LogoTopBar

Industrial Applications

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Green Fuel Technologies liquid concentrate product can be used in many different industrial applications as well. Below we have summaries of usage in power generation applications as well as asphalt manufacturing.

Summary of GFT Utilization in a Asphalt Manufacturing Plant

Asphalt Mfg

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Executive Summary

The Carbon Mass Balance test, conducted and completed at MC Construction on the ASTEC Industries, Inc. double–barrel asphalt plant, confirms that the addition of Green Fuel Technologies ™ liquid concentrate to the fuel will reduce fuel consumption and harmful emissions.

The overall reduction in fuel consumption during this test was determined to be 26.38% at a production level of 38 and 18.12% for a production level of 47.

Reduction of harmful emissions was determined to be 24.05% for CO, 8.66% for unburned hydrocarbons, 20.42% for CO2 at a production level of 38. Reduction of harmful emissions were determined to be 16.42% for CO, 38.82% for unburned hydrocarbons, and 14.99% for CO2 at a production level of 47.

Further studies into the long-term effects of the use of Green Fuel Technologies ™ treated fuel should be conducted. Tests should be conducted on other asphalt equipment to determine if production rates can be increased by reducing harmful emissions particularly in those areas (California) where stricter controls are limiting production.

Finally, Green Fuel Technologies ™ treated fuel should be used in all combustion equipment at MC Construction. The benefits of reduced fuel consumption, reduced emissions, reduced particulate emissions, and reduced maintenance costs apply to all combustion equipment, not just the asphalt plant, but also the loaders, haulers, pick-up trucks and excavators.

Summary of GFT Utilization in a Power Generation Plant

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Cleaver Brooks Steam Boiler
Power Plant1

Economic Analysis of 8 Day Comparison Study
Using a Cleaver Brooks Boiler

Yield Comparison

Consumption of  Bunker

Consumption of
Bunker with Green Fuel Technology Liquid

Difference

Savings

Gallons Consumed

10,029

9,584

- 445 gallons

 $ 578.50

Cubic Meters of Steam

42,701.46

52,051.58

9,350.12 mts3

21.90%

Cubic Meters/Gallon

4.26

5.43

1.175 mts3

 

Gallons/Cubic Meter of Steam

0.23

0.184

- 0.051

 

Cost per Cubic Meter of Steam

$ 0.305

$ 0.240

- $ 0.066

 $ 615.03

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Savings

 $ 1,193.53

Observations:

This power production plant’s goal was to produce maximum steam power, so its water feed injectors were set to produce more power rather than pure fuel savings. The end result was that it achieved significant power gains and efficiencies while still producing a fuel savings as well. The combined gains of 21.9% additional power achieved, plus the additional fuel savings of 4.4%, provide an aggregate production performance increase of 26.3% by using Green Fuel Technologies Liquid Concentrate. 

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

[Home] [Green Technology] [Trucking Applications] [Shipping Applications] [Industrial Applications] [Automotive Applications] [FAQ's] [Green News] [Contact Us]

Copyright 2010 Green Fuel Technologies, All Rights Reserved