JICA-financed Matarbari coal power project back on track

[bluesky]

Matabari project - Technology -Ultra super critical

I know that the ultra-super critical anti-pollution technology is very expensive. Could it really be the reason that this technology will soar the construction cost? Or there is an error in the reporting?

 

[rome333]

There are not much difference between Super critical and Ultra super critical. Ultra burns coal at higher pressure than Super, hence more efficient. So few less ton of coal is needed for Ultra than Super. Still they both emits the same polluting elements but the amount is little less for Ultra.

 

[Bilal9]

There are not much difference between Super critical and Ultra super critical. Ultra burns coal at higher pressure than Super, hence more efficient. So few less ton of coal is needed for Ultra than Super. Still they both emits the same polluting elements but the amount is little less for Ultra.

Doesn't it also depend on the type of coal used? Where will we get our coal from and what type?

The news does not report about the detail of technology input in the coal-fired plant. I have reasons to believe that the cost is high because high-level technology will be used there to mitigate the exhaust of CO2, CO and other toxic gases from the plant. Only issue here is we have to depend upon foreign source for coal, because coal fields in the north is far away and the mining is obstructed by those Shahidullah/Anu Mohammed gong.

Note that with the addition of this 1300 mW power plant the percentage of coal-fired electricity will remain about 3%. Indian percentage is a staggering 39%. BD has become an inadvertent victim of India produced pollution.

A major part of the cost for coal is transporting it. That's why you see coal mines in USA shutting down. US still depends on some coal run power plants.....but not enough of them....

 

[rome333]

Coal power plants are designed according the proposed characteristics of the coal to be used. Therefore you choose the type of coal first, then design the plant accordingly. Govt only citing the names of Indonesia, Australia and South Africa as possible sourcing locations for coal.

 

[Chowdhury]

This is what they spend in Japan. Government probably wants to make a benchmark standard on coal plant. Besides the overall cost will come down once you calculate the cheap credit from JAICA.

True. Hi bluesky the reporter got nothing to do with the math.Marubeni + consortium bade $3.9 billion & now its up to the authorities who am sure did plenty of homework. As someone in thread quoted you equate quality with Japan let me add a few more like Germany,Sweden, Switzerland,France etc whose quality is time tested & quality do comes with a price. With a Japanese consortium in it & further if Govt monitors with ecologist & environmentalist there shouldn't be too many reasons to worry. Thanks.

 

[truthseeker2010]

even $3 b for 1200mw is too costly, unless it has ccs tech in it, which i am sure it wont have...............

 

[TopCat]

True. Hi bluesky the reporter got nothing to do with the math.Marubeni + consortium bade $3.9 billion & now its up to the authorities who am sure did plenty of homework. As someone in thread quoted you equate quality with Japan let me add a few more like Germany,Sweden, Switzerland,France etc whose quality is time tested & quality do comes with a price. With a Japanese consortium in it & further if Govt monitors with ecologist & environmentalist there shouldn't be too many reasons to worry. Thanks.

The tender is still out. So we need to wait for the final bid by the contractor to know the exact cost.
3.9 billion is what estimated by project feasibility study.

 

[bluesky]

even $3 b for 1200mw is too costly, unless it has ccs tech in it, which i am sure it wont have...............

I completely agree to your point that why a 1200 mW coal-fired power plant should be so expensive. A normal coal power plant would have cost around only $1.2 billion. However, even though expensive, a combined-cycle and non-pollutant expensive power plant is better for the future growth of this sector. It seems the SC ans USC technologies use less amount of coal per megawatt than a normal plant. This is what I got by google searching:

Supercritical & Ultra-supercritical technology
Similar term(s): SC and USC power plants.

Definition:
Conventional coal-fired power plants, which make water boil to generate steam that activates a turbine, have efficiency of about 32%.

Supercritical (SC) and ultra-supercritical (USC) power plants operate at temperatures and pressures above the critical point of water, i.e. above the temperature and pressure at which the liquid and gas phases of water coexist in equilibrium, at which point there is no difference between water gas and liquid water. This results in higher efficiencies – above 45%.

Supercritical (SC) and ultra -supercritical (USC) power plants require less coal per megawatt-hour, leading to lower emissions (including carbon dioxide and mercury), higher efficiency and lower fuel costs per megawatt.

 

[truthseeker2010]

I completely agree to your point that a 1200 mW coal-fired power plant should be so expensive. A normal coal power plant would have cost around only $1.2 billion. However, even though expensive, a combined-cycle and non-pollutant expensive power plant is better for the future growth of this sector. It seems the SC ans USC technologies use less amount of coal per megawatt than a normal plant. This is what I got by google searching:

Supercritical & Ultra-supercritical technology
Similar term(s): SC and USC power plants.

Definition:
Conventional coal-fired power plants, which make water boil to generate steam that activates a turbine, have efficiency of about 32%.

Supercritical (SC) and ultra-supercritical (USC) power plants operate at temperatures and pressures above the critical point of water, i.e. above the temperature and pressure at which the liquid and gas phases of water coexist in equilibrium, at which point there is no difference between water gas and liquid water. This results in higher efficiencies – above 45%.

Supercritical (SC) and ultra -supercritical (USC) power plants require less coal per megawatt-hour, leading to lower emissions (including carbon dioxide and mercury), higher efficiency and lower fuel costs per megawatt.

sc, usc is for efficiency, ccs means carbon capture and storage, which is for controlling pollution. They are two very different things