Estimating an economic parameter related to a process for controlling emission of a pollutant into the air

• US 20060047564A1
• Filed: 12/07/2004
• Published: 03/02/2006
• Est. Priority Date: 08/27/2004
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: General Electric Technology GmbH (GE Aerospace)
• Original Assignee: Alstom Technology Ltd. (Alstom SA)
• Inventors: Piche, Stephen, Boyden, Scott A.
• Granted Patent: US 7,702,519 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/10
• CPC Class Codes: B01D 53/346 Controlling the process
• CPC Class Codes: B01D 53/504 characterised by a specific device
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/06 Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 30/0283 Price estimation or determination
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 40/00 Finance; Insurance; Tax strategies; Processing of corporate or income taxes

Abstract

An economic parameter estimator is provided for a process that has multiple process parameters (MPPs) and is performed to control emission of a pollutant into the air. The performance of the process is associated with one or more economic factors (EFs). The estimator includes either a neural network process model or a non-neural network process model. In either case, the model represents a relationship between one or more of the MPPs and an economic parameter. Also included is a processor configured with logic, e.g. programmed software, to estimate a monetary value of the economic parameter based on a value of each of the one or more MPPs, a value of each of at least one of the one or more EFs, and the one model.

Claims

1. An economic parameter estimator for estimating an economic parameter associated with a process that has multiple process parameters (MPPs) and is performed to control emission of a pollutant into the air, the performance of the process being associated with one or more economic factors (EFs), comprising:

one of a neural network process model and a non-neural network process model representing a relationship between one or more of the MPPs and the economic parameter; and

a processor configured with logic to estimate a monetary value of the economic parameter based on a value of each of the one or more MPPs, a value of each of at least one of the one or more EFs, and the one model.

2. The economic parameter estimator according to claim 1, wherein:

the pollutant is one of NO_x and SO₂.

3. The economic parameter estimator according to claim 1, wherein:

the value of each of the one or more MPPs is either (i) a value measured during the performance of the process or (ii) a value estimated based on one or more other values of the multiple MPPs measured during the performance of the process.

4. The economic parameter estimator according to claim 1, wherein:

the estimated monetary value of the economic parameter is an estimated first monetary value of the economic parameter;

the value of each of the one or more other MPPs is a first value of each of the one or more other MPPs;

the value of each of the at least one EF is a first value of each of the at least one EF; and

the processor is further configured with logic to estimate a second monetary value of the economic parameter based on the estimated first monetary value of the economic parameter, a second value of each of the one or more MPPs, a second value of each of the at least one EF, and the one model.

5. The economic parameter estimator according to claim 1, wherein:

the processor is further configured with logic to update the one model based on the estimated monetary value of the economic parameter.

6. The economic parameter estimator according to claim 5, wherein:

the updating includes updating the represented relationship between the one or more MPPs and the economic parameter based on the estimated monetary value of the economic parameter.

7. The economic parameter estimator according to claim 1, wherein:

the processor is further configured with logic to at least one of (i) estimate the monetary value of the economic parameter in real time during the performance of process and (ii) estimate the monetary value of the economic parameter periodically during the performance of process.

8. The economic parameter estimator according to claim 1, wherein the estimated monetary value of the economic parameter is one of:

a cost of power expended or required to be expended in the performance of the process;

a cost of a material applied or required to be applied to absorb or facilitate absorption of the pollutant in the performance of the process, and thereby control its emission into the air;

a value of regulatory credits generated or to be generated in the performance of the process; and

a value of a by-product produced or to be produced in the performance of the process.

9. The economic parameter estimator according to claim 1, wherein:

the process is a selective catalytic reduction (SCR) process that applies ammonia to remove NO_x from the NO_x laden flue gas and thereby control emissions of NO_x, and exhausts reduced NO_x flue gas;

the one or more MPPs include at least one of an amount of ammonia being applied or required to be applied during the performance of the process;

the at least one EF includes one of (i) a current or anticipated unit cost of ammonia, and (ii) a current or anticipated unit price of regulatory credits; and

the estimated monetary value of the economic parameter is one of (i) a cost of the ammonia being applied or required to be applied during the performance of the process, and (ii) a value of regulatory credits being generated or to be generated by removing the NO_x from the NO_x laden flue gas during the performance of the process.

10. The economic parameter estimator according to claim 1, wherein:

the process is a wet flue gas desulfurization (WFGD) process that distributes and applies limestone slurry to remove SO₂ from SO₂ laden wet flue gas and thereby control emissions of SO₂, and exhausts desulfurized flue gas;

the one or more MPPs include at least one of (i) an amount of limestone slurry being applied or required to be applied during the performance of the process, and (ii) an amount of power being expended or required to be expended in distributing and applying the limestone slurry during the performance of the process;

the at least one EF includes one of (i) a current or anticipated unit cost of limestone (ii) a current or anticipated unit cost of power, and (iii) a current or anticipated unit price of regulatory credits; and

the estimated monetary value of the economic parameter is one of (i) a cost of the limestone being applied or required to be applied during the performance of the process, (ii) a cost of power being expended or required to be expended in distributing and applying the limestone slurry during the performance of the process and (iii) a value of regulatory credits being generated or to be generated by removing the SO₂ from the SO₂ laden flue gas during the performance of the process.

11. The economic parameter estimator according to claim 1, wherein:

the process is a wet flue gas desulfurization (WFGD) process that removes SO₂ from SO₂ laden wet flue gas and thereby controls emissions of SO₂ and also applies oxidation air to crystallize the SO₂ removed from the SO₂ laden wet flue gas and thereby produce gypsum as a by-product of the process, and exhausts desulfurized flue gas;

the one or more MPPs include at least one of (i) an amount of the oxidation air being applied or required to be applied during the performance of the process and (ii) an amount of power being expended or required to be expended in applying the oxidation air during the performance of the process;

the at least one EF includes one of (i) a current or anticipated unit cost of power and (ii) a current or anticipated unit price of gypsum; and

the estimated monetary value of the economic parameter is one of (i) a cost of power being expended or required to be expended in applying the oxidation air during the performance of the process and (ii) a value of the gysum by-product being generated or to be generated by crystallizing the SO₂ during the performance of the process.

12. A method for estimating an economic parameter associated with a process that has multiple process parameters (MPPs) and is performed to control emission of a pollutant into the air, the performance of the process being associated with one or more economic factors (EFs), comprising:

determining a value of each of one or more of the MPPs; and

estimating a monetary value of the economic parameter based on one of a neural network process model and a non-neural network process model representing a relationship between the one or more MPPs and the economic parameter, the determined value of each of the one or more MPPs, a value of each of at least one of the one or more EFs.

13. The method according to claim 12, wherein:

the value of each of the one or more MPPs is determined either (i) by measuring the value during the performance of the process or (ii) estimating the value based on one or more other values of the multiple MPPs measured during the performance of the process.

14. The method according to claim 12, wherein the estimated monetary value of the economic parameter is an estimated first monetary value of the economic parameter, the value of each of the one or more other MPPs is a first value of each of the one or more other MPPs, and the value of each of the at least one EF is a first value of each of the at least one EF, and further comprising:

determining a second value of each of one or more of the MPPs; and

estimating a second monetary value of the economic parameter based on the estimated first monetary value of the economic parameter, the determined second value of each of the one or more MPPs, a second value of each of the at least one EF, and the one model.

15. The method according to claim 12, further comprising:

updating the one model based on the estimated monetary value of the economic parameter.

16. The method according to claim 15, wherein:

the updating includes updating the represented relationship between the one or more MPPs and the economic parameter based on the estimated monetary value of the economic parameter.

17. The method according to claim 12, wherein the estimated monetary value of the economic parameter is one of:

a cost of power expended or required to be expended in the performance of the process;

a cost of a material applied or required to be applied to absorb or facilitate absorption of the pollutant in the performance of the process, and thereby control its emission into the air;

a value of regulatory credits generated or to be generated in the performance of the process; and

a value of a by-product produced or to be produced in the performance of the process.

18. The method according to claim 12, wherein:

the process is a selective catalytic reduction (SCR) process that applies ammonia to remove NO_x from the NO_x laden flue gas and thereby control emissions of NO_x, and exhausts reduced NO_x flue gas;

the one or more MPPs include at least one of an amount of ammonia being applied or required to be applied during the performance of the process;

the at least one EF includes one of (i) a current or anticipated unit cost of ammonia, and (ii) a current or anticipated unit price of regulatory credits; and

the estimated monetary value of the economic parameter is one of (i) a cost of the ammonia being applied or required to be applied during the performance of the process, and (ii) a value of regulatory credits being generated or to be generated by removing the NO_x from the NO_x laden flue gas during the performance of the process.

19. The method according to claim 12, wherein:

the process is a wet flue gas desulfurization (WFGD) process that distributes and applies limestone slurry to remove SO₂ from SO₂ laden wet flue gas and thereby control emissions of SO₂, and exhausts desulfurized flue gas;

the one or more MPPs include at least one of (i) an amount of limestone slurry being applied or required to be applied during the performance of the process, and (ii) an amount of power being expended or required to be expended in distributing and applying the limestone slurry during the performance of the process;

the at least one EF includes one of (i) a current or anticipated unit cost of limestone (ii) a current or anticipated unit cost of power, and (iii) a current or anticipated unit price of regulatory credits; and

the estimated monetary value of the economic parameter is one of (i) a cost of the limestone being applied or required to be applied during the performance of the process, (ii) a cost of power being expended or required to be expended in distributing and applying the limestone slurry during the performance of the process and (iii) a value of regulatory credits being generated or to be generated by removing the SO₂ from the SO₂ laden flue gas during the performance of the process.

20. The method according to claim 12, wherein:

the process is a wet flue gas desulfurization (WFGD) process that removes SO₂ from SO₂ laden wet flue gas and thereby controls emissions of SO₂ and also applies oxidation air to crystallize the SO₂ removed from the SO₂ laden wet flue gas and thereby produce gypsum as a by-product of the process, and exhausts desulfurized flue gas;

the one or more MPPs include at least one of (i) an amount of the oxidation air being applied or required to be applied during the performance of the process and (ii) an amount of power being expended or required to be expended in applying the oxidation air during the performance of the process;

the at least one EF includes one of (i) a current or anticipated unit cost of power and (ii) a current or anticipated unit price of gypsum; and

the estimated monetary value of the economic parameter is one of (i) a cost of power being expended or required to be expended in applying the oxidation air during the performance of the process and (ii) a value of the gysum by-product being generated or to be generated by crystallizing the SO₂ during the performance of the process.