Gaseous mercury capture using supported CuSx on layered double hydroxides from SO2-rich flue gas

Hong, Qinyuan; Xu, Haomiao; Yuan, Yong; Shen, Yi; Wang, Yalin; Huang, Wenjun

doi:10.1016/j.cej.2020.125963

Cited by 38 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The enlargement of basal spacing was favorable to gas transfer and surface reaction, hence accelerating the removal of Hg 0 , as illustrated in Figure . Some recent studies found that the combination of metal sulfide and LDH was effective for Hg 0 removal . The metal element in sulfides significantly affect the Hg 0 removal ability, following the order of Cu > Sn > Co > Ni > Fe > Mn.…”

Section: Metal Sulfidesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mercury Removal from Flue Gas by Noncarbon Sorbents

Yang

Zhao

et al. 2021

Energy Fuels

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mercury emitted from coal-fired power production industries is an enormous threat to human health and ecosystems. Sorbent injection is a promising and feasible strategy for mercury removal from the flue gas. Activated carbons (ACs) are the most explored mercury sorbents, which generally displayed high adsorption capacity. However, ACs still suffer from some disadvantages, such as impeding the utilization of fly ash in concrete production, difficulty to be regenerated for recycle, and so on. Thus, many noncarbon sorbents have been developed as supplementary options besides ACs for mercury removal. A review on the recent progress regarding noncarbon sorbents for removing mercury is provided. In this contribution, the Hg 0 removal capacities of natural minerals, waste-derived sorbents, metal oxides, metal sulfides, and magnetic adsorbents have been summarized. Particularly, the modification methods as well as their intrinsic roles for each types of noncarbon sorbents have been presented and discussed in depth. This work provides guidance for the design and exploration of noncarbon adsorbents, which can be applied in both coal-fired power plants and other nonpower production industries.

show abstract

Section: Metal Sulfidesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mercury Removal from Flue Gas by Noncarbon Sorbents

Yang

Zhao

et al. 2021

Energy Fuels

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mercury pollution has attracted worldwide attention because mercury is a heavy mental with high toxicity, bioaccumulation, and long persistence in the environment. − In 2017, the “Minamata Convention on Mercury” entered into force, which means that reduction of Hg emission from various anthropogenic sources has become an international obligation. , Coal combustion has been widely regarded as one of the largest anthropogenic sources of mercury emission. − Mercury existing in coal-fired flue gas includes elemental mercury (Hg 0 ), oxidized mercury (Hg 2+ ), and particulate mercury (Hg p ). , Among them, Hg 2+ is water-soluble and can be removed by a wet desulphurization device. , Hg p can be captured with fly ash by dust removal equipment. , However, it is difficult to remove Hg 0 from flue gas because it is insoluble in water and highly volatile. , Therefore, most of Hg 0 is directly discharged into the atmosphere and harms the environment and human health.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…11,12 Hg p can be captured with fly ash by dust removal equipment. 13,14 However, it is difficult to remove Hg 0 from flue gas because it is insoluble in water and highly volatile. 15,16 Therefore, most of Hg 0 is directly discharged into the atmosphere and harms the environment and human health.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

SO₂ Tolerance and Mechanism of Elemental Mercury Removal from Flue Gas by a Magnetic Recyclable Fe₆Mn_0.8Ce_0.2O_y Sorbent

Zhou

Tao

et al. 2021

Energy Fuels

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Ce-doped Fe−Mn magnetic sorbent (Fe 6 Mn 0.8 Ce 0.2 O y ) was developed using the coprecipitation method. The effects of O 2 , H 2 O, flue gas temperature, SO 2 concentration, and Ce doping on the SO 2 tolerance of the Fe 6 Mn 0.8 Ce 0.2 O y sorbent for mercury removal were explored in a fixed-bed system. Combined with mercury temperature-programmed desorption (Hg-TPD) and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) analysis, the mechanism of mercury removal by the Fe 6 Mn 0.8 Ce 0.2 O y sorbent in the presence of SO 2 was analyzed. The results show that the Fe 6 Mn 0.8 Ce 0.2 O y sorbent is a promising sorbent for circulating mercury removal with high SO 2 tolerance. Ce doping significantly enhances the SO 2 tolerance of the Fe 6 Mn 0.8 Ce 0.2 O y sorbent for mercury removal by protecting the Mn 4+ active sites from SO 2 poisoning. This is because Ce has a stronger affinity with SO 2 compared to that of Mn, and most of SO 2 will preferentially react with CeO 2 instead of MnO 2 to form Ce 2 (SO 4 ) 3 . O 2 in flue gas improves the SO 2 tolerance of the Fe 6 Mn 0.8 Ce 0.2 O y sorbent by timely supplementing the oxygen vacancies. H 2 O coexisting with SO 2 in flue gas further reduces the mercury removal rate because of the competitive adsorption between H 2 O and mercury. Mercury is mainly adsorbed by MnO 2 in the Fe 6 Mn 0.8 Ce 0.2 O y sorbent by the Mars−Maessen mechanism, and SO 2 in flue gas causes the generation of a small amount of Hg 2 SO 4 and HgSO 4 .

show abstract

“…Li et al deduced that polysulfides on CuS surfaces may contribute greatly in mercury removal according to the XPS analysis . Poly-sulfur ions S x 2– are regarded as the primary sites of CuS x /layered double hydroxide (LDH) composite for Hg 0 oxidation and immobilization . The extraordinary mercury adsorption performance of molybdenum sulfide porous chalcogel (MoS x ) and platinum polysulfide aerogels (K-Pt-S x ) are also attributed to the abundant S–S bond sites.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…16 Poly-sulfur ions S x 2− are regarded as the primary sites of CuS x / layered double hydroxide (LDH) composite for Hg 0 oxidation and immobilization. 23 The extraordinary mercury adsorption performance of molybdenum sulfide porous chalcogel (MoS x ) 24 and platinum polysulfide aerogels (K-Pt-S x ) 25 are also attributed to the abundant S−S bond sites. Although there is no convincing experimental evidence for polysulfide formation on CuS surfaces yet, many experimental studies on polysulfide formation on the surfaces of natural metal sulfides, including chalcopyrite, 26−28 aresenopyrite, 28 pyrite, and marcasite, 29 have already been reported.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Formation of Polysulfides from Consolidation of Cu Vacancies on CuS (001) Surfaces

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cu vacancies on CuS surfaces are very important for their properties, and the detailed structures are not very clear yet. In this study, we have systematically studied the structure and stability of CuS (001) surfaces with vacancies using the DFT + U method. The cleavage of CuS along the <001> direction affords a pair of asymmetric surfaces slab1 (featured by S 2− on the surface) and slab2 (featured by S 2 2− on the surface). Our calculation predicts that the surface defects would induce polysulfide formation on slab1 and the driving force increases with the concentration of the vacancies. As a comparison, the polysulfide formation on slab2 is much more challenging. Further mechanistic studies suggest that the polysulfide formation on slab1 is kinetically feasible. The electronic and geometric features of the polysulfide, as well as the difference between slab1 and slab2, have also been discussed in detail.

show abstract

Gaseous mercury capture using supported CuSx on layered double hydroxides from SO2-rich flue gas

Cited by 38 publications

References 46 publications

Mercury Removal from Flue Gas by Noncarbon Sorbents

Mercury Removal from Flue Gas by Noncarbon Sorbents

SO₂ Tolerance and Mechanism of Elemental Mercury Removal from Flue Gas by a Magnetic Recyclable Fe₆Mn_0.8Ce_0.2O_y Sorbent

Formation of Polysulfides from Consolidation of Cu Vacancies on CuS (001) Surfaces

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Gaseous mercury capture using supported CuSx on layered double hydroxides from SO2-rich flue gas

Cited by 38 publications

References 46 publications

Mercury Removal from Flue Gas by Noncarbon Sorbents

Mercury Removal from Flue Gas by Noncarbon Sorbents

SO2 Tolerance and Mechanism of Elemental Mercury Removal from Flue Gas by a Magnetic Recyclable Fe6Mn0.8Ce0.2Oy Sorbent

Formation of Polysulfides from Consolidation of Cu Vacancies on CuS (001) Surfaces

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

SO₂ Tolerance and Mechanism of Elemental Mercury Removal from Flue Gas by a Magnetic Recyclable Fe₆Mn_0.8Ce_0.2O_y Sorbent