Impact of coal source changes on mercury content in fly ash: Examples from a Kentucky power plant

被引:16
作者
Hower, James C. [1 ]
Clack, Herek L. [2 ]
Hood, Madison M. [1 ,3 ]
Hopps, Shelley G. [1 ]
Thomas, Gerald H. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Kentucky, Ctr Appl Energy Res, 2540 Res Pk Dr, Lexington, KY 40511 USA
[2] Univ Michigan, Dept Civil & Environm Engn, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
[3] Univ Kentucky, Dept Earth & Environm Sci, Lexington, KY 40506 USA
关键词
Coal combustion; Coal chemistry; Power plants; ACTIVATED CARBON INJECTION; ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATORS; SORBENT INJECTION; PARTICLE-SIZE; FABRIC-FILTER; REMOVAL; CAPTURE; ELEMENTS; GAS; NANOPARTICLES;
D O I
10.1016/j.coal.2016.10.007
中图分类号
TE [石油、天然气工业]; TK [能源与动力工程];
学科分类号
0807 ; 0820 ;
摘要
Mercury capture by coal combustion fly ash is a function of the chemistry of the feed coal, including halogens; the amount and type of carbon in the fly ash; and the type of fly ash collection and the flue gas temperature at the point of fly ash collection. In this study of fly ash collected at different points in time from a five-row electrostatic precipitator (ESP) system at a Kentucky power plant, relationships were seen between the amount of fly ash carbon and the concentration of Hg in the ash. Coincident with the burning of low-S coal at two collection times, a better correlation between Hg and C was seen in the relatively cooler 3rd and 4th ESP rows than in the first two rows. This was particularly evident in the 2007 collection where the fly ash carbon was higher than in the 2004 collection. In 2013, following the installation of flue-gas desulfurization and the resulting switch to high-S coal and the installation of a hydrated-lime injection system between the 2nd and 3rd ESP rows, no significant Hg vs. C trend was observed. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:2 / 6
页数:5
相关论文
共 27 条
[1]  
Belba V. H., 2010, 8 POW PLANT AIR POLL
[2]  
Chen S., 1996, Prepr. Pap.-Am. Chem. Soc., V1996, P442
[3]   Particle size distribution effects on gas-particle mass transfer within electrostatic precipitators [J].
Clack, Herek L. .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2006, 40 (12) :3929-3933
[4]   Simultaneous Removal of Particulate Matter and Gas-Phase Pollutants within Electrostatic Precipitators: Coupled In-Flight and Wall-Bounded Adsorption [J].
Clack, Herek L. .
AEROSOL AND AIR QUALITY RESEARCH, 2015, 15 (06) :2445-2455
[5]   Mercury Capture within Coal-Fired Power Plant Electrostatic Precipitators: Model Evaluation [J].
Clack, Herek L. .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2009, 43 (05) :1460-1466
[6]  
Clack HL, 2013, 11 INT C MERC GLOB P
[7]  
Environmental Protection Agency, 2012, MERC AIR TOX STAND M
[8]  
Environmental Protection Agency, 2013, CROSS STAT AIR POLL
[9]   Modeling powdered activated carbon injection for the uptake of elemental mercury vapors [J].
Flora, JRV ;
Vidic, RD ;
Liu, W ;
Thurnau, RC .
JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, 1998, 48 (11) :1051-1059
[10]   Association of the Sites of Heavy Metals with Nanoscale Carbon in a Kentucky Electrostatic Precipitator Fly Ash [J].
Hower, James C. ;
Graham, Uschi M. ;
Dozier, Alan ;
Tseng, Michael T. ;
Khatri, Rajesh A. .
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2008, 42 (22) :8471-8477