- 翻譯公司資訊
-
世聯翻譯公司完成化工專業(yè)領域英文翻譯
發(fā)布時間：2019-09-26 08:44 點擊：
世聯翻譯公司完成化工專業(yè)領域英文翻譯
APPENDIX A-1Laboratory Test report of second Chinese Coal Sample (ALS Laboratory Group)1.0 INTRODUCTION1.1 Work PlanThe Work Plan described activities associated with verification of results obtained by treating coal with the NANO FOSSILFUELS TECHNOLOGY, LLC (hereinafter referred to as Nano) COMBUSTION CATALYST FOR USE IN COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS because of the potential benefits of reducing the amount of coal burned in the power plants by:• Increasing the BTU content of the coal• Decreasing the Fly Ash content produced by burning the coal• Decreasing the pollutants emitted from the smokestack of the power plantsThe Nano product has been shown, through CFT test reports on coal (see Appendix A of the March 29 report for the Dr. King study) to perform all of the functions and benefits listed in the paragraph above. This original study showed a 14% increase in the BTU content of the coal after treatment with the NANO Combustion Catalyst. In our attempts to reproduce the original test results using laboratory analysis of coal samples supplied by China, the best results we could demonstrate for the increase in the BTU content was 6%. Although this result will decrease the amount of coal that a Chinese Power Plant would us, burning 5.5 million tons of coal per year, and achieve a net reduction in the cost of the coal of approximately $5 million per year, we still were trying to find out other test methods that would yield a better result.A second large sample of coal (approximately 27 kg) was sent to us by China for additional testing. We were also sent the analysis data of this coal, done in China, so we could compare it to the lab results we obtained for the Baseline Sample (untreated coal)The current plan was to subject both the untreated coal, and the coal treated with the Nano product, to standard proximate analysis by standard laboratory procedures for coal analysis to measure the BTU content, moisture, as content and sulfur content of the untreated and treated coal and calculate the differences between the two samples.1.2 Testing on a new sample of coalThe coal sample was treated exactly the same way as described in Section 2.2 of the original March 29, 2014, report and sent to the same laboratory (Standard Laboratories, Casper, WY USA) as was used for the previous sample.When the laboratory test results for the new coal sample were reviewed, there was no appreciable difference in results between the untreated coal sample (Baseline) and the NANO-treated coal sample. This was very unusual since we had not previously seen a NANO-treated coal sample were the BTU value did not increase over the BTU content of the Baseline sample. We thought that maybe the lab had made some kind of error in their testing so we sent another sample of the NANO-treated coal to them and asked that they analyzed two different portions of the treated coal sample (duplicate analysis) so we could see if there was some kind of reproducible result.Because we suspected that there may be a problem with the latest analysis done by Standard Laboratories, we sent an identical sample to another coal testing laboratory in Canada (ALS Laboratory Group, Richmond, British Columbia, Canada) to see if there was any appreciable difference between the results obtained from both Laboratories.1.3 Test results on the new coal sampleWhen reviewing the test results on the new coal sample from standard laboratories we saw that, as with the previous results on the new coal sample, there was no appreciable difference between the Baseline sample and the NANO-treated sample. We also noticed, in looking at the results of the duplicate sample, and comparing them to the previous result for this sample from this laboratory, the results were lower for the BTU value which did not make logical sense. When new questioned the person at Standard Laboratories who did the test he did admit that he did not have quite enough of the NANO-treated samples to do both tests so one sample may have been short in size which would yield a lower value. Therefore we determined that we could not use the lab data from this test.When we compared the results of the values of the tests done by Standard Laboratories to those done by the ALS Laboratory Group in Canada, we noticed that the results were similar. This told us that there was not much difference in the test results for the NANO-treated sample so there was no bias in the results from one lab to another. However, we were still puzzled as to why the NANO-treated sample sent to the ALS Laboratory Group had about the same value as the Baseline sample.2.0 Finding out the reason why the value of the NANO-treated sample showed the same results as the Baseline sampleWe knew that something had to be different in the way we were treating the second Baseline coal sample to obtain the NANO-treated sample. We contacted the manufacturer of the Combustion Catalyst and explained to him the results we achieved with the first sample (6% increase in BTU value) and the second sample (no increase in BTU value) with the data in the Dr. King study (14% increase in the BTU value) to see if he could find a reason why our latest test results were so different from the Dr. King test.He told us that in the original coal tests done in 2010 by Dr. King that they had let the coal sample, after being sprayed with the Combustion Catalyst, air-dry for 2 days before any testing was done. He asked us how long we had let the samples air-dry before sealing them in a plastic bag which was then sent to the laboratory for analysis. In reviewing the treatment of our samples for each test, and comparing it with the results of the tests done by Dr. King, we found one big difference as follows:TEST % increase inBTU Value Time for NANO-treated sample to dryDr. King Test 14% 2 daysFirst China Coal Sample 6% 1 hourSecond China Coal Sample (Standard Laboratory Result) 0% 5 min.Second China Coal Sample (ALS Laboratory Group) 0% 5 min.We determined that the reason that we did not get increases in the BTU values, as compared to the Dr. King test, is that we were not letting the samples dry long enough after t hey were treated with the Combustion Catalyst.2.1 De-emulsification of water in coal—The reason that coal needs to dry after treatment with the Combustion CatalystWe asked the manufacturer of the Combustion Catalyst why the coal sample treated with the NANO product needed to dry so long before analysis. Here is his explanation:The water in the coal sample is not liquid but rather is stored in the coal as an emulsion along with other organic matter. When a coal sample has been treated with the NANO Combustion Catalyst it takes some time for the Combustion Catalyst to be absorbed into the coal. After being absorbed into the coal the organic aliphatic ester in the Combustion Catalyst takes time to react with the water and de-emulsify the water so that the water comes back out as a liquid dissolved in the organic solvents in the Combustion Catalyst. When the coal sample is allowed to dry then the solvents in the Combustion Catalyst, which have the water dissolved in them, can evaporate which also removes the water which in turn helps to increase the BTU value of the coal.When we were packaging the NANO-treated coal samples into a sealed plastic bag after only 5 minutes, or 1 hour, of drying time, very little, if any, of the solvents and water could evaporate so the water remained inside the coal.3.0 Treating and Drying the NANO-treated Combustion Catalyst before Laboratory AnalysisIn order to prove the theory of de-emulsification of the water in the coal sample, in order to get an increase in the BTU value of the coal, it was necessary to prepare new samples of the second coal sample sent to us by China. The samples would be treated with the NANO Combustion Catalyst according to our original procedure but the sample would be allowed to dry for 1-2 days before being sent to the lab for analysis.3.1 Drying the NANO-treated coal sample.Two coal samples were prepared. One was the Baseline Sample (untreated coal) that was prepared to the exact same conditions outlined in Section 2.2.1 in the Original report of March 29, 2014. On Tuesday, April 15, the NANO-treated coal sample was prepared by Ernest Gisler at 10:00 am it the morning. It was kept in the metal test frame, used to hold the coal sample for spraying with the NANO product, and left to dry in the sun until approximately 6: 00 pm that evening. The treated sample was then brought inside the building used By Nano Fossil Fuels Technology, LLC, and was protected from contamination but was still exposed to the atmosphere in the building so that it could dry overnight. At approximately 10 am on April 16 the treated coal sample was again brought outside in the sun and left until about 4:00 pm in the afternoon, a total of 30 hours of drying time of which 14 hours were outside in the sun. The treated sample was then placed in a sealed plastic bag and brought to Alan Di Stefano around 5:00 pm on April 16. The two samples, Baseline and NANO-treated coal, were brought to a Federal Express office around 8 am on April 17 and shipped to ALS Laboratory Group in Canada for Analysis. The samples arrived at the lab on April 21 and were analyzed on April 23 and the lab report was sent to Alan Di Stefano on April 23 by e-mail.The outside temperature on April 15-16 reached a high of24 deg. C and the relative humidity was 44% so the conditions were very favorable for maximum drying of the sample.4.0 Laboratory Results for the second set of coal samples after dryingPlease see APPENDIX A-1 for the laboratory report from ALS Laboratory Group, Canada. Sample ID #2 was the coal sample treated with the NANO Combustion Catalyst and dried according to the procedure in Section 3.1 above. Sample ID #3 was the Baseline sample of untreated coal.When comparing the results of the NANO-treated Sample #2 to the Baseline Sample #3 we find the following results• The Dry BTU value of Sample #2 (9,719) showed an increase of16.88% over the Baseline (untreated) coal sample #3 (BTU value of 8,315). This is on about the same level as the original test conducted by Dr. King in 2010 (14% increase in BTU value).• The % Ash in Sample #2 (29.26%) showed a 14.6% decrease from the Baseline Sample #3 (34.26%).• The % Sulfur in Sample #2 (2.98%) showed a 2.3% reduction from the Baseline Sample #3 (3.05%)5.0 Conclusion of Laboratory Testing dataConclusion: Drying the NANO-treated coal sample for 30 hours before sending it off in a sealed plastic bag for laboratory analysis gave us an increase in the BTU value that was approximately the same as the increase in BTU value in the original study conducted by Dr. King in 2010.Therefore, one can draw the conclusion that all of the other changes noted in the original testing by Dr. King (reductions in SO2, NOx, CO and Mercury values) could also be expected.Therefore, the final testing of a properly dried coal sample from China, performed for this report, validates approximately the same results as that achieved in the original 2010 testing overseen by Dr. King.6.0 Conclusions and RecommendationsThe original Work Plan (Section 1.0 of the March 29,2014 report) sought verification of results obtained by treating coal with the NANO FOSSIL FUELS TECHNOLOGY, LLC, COMBUSTION CATALYST FOR USE IN COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS, and comparing it with previous test results documented in Appendix A of that report (Dr. King testing) in the following areas:• Increasing the BTU content of the coal• Decreasing the Fly Ash content produced by burning the coal• Decreasing the pollutants emitted from the smokestack of the power plantsIn reviewing the analysis of the lab results in Section 4.0 of this updated report, we believe that the current test results verified the type of results shown in the original Appendix A and that the results achieved in both sets of testing were comparable and reproducible for: Increasing the BTU content of the coal; Decreasing the Fly Ash content produced by burning the coal. Since the pollutants emitted from burning the coal were not measured in the current testing regimen, only the modeling of the results of the test in the original Appendix A could be demonstrated.APPENDIX A-1: Laboratory Test report of second Chinese Coal Sample (ALS Laboratory Group)Unitrans世聯翻譯公司在您身邊,離您近的翻譯公司,心貼心的專業(yè)服務,專業(yè)的全球語言翻譯與信息解決方案供應商,專業(yè)翻譯機構品牌。無論在本地,國內還是海外,我們的專業(yè)、星級體貼服務，為您的事業(yè)加速！世聯翻譯公司在北京、上海、深圳等國際交往城市設有翻譯基地，業(yè)務覆蓋全國城市。每天有近百萬字節(jié)的信息和貿易通過世聯走向全球！積累了大量政商用戶數據，翻譯人才庫數據，多語種語料庫大數據。世聯品牌和服務品質已得到政務防務和國際組織、跨國公司和大中型企業(yè)等近萬用戶的認可。 專業(yè)翻譯公司,北京翻譯公司,上海翻譯公司,英文翻譯,日文翻譯,韓語翻譯,翻譯公司排行榜,翻譯公司收費價格表,翻譯公司收費標準,翻譯公司北京,翻譯公司上海。
