Fuel treatment solutions for power plants should be selected against a defined operating problem and verified through a controlled trial. Start with the actual fuel analysis, the equipment affected and a useful baseline. A product claim alone cannot establish a fuel saving for your plant.
Identify the problem before selecting treatment
Record whether the concern is deposit formation, corrosion, unstable combustion or fuel handling. Note where and when it occurs, which fuel deliveries were involved and what changed in operations. Review these observations with the site technical team before assigning a cause.
- Fuel information: recent analysis, sampling date and changes between deliveries
- Equipment: unit type, affected locations and operating load
- Operating history: fuel consumption, useful output and maintenance records
- Evidence: relevant deposit, ash or corrosion observations
Compare additive grades using their documents
The published CHIMI MAG technical sheets describe organo-magnesium additives for heavy fuel oil. They list 20% and 30% active organo-magnesium grades. Compare the current sheets, agreed specifications and dosing-equipment requirements before selecting a product.
A higher concentration does not by itself demonstrate better plant performance. Keep the concentration basis, delivered quantity and application requirements consistent when comparing offers. Confirm any proposed treatment ratio and injection arrangement with the site team.
Establish a comparable baseline
Record fuel input alongside useful steam or electricity output. Compare periods with similar duty and document fuel quality, load, operating changes and maintenance. A fall in fuel consumption during lower production is not evidence of improved efficiency.
Agree the trial before starting
Define the problem, measurements, sampling method, comparison periods and acceptance criteria. Agree responsibilities and operating limits. Keep changes in burner settings, cleaning or other treatment visible in the record so their effects are not silently credited to an additive.
- Use consistent meters, units and sampling methods
- Record fuel input and useful output together
- Track the specific operating problem and relevant maintenance observations
- Record treatment consumption and all incremental costs
- Retain conditions and changes that could explain the result
Worked cost example — illustrative only
Suppose a plant spends 100,000 monetary units on fuel during a comparable baseline period. If a properly assessed trial finds a 1% fuel-cost reduction at equivalent useful output, the gross saving is 1,000. If additive, dosing and monitoring costs total 700 for that period, the net saving is 300. These are invented teaching figures, not CHIMI ART prices, a customer result or a promised saving.
Include all costs and avoid double counting
Net benefit equals supported fuel and operating savings minus incremental treatment costs. Use the same time period and currency. Include additive, dosing, monitoring and handling costs. Count maintenance or availability benefits only when records support them; do not count the same avoided fuel or outage twice.
What to send with your enquiry
Send the fuel analysis, unit type, operating problem, useful-output and fuel baseline, current treatment and intended trial period. Include your delivery location and documentation requirements. The links below provide the published product sheets and a companion explanation of cost-benefit assessment.