|
ORGANIC WATER TREATMENT CHEMICALS
STEAM BOILERS, COOLING TOWERS,
HOT AND CHILLED CLOSED SYSTEMS
FUEL OIL TREATMENT
Calculations
of Fuel Savings
Assume
that the feed water consists
of 60% condensate and 40% make-up.
By recovering additional condensate,
the feed water quality is improved,
resulting in a lower blow down
rate. The blow down rate reduction
and corresponding fuel savings
can be calculated. Thus if the
additional recovery results
in a feed water of 67% condensate
rather than 60%, the total alkalinity
will be reduced from 70 ppm
to 58 ppm and we can increase
the feed water concentration
from 10 to 12. The blow down
rate can then be reduced from
10% to 8-1/3%. The actual blow
down and feed water requirement
in pounds can be calculated
as follows:
Apply
the following equation to determine
reduction savings:
Assume
a steam production of 1,000.000
lbs / day.
Where;
F = feed water requirement (lbs)
S
= steam generated (lbs)
%
B D = percent blow down,
expressed as a decimal.
|
At
10% blow down
F =
|
1,000,000
|
=
|
1,000,000
|
= 1,111,110 lbs.
|
|
1 - (0.10)
|
0.9
|
|
At 8-1/3% blow down
F =
|
1,000,000
|
=
|
1,000,000
|
=
1,090,870 lbs.
|
|
1 - (0.0833)
|
0.9167
|
The
difference represents the actual
blow down reduction:
1,111,110 lbs. – 1,090,870 lbs.
= 20,240 lbs. reduction
Apply
the following equation to determine
the fuel costs savings:
|
Br * H
|
*
C = $Savings
|
|
V
* % E
|
Where:
Br = blow down reductions (lbs/day)
H
= heat content of blow
down (from Table II)
C
= cost of fuel ($/unit)
V
= heating value of fuel
(Btu/unit)
%
E = boiler efficiency
Using
our former example and burning
No. 6 fuel oil with a heating
value of 142,440 Btu/gallon
at a cost of $0.32 per gallon
(adjust to market cost as desired),
we can calculate the following
daily savings:
|
20,240
lbs. * 309 Btu
/ lb
|
* $0.32 =
|
6254160
|
* 0.32 = $17.56 / day
|
|
142,440 Btu/gal. * 0.80
|
113952
|
In
this example, by returning only
an additional 7% of condensate,
a significant savings has been
realized. Also, the heating
value of the returned condensate
would yield additional savings.
These
calculations are based on the
assumption that blow down heat
is not being recovered. A blow
down heat recovery system would,
reduce the potential savings.
|
Drum Pressure (psig)
|
TDS
(ppm)
|
Total
Alkalinity (ppm CoCO3)
|
Suspended
Solids (ppm)
|
Silica
(ppm)
|
|
|
Fire
Tube
|
Water
Tube
|
With
Turbines
|
Without
Turbines
|
|
0-300
|
3500
|
700
|
800
|
(a)
|
100
|
150
|
|
301-450
|
3000
|
600
|
400
|
(a)
|
100
|
90
|
|
451-600
|
2500
|
500
|
-
|
(a)
|
40
|
40
|
|
601-750
|
2000
|
400
|
-
|
(a)
|
25
|
30
|
(a)
The feed water for all modern
water tube boilers should contain,
little or so iron, copper or
hardness for most reliable operations.
|
Pressure (psig)
|
Heat
of Saturated Liquid
(BTU/lb)
|
|
10
|
208
|
|
15
|
219
|
|
20
|
228
|
|
25
|
236
|
|
30
|
243
|
|
40
|
256
|
|
50
|
267
|
|
60
|
277
|
|
70
|
287
|
|
80
|
294
|
|
90
|
302
|
|
100
|
309
|
|
120
|
322
|
|
140
|
333
|
|
160
|
344
|
|
180
|
353
|
|
210
|
366
|
|
235
|
376
|
|
260
|
385
|
|
285
|
394
|
|
335
|
410
|
|
385
|
424
|
|
435
|
437
|
|
485
|
450
|
|
585
|
472
|
|
685
|
493
|
|
785
|
512
|
|