 4.4 7.5 12 16 Third-grade 0.47 0.79 2.7 4.6 7 10 14 19 0.8 1.3 4.4 7.6 4.7 7.9 27 46 1.5 2.6 8.8 15 0.15 0.26 0.88 1.5 2.3 3.3 0.39 0.65 2.2 3.8 5.9 8.3 0.08 0.13 0.44 0.77 1.2 1.6 1.2 2 6.6 11 18 25 Monitor site Concentration ( mg/m )
3

No.

Pollutants

14

Tin and its compound

8.5

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.24

15

Benzene

12

16

Toluene

40

17

Xylene

70

Site with the maximum concentration out the border Site with the maximum concentration out the border Site with the maximum concentration out the border Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.4

2.4

1.2

18

Phenols

100

0.08

19

Formaldehyde

25

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.2

20

Acetaldehyde

125

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.04

21

Acrylonitrile

22

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.6

52

Table 2 (continued)
Permitted maximum concentration of emission gas (mg/m3) Permitted maximum rate of emission Monitor concentration limit gas, kg/h value of inorganization exhaust Height of exhaust (m) 15 20 30 40 50 60 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 15 20 30 40 50 60 15 20 30 40 50 60 15 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 15 20 30 40 50 60 15 20 30 40 50 60 Secondgrade 0.52 0.87 2.9 5 7.7 11 0.15 0.26 0.88 1.5 2.3 3.3 4.6 5.1 8.6 29 50 77 100 0.52 0.87 2.9 5 7.7 11 0.52 0.87 2.5 4.3 6.6 9.3 13 18 23 29 0.05 0.09 0.29 0.5 0.77 1.1 0.77 1.3 4.4 7.5 12 16 Thirdgrade 0.78 1.3 4.4 7.6 12 17 0.24 0.39 1.3 2.3 3.5 5 7 7.8 13 44 70 120 170 0.78 1.3 4.4 7.6 12 17 0.78 1.3 3.8 6.5 9.9 14 20 27 35 44 0.08 0.13 0.44 0.77 1.2 1.7 1.2 2 6.6 11 18 25 Monitor site Concentration ( mg/m3) Site with the maximum concentration out the border

No.

Pollutants

22

Acrolein

16

0.4

23

Hydrochloride

4)

1.9

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.024

24

Methanol

190

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

12

25

Aniline sorts

20

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.4

26

Chlorobenzene sorbents

60

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.4

27

Nitrobenzene sorts

16

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.04

28

Vinyl chloride

36

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.6

53

Table 2 (continued)
Permitted maximum concentration of emission gas (mg/m3) Permitted maximum rate of emission Monitor concentration limit gas, kg/h value of inorganization exhaust Height of exhaust (m) 15 0.30*103 (Production and processing of asphalt and carbon product) 20 30 40 50 60 25 30 40 50 15 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Secondgrade Thirdgrade Monitor site Concentration ( mg/m3)

No.

Pollutants

0.050*103 0.080*103 0.085*103 0.13*103 0.29*103 0.43*103 0.50*10 0.77*10

3 3

29

B[a]P

0.76*10

1.2*103

Site with the maximum concentration out the border

0.008 g/m3

30

Phosgene 5)

140 (Blown asphalt) 31 Asphalt fume 40 (Smelting /dipcoating) 75 (Building agitating)

3

1.1*103 0.1 0.17 0.59 1 0.18 0.3 1.3 2.3 3.6 5.6 7.4 10

1.7*103 Site with the 0.15 maximum 0.26 0.08 concentration 0.88 out the border 1.5 0.27 0.45 2 3.5 Apparent in organization exhaust 5.4 is forbidden for production 7.5 facilities 11 15

32

Asbestos dust

1root (fibre)/cm or 10mg/m3

15 20 30 40 50 15 20 30 40

0.55 0.93 3.6 6.2 9.4 10 17 53 100

0.83 1.4 5.4 9.3 14 16 27 83 150

Apparent in organization exhaust is forbidden for production facilities Site with the maximum concentration out the border

120 Non-methane (Use of solvent gasoline 33 or other mixed total hydrocarbon hydrocarbon products)

1) Generally the Site with the maximum concentration out of the border is located at the scope within 10m of the downwinddirection of the inorganization exhaust source, if the maximum ground concentration of the inorganization exhaust is estimated go bey 2) All means the dust that contains free SiO2 exceed 10%. 3) The height of exhaust for Cl2 cant lower than 25m. 4) The height of exhaust for Hydrocyanic cant lower than 25m. 5) The height of exhaust for phosgene cant lower than 25m.

54

NATIONAL STANDARD OF PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA EMISSION STANDARDS FOR ODOUR POLLUTANTS - GB 14554-93 (PART)
Effective from 15th January 1994 4.2 Standard value 4.2.1 Boundary standard value of odour pollutants is the limited value for in organisation emission source, see as following table 1. Table 1 Boundary standard value of odour pollutants
No.

Controlling item Ammonia Trimethyl amine H2S Methanthiol (Methyl sulfhydryl) Dimethyl sulfide Dimethyl disulfide CS2

unit mg/m
3 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Second grade Third grade First grade New/extension Existing New/extension Existing /rebuilding project /rebuilding project 1 1.5 2 4 5 0.05 0.03 0.004 0.03 0.03 2 3 10 0.08 0.06 0.007 0.07 0.06 3 5 20 0.15 0.1 0.01 0.15 0.13 5 7 30 0.45 0.32 0.02 0.55 0.42 8 14 60 0.8 0.6 0.035 1.1 0.71 10 19 70

mg/m

mg/m3 mg/m3 mg/m3 mg/m mg/m

3 3 3

Styrene mg/m odor concentration Dimensionless

For coal chemical industry the second grade is appropriate. 4.2.2 Emission standards value for odour pollutants, see in table 2. Table 2 Emission standards value for odour pollutants No. Controlling item Height of exhaust, m 15 20 25 30 35 40 60 80 100 120 15 20 25 30 35 40
55

H2S

Methanol sulfide

Emission rate, Kg/h 0.33 0.58 0.90 1.3 1.8 2.3 5.2 9.3 14 21 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.17 0.24 0.31

60 15 20 25 Methyl sulfide 30 35 40 60 15 20 25 Dimethyl disulfide 30 35 40 60 15 20 25 30 35 CS2 40 60 80 100 120 15 20 25 Ammonia 30 35 40 60 15 20 25 30 Trimethyl 35 amine 40 60 80 100 120 15 20 25 Styrene 30 35 40 60 Odour concentration Height of exhaust,
56

0.69 0.33 0.58 0.90 1.3 1.8 2.3 5.2 0.43 0.77 1.2 1.7 2.4 3.1 7.0 1.5 2.7 4.2 6.1 8.3 11 24 43 68 97 4.9 8.7 14 20 27 35 75 0.54 0.97 1.5 2.2 3.0 3.9 8.7 15 24 35 6.5 12 18 26 35 46 104 Standard value

m 15 20 25 30 35 40 60

(Dimensionless) 2 000 6 000 15 000 20 000 40 000 60 000

5 Execution of the standard 5.1 Odour pollutants discharged (including leakage and in organization emission) by pollution discharging unit, the once maximum monitoring value (including odour concentration) of monitoring site (without other interfere factor) at the boundary of the emission unit, is specified not to beyond the value in table 1. 5.2 The emission rate and odour concentration, which is discharged by pollution discharging unit through exhaust of flue gas/gas (with the height higher than 15m), is not allowed to beyond the value in table 2. 5.3 The emission rate and odour concentration, which is discharged and volatilized by pollution discharging plant through discharging wastewater is not allowed to beyond the value in table 1.

57

NATIONAL STANDARD OF PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA EMISSION STANDARD OF AIR POLLUTANTS FOR THERMAL POWER PLANTS - GB 13223-2003 (PART)
Effective from 1st January 2004 New building/extension and reconstruction thermal power plant projects (including the new building/extension and reconstruction thermal power plant projects whose environmental impact assessments have been examined and approved in the second time period(1997.1-2004.1), but still not start to construction five years later after approved and before the effective of this standard), of which the environmental impact assessment report has been examined and approved after January 1st 2004, execute the emission control requirements of the third time period. 4.2 Limiting value of pollutants emission 4.2.1 Limiting value of permitted maximum concentration of dust in flue gas and gas blackness Table 1 - Permitted maximum concentration of dust in flue gas and flue gas blackness for thermal power boiler
Permitted maximum concentration of dust in flue gas/(mg/m3 ) The third time period January 1st 2004 50 (3 100 200 (4 50 Flue gas blackness Ringelmen blackness ,grade January 1st 2004 1

Time period Effective time Coal-fired boiler Oil burning boiler

Note: (3 Desulphurisation unit of which the environmental impact assessment report has approved, and the boilers of coal mine mouth power plants which located at the two no-control area in the western area and use the extra low sulfur coal (St,ar of coal into boiler is less than 0.5%) as fuel , before the executive of this standard ,execute this limited value . (4 Resource complex utilization power plants that using coal gangue etc. as the main fuel (the as received basis calorific value of fuel into boiler is no more than 12550kJ/kg ) execute this limited value.

4.2.2 Limiting value of permitted maximum concentration of sulfur dioxide Table 2 - Permitted maximum concentration of sulfur dioxide for thermal power boiler
Time period Effective time unit Coal fired boiler and oil burning boiler The third time period January 1 2004 [ g/m ] 400 (3 800 1200
(4 3 st

Note: (3 Resource complex utilization plants that using coal refuse etc. as the main fuel (the as received basis calorific value of fuel into boiler is no more than 12550kJ/kg ) execute this limited value. 58

(4 The boilers of coal mine mouth power plants which located at the two no-control area in the western region and use the extra low sulfur coal (St,ar of coal into boiler is less than 0.5%) as fuel ,execute this limited value .

4.2.3 Limiting value of permitted maximum concentration of NOx The third time period thermal power boilers need to reserve place for NOx removal unit from flue gas. Table3 Permitted maximum concentration of NOx for thermal power boiler and gas turbine (Unit: mg/m3)
Time period Effective time Vdaf<10% Coal-fired boiler 10%Vdaf20% Vdaf>20% Oil burning boiler oil Gas turbine unit gas The third time period January 1st 2004 1100 650 450 200 150 80

For coal chemical industry the third time period is appropriate. 4.3 Permitted maximum emission rate of sulfur dioxide for power plants 4.3.1 The calculation of permitted maximum emission rate of sulfur dioxide New building/ reconstruction and extension thermal power plant project, which belong to the third time period, not only to meet the limited concentration in the 4.2 section, but also to meet the sulfur dioxide limited value of permitted maximum emission rate of thermal power plant. The emission rate can calculate as following (1) - (3) equations: 2 Q=P U H g 103.(1)

U=
Hg=

1 N Ui .(2) N i =1

1 N 2 H ei .(3) N i =1 Of which: Q: Permitted maximum emission rate of plant sulfur dioxide, kg/h; P: Emission controlling coefficient U : Average value of circumstance air speed at each exit of the chimney Hg: The equivalent monophyletic height of plant chimney, m; Hei: Effective height of the i chimney, m; Ui: Circumstance air speed at the exit of the i chimney, m/s; see Appendix I
For the calculation of effective height of the chimney the following equation applies: He=Hs +H ...(3) Of which: He: Effective height of the chimney, m; Hs: Geometric height of the chimney, m; when it beyond 240m, still seen as 240m in the calculation H: The rising height of the flue gas, m, see in appendix I.

59

4.3.2 The determination of P Table4 The limited value of the permitted maximum emission controlling coefficient P
Region Shandong province 2.6 Built area and planning area of major city(1 6.7 Built area and planning area of general city(2 Outside the city built area and planning area 11.5 Note: (1 Major city is the air pollutant prevention major city approved by the State Council; (2 General city is the county level and above county level city.

4.3.3 The height of the chimney The local authorities of environmental protection can stipulate the minimum limited value of the chimney height depends on the concrete conditions. Appendix I I.1 The calculation of the rising height of the flue gas: For the calculation of the rising height of the flue gas the following equations (A1)(A5) apply. When QH21000kJ/s, and T35k: 3 2/3 City/hills: H=1.303 Q1/ /Us(A1) H Hs
3 2/3 Plain/rural area: H=1.427 Q1/ /Us(A2) H Hs When 2100QH21000kJ/s, and T35k: 5 2/5 City/hills: H=0.292 Q 3/ /Us(A3) H Hs 5 2/5 Plain/rural area: H=0.332 Q 3/ /Us(A4) H Hs When QH<2100 kJ/s, or T<35k: H=2(1.5Vsd+0.010QH)/Us(A5) Of which: T: The difference of flue gas temperature at the exit of the chimney and the environmental temperature, k, the calculation method sees in A.1.1; QH: Rate of flue gas heat release, kJ/s, and the calculation method sees in A.1.2; Us: Circumstance air speed at the exit of the chimney, m/s; and the calculation method sees in A.1.3; Vs: The real flue gas speed at the exit of the chimney, m/s; d: The inner diameter of the exit of the chimney, m. The meaning of other signs is the same as in section 4.3.1. I.1.1 The difference of flue gas temperature at the exit of the chimney and the environmental temperature T T Ts - Ta(A6) Of which: Ts: The temperature of flue gas at the exit of the chimney, k, it can be calculated using the entrance temperature following the lapse rate of 5 per 100m Ta: The average environment temperature, k, it can be substituted by the average surface air temperature in the recent 5 years which observed by

60

local weather observatory/station. I.1.2 The calculation of the rate of flue gas heat release QH QH=CpVoT(A7) Of which: Cp: 1.38kJ/Nm3k; Vo: The emission rate of flue gas. When one chimney joins several boilers ,the Vo of this chimney is the sum of this item of every joint boiler. I.1.3 The calculation of the circumstance air speed at the exit of the chimney 0.15 H U s = U 10 s (A8) 10 Of which: Us: The calculated air speed of the rising height of the flue gas, m/s, when U 10 <2.0m/s, U 10 =2.0m/s. U 10 : The average air speed at the height of 10m from surface, using the average air speed at the height of 10m from surface in the recent 5 years observed by local weather observatory/station, when U 10 <1.3m/s, U 10 =1.3m/s. Hs : Geometric height of the chimney, m.

National Standard of Peoples Republic of China Standards for Drinking Water Quality - GB 5749 - 2005 The quality of drinking water should meet the demand of tables 1,2 and 3
61

Table 1 Normal test item and restricted value of water quality

Index 1 Microorganism index Total of coli form group (MPN/100mL CFU/100mL) Heat-resisted coli form group (MPN/100mL CFU/100mL) Escherichia coli form (MPN/100mL CFU/100mL) Colony form units (CFU/mL) 2 Toxicology index Arsenic (mg/L) Cadmium (mg/L) Chrome (Cr+6 mg/L) Lead (mg/L) Mercury (mg/L) Selenium (mg/L) Cyanide (mg/L) Fluoride (mg/L) Nitrate (mg/L) Chloroform(mg/L) Carbon tetrachloride(mg/L) Bromate (when ozone used mg/L) Formaldehyde (when ozone used mg/L) Chlorite (disinfect with chlorine dioxide mg/L) Chlorate (disinfect with composite chlorine dioxide mg/L) 3 Sense characters and normal chemical index Chromaticity (Pt Co unit) Turbidity (NTU-Scattering unit) Smell and odor Visible object pH Dissolved total solid (mg/L) Total hardness (take CaCO3) (mg/L) Oxygen consumption demand (CODMntake O2 mg/L) Restricted value 100 0.01 0.005 0.05 0.01 0.001 0.01 0.05 1.0 10, Water restrictions 20 0.06 0.002 0.01 0.9 0.7 0.7 15 1when limited by water resource and process condition is 3 Non smeel non odor non >6.5; <8.5 1000 450 3, over Class waterRaw water6mg/L is 5 0.002 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1 1.0 1.0 250 250

Volatile phenol (take phenol as mg/L) Anion synthetic detergent (mg/L) Aluminum (mg/L) Iron (mg/L) Manganese (mg/L) Copper (mg/L) Zinc (mg/L) Chloride (mg/L) Sulphate (mg/L) 4. Radioactivity matter Total radioactivity (Bq/L) 0.5 Total radioactivity (Bq/L) 1 MPNThe greatest possible. CFUColony-forming units.When total coliform samples were detectedEscherichia coli or heat-resistant coliforms should be further examined .When total coliform samples were not detectedEscherichia coli or heat-resistant coliforms neednt be further examined. It shows that the water has been polluted by human or animals faecal when the escherichia coli or heat-resistant coliforms was detected in it.

Table 2 Normal test item of water quality (By used disinfector)

62

Disinfector name

Contacting time 30min Contacting with water at least 30min 120 min Contacting with water at least 120min 12min Contacting with water at least 12min 30min Contacting with water at least 30min

Restricted value of the water leaving factory

The remainder water leaved factory

The remainder water in the twig of tube net

Chlorine and dissociated chlorine preparation (dissociated chlorine mg/L) Chloramine (mg/L)

0.3

0.05

0.5

0.05 0.02Such as chlorination, Total chlorine0.05

Ozone (O3 mg/L)

0.3

Chlorine dioxideClO2mg/L

0.8

0.1

0.02

Table 3 Unconventional test item and restricted value of water quality

Item 1. Microorganism index Giardiasisone/10L Latent sporozoon one/10L 2. Toxicology index Stibium (mg/L) Barium (mg/L) Beryllium (mg/L) Boron (mg/L) Molybdenum (mg/L) Nickel (mg/L) Silver (mg/L) Thallium (mg/L) Chlorine cyan (CN mg/L) Trihalomethanestotal of Trichloromethane,chlorodibromomethane, Dichloro-a bromomethane,Bromoform Trihalogenated methane Chlorodifluorobromomethane (mg/L) Bromodichloromethane (mg/L) Tribromomethane (mg/L) Dichloromethane (mg/L) 1,2-dichloroethane (mg/L) 1,1,1-trichloroethane (mg/L) 3-Chloro-1,2-epoxypropane(mg/L) vinyl chloride (mg/L) 1,1- vinylidene chloride (mg/L) 1,2-dichloroethylene (mg/L) Trichloroethylene (mg/L) Tetrachloroethylene (mg/L) Hexachlorobutadiene(mg/L) Dichloroacetic acid(mg/L) Restricted value
1 1

0.005 0.7 0.002 0.5 0.07 0.02 0.05 0.0001 0.07 the ratio of measured concentration of each compound with its own limits is not more than 1 in such compounds 0.1 0.06 0.1 0.02 0.03 2 0.0004 0.005 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.04 0.0006 0.05

63

Trichloroacetic acid(mg/L) 2,2,2-trichloroethanal (Chloral hydrate mg/L) Benzene (mg/L) Toluene (mg/L) Dimethylbenzene (mg/L) Ethylbenzene (mg/L) Cinnamene (mg/L) 2,4,6-trichlorophenol (mg/L) Benzo(a)pyrene (mg/L) Chlorobenzene (mg/L) 1,2-dichlorobenzene (mg/L) 1,4-dichlorobenzene (mg/L) Trichlorobenzene (total mg/L) Di(2-ethylhexyl)(o-)phthalate (mg/L) Acrylamide (mg/L) Microcystin-LR (mg/L) Alachlor (mg/L) Bentazone (mg/L) Chlorothalonil (mg/L) 1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-bis(p-chlorophenyl)ethane (mg/L) Decamethrin K-othrin Decis Deltamethrin (mg/L) Dimethoate (mg/L) 2,4-Dicholrophenoxyacetic acid (mg/L) Heptachlor (mg/L) Hexachlorobenzen (mg/L) Benzene hexachloride (total Gross mg/L) -benzene hexachloride (mg/L) Carbofos (mg/L) Parathion (mg/L) Parathionmethyl (mg/L) Pentachlorophenol (mg/L) Atrazine (mg/L) Furadan (mg/L) chlorpyrifos (mg/L) DDVP (With trichlorfon mg/L) Glyphosate (mg/L) 3. Sense character and normal chemical index N(mg/L) PhosphateOnly be used for additional types of corrosion and scale inhibitors phosphatePO4
3

0.1 0.01 0.01 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.02 0.2 0.00001 0.3 1 0.3 0.02 0.008 0.0005 0.001 0.02 0.3 0.01 0.001 0.02 0.08 0.03 0.0004 0.001 0.005 0.002 0.25 0.003 0.02 0.009 0.002 0.007 0.03 0.001 0.7 0.5 5

mg/L Sulfide (mg/L) Natrium (mg/L)

0.02 200

Table 4 Water quality request of country minitype collecting water supply and separate water supply
Item 1. Microorganism index Colony form units (CFU/mL) 2. Toxicology index Arsenic (mg/L) Floriede (mg/L) Nitratemg/L 3.Sense character and normal chemical index ChromaPlatinum cobalt color units Restricted value 500 0.05 1.2 20 User acceptable (reference value of 20)

64

OpacityNTU- Nephelometric Turbidity Units Smell Naked eye matter pHpH units Dissolved solidmg/L Total rigidity (CaCO3 in terms) Oxygen consumptionCODMnO2 mg/L Iron (mg/L) Manganese (mg/L) Chlorid (mg/L) Sulfate (mg/L)

3, the special circumstances for 5, Water were distributedUser acceptability User acceptability User acceptability Not less than 6.5, not more than 9.5 User acceptable (reference value 1500) User acceptable (reference value 500) 5 User acceptable (reference value 0.5) User acceptable (reference value 0.3) User acceptable (reference value 300) User acceptable (reference value 300)

9. Detection and evaluation of water quality 9.1 Water quality tested of water supply units 9.1.1 Detection frequency of water supply units,Unconventional tests choice was agreed by Countylevel departments which in charge of the local water supply with the local health administrative departments at the county level. 9.1.2 The sampling points choose of the water quality testing for urban centralized water supplyTest items and the frequency The passing rate calculation was implementated in accordance with the "water quality standards for urban water supply" (CJ / T 206-2005). 9.1.3 The sampling points choose of the water quality testing for towns and villages centralized water supply Test items and the frequency The passing rate calculation was implementated in accordance with the "water quality standards for towns and villages water supply" (SL308-2004). 9.1.4 Water quality test results of water supply departments should be regularly submitted to the local health authorities The content and approach of test results submitted to the water quality was agreed by the local authorities and local health authorities. The water quality testing data files for water supply department was establish by Local health authorities. 9.2 Water quality tested by Health supervision 9.2.1 The finished water supply, peripheral water (including secondary water supply) from the water supply department should be regularly monitored and tested by Health administrative departments at all levels according to actual needs in accordance with the law. 9.2.2 When the sudden events outbreak such as accident occurred in the water supply and referred to water-borne diseases, the health administrative departments at all levels need to identify the supervision and monitoring program. 9.2.3 The testing scope, project and frequency of health supervision water quality was determined by the local provincial health authorities. 10. The method for drinking Water Quality Inspection The drinking Water Quality Inspection was implemented in accordance with GB / T 5750.

Data
Name Enterrococcus (CFU/100mL) Bacillaceae (CFU/100mL) -naphthol (mg/L) 2-Methylisoborneol (ug/L) Second adipates (2 - ethylhexyl)mg/L 65 Limits 0 0 0.4 0.01 0.4

dibromoethyleneug/L Dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD ng/L) GeosminDMN Triacontanol ug/L Pentachlorodimethylmethane (mg/L) Bisphenol A (mg/L) Acrylon (mg/L) Crylic acid (mg/L) Acraldehyde (mg/L) Tetra ethyl lead (ug/L) Glutaraldehyde (mg/L) Petroleum (total mg/L) Asbestos (10m million/L) Nitrite (mg/L) Polyclyclic-arene(total ug/L Polychorinated biphenylstotal ug/L Diethyl phthalate (mg/L) Dibutyl phthalatemg/L Naphthentic acid (mg/L) Anisole (mg/L) Total organic carbon TOC mg/L Niton (pCi/L) Uranium (mg/L) Xanthic acid-fourtheaster (ug/L) Ethylmercuric chloride (ug/L) Nitrobenzol (mg/L) Radium226, Raium228 (pCi/L) Niton (pCi/L)

0.05 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.07 0.3 700 3,short time 0.2,long time 2 0.5 0.3 0.003 1.0 0.05 5 300 0.03 1 0.1 0.017 5 300

References 1. World Health Organization. Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, third edition. Vol. 1, 2004, Geneva 2. EUs Drinking Water Standards., Council Directive 98/83/EC on the quality of water intended for human consumption. Adopted by the Council, on 3 November 1998 4. US EPA, Drinking Water Standards and Health Advisories, Winter 2004 5. Russian State drinking water health standards which was Implemented in January 2002. 6. Japan's quality benchmark of drinking water (the Ordinance of the Associate Water Law) which was Implemented in April 2004.

NATIONAL STANDARD OF PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS FOR SURFACE WATER GB/T 14848-93 (PART)
Effective from 1st October 1994

66

This standard is applicable to general groundwater, not for hot groundwater/miner water/bittern water. Table 1 Classification index of ground water
Standard value No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Item I type Chromaticity (degree) Smell and odor Turbidity (degree) Visible object pH Total hardness (CaCO3)(mg/L) Solubility total solid (mg/L) Sulfate(mg/L) Chloride(mg/L) Fe(mg/L) Mn(mg/L) Cu(mg/L) Zn(mg/L) Mo(mg/L) Co(mg/L) Volatile phenols (phenol) (mg/L) Anion synthetic detergent (mg/L) Permanganate index (mg/L) Nitrate(N) (mg/L) Nitrite(N) Ammonia nitrogen (NH4)(mg/L) Fluoride(mg/L) Iodide(mg/L) Cyanide(mg/L) Hg(mg/L) 150 300 50 50 0.1 0.05 0.01 0.05 0.001 0.005 0.001 no 1.0 2.0 0.001 0.02 1.0 0.1 0.001 0.00005 5 no 3 no II type 5 no 3 no 6.5~8.5 300 500 150 150 0.2 0.05 0.05 0.5 0.01 0.05 0.001 0.1 2.0 5.0 0.01 0.02 1.0 0.1 0.01 0.0005 67 450 1000 250 250 0.3 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.1 0.05 0.002 0.3 3.0 20 0.02 0.2 1.0 0.2 0.05 0.001 III type 15 no 3 no IV type 25 no 10 no 5.5~6.5, 8.5~9 550 2000 350 350 1.5 1.0 1.5 5.0 0.5 1.0 0.01 0.3 10 30 0.1 0.5 2.0 1.0 0.1 0.001 V type 25 exist 10 exist <5.5, >9 >550 >2000 >350 >350 >1.5 >1.0 >1.5 >5.0 >0.5 >1.0 >0.01 >0.3 >10 >30 >0.1 >0.5 >2.0 >1.0 >0.1 >0.001

26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 I II III IV V

As(mg/L) Se(mg/L) Cd(mg/L) Cr+6(mg/L) Pb(mg/L) Be(mg/L) Ba(mg/L) Ni(mg/L) DDT(g/L) Benzene hexachloride (g/L) Total amount of E. coli group(No./L) Total amount of bacteria(No./mL) Total radioactivity (Bq/L) Total radioactivity (Bq/L)

0.005 0.01 0.0001 0.005 0.005 0.00002 0.01 0.005 no 0.005 3.0 100 0.1 0.1

0.01 0.01 0.001 0.01 0.01 0.0001 0.1 0.05 0.005 0.05 3.0 100 0.1 1.0

0.05 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.05 0.0002 1.0 0.05 1.0 5.0 3.0 100 0.1 1.0

0.05 0.1 0.01 0.1 0.1 0.001 4.0 0.1 1.0 5.0 100 1000 >0.1 >1.0

>0.05 >0.1 >0.01 >0.1 >0.1 >0.001 >4.0 >0.1 >1.0 >5.0 >100 >1000 >0.1 >1.0

is mainly reflects the low background concentration of chemical components in ground water, this type water can suitable all uses; is mainly reflects the background concentration of chemical components in ground water, this type water can suitable all uses; is on the basis of the value of human body health, is suitable for as drinking water resource and for industrial/ agricultural uses; is on the basis of the value of industrial/ agricultural uses, besides suitable for industrial/ agricultural use, it also can be use as drinking water after treatment; can not be use for drinking, it can be chosen for other uses.

NATIONAL STANDARD OF PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS FOR SURFACE WATER
Effective from 1st June 2002

GB 3838-2002 (PART)

68

Table 1 Limited value of basic items for environmental quality standards for surface water Unit: mg/L
No. Items Water temperature( ) pH Dissolved oxygen Classification of standard value Class I Class II Class III Class IV Class V The variety of environmental water temperature caused by man-made should be limited as follows: Weekly average maximum temperature rise 1 Weekly average maximum temperature drop 2 6---9 Saturation degree 6 5 3 2 90%(or 7.5) 2 4 6 10 15 15 15 20 30 40 3 3 4 6 10 0.15 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 0.02(for 0.1(for 0.2(for 0.3(for 0.4(for lake/pool lake/pool lake/pool lake/pool lake/pool 0.01) 0.025) 0.05) 0.1) 0.2) 0.2 0.01 0.05 1.0 0.01 0.05 0.00005 0.001 0.01 0.01 0.005 0.002 0.05 0.2 0.05 200 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.01 0.05 0.00005 0.005 0.05 0.01 0.05 0.002 0.05 0.2 0.1 2000 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.01 0.05 0.0001 0.005 0.05 0.05 0.2 0.005 0.05 0.2 0.05 10000 1.5 1.0 2.0 1.5 0.02 0.1 0.001 0.005 0.05 0.05 0.2 0.01 0.5 0.3 0.5 20000 2.0 1.0 2.0 1.5 0.02 0.1 0.001 0.01 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 1.0 0.3 1.0 40000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

Permanganate index COD BOD5 NH3-N Total phosphorus[P]

Total nitrogen (for lake/reservoir take N) Cu Zn Fluoride(take F- as) Se As Hg Cadmium Chrome(sexavalent) Pb Cyanide Volatile phenol Petroleum types Anion surface active agent Sulfide Group of dung coliform(no./L)

For coal chemical industry type III is appropriate. Table 2 Standard limited values of additional items for surface water source of centralized living drinking water - Unit: mg/L
No. 1 2 3 4 5 Items Sulfate(take SO42-) Chloride(take Cl ) Nitrate(take N) Fe Mn
-

Standard limited value 250 250 10 0.3 0.1

Table3 Standard limited values of specific items for surface water source of
69

centralized living dring water - Unit: mg/L Standard No. Item Standard value value 1 CHCl3 Chloroform 0.06 41 Acrylamide 0.0005 2 CCl4 Carbon tetrachloride 0.002 42 Acrylonitrile 0.1 3 CHBr3 Tribromomethane 0.1 43 Dibutyl(o-)phthalate 0.003 0.02 44 Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 0.008 4 CH2Cl2 Dichloromethane 5 1,2-dichloroethane 0.03 45 Hydrazine hydrate 0.01 6 Chloroepoxy propane 0.02 46 Lead tetraethyl 0.0001 7 Vinyl chloride 0.005 47 Pyridine 0.2 8 1,1-dichlorethylene 0.03 48 Turpentine 0.2 9 1,2-dichlorethylene 0.05 49 Picric acid 0.5 10 Trichloroethylene 0.07 50 Butyl xanthic acid 0.005 11 Tetrachloroethylene 0.04 51 Active chlorine 0.01 12 Chloroprene 0.002 52 DDT 0.001 13 Hexachlorobutadiene 0.0006 53 Lindane 0.002 14 Styrene 0.02 54 Heptachlor epoxide 0.0002 15 Formaldehyde 0.9 55 Parathion 0.003 16 Acetaldehyde 0.05 56 Parathion-methyl 0.002 17 Acraldehyde 0.1 57 Malathion 0.05 18 Trichloro acetaldehyde 0.01 58 Rogor 0.08 19 Benzene 0.01 59 Dichlorvos 0.05 20 Methylbenzene/toluene 0.7 60 Danex/ dipterex 0.05 Demeton/systox 0.03 21 Ethylbenzene 0.3 61 22 Xylene1) 0.5 62 Chlorothalonil 0.01 23 Isopropyl benzene 0.25 63 Carbaryl 0.05 24 Chlorobenzene 0.3 64 Deltamethrin 0.02 25 1,2-dichlorobenzene 1.0 65 Atrazine 0.003 26 1,4- dichlorobenzene 0.3 66 B[a]P 2.8*10-6 2) 0.02 67 Methyl hydrargyum 1.0*10-6 27 Trichlorobenzene 28 Tetrachlorobenzene3) 0.02 68 Polychlorinated biphenyl6) 2.0*10-5 29 Hexachlorobenzene 0.05 69 LR 0.001 30 Nitrobenzene 0.017 70 Phosphorus yellow 0.003 31 Dinitro benzene4) 0.5 71 Mo 0.07 32 2,4-dinitrotoluene 0.0003 72 Co 1.0 33 2,4,6-trinitrotoluene 0.5 73 Be 0.002 34 Nitro-chlorobenzene5) 0.05 74 B 0.5 35 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzol 0.5 75 Sb 0.005 36 2,4-chlorophenesic acid 0.093 76 Ni 0.02 37 2,4,6-trichlorophenol 0.2 77 Ba 0.7 38 Pentachlorophenol 0.009 78 V 0.05 39 Aniline 0.1 79 Ti 0.1 40 Benzdine 0.0002 80 Tl 0.0001 Note: 1) Xylene means the para-xylene/meta-xylene/ortho-xylene 2) Trichlorobenzene means the 1,2,3-trichlorobenzene/1,2,4-trichlorobenzene/ 1,3,5- Trichlorobenzene. 3) Tetrachlorobenzene means the 1,2,3,4-tetrachlorobenzene/ 1,2,3,5-tetrachlorobenzene/1,2,4,5-tetrachlorobenzene 4) Dinitro benzene means the para-dinitro benzene/meta-dinitro benzene/ ortho-dinitro
70

No.

Item

benzene 5) Nitro-chlorobenzene means the para-nitro-chlorobenzene/ meta-nitrochlorobenzene/ ortho-nitro-chlorobenzene 6) Polychlorinated biphenyl means the PCB-1016/PCB-1221/PCB1232/ PCB-1242/PCB-1248/PCB-1254/PCB-1260

NATIONAL STANDARD OF PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA INTEGRATED WASTEWATER DISCHARGE STANDARD

Effective from 1st January 1998 4.2.2 According to time this standard stipulate the permitted maximum concentration of the first kind and the second kind of pollutants, and the permitted maximum water discharge of part of the industries, as follows: 4.2.2.2 Projects build (including reconstruction and extension) after January 1st 1998, the discharge of water pollutants should execute the regulations in table 1, table 4 and table 5 simultaneously. For coal chemical industry fist-grade is appropriate.
71

GB 8978-1996 (PART)

Table 1 - The permitted maximum concentration of the first kind pollutants (Unit: mg/L) No. pollutants the permitted maximum concentration 1 Total mercury 0.05 2 Alkylmercury 3 Total cadmium 0.1 4 Total chrome 1.5 5 Sexavalent chrome 0.5 6 Total arsenic 0.5 7 Total lead 1.0 8 Total nickel 1.0 9 B[a]P 0.00003 10 Total beryllium 0.005 11 Total silver 0.5 12 1 Bp/L Total radioactivity 13 10 Bp/L Total radioactivity Table 4 The permitted maximum concentration of the second kind pollutants (Project built after January 1st 1998) (Unit: mg/L) first- Second- ThirdNo. Pollutants Scope of application grade grade grade All wastewater discharge 1 pH 6~9 6~9 6~9 units(plants) Chromaticity All wastewater discharge 2 50 80 (dilution multiple) units Mining/mineral separation/coal 70 300 preparation industry Lode gold mineral 70 400 separation Gulch-gold mineral Suspended 3 separation 70 800 substance (SS) of outlying district The second grade wastewater treatment 20 30 plants in cities and towns Other wastewater 70 150 400 discharge units Sugar-cane saccharifying/ ramie degluing/ wet 20 60 600 process fibre board/ colorant/scouring industry Beet saccharifying/ alcohol/ monosodium 4 BOD5 glutamate/ 20 100 600 leather/chemical fiber pulp industry The second grade waste 20 100 600 water treatment plants Other wastewater 20 30
72

Chemical Oxygen Demand(COD)

6 7 8 9 10

Petroleum Animal and vegetable oil Volatilize phenol Total Cyanide Sulphide

11

Ammonia nitrogen

12

Fluoride

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Phosphate(take P) Formaldehyde Aniline sort Nitrobenzene sort Anion surfactant(LAS) Total copper Total zinc Total manganese

discharge units Beet sugar refine etc. monosodium glutamate etc. Petrochemical industry(Including petroleum refining) The second grade wastewater treatment plants in cities and towns Other wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units Medical raw medicine /dye/petrochemical industry Other wastewater discharge units Yellow phosphorus industry Low fluorine area (Fluorine content in water <0.5mg/L) Other wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units Fatty acid industry Other wastewater
73

100 100 60 60 100 5 10 0.5 0.5 1.0 15 15 10 10 10 0.5 1.0 1.0 2.0 5.0 0.5 2.0 2.0 2.0

200 300 120 120 150 10 15 0.5 0.5 1.0 50 25 15 20 10 1.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 10 1.0 5.0 5.0 2.0

1000 1000 500

500 20 100 2.0 1.0 1.0

20 30 20

5.0 5.0 5.0 20 2.0 5.0 5.0 5.0

23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46

Phosphorus Organophosphor pesticide(take P) Rogor Parathion Methyl parathion Carbofos Pentachlorophenol and sodium pentachlorophenate (take pentachlorophenol) Adsorptive organic halide(AOX)(take Cl) Chloroform Tetrachloro-methane Trichloroethylene Tetrachloroethylene Benzene Toluene(Methylbenzene) Ethylbenzene Ortho-xylene Para- xylene Meta- xylene Chlorobenzene Orthodichlorobenzene Paradichlorobenzene Para-nitrochlorobenzene 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzol Phenol

discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater
74

0.1 5.0 1.0 0.3 0.03 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.3

0.1 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.0 8.0 5.0 0.6 0.06 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.6 1.0 1.0 0.4

0.3 0.5 2.0 2.0 2.0 10 10 8.0 1.0 0.5 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.0 5.0 1.0

47 48 49 50 51 52 53

Metacresol 2,4-dichlorophenol 2,4,6-trichlorophenol Phthalate dibutyl Phthalate dioctyl Ventox(acrylontrile) Total selenium

56

Total organic acid(TOC)

discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units All the wastewater discharge units Fatty acid industry Ramie degumming industry Other wastewater discharge units

0.1 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.3 2.0 0.1 20 20 20

0.2 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.6 5.0 0.2 40 60 30

0.5 1.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 5.0 0.5

Note: Other wastewater discharge units: Means all the wastewater discharge units except industries listed in this controlling project. Table 5 The permitted maximum water discharge rate (Project built after January 1st 1998) No. Industry type permitted maximum water discharge 2 Coking industry 1.2m3/t(coke) 19 Thermal power generation industry 3.5m3/(MWh)

NATIONAL STANDARD OF PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA STANDARD OF NOISE AT BOUNDARY OF INDUSTRY ENTERPRISES
Effective from 1st January 1991 All kinds of Standard value of noise at boundary of industry enterprises are listed in the following table: Equivalent sound level Leq [dB (A)]
Types I II Day time 55 60 Night time 45 50

GB 12348-90 (PART)

75

III IV

65 70

55 55

The applicable scopes: Type I is appropriate for area where give priority to residence and culture/education organizations. Type II is appropriate for residence /merchandise and industry mixed area and commercial centre. Type III is appropriate for industry area. Type IV is appropriate for both sides area which along the main lines of communication. The applicable of each standard types is delimited by local government. The peak value of frequent burst noise (such as exhaust noise) in the night time, are not allowed to exceed 10dB (A) of the standard value; and the peak value of accidental burst noise (such as brevity whistle) in the night time, are not allowed to exceed 15dB(A) of the standard value. The day time and night time in this standard is delimited by the local government based on the local custom and seasonal variations.

NATIONAL STANDARD OF PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA STANDARD FOR POLLUTION CONTROL ON THE STORAGE AND DISPOSAL SITE FOR GENERAL INDUSTRIAL SOLID WASTES
Effective from 1st July 2002 State Environment Protection Administration of China State Quality Monitoring/Checking/Quarantine Administration of China 1.2 Scope of application This standard is applicable for the building /operation and supervisory of the storage and disposal site for general industrial solid wastes, which is new building / extension / reconstruction or have been built and put into production, but not suitable for hazardous waste material and living garbage treatment field. For coal chemical industry the Type II site is appropriate.
76

GB 18599-2001(PART)

4 The type of storage and treatment site Type I is the pollutants concentration in soak liquid from general industrial solid wastes is less than the max value in GB8978 and the pH is between 6~9; Type II site is one or more than one pollutant concentration in soak liquid from general industrial solid wastes is larger than the max value in GB8978 and the pH is in scope <6 or >9; 5 Environment protection demands for site selection 5.1 The same demands of Type I and Type II sites. 5.1.1 The selected site should meet the demands for the overall plan of the local town and country construction. 5.1.2 The site should be selected at the leeward of the predominant wind direction of the industry area and the residents concentrate area, and the boundary of the site should be 500m far from residents concentrate area. 5.1.3 The site should be selected on the ground base which can meet the demand of bearing capacity, to avoid the influence of the ground subsidence, especially the influence of non-uniform and partial subsidence. 5.1.4 The selection of the site should avoid the fault /fracture zone of the fault/ solution cavity area and naturally earth slide or debris flow influenced area. 5.1.5 The site selected at the beach area and flood basin under the highest water level of river/lake/reservoir is forbidden. 5.1.6 The site selected at the natural protection area/landscape point of interest and other areas which need specially protection is forbidden. 5.3 Other demands of Type II site 5.3.1 The selection of the site should avoid the main supply area of groundwater and the water aquifers of drinking-water source. 5.3.2 The site should be selected on the ground base which its seepage control is better. The distance from ground surface of natural foundation layer to groundwater level is not allowed to be less than 1.5m.

6. Environment protection demands for the design of the storage and disposal site 6.1 The same demands of Type I and Type II sites. 6.1.1 The building type of storage and disposal site should match the type of the general industrial solid wastes that will be piled up. 6.1.2 Special topic evaluation of storage and disposal site should be included in the environmental impact assessments; storage and disposal site, which is extended/ reconstruction or beyond its term of service, should be fulfil the environmental impact assessment procedure again. 6.1.3 Some measures should be taken to avoid mill dust pollution for the storage and disposal site. 6.1.4 Diversion canal should be set-up around the storage and disposal site, in order to not let rainfall runoff into the site and then force an increase of percolate and land slip. 6.1.5 Central drainage facility for percolate liquid should be designed. 6.1.6 Facilities as barrier /dam/ retaining wall should be constructed to avoid bleed of general industrial solid wastes and percolate.
77

6.1.7 Some measures should be taken to avoid ground subsidence, especially the non-uniform and partial subsidence, when it is necessary, so as to ensure the facilities and the equipments running in a normal way. 6.1.8 Some measures must be taken to avoid self-ignition of coal gangue which has the sulphur content more than 1.5 percent. 6.1.9 The storage and disposal site should set its environmental protection graphic sign according to the GB 15562.2, in order to strengthen the supervisory and management. 6.2 Other demands of Type II site 6.2.1 Natural or manmade material should be used to construct the impermeable layer, when the permeability coefficient of the natural basic layer is more than 1.0*10-7cm/s, and the thickness of the impermeable layer should equal the impervious nature of clay blanket with the permeability coefficient 1.0*10-7cm /s and the thickness 1.5m. 6.2.2 Percolate disposal facility should be designed to treat the percolate liquid when it is necessary. 6.2.3 At least three monitoring well of groundwater should be set around the storage and disposal site, to monitor the pollution of groundwater cause by percolate liquid. Take one as contrast well, which set at the upstream of ground water flow direction of the storage and disposal site; the second one as pollution monitoring well, set at the downstream of ground water flow direction of the storage and disposal site; the last one as pollution diffuse monitoring well, set at the point of the circumference of the storage and disposal site where diffuse influence most likely happen. However groundwater monitoring well can not be set, when both the geology and the hydrologic geology data show that the aquifer is buried at a deep depth, so that the groundwater has been proofed and firmly believed not to be polluted.

7. Environmental protection demands for the operational guidance of the storage and disposal site 7.1 The same demands of Type I and Type II sites. 7.1.1 After the completion of the storage and disposal site has been accepted by the same administrative department in charge of environmental protection, which examined and approved the environmental impact assessment report or chart, then it can be put into operation or application. 7.1.2 Hazardous wastes and living garbage is forbidden to mix into in the storage and disposal site for general industrial solid wastes. 7.1.3 The percolate liquid of the storage and disposal site can be discharged after it meet the standard of GB8978, and the discharge of air pollutants should meet the in-organization release demands of GB16297. 7.1.4 The units/plant which use the storage and disposal site should establish a checking and maintenance system. Periodical checking and maintaining the barrier /dam/ retaining wall/ diversion canal, some measures should be taken as soon as probable breakage or abnormality is found, to secure the normal running of the site. 7.1.5 The units which use the storage and disposal site should establish a file
78

system. The species and quantity of general industrial solid wastes entered into the site and the following information have a detail record, long-team stored, for checking at any time. a) Checking and maintaining data of all kind of facilities and equipments; b) Observation and disposal data of ground subsidence/collapse/land slip; c) Monitoring data of percolate liquid and the water pollutants discharging after its disposal and air pollutants discharging. 7.1.6 The environmental protecting graphic sign of the storage and disposal site should be checked and maintained according to the GB 15562.2. 7.3 Other demands of Type II site 7.3.1 The seepage control project should be periodically checked and maintained, groundwater quality should be periodically monitored, and some measures should be taken as soon as antiseep function is found falling down. The assessment of groundwater quality is according to GB/T14848. 7.3.2 Central drainage facility and percolate liquid disposal facilities should be checked and maintained periodically, water quality of percolate and the discharging water after its disposal should be monitored periodically, and some measures should be taken as soon as the central drainage facility is found plug or the disposed water quality beyond the standard of GB8978 or local pollutants discharging standard. 8 Environmental protection demands for closing or sealing the site 8.1 The same demands of Type I and Type II sites. 8.1.1The storage and disposal site should be closed or sealed separately when its term of service expired, or no longer use for waste storage and disposal. The closing or sealing plan must be established before the close or seal of the site, and the plan should be handed in to the local environmental protection administrative chief division to check and approval, and some measures should be made to avoid pollution. 8.1.2 The surface taper generally should not over 33% when closing or sealing the site. One steps should be built every 3-5m lifting of the datum mark. The steps should have a width of no less than 1m, the taper of 2-3%, and the intensity enough to subject to the flushing of the storm rainfall. 8.1.3 Maintenance and management needs to go on after the closing or sealing of the site until it is stable, in order to avoid subsidence and dehiscence of the soil sealing layer, which induce the increase of quantities of the percolate, and to avoid accidents such as landslide induced by destabilization of the stack of general industry solid wastes. 8.1.4 Marks should be set after closing or sealing the site, and time of closing or sealing the site and the matters need attention when using this land should be noted. 8.3 Other demands of Type II site 8.3.1 In order to avoid direct exposure of the solid wastes and soak of rainwater into the stack, two layer of soil should be covered when sealing the site, the first layer used as separation layer, covering with clay soil with the thickness of 2045cm and been compressed, to avoid soak of rainwater into the stack; the second layer as the overburden layer, covering with natural soil to favour the growth of plant, of which the thickness depends on the species of plant grown on it.
79

8.3.2 The monitoring system of percolate liquid and the discharging water after its disposal should be maintained normal running after sealing of the site until the water quality is stationary. The monitoring system of groundwater should be normal running.

NATIONAL STANDARD OF PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA

STANDARD OF ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE IN URBAN AREA
Effective from 1st January 2004 This standard is applicable for urban area. For rural living area this standard can be executed as a reference. Standard of five types environmental noise of urban area are listed in the following table: Equivalent noise level LAeq: dB
Types 0 1 Day time 50 55 Night time 40 45

GB 3096-93 (PART)

80

2 3 4

60 65 70

50 55 55

Type 0 is appropriate for recuperate, high-level villa and hotel area where need more quietly. Type 1 is appropriate for area where give priority to residence and culture/education organizations. Dwelling environment of rural area can execute this standard as a reference. Type 2 is appropriate for residence /merchandise and industry mixed area. Type 3 is appropriate for industry area. The peak value of accidental burst noise in the night time, are not allowed to exceed 15dB (A) of the standard value. The applicability of every standard type is delimited by local government. The day time and night time in this standard is delimit by the local government based on the local custom and seasonal variations. For coal chemical industry type 3 is appropriate.

81

APPENDIX B Output of pig iron of key large sized and medium sized Steel and Iron Corporation in China (2006 2007)

Table 1 Output of pig iron of key large sized and medium sized Steel and Iron Corporation in China in 2006 and 2007
2007 82 BFG pig iron 4 / a] [108 m3] [ 10 t 2430.95 948.07 2331.54 909.3 2006 BFG pig iron 4 / a] [108 m3] [ 10 t 2266.09 883.78 2254.37 879.2

No 1 2

enterprise Baoshan I&S group Anshan-Benxi I&S Group

Region Shanghai Liaoning

grow t h [ %] 7.28 3.42

Table 1 continuation

83

No

enterprise

Region

2007 BFG pig iron 4 / a] [108 m3] [ 10 t 322.73 282.57 278.53 272.96 266.58 265.39 259.32 258.39 255.59 239.04 236.26 233.84 230.14 216.86 206.24 205.12 204.5 202.88 188.81 188 182.93 176.96 125.86 110.2 108.63 106.45 103.97 103.5 101.13 100.77 99.68 93.23 92.14 91.2 89.75 84.58 80.43 80 79.76 79.12 73.64 73.32 71.34 69.01

2006 BFG pig iron 4 / a] [108 m3] [ 10 t 296.4 257.2 275.2 258.93 256.43 242.33 192.57 242.22 200.02 221.23 230.99 232.59 180.01 167.12 169.42 197.36 173.23 170.83 182.58 0 182.94 132.01 115.6 100.31 107.33 100.98 100.01 94.51 75.1 94.47 78.01 86.28 90.09 90.71 70.2 65.18 66.07 76.97 67.56 66.62 71.21 0 71.35 51.48

grow t h [ %] 8.88 9.86 1.21 5.42 3.96 9.52 34.66 6.68 27.78 8.05 2.28 0.54 27.85 29.76 21.73 3.93 18.05 18.76 3.41 0 -0.01 34.05

33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54

Chongqing Iron & Steel Chongqing Group Co., Ltd Shanxi Haixin Iron & Shanxi Steel Co., Ltd Shuicheng Iron & Steel Guizhou Group Co., Ltd Xintai Iron & Steel Co., Hebei Ltd Sichuan Chuanwei Iron & Sichuan Steel Group Co., Ltd Fujian Sangang Group Fujian Co., Ltd Hebei Jingye Group Co., Hebei Ltd Yingkou Median Plate Liaoning Plant Handan Zongheng Iron & Hebei Steel Group Co., Ltd Changzhi Iron & Steel Shanxi Group Co., Ltd Hangzhou Iron & Steel Zhejiang Group Co., Ltd Shanxi Longmen Iron & Shanxi Steel Group Co., Ltd Nanchang Iron & Steel Jiangxi Group Co., Ltd Jinan Jiyuan Iron & Steel Henan Group Co., Ltd Delong Iron & Steel Co., Hebei Ltd Lingyuan Iron & Steel Liaoning Group Co., Ltd Jiangyin Xingcheng Special Iron & Steel Co., Jiangsu Ltd Shandong taishan Iron & Shandong Steel Group Co., Ltd Lengshuijiang Iron & Hunan Steel Group Shandong Weifang Iron & Shandong Steel Group Co., Ltd Shijiangzhuang Iron & Hebei Steel Co., Ltd Sichuan Dazhou Iron & Sichuan Steel Group Co., ltd

Table 1 continuation
84

No 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 Total

enterprise

Region

2007 BFG pig iron 4 [ 10 t / a] [108 m3] 155.84 153.89 147.67 130.21 124.89 119.1 109.09 106.07 100.22 87.94 85.02 72.62 72.39 54.48 45.07 34924.83 60.78 60.02 57.59 50.78 48.71 46.45 42.55 41.37 39.09 34.3 33.16 28.32 28.23 21.25 17.58 13620.68

2006 BFG pig iron 4 [ 10 t / a] [108 m3] 138.75 120.97 126.37 96 113 112.13 108.03 100.08 105.6 49.63 75.63 70.28 76.03 57.26 51.73 30705.26 54.11 47.18 49.28 37.44 44.07 43.73 42.13 39.03 41.18 19.36 29.5 27.41 29.65 22.33 20.17 11975.05

grow t h [ %] 12.32 27.21 16.86 35.64 10.52 6.22 0.98 5.99 -5.09 77.19 12.42 3.33 -4.79 -4.86 -12.87 13.74

Changzhou Zhongtian Jiangsu Iron & Steel Co., Ltd Shanxi Zhongyang Iron & Shanxi Steel Co., Ltd Hubei Xinye Iron & Steel Hubei Co., Ltd Shanxi Zhongyu Iron & Shanxi Steel Co., Ltd Xilin Iron & Steel Group Heilongjiang Co., Ltd Guangzhou Iron & Steel Guangdong Group Co., ltd Jiansu Xixing Group Jiangsu Zhangdian Iron & Steel Shandong Group Hebei Dongshan Yejin Hebei Industrial Co., Ltd Xining Special Iron & Qinghai Steel Group Jinan Gengcheng Iron & Shandong Steel Co., Ltd Tianjin Pipe Group Co., Tianjin Ltd Jiangsu Sugang Group Jiangsu Shenggeban Pipe Co., Ltd Jiangsu Shanxi lveyang Iron & Shanxi Steel Co., Ltd

85

APPENDIX C

UK-China and China-UK visits

86

OUTWARD MISSION BY A UK TEAM TO CHINA JULY 2007

The UK team visit to China, led by Prof. John Oakey from Cranfield University, was undertaken from the 30th of June to the 7th of July 2007. The itinerary for the mission is shown below: Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday 30/06/07 1/07/07 2/07/07 3/07/07 Leave UK Arrival to Beijing a.m. meeting with CCRI in Beijing p.m. fly to Jinan overnight in Jinan a.m. travel to UCG site at Xinwen a.m. Workshop with Xinwen people to work on project p.m. Travel to Taian Thursday Friday 5/07/07 6/07/07 a.m. UK partner progress review meeting p.m. Return to Jinan (stay overnight) Travel to Shijizhuang, visit plant debrief meeting with CCRI and others from Chinese group Evening drive back to Beijing Saturday 7/07/07 Return flight to the UK Wednesday 4/07/07 details

87

INWARD MISSION BY A CHINESE TEAM TO THE UK NOVEMBER 2007

The Chinese visit to the UK, led by Mr. Bu Xuepung from BRICC, was undertaken from the 24th of November to the 2nd of December 2007. Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Fiday 24/11/07 25/11/07 26/11/07 27/11/07 28/11/07 29/11/07 30/11/07 31/11/07 1/12/07 2/12/07 Arrival to UK visit to Siemens at Lincoln a.m. visit to Lincoln Cathedral p.m. transfer to Milton Keynes cultural visit to London cultural visit to London a.m. visit to Cranfield University Campus p.m. progress meeting at Cranfield University a.m. technical meeting at Cranfield University p.m. transfer to Rugby (visit to Alstom) a.m. visit to Alstom p.m. technical meeting at Alstom transfer to Heathrow, cultural visit to the Windsor castle departure from the UK

Due to the fact that only one team of Chinese partners was able to attend the mission to the UK in November 2007, it has been decided to organize a follow-on mission in the spring of 2008.

88

INWARD MISSION BY A CHINESE TEAM TO THE UK PART 2 MARCH 2007

The Chinese visit to the UK, led by Mr. Bu Xuepung from BRICC, was undertaken from the 27th of March to the 4th of April 2008. Participants from BRICC, CUMT and Xinwen Mining group took part in this mission. Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Monday 27/03/08 28/03/08 29/03/08 30/03/08 31/03/08 Arrival to the UK a.m. visit to Cranfield University p.m. progress meeting at Cranfield University transfer to Luton and flight to Edinburgh cultural visit to Edinburgh a.m. visit to the Heriot Watt University p.m. technical discussions and presentations at Heriot Watt University evening flight to Luton transfer to Milton Keynes Tuesday 01/04/08 technical workshop at Cranfield University a.m. meeting at Cranfield University p.m. transfer to Lincoln Thursday Friday 03/04/08 04/04/08 a.m. visit to Siemens p.m. transport to London Heathrow departure from the UK Wednesday 02/04/08

89

OUTWARD MISSION BY A UK TEAM TO CHINA FINAL WORKSHOP IN BEIJING OCTOBER 2008

The UK team visit to China, led by Prof. John Oakey from Cranfield University, was undertaken from the 18th of October to the 24th of October 2008 and its main purpose was to participate at the final workshop and to hold final discussions with project partners on the latest developments and possible future collaboration. Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday 18/10/08 19/10/08 20/10/08 21/10/08 departure from the UK arrival to Beijing meeting at CCRI (final preparation for the workshop) final workshop (for detailed itinerary and partner presentations, please see Appendix D) meeting with CCRI and other partners to discuss future cooperation

Wednesday 22/10/08

Thursday 23/10/08 NZEC meeting + cultural visit in Beijing Friday 24/10/08 departure from Beijing

90