GRE Project #202333 PT RE Project # O13.

PJ/RE/V2013

DELIVERABLE I-2
SITE WALK DOWN REPORT
DryFiningTM Retrofit of
PT PEMBANGKITAN JAWA BALI PAITON I
INDONESIA

Submitted by:

GREAT RIVER ENERGY

12300 Elm Creek Boulevard
Maple Grove, MN 55369 USA

2013 July 10

Proprietary Statement

The material contained within this report is proprietary to Great River Energy and subject to the Confidentiality
and Intellectual Property Agreement 2012 December 02 between the parties. It shall be used by PT Rekadaya
Elektrika only for the purpose of evaluating the Feasibility Study for DryFining Retrofit of PJB Paiton I. PT Rekadaya
Elektrika agrees that it will not give this material to others outside of PT PJB or its organization without the prior
written permission of Great River Energy.

1
CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 3

PROJECT BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................. 5

DRYFININGTM PROJECT SITE WALK DOWN TEAM ........................................................................... 7

OBJECTIVES FOR SITE WALK DOWN ............................................................................................... 8

FUEL PATH SITE OPTIONS ............................................................................................................... 9

CLOSELY INTEGRATED SITE OPTIONS............................................................................................ 14

POSSIBLE SOURCES OF WASTE HEAT ............................................................................................ 16

OVERALL OBSERVATIONS ............................................................................................................. 19

CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................... 20

2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PT Rekadaya Elektrika (PT RE) has entered a Feasibility Assessment Agreement with Great River
Energy (GRE) to evaluate a DryFiningTM retrofit at PT Pembangkitan Jawa-Bali (PJB) Paiton I, a
400 megawatt (MW) power station in Probolinggo, East Java, Indonesia.

The Site Walk Down is essential to evaluate the best possible location(s) for the DryFining
modules in relation to the coal conveyors and heat sources. Based on the preliminary analysis,
approximately 500 m2 of physical space is required to accommodate the DryFining modules.
Potential sources of waste heat were also identified and assessed based on quality and
proximity to possible DryFining module locations. Over the course of the Feasibility
Assessment, having firsthand knowledge of the physical site is beneficial to evaluate alternative
equipment locations and heat source options. While the ultimate location of the DryFining
modules is not expected to impact the Core Scope or its cost, the location can have an impact
on the balance of plant capital budget.

The Site Walk Down for Paiton I was conducted on 1 December 2012, led by Mr. Muljo Adji AG,
Director of Production for PT Pembangkitan Jawa-Bali. Three representatives from the
DryFining Project Team participated: John Weeda and Charles Bullinger from Great River
Energy and Jeff Morris from Heyl & Patterson. Observations and recommendations from this
trip follow.
There appears to be adequate area
Site Option 3 available to locate the major DryFining
equipment modules in at least three
separate locations. Piping of waste heat
Site Option 1
is simpler and less expensive than
conveying coal for long distances to reach
remote dryers.

Site Option 1, close to the initial power

Site Option 2
Figure 1. Conceptual Site Options for DryFining
plant coal feed conveyors, appears more
desirable from a budgetary standpoint.
This space is currently used for spare
parts storage, and PJB must determine if
this space can be reassigned for
DryFining.

If Site Option 2 is chosen, there appears to be sufficient space above the crossover ductwork
between the boiler and precipitator buildings, similar to the physical location at Coal Creek
Station. This option would increase the capital budget for additional structural steel and longer
fuel conveyors.

3
Site Option 3 may offer the most fuel flexibility and available area, but requires significantly
longer runs of piping to bring the residual heat from the plant to the Dryers.

ACTION REQUESTED: We ask that PJB and RE carefully consider availability and constructability
of Site Options 1, 2 and 3 and determine which, if any, are preferred for placement of DryFining
equipment. The decision will impact the overall balance of plant design and cost.

4
PROJECT BACKGROUND

Indonesia has implemented a national policy to export high grade coal for economic
development in the country, leaving the lower-cost, lower-grade coals (that are higher in
moisture content and lower in energy density) for domestic energy production in order to
remain competitive. Domestic energy demand is growing by 5 to 10% per year in Indonesia, yet
this increasing reliance on lower grade coals will reduce the amount of power that can be
generated in the existing power stations. Domestic coal would need to be dried to avoid a
derate of production capacity in existing power plants that were designed for higher grade coal.

PT Pembangkitan Jawa Bali (PJB) owns and operates power plants in Indonesia. Among these,
Paiton I is a Combustion Engineering tangentially fired 400 MW unit commissioned in 1994. It
was originally designed for 25 percent moisture coal (approximately 5,200 kcal/kg) and is
planning to receive lower grade coal at 40 percent moisture (approximately 4,200 kcal/kg) in
the future. The lower grade coal would normally result in reduced power output and lower
reliability due to increased demand and elimination of spare capacity on the existing mill
pulverizers, both of which are undesirable. Drying the new, lower grade coal to approximately
25% moisture would increase the heating value of the new fuel back to the original design fuel
and improve reliability by decreasing mill duty and regaining one spare mill.

In 2011, PT PJB hired Dr. Muhammad Nur Yuniarto and his team from the Institut Teknologi
Sephuluh Nopember (ITS) to conduct a search and evaluation of coal drying technologies from
all over the world. ITS completed their assignment and found that Great River Energys
DryFiningTM technology uses waste heat rather than primary sources of energy to dry coal.
DryFiningTM technology has been in commercial operation at utility scale since 2009 and
provides environmental benefits in addition to coal drying.

PJB SPECIFICATIONS Starting Raw Coal Finished DryFineTM Units

Throughput capacity 250 200 Metric Tonne/hour
Total moisture 40 25 % by weight
Higher Heating Value 4200 tbd kcal/kg

In January 2012, Heyl & Patterson and Great River Energy responded to a Request for Proposal
from PJB to provide a preliminary scope and cost estimate for the DryFiningTM technology for
Paiton I. The preliminary scope of the design included three (3) DryFiningTM modules consisting
of customized fluidized bed dryers, fluidizing air fans, in-bed heating coils, baghouse, stack and
instrumentation for $17.1 million USD ($13.5 million for core equipment FOB factory plus $3.6
million USD license fee). The DryFining equipment was designed to achieve 200 tons per hour
(TPH) fuel processing capacity to reduce fuel moisture from approximately 40 percent to 25
percent moisture by weight, based on process specifications provided by PJB. Installation of the
equipment and design and installation of the balance of plant (coal crusher, flue gas cooler,
foundations, structural steel, all fuel handling, dust control, fire detection, fire protection,
electrical, interconnecting piping, ductwork, labor, and controls) were not included in the core
scope cost estimate. The cost estimate was preliminary and included certain assumptions that
5
must still be verified. It is possible that the number and size of dryers may change given the
complete specifications for the primary fuel and the quality of residual heat available.

In December of 2012, PT Rekadaya Elektrika received a Letter of Intent No A612082 from PT PJB
regarding Procurement Plant of Specific Coal Dryer (Engineering, Supervision, Dryer Bed,
License and Training) for Generating Unit of Paiton. New specifications were issued with a
lower rank design case fuel.

NEW SPECIFICATIONS WARA.300 Coal DryFineTM Units

Throughput capacity 250 200 Metric Tonne/hour
Total moisture 40 25 % by weight
Higher Heating Value 3855 4880 kcal/kg

6
DRYFININGTM PROJECT SITE WALK DOWN TEAM

The Site Walk Down for Paiton I was conducted on 1 December 2012, led by Mr. Muljo Adji AG,
Director of Production for PT Pembangkitan Jawa
Jawa-Bali.
Bali. Three representatives from the
DryFining Project Team participated: John Weeda and Charles B Bullinger
ullinger from Great River
Energy, and Jeff Morris from Heyl & Patterson.

Great River Energy John Weeda jweeda@GREnergy.com

Executive Representative: Director, North Dakota Generation
Great River Energy +001 1 (701) 442-7000
442
rd
2875 3 Street SW
Underwood, ND 58576
58576-9759 USA
Great River Energy Charles Bullinger cbullinger@GREnergy.com
Technical Lead: Senior Principal Engineer
Great River Energy +001 1 (701) 250-2162
250
1611 East Century Avenue Suite 200
Bismarck, ND 58503 USA
Heyl & Patterson Jeff Morris jwm@heylpatterson.com
Technical Consultant: Vice President
HEYL & PATTERSON +001 1 (412) 788-9810
788
PO Box 36
Pittsburgh PA 15230 USA

7
OBJECTIVES FOR SITE WALK DOWN

The Site Walk Down is essential to evaluate the best possible location(s) for the dryers in
relation to the coal conveyors and heat sources. Based on the preliminary analysis,
approximately 500 m2 of physical space is required to accommodate three DryFiningTM
modules. Additional space may be required if additional modules are required based on the
upcoming detailed analysis. It is also understood that there is a potential to expand the
installation in the future to serve Paiton II if Paiton I proves successful. Allowable space for
expansion and proximity to both units may be factors for consideration. Other sources of waste
heat were identified and the quality and proximity to DryFining module locations will be
assessed. The formal recommendation on the sources and adequacy of waste heat will be
determined in Task I-7 Thermal System Integration. Firsthand knowledge of the site is
extremely useful when evaluating alternative physical locations and heat source options. While
the ultimate location of the DryFining modules is not expected to impact the Core Scope or its
cost, the location can have an impact on the balance of plant capital budget.

LAYOUT FLEXIBILITY

Each DryFining module is approximately 5 m wide by 17 m long. An additional 5 m width is

required for maintenance and repair access (170 m2). The overall height including Dryer with
baghouse above and hoppers below is approximately 40 m.

Paiton I will require three or possibly four DryFining modules, so an area of 10 m wide x 50 to
70 m long or 500 to 700 m2 is required (see Figure 2). The DryFining modules can be positioned
in a long and narrow train or clustered in a 20 m x 35 m rectangle (Figure 3).

DryFine 1 DryFine 2

[-------------------- 50 m ----------------]
DryFine 1 DryFine 2 DryFine 3 DryFine 4 DryFine 3 DryFine 4

[---------------------------70 m --------------------------] [-------------35 m ----------]

Figure 2. Long narrow layout Figure 3. Clustered layout

If expansion for Unit 2 is considered, the overall footprint would be doubled to 20 m x 70 m or

approximately 1400 m2 (see Figure 4)

DryFine 1 DryFine 2 DryFine 3 DryFine 4

DryFine 5 DryFine 6 DryFine 7 DryFine 8

[----------------------------70 m -------------------------]
Figure 4. 1400 m2 sample layout for Unit #1 and Unit #2

8
FUEL PATH SITE OPTIONS

An initial review of the coal yard was undertaken to understand how coal gets to the plant. It is
usually more economical to transport waste heat through piping and ductwork than transport
the fuel via new conveyors to the Dryers and back. Therefore, it makes sense to examine the
path that the fuel takes throughout the plant for potential dryer locations first.

The coal unloading and stockout facility

was visited first. Coal is shipped by
barge (in the background) from either
Kalimantan (Borneo) or Sumatra with
varied quality and sorted into storage
piles.

Coal travels by conveyor from the barge

unloading facility and coal yard piles at
grade to the boiler burners high in
elevation some distance away. If space
is available near the existing conveyor
and transfer points, it will minimize the
number and length of new conveyors
to take the fuel away, process it remotely and return it back to the existing conveyor path.

The coal handling operator explained the local control room, and described how the coal came
in by barge, was unloaded and then sorted and stored in different piles according to quality and
heating value. Different quality coals can be blended prior to conveyance and combustion.

The photo below shows the ability to receive coal

of varying quality and stock in one of three piles.
The space at this location may be adequate for
placement of drying equipment, if one pile is
eliminated in the future.

9
Figure 5. Current fuel path

From the barge unloading facility coal travels by conveyors A1 or A2 to Transfer House 1. From
there, coal travels in either conveyor B1 or B2 to Transfer House 2 for continued transport on
conveyors C1 and C2 to Transfer House 3. Transfer House 2 can also accept coal from reclaim
conveyor F2 and stockpile 1. At Transfer House 3, the coal can either continue on to Transfer
House 4 via conveyors D1 or D2 or go by conveyor E2 to Stockpile 2.

From Transfer House 4 coal can go to conveyor E1 to stockpile 1, the head end of J1 or J2.
Transfer House 4 can also receive coal from Stockpile 1 via reclaim conveyor F1. J1 and J2 are
enclosed conveyors that travel across the entire back of the Paiton units 1 & 2 to the top of
Transfer House 5. The coal then travels up conveyors K1 and K2 to the Transfer Tower in the
west side of Paiton 2 to tripper conveyors L1 and L2 which deliver coal to the individual
pulverizer silos.

10
Presently, Paiton I coal size specification calls for 100% to pass through a 50mm screen. Feed
coal to the DryFining modules must be crushed to 6 mm or less in order to properly fluidize and
dry. New crushers will be required (outside of core scope) to prepare the fuel from the above
contractual coal sizing to the DryFine feed coal specification. Location and tie in to the new
crushers will need to be evaluated in the overall space and layout configuration
recommendations.

Current Coal Sizing

Screening Current Contractual Coal Sizing DryFining Requirement
100% 50 mm 6 mm
75% 32 mm
20% maximum 2.38 mm

The 6mm maximum size has been determined by rigorous testing in GREs Prototype Dryer.
Small particles promote bubbling of the bed and transfer of heat which, in turn, promotes
evaporation of the water in the coal. If coal cannot be crushed further at the loading facility,
crushers could be placed at the head end of J or K conveyors. The placement of the DryFining
equipment, height of the Transfer Houses and input from the plant operators is required to
determine the best solution. While location between the tail end of J and head of K, decoupled
and on the ground, seems to provide the least overall capital cost, it would have to be
integrated with the current operations. A meeting will need to be convened to discuss options
with the PJB and Rekadaya Elektrika before the final selection is made. Crushing between
conveyors J & K, transfer to dryers at a location between the Precipitators and Boiler, much Like
Coal Creek Station, could also be accomplished but the cost of raising the equipment,
installation of a new transfer house and conveyance from and back to conveyor K would add
considerable capital cost.

A bypass arrangement will be recommended to allow for coal to enter the plant as it does now,
if for any reason the DryFining system is out of service. A flexible design may also be desired at
the head end of conveyor K to allow DryFine coal to fill silos in Unit 1, and then the same
conveyor be allowed to fill Unit 2 with raw coal in the event that either K1 or K2 is out of
service. Allowances should be made for both conveyors K1 and K2 to accept either DryFine or
raw coal by carefully positioned gates at the head end of each. Tie-ins can typically be made
during regular scheduled outages to the conveying systems and thermally integrated systems
which will minimize any unit downtime during construction.

A potential location at the head end of Conveyor K1 and K2 (Transfer House between J and K)
appeared to be a good place for a ground elevation scenario, but is currently used for storing
pulverizer replacement parts. It is possible, and quite cost effective, for coal to be diverted into
a de-coupled DryFining system from the top of Conveyor J, DryFine processed and then
returned to head-end of Conveyor K for delivery into the plant on its normal route.

11
 K Conveyors
J Conveyors

J Conveyors transport raw feed coal from the coal yard across Paiton I and II where it is transferred to K Conveyors
along the outside edge of Paiton II before it crosses back over to feed Paiton II and Paiton I.

J Conveyors

The transfer point between J and K conveyors would be a good potential spot to pick up the DryFine feed coal.
Note the pulverizer parts storage area nearby.

12
 Site Option 1
DryFining footprint
(20 m wide x 35 m long)

A promising location for the DryFining equipment was seen from the boiler roof area, from the coal delivery
system to the boiler cascade. May have sufficient area for expansion to Paiton I and II (25 m w x 65 m l x 40 m h)?

20 m x 35 m 20m x 35 m
Unit 2 exp Unit 1

Figure 6. Conceptual Site Option 1 DryFining layout with future expansion for Unit #2 shown

13
 K Conveyors

CLOSELY INTEGRATED SITE OPTIONS

Another possible location, similar to Coal Creek Station, is positioned above the crossover
ductwork between the boiler and precipitator buildings. The Paiton layout has more space
available between the buildings and is much closer to the ground. This option would help to
mitigate the impact
on balance of plant
structural steel by
reducing the amount
of steel required. A
series of
photographs were
taken from the roof
including the area
between the air
heaters and
precipitators and the
primary and
secondary air
ductwork.

14
 Site Option 2
DryFining location
(10 m wide x 70 m long
x 40 m high)

15
 Site Option 2

Site Option 2 side elevation view

A third site option may be the use of a portion of the coal yard. If only one coal pile is needed in
the future, one stockout conveyor either E1 or E2, could deliver the coal to the top of a crusher,
then into the DryFining system below it. From there, after processing, the coal could re-enter
the existing system via reclaim conveyor F1 or F2 and continue on the path it has taken since
plant startup. This option would not impact laydown areas or affect any of the in-place
equipment and operation beyond Transfer House #4. (E1 and F1 are depicted in the
photograph; however E2and F2 may be a better location as unprocessed coal would not need
to travel through unnecessary additional
Site Option 3
conveyors and Transfer House #4 only
once, requiring less overall horsepower).

This location would also allow operations

the flexibility to add DryFine coal to either
unit and would retain the option to bypass
the DryFine system altogether if
necessary.

Each of the site options will be discussed

with RE and PJB for practicality,
operability, interference, and capital cost
implications.

16
POSSIBLE SOURCES OF WASTE HEAT

A key advantage of DryFining is to use waste heat to dry the fuel, rather than consume
additional primary energy which adds considerable operating cost and eliminate any real
efficiency gains. DryFining uses heated air in the fluidized bed and hot water coils located
within the bed to perform the overall fuel drying. Multiple sources of waste heat in both liquid
and gas form are sought. Flue gas from the stack or chimney is an obvious source of heat
energy but can be very expensive to utilize if condensation and acid dewpoint require the use
of expensive alloy materials. Lower temperature sources of concentrated waste heat in liquid
form and other sources of indirect flue gas are preferred for the best overall economics.

Typical sources of low grade waste heat from liquids may be found in circulating water and LP
Feedwater Heater drains. Some supplemental steam may be required if sufficient waste heat is
not available to achieve the overall drying objectives.

A floor by floor tour of the boiler

Hot Primary Air to Mills
Hot Secondary Air to
Burner Fronts
Cold Primary Air Duct
building and air heater areas was
provided. Photographs were taken at
various angles in the event the
evaluation will require heat exchanger
installation in these areas. The side
elevation in the photograph to the left
shows the cold primary air ductwork
from the primary air heater to the mills
in orange, the hot secondary duct to
the burner front in the middle, and hot
primary air to the mills ductwork on
top. Following a thorough thermal
evaluation, these locations may be
needed for the installation of heat
exchangers for the DryFining process.

17
If additional sources of heat are required to accomplish the desired level of drying, a flue gas
cooler may be required. Flue gas coolers can be very expensive if they must be designed with
high temperature alloy and corrosion resistant materials for acid dewpoint condensing duty.
Ample space exists to locate a flue gas cooler, if necessary.

Possible location
for Flue Gas
Cooler if needed

In the event a flue gas cooler arrangement proves the best choice, the photograph above shows where a heat
exchanger might be located in the precipitator exhaust ductwork to the chimney.

18
OVERALL OBSERVATIONS

The tour concluded in the main

control room where the crew
provided key information
about the existing operation,
and asked several questions
about the DryFining system.

A presentation detailing the

DryFining system was given to
PJBs engineers and staff. The
quality of questions
demonstrated their knowledge
and experience, as well as their
obvious pride in their plant.

Subsequently, the DryFining Team has received more detailed plant layout drawings and
performance data to support the thermal integration analysis. The thermal integration analysis
will determine if there is adequate waste heat available and finalize the sizing and number of
DryFining modules required.

19
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

In summary, Paiton is believed to be an excellent candidate for GREs DryFiningTM system. The
necessary moisture removal percentage is comparable to that of Coal Creek Station. The T-fired
arrangement is one GRE is very familiar with. There appears to be adequate room for the
DryFining equipment, heat exchangers, and balance of plant. Significantly, the people at Paiton
I are engaged, responsible, and very interested in improving the operation and performance of
their plant. It remains to be seen whether or not the thermal evaluation will reveal enough heat
to accomplish our goal of reducing 40% moisture coal to 25%. Multiple scenarios will be
evaluated.

The DryFining Team determined that there appears to be adequate open area available to
locate the DryFining major equipment modules close to the initial power plant coal feed
conveyors (Site Option 1) if the storage of pulverizer parts can be relocated. Piping of waste
heat is simpler and less expensive than conveying coal for long distances to reach remote
dryers and this would be the most economical area in which to locate the Dryers. It will be up
to PJB to determine if Site Option 1 may be utilized for DryFining or not.

Site Option 3

Site Option 1

Site Option 2

Figure 7. Conceptual site locations for DryFining

20
The DryFining Team also determined that there appears to be adequate space for a closely
integrated site option on top of the cross over ductwork between the boiler building and
precipitators (Site Option 2), which is similar to the orientation at Coal Creek Station in the
United States. This option would increase the capital budget for additional structural steel and
longer runs of fuel conveyors.

Site Option 3 may offer the most flexibility and unobstructed area, but requires significantly
longer runs of piping to bring the residual heat from the plant to the Dryers.

PJB and RE should carefully consider availability and constructability of Site Options 1, 2 and 3
and determine which, if any, are preferred for placement of DryFining equipment. The decision
may impact the overall balance of plant design and cost.

If Site Options 1, 2 or 3 are not acceptable, it is possible that other locations may be discovered
as we work through the balance of the Feasibility Assessment.

21