No abstract

No abstract

The principal finding of this study was the high capital cost and poor financial performance predicted for the size and configuration of the plant design presented.The XBi financial assessment gave a disappointingly low base-case discounted cash flow rate of return (DCFRR) of only 8.1% based on a unit capital cost of $900 per ton year (tpy) for their 129,000 tpy design. This plant cost is in reasonable agreement with the preliminary estimates developed by J.E. Sinor Associates for a 117,000 tpy plant based on the FMC process with similar auxiliaries (Sinor, 1989), for which a unit capital costs of $938 tpy was predicted for a design that included char beneficiation and coal liquids upgrading--or about $779 tpy without the l:,quid upgrading facilities. The XBi assessment points out that a unit plant cost of $900 tpy is about three times the cost for a conventional coke oven, and therefore, outside the competitive range for commercialization.Modifications to improve process economics could involve increasing plant size, expanding the product slate that XBi has restricted to form coke and electricity, and simplifying the plant flow sheet by eliminating marginally effective cleaning steps and changing other key design parameters.2. The feasibility of discharging hot briquettes into air;3. The relatively low 50% efficiency for 10 micron and 4 micron solids in cyclones;4. Any comment that can be offered on bed support in a commercial carbonizer based on scaling up the EERC/Boley design; 5. The need for an explanation of the XBi changes in the EERC material •"' balances forthe carbonizer and calciner.Additional comments and corrections have been marked on the attached copyof the subject report.,.

No abstract

No abstract