la trobe lignite developements - rio sponsored, page-41

f111,

Is that why no2 unit is different, geez mate your giving away your age with that response. Yeah i knew they didnt want to ship if up thats why lyb was reduced in scope and why newport went ahead in the first place. Damn gov ordered it but didnt want to pay to move it, haha, those where the good old days I suppose when they had no cents, or is it sense.

Well maybe 1000-470MW is closer to the mark.

So in effect as I was saying previously that 6% would need to be re-rated to much higher water content which is probably why they should just stick to partial dewatering using the other two technologies they already have up there.

I wouldnt go putting a line in at 18% or around that mark as the design life for those steels and is very dependent upon thermal transient conditions and if you change the latent heat in the boiler you will experience reduced life, and as they are already been running for some 30+ years, i dare suggest that the good old design life is running thin. moreso how on earth they going to fund the damn thing.

regarding the temperatures, well we have seen two different sets of numbers so I dont know its one things running a mechanco set in bacchus marsh but its another to run 24 hours a day 365 days a year, i see more structural issues all around.

and we agree with the CO2 cost about $25 per tonne it maybe cheaper just to go all Gas, your CO2 emmisions is vastly smaller and it would appease all the CCSD, EPA, et al requirements I feel.

also i fail to see how this is so useable other than indonesia, the moisuture content is much lower than in the valley but the ask content is greater, and when you start going to the other regions the ash content is huge, i have never seen them trial those sorts of coals.

Cheers