Literature DB >> 30887449

Distribution and emission characteristics of filterable and condensable particulate matter before and after a low-low temperature electrostatic precipitator.

Xiaodong Li1, Chenyang Zhou2, Jingwei Li2, Shengyong Lu2, Jianhua Yan2.   

Abstract

The low-low temperature electrostatic precipitator (LLT-ESP), a combination of a traditional temperature electrostatic precipitator (ESP) and a non-leakage media gas-gas exchange (MGGH), could reduce the inlet flue gas temperature below the dew point and improved the performance of the ESP. Particulate matter (PM) from the stationary sources contains filterable particulate matter (FPM) and condensable particulate matter (CPM). In this study, coal with a high ash content (coal-HA) was burned, and the emission characteristics and removal efficiencies of the particulate matter in an LLT-ESP were investigated. The standards used to test filterable and condensable PM were ISO standard 23210-2009 and U.S. EPA Method 202, respectively. The LLT-ESP was efficient in removing filterable PM, with a total filterable PM removal efficiency as high as 99.6%. The removal efficiency of filterable PM increased with increasing particulate size and decreasing imported flue gas temperature. The LLT-ESP also provided excellent removal of condensable PM with a condensable PM removal efficiency exceeding 77%. Upstream of the LLT-ESP, the concentrations of filterable PM were much higher than those of condensable PM. Downstream of the LLT-ESP, the relationship between the quantities of condensable and filterable PM reversed. To reduce the emissions of PM from coal-fired power plants, more attention should be paid to controlling condensable PM. The temperature of the flue gas upstream of the LLT-ESP played an important role in eliminating condensable PM. At lower imported flue gas temperature operation conditions, the removal efficiency of the LLT-ESP for the condensable PM and the escaping mass concentration of condensable PM increased. Among the organic fraction of the condensable PM, hydrocarbons and esters were dominant. Meanwhile, SO42- was the primary component, followed by Cl- in anions. Na+, Ca2+, and Fe3+ were the main components in metal ions. Particles with diameters ≥ 10 μm, which contained most of the Si and Al, were dominant in the fly ash collected from sections 1 and 2 of the LLT-ESP. The main particles in sections 3 and 4 were PM10, which contained the highest concentrations of Ca and Fe.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Condensable particulate matter; Filterable particulate matter; Fly ash; Low-low temperature electrostatic precipitator; Removal efficiency

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30887449     DOI: 10.1007/s11356-019-04570-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int        ISSN: 0944-1344            Impact factor:   4.223


  6 in total

Review 1.  In-stack condensible particulate matter measurements and issues.

Authors:  L A Corio; J Sherwell
Journal:  J Air Waste Manag Assoc       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 2.235

2.  [Determination and Emission of Condensable Particulate Matter from Coal-fired Power Plants].

Authors:  Bing Pei
Journal:  Huan Jing Ke Xue       Date:  2015-05

3.  Investigation on emission factors of particulate matter and gaseous pollutants from crop residue burning.

Authors:  Guoliang Cao; Xiaoye Zhang; Sunling Gong; Fangcheng Zheng
Journal:  J Environ Sci (China)       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 5.565

4.  Chemical compositions of PM2.5 aerosol during haze periods in the mountainous city of Yong'an, China.

Authors:  Liqian Yin; Zhenchuan Niu; Xiaoqiu Chen; Jinsheng Chen; Lingling Xu; Fuwang Zhang
Journal:  J Environ Sci (China)       Date:  2012       Impact factor: 5.565

Review 5.  Black carbon as an additional indicator of the adverse health effects of airborne particles compared with PM10 and PM2.5.

Authors:  Nicole A H Janssen; Gerard Hoek; Milena Simic-Lawson; Paul Fischer; Leendert van Bree; Harry ten Brink; Menno Keuken; Richard W Atkinson; H Ross Anderson; Bert Brunekreef; Flemming R Cassee
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2011-08-02       Impact factor: 9.031

6.  Spatial and temporal variation in PM(2.5) chemical composition in the United States for health effects studies.

Authors:  Michelle L Bell; Francesca Dominici; Keita Ebisu; Scott L Zeger; Jonathan M Samet
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 9.031

  6 in total
  1 in total

1.  Field test of SO3 removal in ultra-low emission coal-fired power plants.

Authors:  Yang Zhang; Chenghang Zheng; Fushan Hu; Haitao Zhao; Shaojun Liu; Zhengda Yang; Yue Zhu; Xiang Gao
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2019-12-16       Impact factor: 4.223

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.