WELCOME

Weekly selected highlights in flow control, treatment and combustion from the many McIlvaine publications.

 The Challenge of Choosing the Best Coal Fired Power Plant Air Pollution Control Technologies

 Join us on Wednesday August 22 to discuss a program that both helps suppliers demonstrate that they have the lowest total cost of ownership solutions and help end users pick the best systems and components.  Registration details are shown below

The EU is making difficult choices regarding mercury control technologies to meet new 2021 limits.  Asian power plants are retrofitting air pollution control equipment as well as investing many billions of dollars in APC for the new plants.

What assurance does the purchaser have that he is buying the products with the lowest total cost of ownership (LTCO)?  Did he choose the right process?  Did he choose the right components for that process? The McIlvaine Company began assisting coal plants make the best choices with multi thousand page loose leaf manuals which were continually updated.  One set covered electrostatic precipitators, another covered fabric filters. One set covered monitoring. The set covering FGD was later expanded to also include DeNOX.

With the arrival of the digital age McIlvaine began supplying these services in a digital format but with the same goal which was to supply the four knowledge needs: Alerts, Answers, Analysis, and Advancement.  These are included in 44I Coal Fired Power Plant Decisions. As the digital age matured McIlvaine developed a whole new service N031 Industrial IOT and Remote O&M.   We are now looking at a post digital Age where the Industrial Internet of Wisdom (IIoW) empowers IIoT.  One of the results will be a whole new approach to helping purchasers select processes and systems with the LTCO.

With remote monitoring and IIoW the information about the cost of ownership of power plant air pollution control is soaring.  The nozzle, bag, catalyst or other component supplier with the lower total cost of ownership (TCO) will have a much greater right-to-win than the competitor with a better position in the market.   The air pollution control (APC) company spending more on R&D and less on positioning will ultimately prevail.  The APC company interested in sharing rather than concealing knowledge will have the advantage.

If an APC company has the lowest total cost of ownership (LTCO) for a particular application it should encourage transparency and maximum interconnection of all the people and knowledge resources relative to that application.  This includes information about competitor products.

The goal for the APC company is to continually provide lowest total cost of ownership validation (LTCOV). This means it must convince purchasers that it has a TCO lower than competitors.  So the more that is known about competitors or about alternative solutions the better.  This assertion is easily justified for high performance components or consumables.  The supplier of a filter bag which lasts three years compared to only two years for the competition will benefit from maximum dissemination of this information. 

The assertion is more challenging when it comes to systems. In fact it seems that the more that is known about the success of a system design the more likely it is that some imitator in the next country to pass stringent regulations will start with a license and soon become a competitor.  There are two  related ways the supplier of systems can avoid this fate.

1.      Participate in the operation and maintenance of each system through remote monitoring and use of subject matter ultra-experts (SME’s with access and use of decision systems in the area of expertise)

2.     Accelerate R&D and continually improve the TCO of the design

W.L  Gore has pioneered a new mercury removal technology with much lower TCO for coal fired plants where the right combination of regulations, coal being burned and type of SO2 scrubber exist. Innovative use of catalytic filtration could result in big TCO reductions.  McIlvaine conducted nine hours of webinars with 80 people for BHE.  The consensus was that a new combination of existing technologies integrated into a hybrid system would save BHE hundreds of millions of dollars for NOx control at two plants.  The industry accidently found the perfect way to use air pollution control systems in power plants to generate a rare earths feed stock. 

 

HCl Scrubbing and Rare Earth Recovery from Coal-Fired Power Plants and Gasifiers are the Perfect Marriage

A system supplier with modest additional R&D can offer a very attractive  TCO option with this two stage scrubber approach.

Remote monitoring and operational support can greatly lower the TCO. MHPS, Doosan,  GE and others are already demonstrating this. Their  success is continually  covered in the McIlvaine IIoT and Remote O&M newsletter which is included in in 44I Coal Fired Power Plant Decisions.

Lowest Total Cost of Ownership Validation (LTCOV) necessitates providing as much information about the industry, process, product, and competitive alternatives as possible. The supplier must convince the purchaser that the supplier’s product is the LTCO option.  This can occur only with the interconnection of the relevant knowledge and people. 

The supplier with the LTCO for components and consumables in various APC applications can and should justify the expense necessary to validate his LTCO where the application has enough revenue potential to justify a modest expense.  The challenge is to keep the expense modest. The can be achieved with the McIlvaine Decisions Program.

The total cost of ownership (TCO) for APC product X can be precisely or approximately determined in a continuing process.  Half the steps are already taken in the Decision Guides. The other half (green) need to be taken by the Product X supplier.

LTCOV can be determined  for each product in Coal fired Power Generation APC which is part of the Serviceable Obtainable Market (SOM).

 

The LTCOV process is continuous. If the product expected life is 6 months but recent experience shows 9 months this information can be posted in the Decision Guide. Formal precise white papers can be complemented by qualitative validation initiatives or in many cases the qualitative or approximate LTCOV has to substitute for a precise quantitative evaluation.

 

It is ideal where a precise quantitative LTCOV can be produced.  However, for sales purposes if one can show that the LTCO is lower than alternatives then that is sufficient. Let’s say Product X has replaced a product which lasted six months.  Product X has now been in service eight months and is still working well. Regardless of how much longer X lasts it is clearly the LTCO choice if price and performance of the  two products are equal.  Ultimately depending on the life, the price for Product X can be raised and it will still be the LTCO choice

How can suppliers participate? 

 

1.     Obtain access to the Coal fired Power Plants Decisions

2.     Determine which process guides fall into the SOM e.g.  nozzles in the supplier’s scope may be used in dry scrubber slurry injection, wet scrubber slurry injection, ammonia injection,  activated carbon injection, mist eliminator wash water cleaning and others.

3.     Determine which existing product guides within this process are in your SOM scope e,g. nozzle product guide.

4.     Provide background data such as case histories, articles and presentations which will help ascertain that your product has the LTCOV.  Also provide information for the monthly newsletters e.g. FGD & DeNOx to continually provide new background data  3ABC FGD and DeNOx Knowledge Systems or if Product X is a filter bag 1ABC Fabric Filter or if it is a measurement device  9ABC Air Pollution Monitoring and Sampling Knowledge Systems  (new title is IIoT and Remote O&M. 

5.     Prepare the LTCO analysis for posting to the 44I Coal Fired Power Plant Decisions

6.     Use the networking in the Decision Guide to provide validation of the LTCO.

7.     Provide all relevant technical and sales people with access to the Decision Guides and LTCOV.

8.     Encourage input and assistance from niche experts throughout the corporation.

9.     When making presentations to customers make sure they have access to the Decision Guides as well as the LTCOV.  (the fact that competitor information is displayed is a plus because it demonstrates that your TCO is the lowest).

10.  In preparing quotations for specific customers expand the LTCOV from Tier 1 which is not site specific to Tier 2 which takes into account site specific variables such as electricity cost, water availability, local regulations etc.

11.   Provide a direct marketing program using LTCOV to all customers in SOM with  an annual purchase potential in excess of the amount  needed to justify the sales expense

The business program is discussed at www.mcilvainecompany.com

It all starts with 44I Coal Fired Power Plant Decisions   which is only a $1600/yr investment

Join us on Wednesday August 22 at 10:00AM to discuss this opportunity. To register   

Click here to Register for the Webinars

The New Business Tool for Refining, Power, and Oil/Gas Valve Suppliers

The Industrial Internet of Wisdom (IIoW) empowering IIoT promises to completely change the way valves are purchased in the refining, power and oil/gas industries. This starts with a whole new right to win strategy for valve suppliers, elimination of conventional market research and a radically different marketing approach.

With remote monitoring and IIoW the information about the cost of ownership of valves is already soaring.  The valve company with the lower total cost of ownership (TCO) will have a much greater right-to-win than the competitor with a better position in the market. The valve company spending more on R&D and less on positioning will ultimately prevail. The valve company interested in sharing rather than concealing knowledge will have the advantage.

If a valve company has the lowest total cost of ownership (LTCO) for a particular application it should encourage transparency and maximum interconnection of all the people and knowledge resources relative to that application.  This includes information about competitor products.

The goal for the valve company is to continually provide lowest total cost of ownership validation (LTCOV). This means it must convince purchasers that it has a TCO lower than competitors.  So the more that is known about competitors or about alternative solutions the better.

 Lowest Total Cost of Ownership Validation ( LTCOV) necessitates providing as much information about the industry, process, product, and competitive alternatives as possible. It must convince the purchaser that the supplier’s product is the LTCO.  This can occur only with the interconnection of the relevant knowledge and people. 

The supplier with the LTCO for valves in various refining, power, and oil/gas applications can and should justify the expense necessary to validate his LTCO where the application has enough revenue potential to justify a modest expense.  The challenge is to keep the expense modest. The can be achieved with the McIlvaine Decisions Program.

The McIlvaine  decision programs cover all combust, flow, and treat processes and products e.g. 44I Coal Fired Power Plant Decisions,  59D Gas Turbine and Reciprocating Engine Decisions, Municipal Wastewater Decisions  and 202I Refinery Decisions.

It also includes Decision Systems on specific processes within those industries. This includes 3ABC FGD and DeNOx Knowledge Systems. This system which has been continually updated on a monthly basis since 1976 has the information on all the FGD processes and the valve requirements for each. Large slurry  valves are required for scrubber recycle at low pH and small valves for ball mill slurries with high pH .  Recorded webinars and case histories provide the background  for comprehensive LTCOV.

In the course of continually providing the LTCOV the valve supplier will also gather the intelligence necessary for innovation.  The way to keep ahead of competitors and maintain the LTCO is not to hide the knowledge from them but to keep ahead of them with a continually improving  LTCO.

Here are some areas where McIlvaine has been gathering the TCO valve information and you can view the data.

Choke Valves in Oil and Gas

A significant portion of choke valve sales are sold to oil and gas companies. The terms choke, control and axial are used in different ways.  Here are some ways the term is defined:

·        Flow path: Angle most important - if it is axial it is control, if it is angle it is choke.

·        Trim:  If one type of trim is used it is most suitable for choke, if another it is for control.

·        Location:  If it is extraction it is choke, if it is other applications it is control.

·        Valve type:  For some valve suppliers “choke” is just one of a number of applications and not a type of valve.

With remote monitoring and IIoT evaluation of choke valve performance it is important that the relevant decisive classification of applications, valve types, and materials be clarified.  This is an ongoing project.  To view the questions and present status click on : Choke Valve Decision Guide

Power Industry Steam Valves

There are similarities and differences in the steam cycle valve requirements for nuclear, ultra-supercritical coal, supercritical coal, and gas turbine combined cycle plants.  What sizes are required?  What valve types are recommended for each application? What is the appropriate support (trunnion, floating or a unique design)?  What materials are best for base load and rapid cycling applications? Power Industry Steam Valves 

Oil and Gas Gate Valves for greater than 5000 psi service

Subsea and shale applications are where one finds most of the gate valves with requirements for greater than 5000 psi service.  What are the specific applications, gate valve designs, and materials which are best for each specific application? This analysis is in the early stages.  We have identified some suppliers and their products and are asking them for comments.  We welcome input from all sources. Oil and Gas Gate Valves Greater than 5000 psi Decision Guide

Rising Stem Ball Valves

Rising stem ball valves are used in the oil and gas industry as well as in petrochemical plants. This analysis initially only has details on valves used for molecular sieve switching.  At this time there is only a partial analysis of suppliers.  We need your input relative to additional applications, additional suppliers, and input on valve sizes and cost.  Rising Stem Ball Valves

Molecular Sieve Switching Valves

Many valves have been used on this service but few are performing as might be wished. Three valve designs are usually found in molecular sieve unit switching valve service: (1) metal-seated ball valves; (2) metal-seated, triple off-set butterfly valves; and (3) metal-seated, non-contacting, rising stem ball valves. Some rotary valve options such as the triple offset butterfly valves are relatively inexpensive to purchase and may perform adequately in the near term. Operators, however, have generally found them to be deficient in sealing capability, expected service life and total cost of ownership. Process disruption, high MRO expense and the inability to deliver a minimum of five years of continuous service between planned shutdowns have all been persistent negatives.

Historically the rising stem ball valve (RSBV) has been used in this application. But the selection is complicated and depends to some extent on the severe conditions existing. Zero-leakage carbide coated metal seated ball valves can be a preferred option in particularly severe service.

With remote monitoring and IIoT evaluation of valve performance it is important that the relevant decisive classification of applications, valve types, and materials be clarified.  This is an ongoing project.  To view the questions and present status click on: http://www.mcilvainecompany.com/Decision_Tree/subscriber/Severe_Service_Valve_04_14_16.pdf

How to move forward

1.     The first step is to prioritize the LTCOV determinations and start with those that will provide the highest ROI.  McIlvaine has the market and technical knowledge to help you prepare the priority list.

2.     The second step is to move forward with one or more LTCOVs.  This will require making sure that the decision system has all the relevant papers and case histories which can be the basis for validation.  If all the important niche experts are not already involved with the system encourage them to join in.  With this foundation the LTCOV can be prepared at modest cost. McIlvaine can assist or spear head this effort.

3.     Make sure that potential purchasers have access to the system which contains your LTCOV.

4.     Participate in webinars, provide new case histories, and continue to innovate and continually revise your LTC0V.

5.     Keep expanding your LTCOV portfolio.

The business program is explained at www.mcilvainecompany.com

Bob McIlvaine can provide a free GoToMeeting discussion of this business program.

 His contacts are  rmcilvaine@mcilvainecompany.com 847-784-0012 ext. 122, mobile 847-226-2391.