1. Sorbent Polymer Composite Mercury and SO2 Control Installation and Full Scale Performance Update
John Knotts - W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc Gas Phase Filtration Technology Leader
Chris Polizzi - W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc Product Specialist - Membrane Technologies

2. Sorbent Polymer Catalyst (SPC) composite
Four Part Technology
ePTFE
Sorbent
Catalyst
Chemistry
Mercury Sorbent
Captures elemental and oxidized mercury
High capacity for mercury capture
Does not require regeneration
Chem-adsorbed
SO2 Oxidation Catalyst
Sulfur dioxide is converted into an aqueous sulfuric acid solution and expelled to SPC materials outer surfaces
SO2 reduction is a co-benefit of this technology
H2SO4 formation from humidified SO2 gas feed
SPC Material – showing ePTFE, Sorbent and Catalyst 2

3. SPC System Background:
Fixed Sorbent Technology
Low pressure drop sorbent module
Simple Passive Operation
Tailpipe solution installed downstream of all process equipment
Passive operation – no moving parts
Does not require any injection of sorbents or chemicals
Continuous mercury adsorption and SO2 removal for long periods of time without deactivation
No need to inject any carbon for mercury control - avoids ongoing cost related to PAC supply
No contamination of the Cement Kiln Dust with carbon
No need to shuttle or waste any Cement Kiln Dust
No additional differential pressure or pulsing requirement on filter bags from carbon injection
System also address SO2 emissions without requiring any injection of sorbents or chemicals

4. Sorbent Polymer Catalyst (SPC) Composite Material
Mercury Control Module
Open Channel Design
Low Pressure Drop

5. Scalable Sequestration and Removal Efficiencies
Module Stack Height and Gas Velocity Impacts Removal Efficiency
Example of Mercury Removal Efficiencies at Typical Process Velocities of 8-16 feet per second

6. In-Scrubber Power v. Stand-Alone Cement Approach
Can be installed in existing Wet FGD (above Mist Eliminator)
“Zero-footprint” approach
Can be installed as stand-alone structure after Baghouse or ESP
(gas cooling to less than 200 F required)

7. First Energy Fort Martin - Full Scale Installation Approach and Data
Located in Maidsville, WV
Two coal-fired units burning Bituminous coal
Unit 1 online in 1967 and produces 552MW
Unit 2 online in 1968 and generates 546MW
Plant uses 2.8 million tons of high sulfur Eastern bituminous coal annually
No SCR
Configuration: Pulverized Coal Boiler – ESP – B&W WFGD – GMCS – Stack
3,294,000 acfm of treated airflow

8. Ft Martin Unit 1 Installation Approach

9. Installation Photos – GMCS Module Loading:

10. Installation Photos – GMCS Module Stacking:

11. Fort Martin – Unit 1 Full Scale Results
Outage

12. American Electric Power Conesville - Full Scale Installation Approach and Data
Located in Conesville, OH
Units MW
Unit 6 – 430 MW
Tangentially fired units
In service since 1976
Cold side ESP
Mg-enhanced lime wet FGD
2,580,000 acfm of treated airflow

13. Looking
North at
Scrubber 6B
Pltf. El.
829’-6”
Pltf. El.
821’-6”

16. AEP Conesville – Unit 6 Full Scale Results16

17. Cement - Full Scale Installation Approach and Data
2,000 Gore Modules

18. Cement Installation Approach – Elevation View

19. Installation Approach – Plan View

20. Installation Approach – Flow Diagram

21. Cement Data – 4 Module Stack
Days 21

22. For Questions Please Contact:
John Knotts - W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc.

23. Thank you!
© 2009 W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc. 23