Literature DB >> 15666473

Flue gas desulfurization: the state of the art.

R K Srivastava1, W Jozewicz.   

Abstract

Coal-fired electricity-generating plants may use SO2 scrubbers to meet the requirements of Phase II of the Acid Rain SO2 Reduction Program. Additionally, the use of scrubbers can result in reduction of Hg and other emissions from combustion sources. It is timely, therefore, to examine the current status of SO2 scrubbing technologies. This paper presents a comprehensive review of the state of the art in flue gas desulfurization (FGD) technologies for coal-fired boilers. Data on worldwide FGD applications reveal that wet FGD technologies, and specifically wet limestone FGD, have been predominantly selected over other FGD technologies. However, lime spray drying (LSD) is being used at the majority of the plants employing dry FGD technologies. Additional review of the U.S. FGD technology applications that began operation in 1991 through 1995 reveals that FGD processes of choice recently in the United States have been wet limestone FGD, magnesium-enhanced lime (MEL), and LSD. Further, of the wet limestone processes, limestone forced oxidation (LSFO) has been used most often in recent applications. The SO2 removal performance of scrubbers has been reviewed. Data reflect that most wet limestone and LSD installations appear to be capable of approximately 90% SO2 removal. Advanced, state-of-the-art wet scrubbers can provide SO2 removal in excess of 95%. Costs associated with state-of-the-art applications of LSFO, MEL, and LSD technologies have been analyzed with appropriate cost models. Analyses indicate that the capital cost of an LSD system is lower than those of same capacity LSFO and MEL systems, reflective of the relatively less complex hardware used in LSD. Analyses also reflect that, based on total annualized cost and SO2 removal requirements: (1) plants up to approximately 250 MWe in size and firing low- to medium-sulfur coals (i.e., coals with a sulfur content of 2% or lower) may use LSD; and (2) plants larger than 250 MWe and firing medium- to high-sulfur coals (i.e., coals with a sulfur content of 2% or higher) may use either LSFO or MEL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 15666473     DOI: 10.1080/10473289.2001.10464387

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc        ISSN: 1096-2247            Impact factor:   2.235


  14 in total

1.  Effectiveness of SO2 emission control policy on power plants in the Yangtze River Delta, China-post-assessment of the 11th Five-Year Plan.

Authors:  Jiani Tan; Joshua S Fu; Kan Huang; Cheng-En Yang; Guoshun Zhuang; Jian Sun
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-02-03       Impact factor: 4.223

Review 2.  Recent advances in flue gas desulfurization gypsum processes and applications - A review.

Authors:  Nadeesha H Koralegedara; Patricio X Pinto; Dionysios D Dionysiou; Souhail R Al-Abed
Journal:  J Environ Manage       Date:  2019-09-24       Impact factor: 6.789

3.  Utilization of Water Utility Lime Sludge for Flue Gas Desulfurization in Coal-Fired Power Plants: Part III. Testing at a Higher Scale and Assessment of Selected Potential Operational Issues.

Authors:  Seyed A Dastgheib; Justin Mock; Hafiz H Salih; Craig Patterson
Journal:  Energy Fuels       Date:  2019       Impact factor: 3.605

4.  Analysis of emission reduction strategies for power boilers in the US pulp and paper industry.

Authors:  Gurbakhash Bhander; Wojciech Jozewicz
Journal:  Energy Emiss Control Technol       Date:  2017-08-04

5.  Activation of Human Transient Receptor Potential Melastatin-8 (TRPM8) by Calcium-Rich Particulate Materials and Effects on Human Lung Cells.

Authors:  John G Lamb; Erin G Romero; Zhenyu Lu; Seychelle K Marcus; Hannah C Peterson; John M Veranth; Cassandra E Deering-Rice; Christopher A Reilly
Journal:  Mol Pharmacol       Date:  2017-10-16       Impact factor: 4.436

6.  Optimization of palm oil mill sludge biochar preparation for sulfur dioxide removal.

Authors:  Nursashabila Iberahim; Sumathi Sethupathi; Mohammed J K Bashir
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2017-05-26       Impact factor: 4.223

7.  Reactive collisions of sulfur dioxide with molten carbonates.

Authors:  Thomas Krebs; Gilbert M Nathanson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-02-01       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Air pollutant strategies to reduce adverse health impacts and health inequalities: a quantitative assessment for Detroit, Michigan.

Authors:  Sheena E Martenies; Chad W Milando; Stuart A Batterman
Journal:  Air Qual Atmos Health       Date:  2018-02-10       Impact factor: 3.763

9.  Implementation of a Sulfide-Air Fuel Cell Coupled to a Sulfate-Reducing Biocathode for Elemental Sulfur Recovery.

Authors:  Enric Blázquez; David Gabriel; Juan Antonio Baeza; Albert Guisasola; Pablo Ledezma; Stefano Freguia
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-05-23       Impact factor: 3.390

10.  Mapping and prediction of coal workers' pneumoconiosis with bioavailable iron content in the bituminous coals.

Authors:  Xi Huang; Weihong Li; Michael D Attfield; Arthur Nádas; Krystyna Frenkel; Robert B Finkelman
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 9.031

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.