Paper Titles

Hexacarboxylate-Bridged Dicopper (II) Paddle-Wheel-Based 3-D Metal-Organic Framework: Synthesis, Structure
p.314

Study on Pyrolysis Behavior of Polybenzoxazine by PyGC-MS
p.318

Substituent Group Effete on the Geometric Configurations of the Acyclic Ruthenium Bipyridine Imidazole-Cyanide Anion Recognition Systems
p.322

Co-Effect of AlF₃ and MgF₂Coating on the Electrochemical Performance of LiNi_1/3Co₁_/3Mn_1/3O₂ Cathode Material under High Voltage
p.327

Novel Sorbents and their Sorptive Properties for Mercury Emissions Control of Coal-Fired Flue Gas
p.332

V₁₀O₂₈^-6 Cluster Compound, a Promising Cathode Material for Li Ion Battery
p.337

Thermal Oxidative Degradation Behavior of Fluorinated Thermotropic Liquid Crystal Copolyesters
p.343

Studies of Reaction Kinetics of Catalytic Hydrogenation of Isophthalonitrile for Meta-Xylenediamine Preparation
p.348

Optimization of the Coagulation Process for Kaolin and Humic Acid Removal Using Polymeric Aluminum Ferric Sulfate
p.353

HomeAdvanced Materials ResearchAdvanced Materials Research Vol. 1088Novel Sorbents and their Sorptive Properties for...

Novel Sorbents and their Sorptive Properties for Mercury Emissions Control of Coal-Fired Flue Gas

Article Preview

Abstract:

Mercury is a striking pollutant and mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants are under environmental regulation. The primary objective of mercury abatement in coal-fired power plants is to remove elemental mercury. Sorbent injection is one of the major commercially available technologies for mercury control from coal fired power plants and activated carbon is the most commonly employed sorbent. Modified activated carbons have been found to exhibit high mercury emission reduction efficiency. Noble metal and metal oxides also showed excellent mercury adsorption capacity. Fly ash, a waste product from coal-fired solid wastes, may be an excellent adsorbent owing to its low cost and abundance. There is no consistent evidence for the adsorption mechanism of mercury on modified activated carbon; a popular view is that the sorption mechanism is combination of physisorption and chemisorption.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Advances in Materials Science

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volume 1088)

Pages:

332-336

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1088.332

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

February 2015

Authors:

Na Huang, Yan Bin Zhu*, Dan Jie Meng

Keywords:

Coal-Fired Flue Gas, Mercury, Sorbent

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

© 2015 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

[1] N. Pirrone, S. Cinnirella, X. Feng, R. Finkelman, H. Friedli, J. Leaner, R. Mason, A. Mukherjee, G. Stracher, D. Streets, Global mercury emissions to the atmosphere from anthropogenic and natural sources. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 10 (2010).

DOI: 10.5194/acp-10-5951-2010

[2] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mercury Study Report to Congress, Volume I: Executive Summary, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards and Office of Research and Development, EPA-452/R-97-003, December (1997).

[3] B. Zhao, Z. Zhang, J. Jin, W. -P. Pan, Simulation of mercury capture by sorbent injection using a simplified model. Journal of Hazardous Materials 170 (2009) 1179-1185.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.05.095

[4] GAO., Preliminary observations on the effectiveness and costs of mercury control technologies at coal-ﬁred power plants. Washington, DC, USA: (2009).

[5] J. Ren, J. Zhou, Z. Luo, K. Cen, An experimental study on acticated sorbents for gas-phase mercury removal from flue gas. Proceedings of the CSEE (2004) 172-176.

[6] H. Zeng, F. Jin, J. Guo, Removal of elemental mercury from coal combustion flue gas by chloride-impregnated activated carbon. Fuel 83 (2004) 143-146.

DOI: 10.1016/s0016-2361(03)00235-7

[7] H. Gao, J. Zhou, Z. Luo, K. Cen, Experimental Study on Hg Vapor Adsorption of Modified Activated Carbons in Simulated Flue Gas. Proceedings of the CSEE 27 (2007) 26-30.

[8] M. De, R. Azargohar, A. K. Dalai, S. R. Shewchuk, Mercury removal by bio-char based modified activated carbons. Fuel 103 (2013) 570-578.

DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2012.08.011

[9] W. Du, L. Yin, Y. Zhuo, Q. Xu, L. Zhang, C. Chen, Catalytic Oxidation and Adsorption of Elemental Mercury over CuCl2-Impregnated Sorbents. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 53 (2014) 582-591.

DOI: 10.1021/ie4016073

[10] Information on http: /www. norit. com/products-and-services/products/darcosup-sup-hg-lh.

[11] S. Sjostrom, M. Dillon, B. Donnelly, J. Bustard, G. Filippelli, R. Glesmann, T. Orscheln, S. Wahlert, R. Chang, A. O'Palko, Influence of SO3 on mercury removal with activated carbon: Full-scale results. Fuel Processing Technology 90 (2009).

DOI: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2009.08.019

[12] X. Li, J. -Y. Lee, Modeling of Mercuric Chloride Removal by CuCl2-Impregnated Activated Carbon Sorbent in a Fabric Filter. Energy & Fuels 27 (2013) 7654-7663.

DOI: 10.1021/ef4017625

[13] A. Saha, D. N. Abram, K. P. Kuhl, J. Paradis, J. L. Crawford, E. Sasmaz, R. Chang, T. F. Jaramillo, J. Wilcox, An X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy Study of Surface Changes on Brominated and Sulfur-Treated Activated Carbon Sorbents during Mercury Capture: Performance of Pellet versus Fiber Sorbents. Environmental science & technology 47 (2013).

DOI: 10.1021/es403280z

[14] Y. Yao, V. Velpari, J. Economy, Design of sulfur treated activated carbon fibers for gas phase elemental mercury removal. Fuel 116 (2014) 560-565.

DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2013.08.063

[15] M. M. Wiatros-Motyka, C. -g. Sun, L. A. Stevens, C. E. Snape, High capacity co-precipitated manganese oxides sorbents for oxidative mercury capture. Fuel 109 (2013) 559-562.

DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2013.03.019

[16] J. Zhou, W. Hou, P. Qi, X. Gao, Z. Luo, K. Cen, CeO2–TiO2 Sorbents for the Removal of Elemental Mercury from Syngas. Environmental science & technology 47 (2013) 10056-10062.

DOI: 10.1021/es401681y

[17] M. Levlin, E. Ikävalko, T. Laitinen, Adsorption of mercury on gold and silver surfaces. Fresenius' journal of analytical chemistry 365 (1999) 577-586.

DOI: 10.1007/s002160051526

[18] A. A. Presto, E. J. Granite, Noble metal catalysts for mercury oxidation in utility flue gas. Platinum Metals Review 52 (2008) 144-154.

DOI: 10.1595/147106708x319256

[19] E. J. Granite, C. R. Myers, W. P. King, D. C. Stanko, H. W. Pennline, Sorbents for mercury capture from fuel gas with application to gasification systems. Industrial & engineering chemistry research 45 (2006) 4844-4848.

DOI: 10.1021/ie060456a

[20] A. Jain, S. -A. Seyed-Reihani, C. C. Fischer, D. J. Couling, G. Ceder, W. H. Green, Ab initio screening of metal sorbents for elemental mercury capture in syngas streams. Chemical Engineering Science 65 (2010) 3025-3033.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ces.2010.01.024

[21] J. C. Hower, C. L. Senior, E. M. Suuberg, R. H. Hurt, J. L. Wilcox, E. S. Olson, Mercury capture by native fly ash carbons in coal-fired power plants. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 36 (2010) 510-529.

DOI: 10.1016/j.pecs.2009.12.003

[22] Y. Zhang, W. Duan, Z. Liu, Y. Cao, Effects of modified fly ash on mercury adsorption ability in an entrained-flow reactor. Fuel 128 (2014) 274-280.

DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2014.03.009

[23] T. M. Bisson, Z. Xu, R. Gupta, Y. Maham, Y. Liu, H. Yang, I. Clark, M. Patel, Chemical–mechanical bromination of biomass ash for mercury removal from flue gases. Fuel 108 (2013) 54-59.

DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2012.02.035

[24] W. Xu, H. Wang, T. Zhu, J. Kuang, P. Jing, Mercury removal from coal combustion flue gas by modified fly ash. Journal of Environmental Sciences 25 (2013) 393-398.

DOI: 10.1016/s1001-0742(12)60065-5