Revamping of 4 x 58 MWth Pulverized Coal-Fired Boilers With Circulating Fluidized Bed Firing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A techno-economic feasibility study has been conducted to investigate revamping four 58 MWth (15 MWe) pulverized-coal (PC) boilers with circulating fluidized bed (CFB) firing. The steam generators at Amarkantak Thermal Power Station in Chachai, Madhya Pradesh, are owned by Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board (MPSEB), supplied by Simmering-Graz-Pauker AG of Vienna, Austria, and commissioned in mid-1965. The study reveals that: (i) CFB revamping of the boilers is technically feasible and economically sound; (ii) Performance improvement of the plant is significant in terms of such indices as plant load factor, forced outage and auxiliary oil consumption, among others. The expected performance improvement is due in large part to the elimination of key outage-prone components such as pulverizers (mills) and burners. (iii) There is significant improvement in emissions performance due to the reduction in emissions of NOx and fly ash; (iv) The financial analysis indicates that the CFB revamping option gives the highest return on investment compared to alternatives.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".