Now, let’s discuss the four-nozzle technology again
Thread Content
Let’s discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the four-nozzle technology again?
It is easy to amplify, but the two water-coal slurry systems increase costs
Yes, I just read the previous posts. It’s been a long time; by now the factory must have gained a lot of experience in operating vehicles, so we can discuss it in more detail
It is the result of a collaboration between Yankuang and East China University of Science and Technology. At present, industrial production takes place only at Yankuang Guohong’s single gasification furnace; it is said that operations are not going very smoothly, as new processes and technologies require a period of adjustment. One of the technical advantages is that the patent fees for domestic independent intellectual property rights are relatively low ； Second, the process load is easy to adjust ； The conversion rate for three is relatively high.
How is the water flow for the four nozzles adjusted?
At East China University of Science and Technology, the four-nozzle gasification technology currently has at least ten units in operation or under construction, and one unit was exported to the United States last month. It is said that the only current drawback of this technology is the relatively short lifespan of the burner. It can be said that the localization of this technology has been done quite well.
The key to competing with Texaco’s water-coal slurry in this technology lies in the patent licensing fees; if General Electric reduces these fees significantly, it will be difficult for the four-nozzle system to compete.
Advantages of four-nozzle design: 1. Energy-efficient and environmentally friendly: The coal slurry stays in the furnace for a longer time, allowing for complete combustion; as a result, the slag contains low levels of carbon. 2. Lower patent fees. Disadvantages of four-nozzle design: 1. Higher initial investment and higher costs. 2. The service life of the gasifier burners is shorter compared to that of Texaco burners (GE)
Our factory also uses the four-nozzle technology. This system offers high production capacity and good quality of syngas; what’s more important is that it relies on **in-house technology, which supports domestic production. Besides, the four-nozzle technology is also highly advanced on an international scale! ! Hehe~~~ Support domestic products! !
The advantage of the four-nozzle design is its lower patent costs; compared to Texaco’s version, it is preferred in this regard. However, it has its disadvantages as well: the lifespan of the burners is shorter than that of Texaco’s version, and the dome is prone to overheating
I know this. It is currently operating well, with a typical operational cycle of over 100 days. There is no issue with the burner lifespan as mentioned by everyone. The active ingredient content is 3–5% higher than that of Texaco. The early operations of Texas and Guotai are now normal. At Cathay, an over-temperature condition of the vaporizer dome occurred because the burner was too close to the dome, and the flame was ignited by the upward flow generated by the impact of the combustion gases from the burner. It has been in operation for nearly four years, and there have been no issues with the four burners not operating synchronously, as was initially a concern; nor has there been any situation where the flames from the burners damaged the opposite furnace wall
Our company has also decided to use this four-nozzle system. I used to work with Texaco; the investment for a single furnace is higher in that case, but the coal consumption is greater. Our system can handle 1,500 tons of coal per day, and it has a high concentration of useful gas components. We’re about to go to Guotai to learn more about this, which will allow us to make a comparison with Texaco’s systems.