Feasibility Offshore Coal-Fired Electrical Power Generation

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 5

Feasibility of Offshore Coal-

Fired Electrical Power Generation

Isao Roy Yumori


Staff Engineer, Oceanic Institute
Guy Rothwell
Chief Engineer, Oceanic Institute

Abstract Disadvantages of ocean basing are: 1)power industry


is unfamiliar with the design of ocean based plants;
This paper offers an investigation of the technical 2) expensive undersea pone r cables a r e needed;
and economic feasibility of using standard utility-grade 3) operational costs may be higher because men and
coal burning equipment and electrical generationequip- supplies have tobe transported to and from shore.
ment in an offshore installation.
An investigation of design parameters including II. DESIGN PARAMETERS
siting, configuration, use of conventional power equip-
ment, undersea power cables, fuel transport, construc- A. Configuration
tion, and environmental impact has been made. Three
possible configurations and an economic comparison Several configurations were suggested from looking at
between a barge type floating power plant anda land large ocean platforms used in the oil industryand from
plant a r e given. considering one which was proposed for a nuclear
The conclusion is that an offshore plant is tech- plant. These are shown in Fig. 1, which relates con-
nically feasible, is economically comparable to a land figuration to water depth range.
plant, and offers greater environmental benefits.
This paper is a summary of a report sponsored in Fixed platforms are represented by artificial islands
part by the NOAA Office of Sea Grant. and bottom mounted jack-ups. The artificial island
may be built upof rocks at a shallow site. The jack-up
I. INTRODUCTION platform can be constructed at a protected site and
towed to its final site. Here, the base is lowered to the
Dwindling petroleum reserves imply an impending, if bottom and the upper portion (the completed power
temporary, reliance on coal for electric power produc- plant) is lljacked-upltabove the water.
tion. Since coal-fired power plants with their noise and
smoke a r e considered bothersome by many people, off- Floating platforms include breakwater-protected
shore coal-fired power plants have become a timely barges, as proposed by Westinghouse-Tenneco for
subject for a Sea Grant "Seaward Extensionof Urban 1,130 megawatt nuclear plants, unprotected barges,
Systemst1study. and semi-submersibles. Each of these can be con-
structed at a protected site, towed to its installation
Additional advantages of ocean basing are: 1)valuable site and moored. The barge may use a fixed o r float-
coastal lands can be reserved for higher uses; 2 ) ocean ing single-point mooring or multiple-point moorings.
sites may be closer to load centers and more readily Both the barge and semi-submersible can be maintained
available than land sites; 3) in planning for future in place by using thrusters for dynamic positioning
needs, sites do not have to be bought years in advance, instead of using moorings.
and land acquisition and preparation costsa r e much
lower, involving only shore facilities for undersea The choice of a platform configuration depends on many
cables and harbor facilities for transporting personnel factors, particularly site conditions. This will be
and supplies; 4) intake and outlet lines for cooling examined next.
water may be eliminated and pollution control require-
ments may be less stringent at sea; 5) plant and site B. SiteSelection
preparation may be done concurrently; 6) equipment
may be transported by sea rather than land; 7) there Among factors that must be considered insite selection
are no foundation costs; 8) floating plants are cushioned a r e economics, environmental impact, aesthetics, and
against earthquakes; 9 ) the danger from tsunamis is safety. The following geographic constraints must be
lessened in the open ocean; 10) there are significant considered: water depth; suitability of ocean bottom
production cost savings if identical units can be pro- for foundation o r mooring; weather and sea conditions
duced at one facility [ 61. at the site; cable path and length from site to land;
distance from land (environmental impact); and

IEEE OCEAN'75 - 731


navigational safety [ 51. plant. In a rough sea, transfer by conventional con-
veyor belts or grab buckets can be difficult, especially
Fig. 1 shows the maximum and minimum depths for for floating platforms, since the relative motion
various possible configurations. For example, for a between the tanker and the plant is large. Also, trans-
floating barge, minimum depth is set by a combination fer of coal by conveyors within the plant can be ham-
of draft, maximum vertical movement and avoidance of pered by space and access limitations. The use of
possible interference effects with the bottom. The coal in slurry form can greatly alleviate these prob-
maximum depth is set by the type of mooring. lems. Coal slurry is a mixture of water and granular
coal (8 mesh by 0 mesh particles), usually 45 to 55%
Since the undersea cable is expensive ($84O,OOO/mi. coal by weight; it can be transported by pipeline.
for the 300 megawatt Long Island Interconnect in 1971), Coal slurry, pumped hydraulically in a 271-mile pipe-
the cable path should be as short as possible. The path line from Arizona, has been used successfully in a
should avoid the paths of other cables and pipelines to 1,636 megawatt southern Nevada plant since 1970.
avoid chafing and disrupting communications cables.
On the other hand, the plant should be as f a r from land The Marcona Corp. has ships which transport iron
as economically possible, to minimize pollution of slurry and the same method can be used in transporting
shore and nearshore areas. This provides an optimi- coal slurry. The Marcondo process pumps slurry
zation problem which can be solved only through judi- into tanks on a ship where it is allowed to settle and
cious site selection that considers currents, winds, the excess water is decanted off. High pressure jets
topography,demography, etc. in the bottom of the tank are used for reslurryingso
that the slurry can bepumped off [ 21.
C. Feasibility of Using Conventional Power Equipment
F. Construction Methods and Materials
Conventional power equipment design is highly refined
and has resulted in equipment of proven reliability and Designing a large ocean structure requires careful con-
high efficiency. Since it would be extremely uneconomi- sideration of construction methods, materials and
cal to redesign extensively standard power equipment techniques. The practicality and costs of construction
for use at sea and still maintain the same reliabilityand determine the economics of a design.
efficiency, we attempted to determine if conventional
equipment with only small modifications could be used An ocean based plant will be large, bulky and heavy.
on an ocean plant. O u r conversations with General It will be built either at the site o r at a construction
Electric and Babcock & Wilcox indicate that on float- site and towed to its final site. If towed, the plant
ing platforms, conventional equipment may be used if must be stable in the seaway and able to withstand any
certain precautions are taken. For example, opera- loads that may be expected duringtowing.
tions of the boilers may be affected by motions of the
plant, since rolling or pitching may cause interruption Construction may be of steel or concrete. Steel has
of the water flow. To alleviate this problem, it would been the traditional material for ocean structures, but
be possible to employ standard practice for ship there has been increasing experience with reinforced
boilers, which is to increase the size of the steam and p r e s t r e s s e d concrete, with more and more struc-
drum and add baffles to dampen water surging in the tures using concrete because of its lower cost and
drum [ 11. Also, although conventional steam turbines lower maintenance [41.
should not be affectedby platform motions, the turbine
foundation must be made very stiff to resist camber re- There are many methods of assembling and launching
sulting fromwave bending of the platform which could large concrete structures. An excellent review of
impose excessive loads on the turbine bearings. existing methods is presented in Reference [ 31.
Among methods that would be applicable to ocean power
D. Use of Undersea Power Cables plants are: 1) Construction in floating dry dock;
2) Prefabricate segments and float them to a construc-
Long distance undersea power cableshave a long rec- tion site for joining; 3) Build structure in a basin
ord (20 years) of proven usage. Cable systems have which can be flooded.
carried up to 500 megawatts and are being designed now
to carry over 2,200 megawatts [ 8 ] . Cable systems G. EnvironmentalImpact
have been installed in depths to 1,476 feet, and the
Pirelli Co., a leading manufacturer of undersea power A coal-burning plant can affect its surroundings by
cables, considers depths up to 1,000 meters (3,280 thermal pollution of coastal waters and pollution of the
feet) to be highly feasible. atmosphere. As mentioned in the Introduction, an
ocean based plant can have muchless of an environ-
E. FuelTransport mental impact than a comparable coastal power plant.

Ocean basing requires transfer of fuel in the open ocean An ocean based plantcan readily avoid the adverse
from tankers or colliers to the storage bays of the effects of releasing hot water by diluting it with large

732- IEEE OCEAN '75


volumes of seawater to avoid a hot water plume [ T I . off the northwestern tip of the island of Oahu and a com-
Gaseous exhaust in the form of &st and exhaust gases parable coastal plant showed investment costs to be the
can be dispersed overa large area of ocean by using a same with the ocean plant's lack of land acquisition
tall chimney with high exit velocity. Further research costs being offset by higher costs of engineering, equip-
is needed to determine the effectsof this air pollution ment, moorings, and undersea cable. The ocean plant's
at sea as compared to pollution of popdated areas on generating costs were slightly higherdue to higher in-
land. surance and operating and maintenance costs [ 91.

Conclusions
1. A 500 megawatt, coal-burning floating barge power
III. COMPARISON O F THREE CONFIGURATIONS plant is technically and economically feasible with costs
comparable to a land plant and with a smaller environ-
Three configurations were developed for use in mental impact.
Hawaii. The main design criteria were: 500 mega- 2. Only small modifications to the steam drum in the
watts, using (4) 125 megawatt power strings; coal burn- boiler must be made to use utility grade equipment.
ing; conventional power equipment; 30 days fuel stor- 3. Pre-stressed concrete has many advantages over
age (100,000 long tons of coal); coal transport by steel for ocean-based platforms of this type.
slurry; and plant floated to site. 4. Use of coal slurry simplifies the transport of coal
for ocean plants.
The configurations evaluated were floating barge, bot-
tom mounted jack-up, and semi-submersible.

The floating barge (Fig. 2) layout was determined by: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


keeping heavy components (fuel, turbines, boilers) as We would like to thank Dr. John Craven for his ideas
low as possible for a low c. g. and low wind profile; and support, and acknowledge the work done by
keeping equipment connections as short as possible Dr. William Heronemus in 1973 on ocean-based power
(boiler to turbines); and keeping the barge narrow to plants, although we did not discover his work until our
minimize drag. Its large mass (200,000 long tons) studies were virtually complete.
means motions will be small. It can be built by seg-
mental construction.
References
The jack-up platform (Fig. 3) layout was dominated by 1. Babcock & Wilcox Co.(1963). Steam, Its Genera-
the necessity to place the coal storage in the base. tion and Use. Babcock & Wilcox Publ., N.Y. ,N.Y.
This was necessary for stability and because the struc- 2. Fraser, M. J., L. P. Connolly (1972). lfhlarcona-
ture would have to be very massive to support 100,000 flo and its Use in New Mineral Developmentsll.
tons of coal above water. The upper structure should Canadian Mining and hletallurgical Bulletin (March
be lightweight. The platform can be builtby first con- 1972). pp.134-141.
structing the base, flooding it, then building the rest 3. Gerwick, B. (1971). IIConstruction of Large Con-
of the structure and refloating it by deballasting the crete Ocean Structures1!. Journal of Const. Div.
base. Its main attraction is that it is fixed and cable ASCE (March, 1971).pp.1-16.
connection is easier. 4. Gerwick, B. (1973). 71Designand Construction of
Prestressed Concrete VesselsT1. Offshore Tech.
The semi-submersible (Fig. 4) layout was dominated by Conf.1973.pp.II:587-594.
the necessity for keeping heavy components (turbines, 5. Kehnmuyi, M., B.A. Johansen (1972). "Site
fuel) as low as possible for stabilityand keeping the Considerations Associated with Offshore Generat-
waterplane area (area which pierces water surface) ing Stationsy1. Oceans 72--JEEE Engr. in Ocean
small. The upper structure must be very lightweight. Env.Conf.pp.412-415.
It can be built in the same manner as the jack-up. Its 6. IIOffshore Nuclear Power PlantsTt(1972).
main advantage is small motion response to wave Westinghouse-Tenneco Publ.
action. 7. Roney, M. (1972). I1Environmental Considerations
of Offshore Generating StationsfT. Oceans 7%-
IEEEEngr. in Ocean Env.Conf. pp.419-421.
8. Supplee, G. W. , R. W. Metcalfe (1972). IVable
IV. FESULTS APTD
CONCLUSIONS Development Required for Offshore Generating
Stationsll. Oceans 72--IEEE Engr. in Ocean Env.
The floating bargeconfiguration was chosen for further -
Cod. pp. 422-424.
consideration on the basis of s t q c t u r a l efficiency, 9. Yumori, I. R (1975). The Feasibility of Offshore
arrangement of internal space, ease of operation and Coal-Fired Electrical Power Generation, Seaward
maintenance, and cost. Extension of Urban Systems, Technical Report No.
7, Univ. of Hawaii, UhW-SEAGRANT-CR-75-02,
An economic comparison between a plant 2-1/2 miles 1 2 1 pg.

IEEE OCEAN '75- 733


I ARTIFICIAL ISLAND
DEPTH 0' 60' 120'
1
180' 240' 300'
I
400' 500' 600' 80(
I I

LsITl

BREAKWATER PROTECTED

JACK-UP BOTTOM-MOUNTED

FLOATING BARGE--FIXED
SINGLE POINT MOORJNG

I -r I
-=
FLOATING BARGE--FLOATING
SINGLE POINT MOORING

......
FLOATING MOORED
SEMI-SUBMERSIBLE

LzE!!K
FLOATING BARGE

DYNAMICALLY POSITIONED

1 I -

Figure 1. Depth ranges for different configurations.

734- IEEE OCEAN '75


O r l N
rlrlrl

3
Y
z
w m o
rl 4
a

IEEE OCEAN '75- 735

You might also like