Characteristics and Properties of Absorption Materials for Mercury Removal at High Temperature

Abstract:

In this study, some metal-M/aluminum carbonate absorption materials with molar ratio of M:Al=3:1 were manufactured. There was Cu–Al, Mn–Al, Fe–Al three kinds of sorbents synthesized by co-precipitate method. The physicochemical structures during mercury removal were analyzed by a surface area and pore structure analyzer (BET), an X-ray diffraction (XRD), a scanning electron microscope coupled with an electron detection scanning (SEM/EDS), and X-ray fluorescence (XRF). The results showed that surface areas for metal-M/aluminum carbonate sorbents were only about 11~12 m²/g and the metal ratio loaded was more than 80%. Lab-scale tests mercury removal efficiency in the temperature range of 200–300 ^oC indicated that there was an improvement in the performance of mercury removal by increasing reaction temperature. Cu–Al, Fe–Al and Mn–Al all three sorbents reached their absorption equivalent of 256.6, 253.3 and 247.0 μg/g under 300 ^oC operating temperature and 19736 h^-1 gas hourly space velocity. Additionally, the presence of transition metals can significantly improve the efficiency of mercury removal of the absorption materials.

• Periodical: Key Engineering Materials (Volume 730)
• Pages: 185-189
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.730.185
• Online since: February 2017
• Authors: Han Wen Cheng, Ching Tsung Yu*
• Keywords: Absorption Materials, Heavy Metal, Mercury Removal

References

[1] J. D. Kilgroe, C. B. Sedman, R. K. Srivastava, J. V. Ryan, C. W. Lee, S. A. Thorneloe, Control of Mercury Emissions from Coal-Fired Electric Utility Boilers: Interim Report Including Errata Dated 3-21-02, EPA-600/R-01-109, USEPA, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, NC (2002).

[2] A. P. Dastoora, Y. Larocpue, Global circulation of atmospheric mercury: a modeling study, Atmos. Environ. 38(1) (2004) 147-161.

[3] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2016).

[4] J. H. Pavlish, E. A. Sondreal, M. D. Mann, E. S. Olson, K. C. Galbreath, D. L. Laudal, S. A. Benson, Status review of mercury control options for coal- fired power plants, Fuel Process. Technol. 82(2-3) (2003) 89-165.

DOI: 10.1016/s0378-3820(03)00059-6

[5] G. A. Norton, H. Q. Yang, R. C. Brown, D. L. Laudal, G. E. Dunham, J. Erjavec, Heterogeneous oxidation of mercury in simulated post combustion conditions, Fuel, 82(2) (2003) 107-116.

DOI: 10.1016/s0016-2361(02)00254-5

[6] A. P. Jones, J. W. Hoffmann, D. N. Smith, T. J. Feeley, III, J. T. Murphy, DOE/NETL's Phase II mercury control technology field testing program: preliminary economic analysis of activated carbon injection, Environ. Sci. Technol. 41(4) (2007).

DOI: 10.1021/es0617340

[7] D. Karatza, A. Lancai, D. Musmarra, C. Zucchini, Study of mercury adsorption and desorption on sulfur impregnated carbon, Exp. Therm. Fluid Sci. 21(1) (2000) 150-155.

DOI: 10.1016/s0894-1777(99)00065-5

[8] R. D. Vidic, D. P. Siler, Vapor-phase elemental mercury adsorption by activated carbon impregnated with chloride and chelating agents, Carbon, 39(1) (2001) 3-14.

DOI: 10.1016/s0008-6223(00)00081-6

[9] X. Li, Z. Y. Liu, J. S. Kim, J. Y. Lee, Heterogeneous catalytic reaction of elemental mercury vapor over cupric chloride for mercury emissions control, Appl. Catal. B: Environ. 132-133 (2013) 401-407.

DOI: 10.1016/j.apcatb.2013.05.038

[10] Y. Zhao, M. D. Mann, J. H. Pavlish, B. A. F. Mibeck, G. E. Dunham, E. S. Olson, Application of gold catalyst for mercury oxidation by chlorine, Environ. Sci. Technol., 40(5) (2006) 1603-1608.

DOI: 10.1021/es050165d

[11] A. A. Presto, E. J. Granite, Survey of catalysts for oxidation of mercury in flue gas, Environ. Sci. Technol. 40(18) (2006) 5601-5609.

DOI: 10.1021/es060504i