Review of technologies for mercury removal from flue gas from cement production processes

Zheng, Yuanjing; Jensen, Anker Degn; Windelin, Christian; Jensen, Flemming

doi:10.1016/j.pecs.2012.05.001

Cited by 193 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 130 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some of these techniques include bamboo charcoal, apatite IITM, iron-based sorbents, diperiodatocuprate(III) coordination solution, malt spent rootlets, bacillus cereus, modified Fe 3 O 4 , flocculation method, complexation by dissolved organic matter, heterogeneous photocatalysis with TiO 2 , alginate and pectate [ [26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35]. Others have reviewed the technologies for removing mercury in aqueous solution [36]. However, some of these new techniques are rather expensive for limited size water treatment systems situated in rural communities and the reactivity and removal kinetics require further investigation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mercury Removal from Aqueous Solution by Mixed Mineral Systems I. Reactivity and Removal Kinetics

Egirani¹

2013

IOSR-JESTFT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mercury Removal from Aqueous Solution by Mixed Mineral Systems I. Reactivity and Removal Kinetics

Egirani¹

2013

IOSR-JESTFT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Therefore, there are three mercury cycles in the precalciner clinker production process. Mercury cycling in cement plants has been confirmed in field tests (Mlakar et al, 2010;Paone, 2010;Sikkema et al, 2011;Zheng et al, 2012). A transient model was developed to simulate mercury concentration in flue gas from kiln tail (Senior et al, 2010).…”

Section: Mercury Behavior In Cement Clinker Production Processmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…Temperature of raw materials increases continuously from 400 • C at the inlet of the preheater to over 1400 • C in the rotary kiln. Different mercury species have different decomposition and boiling temperatures, as summarized in one previous study (Zheng et al, 2012). Further studies on identification of mercury species in raw meals are needed to understand the mechanism of mercury vaporization in kiln system.…”

Section: Mercury Transformation During Cement Clinker Production Processmentioning

confidence: 90%

Mercury transformation and speciation in flue gases from anthropogenic emission sources: a critical review

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Mercury transformation mechanisms and speciation profiles are reviewed for mercury formed in and released from flue gases of coal-fired boilers, non-ferrous metal smelters, cement plants, iron and steel plants, waste incinerators, biomass burning and so on. Mercury in coal, ores, and other raw materials is released to flue gases in the form of Hg 0 during combustion or smelting in boilers, kilns or furnaces. Decreasing temperature from over 800 • C to below 300 • C in flue gases leaving boilers, kilns or furnaces promotes homogeneous and heterogeneous oxidation of Hg 0 to gaseous divalent mercury (Hg 2+ ), with a portion of Hg 2+ adsorbed onto fly ash to form particulate-bound mercury (Hg p ). Halogen is the primary oxidizer for Hg 0 in flue gases, and active components (e.g., TiO 2 , Fe 2 O 3 , etc.) on fly ash promote heterogeneous oxidation and adsorption processes. In addition to mercury removal, mercury transformation also occurs when passing through air pollution control devices (APCDs), affecting the mercury speciation in flue gases. In coal-fired power plants, selective catalytic reduction (SCR) system promotes mercury oxidation by 34-85 %, electrostatic precipitator (ESP) and fabric filter (FF) remove over 99 % of Hg p , and wet flue gas desulfurization system (WFGD) captures 60-95 % of Hg 2+ . In non-ferrous metal smelters, most Hg 0 is converted to Hg 2+ and removed in acid plants (APs). For cement clinker production, mercury cycling and operational conditions promote heterogeneous mercury oxidation and adsorption. The mercury speciation profiles in flue gases emitted to the atmosphere are determined by transformation mechanisms and mercury removal efficiencies by various APCDs. For all the sectors reviewed in this study, Hg p accounts for less than 5 % in flue gases. In China, mercury emission has a higher Hg 0 fraction (66-82 % of total mercury) in flue gases from coal combustion, in contrast to a greater Hg 2+ fraction (29-90 %) from non-ferrous metal smelting, cement and iron and/or steel production. The higher Hg 2+ fractions shown here than previous estimates may imply stronger local environmental impacts than previously thought, caused by mercury emissions in East Asia. Future research should focus on determining mercury speciation in flue gases from iron and steel plants, waste incineration and biomass burning, and on elucidating the mechanisms of mercury oxidation and adsorption in flue gases.

show abstract

“…According to Pacyna et al (2006) and Takaoka et al (2011), mercury emissions in MSW incinerations range from 200 to 1000 μg Hg/N-m 3 , while they vary between 5 and 20 μg Hg/N-m 3 in coal combustion plants (Zheng et al, 2012a). Mercury emissions from cement and mineral production are the second largest anthropogenic sources, with numeric values close to those found in coal-fired boilers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Among the anthropogenic sources, the coal-fired utility boilers (Uddin et al, 2008;Granite et al, 2000), the combustion of municipal solid wastes (MSW) (Serre and Silcox, 2000;Jurng et al, 2002), and the cement production processes (Zheng et al, 2012a;Zheng et al, 2012b;Prisciandaro et al, 2003) are the main sources of mercury emissions. According to Pacyna et al (2006) and Takaoka et al (2011), mercury emissions in MSW incinerations range from 200 to 1000 μg Hg/N-m 3 , while they vary between 5 and 20 μg Hg/N-m 3 in coal combustion plants (Zheng et al, 2012a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adsorption of elemental mercury vapors from synthetic exhaust combustion gas onto HGR carbon

Musmarra

Karatza

Lancia

et al. 2016

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An activated carbon commercially available named HGR, produced by Calgon-Carbon Group, was used to adsorbe metallic mercury. The work is part of a wider research activity by the same group focused on the removal of metallic and divalent mercury from combustion flue gas. With respect to previously published papers, this one is aimed at studying in depth thermodynamic equilibria of metallic mercury adsorption onto a commercial activated carbon. The innovativeness lies in the wider operative conditions explored (temperature and mercury concentrations) and in the evaluation of kinetic and thermodynamic data for a commercially available adsorbing material. In detail, experimental runs were carried out on a laboratory-scale plant, in which Hg°vapors were supplied in a nitrogen gas stream at different temperature and mercury concentration. The gas phase was flowed through a fixed bed of adsorbent material. Adsorbate loading curves for different Hg°concentrations together with adsorption isotherms were achieved as a function of temperature (120, 150, 200°C) and Hg°concentrations (1.0−7.0 mg/m 3 ). Experimental runs demonstrated satisfying results of the adsorption process, while Langmuir parameters were evaluated with gas-solid equilibrium data. Especially, they confirmed that adsorption capacity is a favored process in case of lower temperature and they showed that the adsorption heat was -20 kJ/mol. Furthermore, a numerical integration of differential equations that model the adsorption process was proposed. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) investigation was an useful tool to investigate about fresh and saturated carbon areas. The comparison between them allowed identification of surface sites where mercury is adsorbed; these spots correspond to carbon areas where sulfur concentration is greater.Implications: Mercury compounds can cause severe harm to human health and to the ecosystem. There are a lot of sources that emit mercury species to the atmosphere; the main ones are exhaust gases from coal combustion and municipal solid waste incineration. Furthermore, certain CO 2 capture processes, particularly oxyfuel combustion in a pulverized fuel coal-fired power station, produce a raw CO 2 product containing several contaminants, mainly water vapor, oxygen, and nitrogen but also mercury, that have to be almost completely removed; otherwise these would represent a strong drawback to the success of the process.PAPER HISTORY

show abstract

Review of technologies for mercury removal from flue gas from cement production processes

Cited by 193 publications

References 130 publications

Mercury Removal from Aqueous Solution by Mixed Mineral Systems I. Reactivity and Removal Kinetics

Mercury Removal from Aqueous Solution by Mixed Mineral Systems I. Reactivity and Removal Kinetics

Mercury transformation and speciation in flue gases from anthropogenic emission sources: a critical review

Adsorption of elemental mercury vapors from synthetic exhaust combustion gas onto HGR carbon

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About