Novel Sorbents for Mercury Removal from Flue Gas

Granite, Evan J.; Pennline, Henry W.; Hargis, Richard A.

doi:10.1201/b13132-11

Cited by 76 publications

(133 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

130

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…and their oxides and sulfides, calcium species (lime) and zeolites [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. However most of these sorbents are less effective at higher temperature, have low capacities, cannot be regenerated and are easily deactivated by flue gas components such as sulfur oxides (SOx) [13][14], which means that the search for the ideal mercury sorbent is far from over [15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental study of mercury removal from exhaust gases

Wdowin

Wiatros-Motyka

Panek

et al. 2014

Fuel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An initial study has been made of the use of synthetic zeolites for mercury capture from exhaust gases. Synthetic zeolites (Na-X and Na-P1), and for comparison a natural zeolite (clinoptilolite) and activated carbon with bromine (AC/Br) were tested for mercury uptake from a gaseous stream. The materials were subjected to mercury adsorption tests and their thermal stability was evaluated. The untreated synthetic zeolites had negligible mercury uptake, but after impregnation with silver, the adsorption of mercury was markedly improved.The synthetic zeolite Na-X impregnated with silver adsorbed significantly more mercury before breakthrough than the activated carbon impregnated with bromine, indicating the potential of zeolite derived from coal fly ash as a new sorbent for capture of mercury from flue gases.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental study of mercury removal from exhaust gases

Wdowin

Wiatros-Motyka

Panek

et al. 2014

Fuel

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Much research has been conducted on removal of mercury from flue gases using sorbents, catalysts, photocatalysts, and direct ultraviolet irradiation (Granite et al, 2000;Granite and Pennline, 2002;Granite et al, 2008;Presto and Granite, 2008), whereas less research has been conducted on the removal of mercury from fluorescent lamp waste glass. In 1992 Cogar proposed a wet treatment which, after several washing steps, managed to remove the phosphor powder attached to the surface of the glass and to recover the mercury by an ion exchange process.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Removal of mercury bonded in residual glass from spent fluorescent lamps

Rey‐Raap¹,

Gallardo²

2013

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current technologies available for recycling fluorescent lamps do not completely remove the phosphor powder attached to the surface of the glass. Consequently, the glass contains the mercury diffused through the glass matrix and the mercury deposited in the phosphor powder that has not been removed during treatment at the recycling plant. A low-cost process, with just one stage, which can be used to remove the layer of phosphor powder attached to the surface of the glass and its mercury was studied. Several stirring tests were performed with different extraction mixtures, different liquid-solid ratios, and different agitation times. The value of the initial mercury concentration of the residual glass was 2.37±0.50µg/g. The maximum extraction percentage was 68.38%, obtained by stirring for 24 hours with a liquid-solid ratio of 10 and using an extraction solution with 5% of an acid mixture prepared with HCl and HNO 3 at a ratio of 3:1 by volume. On an industrial scale the contact time could be reduced to 8 hours without significantly lowering the percentage of mercury extracted. In fact, 64% of the mercury was extracted.2

show abstract

“…The transformation amounts of semi-mobile mercury in the > 150, 75-150, 54-75, and < 54 µm size grades and raw FA were 118.4 ± 3.5, 115.5 ± 4.3, 110.5 ± 2.1, 91.8 ± 0.9, and 101.1 ± 2.9 ng g -1 , respectively, corresponding to the conversion ratio of 51.7%, 52.9%, 46.8%, 44.6%, and 46.8%, respectively. The above mercury transformation process could be explained by the Mars-Maessen model (Granite et al, 2000), as shown in Eqs. (4-7).…”

Section: Emission and Species Distribution Of Mercury In Fa During Thmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In an oxidizing atmosphere, Hg 0 is easily oxidized by direct oxidation with gas-phase oxygen to HgO (Eq. (4)) and catalytic oxidation with a catalyst, such as inorganic constituents (López-Antón et al, 2007;Bartoňová et al, 2012) and residual carbon (Sakulpitakphon et al, 2000;Dunham et al, 2003), and then leading to the formation of Hg 2+ complexes (Granite et al, 2000;Pena et al, 2001) and HgO (extractable mercury) (Galbreath and Zygarlicke, 2000).…”

Section: Emission and Species Distribution Of Mercury In Fa During Thmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emission and Species Distribution of Mercury during Thermal Treatment of Coal Fly Ash

Wang

Shi

Chiang

et al. 2016

Aerosol Air Qual. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The thermal treatment of coal fly ash (FA) utilized by industries will inevitably lead to the emission of mercury, potentially causing atmospheric pollution. The present study is aimed at understanding the emission amount and species distribution of mercury during FA thermal treatment, and attempts were made to further provide basic data of mercury emission for environmental utilization of the FA by industries as raw materials. The physio-chemical properties of FA were analyzed and FA samples were heated at 200-1200°C in a tubular furnace in an oxidizing atmosphere. Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) was carried out to determine the content of residual carbon in FA. The mercury species distribution was determined using United States EPA method 3200. The results indicated that semi-mobile mercury was the main mercury species in FA. Owing to the adsorption of residual carbon on Hg 0 , more residual carbon which lead to higher proportion of semi-mobile obtained in coarser size grades. 20% of total mercury emitted at 206°C, followed by a rapid growth of the emission rate of mercury at above 206°C, and the emission of total mercury achieved to be 50% and 90% corresponding to 291°C and 515°C, respectively. A distinct transformation from semi-mobile mercury to extractable mercury occurred at 200°C due to catalytic oxidation of Hg 0 and enhance the mobility and potential toxicity of mercury. Both extractable and semi-mobile mercury decreased sharply at 300-400°C. Finally, the non-mobile mercury was emitted with combustion of residual carbon in FA at 600-800°C. It was thus concluded that measures would be taken to control emission of mercury for environmentally friendly utilization of coal FA by industries when the FA was heated higher than 300°C.

show abstract

Novel Sorbents for Mercury Removal from Flue Gas

Cited by 76 publications

References 21 publications

Experimental study of mercury removal from exhaust gases

Experimental study of mercury removal from exhaust gases

Removal of mercury bonded in residual glass from spent fluorescent lamps

Emission and Species Distribution of Mercury during Thermal Treatment of Coal Fly Ash

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About