Julian Steinhaus1, Christoph Pasel1, Christian Bläker1, Dieter Bathen1,2. 1. Chair of Thermal Process Engineering, University of Duisburg-Essen, Lotharstraße 1, D-47057 Duisburg, Germany. 2. Institute of Energy and Environmental Technology, IUTA e. V., Bliersheimer Straße 60, D-47229 Duisburg, Germany.
Abstract
The adsorption of elemental mercury (Hg0) on activated carbons modified with 0.2, 0.6, and 1 M HCl is systematically examined. Breakthrough curves are measured, and coupled adsorption and desorption experiments with temperature-programmed desorption (TPD) are performed. The experiments show that impregnation with HCl produces surface-bound chlorine, which significantly increases the capacity of activated carbons for mercury. Physisorptive interactions between elemental mercury and the activated carbon surface dominate on the basic materials. In contrast, on HCl-modified activated carbons, chemisorptive interactions of Hg0 with surface-bound chlorine lead to a complex involving carbon, chlorine, and mercury. Using TPD, two mechanisms could be identified that yield reaction products with different energetic values. By continuously recording Hg0 and Hgtotal concentrations, the formation of Hg0 and Hg x Cl2 during desorption of the complexes from the surface could be studied. It is shown that Hg x Cl2 found in TPD is not present as a solid salt in the pores but is formed by thermal degradation of the mercury chlorine complex on the carbon surface. The mass fraction of Hg measured in TPD which is bound in Hg x Cl2 depends on the Hg loading of the activated carbons, with a maximum mass fraction of 27%. We propose that an important step in the chemisorptive reaction with increasing mercury loading is the conversion of a HgCl2 complex into a Hg2Cl2 complex.
The adsorption of elemental mercury (Hg0) on activated carbons modified with 0.2, 0.6, and 1 M HCl is systematically examined. Breakthrough curves are measured, and coupled adsorption and desorption experiments with temperature-programmed desorption (TPD) are performed. The experiments show that impregnation with HCl produces surface-bound chlorine, which significantly increases the capacity of activated carbons for mercury. Physisorptive interactions between elemental mercury and the activated carbon surface dominate on the basic materials. In contrast, on HCl-modified activated carbons, chemisorptive interactions of Hg0 with surface-bound chlorine lead to a complex involving carbon, chlorine, and mercury. Using TPD, two mechanisms could be identified that yield reaction products with different energetic values. By continuously recording Hg0 and Hgtotal concentrations, the formation of Hg0 and Hg x Cl2 during desorption of the complexes from the surface could be studied. It is shown that Hg x Cl2 found in TPD is not present as a solid salt in the pores but is formed by thermal degradation of the mercury chlorine complex on the carbon surface. The mass fraction of Hg measured in TPD which is bound in Hg x Cl2 depends on the Hg loading of the activated carbons, with a maximum mass fraction of 27%. We propose that an important step in the chemisorptive reaction with increasing mercury loading is the conversion of a HgCl2 complex into a Hg2Cl2 complex.
Mercury is a toxic
environmental poison that becomes part of a
global substance cycle between air, water, and soil and accumulates
biologically. For this reason, reducing emissions is a goal of national
and international regulations. State of the art is the cleaning of
the waste gases of large emitters such as coal power plants by absorption
in scrubbers[1−3] or entrained flow adsorbers.[4−7] Small emitter exhaust gases can
be treated in a technically and economically efficient way using fixed-bed
adsorbers with impregnated[8−16] or nonimpregnated[17−25] activated carbons. A precise knowledge of the adsorption mechanisms
is essential for the design of adsorbers and optimization of the operating
conditions.Mercury is emitted during combustion processes in
the elemental
or oxidized form. Because elemental mercury is present in higher concentrations
in the gas phase due to its higher volatility and adsorbs worse than
oxidized mercury, only the adsorption of elemental mercury is investigated
in this publication. In previous publications,[22,26,27] the physisorptive single-component adsorption
of Hg0, as well as the influence of the coadsorptives water
and oxygen, have been presented in detail. As the physisorptive capacity
of nonimpregnated activated carbons is very low, impregnated activated
carbons are used for chemisorptive separation in technical applications.
The adsorbents must have high chemisorptive capacity, fast kinetics,
and high thermal stability of the bound mercury. Activated carbons
modified with chlorine provide an alternative, which is not yet widely
used in industrial applications. Therefore, the following literature
analysis exclusively focuses on the chemisorption of elemental mercury
on chlorine-modified activated carbons.Zeng et al.[28] studied the adsorption
of Hg0 on activated carbons impregnated with ZnCl2. They suspected that Hg0 reacts with a chloride ion to
form a mercury chloride species that adsorbs on the surface. Lee et
al.[29] modified activated carbon with diluted
HCl solution at 70 °C. The mass fraction of chlorine was increased
up to 1.73 wt % by impregnation, with a slight decrease in the specific
surface area. Adsorption experiments showed high capacities for Hg0, while scanning electron microscopy–energy dispersive
spectroscopy (SEM–EDS) and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy
(XPS) indicated formation of mercuric chloride on the surface of the
activated carbon.Choi and Lee[30] modified
commercial activated
carbons with HCl, FeCl3, and CuCl2 with chlorine
concentrations of 1, 2, and 3%, respectively. Adsorption capacities
of activated carbons were determined using breakthrough curves at
140 °C. The activated carbons modified with HCl have the lowest
mercury capacity. However, the difference in capacity of the differently
impregnated activated carbons became progressively smaller with increasing
chlorine concentration on the activated carbon. The authors suggest
that the higher capacity of CuCl2-impregnated activated
carbon compared to that of FeCl3-impregnated carbon is
due to the higher electronegativity of Cu. The higher electronegativity
causes a reduced electron density on the chlorine, which is therefore
a stronger acceptor for the electrons of mercury. Lim et al.[31] confirmed this thesis by calculations with density
functional theory (DFT).Wang et al.[32] used six different biochars
as basic materials for modification with 1 M hydrochloric acid. The
materials were characterized by XPS, FTIR, and nitrogen isotherms.
The adsorption capacity of modified activated carbons increased by
a factor of 61 on average. It is assumed that HgCl2 is
formed in the micropores. In addition, the authors[15,33] modified biochar with chlorine using a nonthermal plasma, which
increased the number of carbon-bound chlorine atoms. Due to this modification,
a maximum of 36 times higher adsorption capacity was measured.Shen et al.[34,35] investigated the adsorption of
elemental mercury on NH4Cl-modified biochar using breakthrough
curves and XPS measurements. From the XPS analyses, it could be concluded
that, in addition to chlorine atoms bound to carbon, functional oxygen
groups are also involved in the chemisorption of mercury.Using
DFT, it could be shown that mercury forms chemisorptive interactions
with various heteroatoms.[36,37] Wang et al.[36] investigated the effect of HCl on the adsorption
of mercury on CuS surfaces using DFT. Three possible ways of HCl modification
were considered: pure adsorption of HCl, the reaction of HCl and CuS
to produce H2 and H2S, and the Deacon process.
The calculations showed that the pure adsorption of HCl has no significant
effect on Hg0 adsorption. Dissociated Cl atoms, on the
other hand, show a strong increase in the enthalpy of adsorption during
Hg0 adsorption. Two different adsorption mechanisms are
considered. Strongly bound Cl atoms can favor the attachment of Hg
to Cu atoms. Weakly bound Cl atoms favor the formation of HgCl2, which is physically bound to the surface.Chen et
al.[38] proved that other heavy
metals also form chemisorptive interactions with active sites on the
activated carbon surface. By fitting a pseudo-second-order model to
the measured data, it was shown that chemisorption is the rate-determining
mechanism in adsorption.The literature shows that impregnation
of activated carbons with
chlorine-containing compounds leads to a large increase in capacity
for elemental mercury. However, the underlying mechanisms of elemental
mercury chemisorption on chlorine-impregnated activated carbons are
not understood in detail. It remains uncertain whether chemisorption
predominantly involves chlorine atoms bonded to the carbon surface
that form mercury–chlorine–carbon complexes or whether
chlorine in the form of its compounds, which remains in the pores
after impregnation and form mercuric chlorides, is the major contributor.
In this work, the Chair of Thermal Process Engineering at the University
of Duisburg-Essen systematically investigates the influence of the
molarity of hydrochloric acid during impregnation of activated carbons
on the chemisorption of mercury on different activated carbons. HCl
in the pores is washed out after impregnation. Therefore, only the
influence of surface bound chlorine is considered.
Materials and
Methods
Activated Carbons
As basic materials, two commercial
activated carbons (AC 01 and AC 02) in the granular form with a particle
diameter of 1.6–2 mm were used. Table shows relevant material properties.
Table 1
Chemical Composition of the Adsorbents
ash content
C
S
N
H
O
activated carbon
raw material
activation
method
[weight % of dry mass]
AC 01
anthracite
steam
10.7
87.4
0.24
0.32
0.53
0.8
AC 02
coconut shell
steam
2.9
90.4
0.44
0.23
0.51
5.5
The
activated carbons consist mainly of carbon with small amounts
of sulfur, nitrogen, and hydrogen. Activated carbon AC 01 was produced
from anthracite and has a lower oxygen content than activated carbon
AC 02, which was produced from coconut shells. Both carbons were activated
by steam. In a previous publication,[22] it
was shown that both basic materials interact almost entirely physisorptively
with mercury.The carbons were modified by washing with 0.2,
0.6, and 1 M hydrochloric
acid. For this purpose, 1 mL of hydrochloric acid (2, 6, and 10 M)
was mixed with 9 mL of deionized water per 1 g of activated carbon
and shaken for 3 h in a shaking incubator. The activated carbon was
then washed several times with water to remove the free hydrochloric
acid. The conductivity of the supernatant eluate must be <30 μS
cm–1 after 10 h of shaking. The samples were then
dried under nitrogen atmosphere in an oven at 110 °C for 12 h.
Modified activated carbons are referred to as −0.2 M HCl, −0.6
M HCl, and −1 M HCl.
Characterization
A scanning electron
microscope (SEM)
(JSM-7500F from Jeol) and a volumetric measuring device (Autosorb
iQ3 from Quantachrome Instruments) were used to characterize basic
materials and modified carbons. The pore size distribution (Figure ) was determined
using quenched solid DFT (QSDFT) with a slit and cylindrical pore
model.[39,40] The specific surface area was calculated
using the Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) method according
to DIN ISO 9277. The total pore volume was determined according to
the Gurvich rule at p/p0 = 0.98, and the micropore volume by the Dubinin-Radushkevich method
according to DIN 66135.[41]Table shows structural properties
of the adsorbents. SEM images of the carbons are illustrated in Figure . The surface of
AC 01 consists of separate plates, while AC 02 has a fibrous structure.
The different morphology is due to the different raw materials (AC
01: anthracite, AC 02: coconut shell). The nitrogen isotherms at 77
K are presented in Figure S1 in the Supporting Information. The calculated structural properties, pore size
distribution, und SEM images prove that the modifications have no
significant effect on the pore structure of the activated carbons.
Figure 1
Pore size
distribution of basic and HCl-modified activated carbons
AC 01 and AC 02.
Table 2
Structural
Properties of Activated
Carbons
property
AC 01
AC 01–1 M HCl
AC 02
AC 02–1 M HCl
BET-surface [m2·g–1]
1079
1012
951
913
total pore volume [cm3·g–1]
0.494
0.485
0.391
0.372
micropore
volume [cm3·g–1]
0.387
0.379
0.376
0.332
Figure 2
SEM images: (a) AC 01,
(b) AC 01-1 M HCl, (c) AC 02, and (d) AC
02–1 M HCl.
Pore size
distribution of basic and HCl-modified activated carbons
AC 01 and AC 02.SEM images: (a) AC 01,
(b) AC 01-1 M HCl, (c) AC 02, and (d) AC
02–1 M HCl.The chlorine content of basic and modified activated carbons was
determined according to DIN 51727 and DIN 10304. A distinction is
made between surface-bound chlorine and chlorides, which are present
in the pore structure of the activated carbon. The amount of chloride-containing
salts is determined by washing the activated carbon with an absorption
solution for 24 h and measuring the chloride content of the absorption
solution by ion chromatography. Surface-bound chlorine can be detected
by combustion of the activated carbon in oxygen atmosphere, where
the surface-bound chlorine reacts to gaseous HCl. The combustion gases
are passed into an alkaline absorption solution, in which HCl is captured
as chloride. The chloride content of the absorption solution is determined
by ion chromatography.
Experimental Approach
The experimental
plant used for
the adsorption and desorption experiments is shown in Figure . A detailed description can
be found in previous publications.[26,42]
Figure 3
Schematic layout
of the experimental plant, a = water bath, b =
cooler, c = temperature-controlled reactor, MFC = mass flow controller,
and AAS = atomic absorption spectrometer.
Schematic layout
of the experimental plant, a = water bath, b =
cooler, c = temperature-controlled reactor, MFC = mass flow controller,
and AAS = atomic absorption spectrometer.In the gas-mixing section, a defined mixture of Hg0 (264
μg m–3) and nitrogen is provided with the
use of a mass flow controller. Adsorption and desorption take place
in a glass vessel, in which 0.6 g of activated carbon is tempered
in the range of 20–560 °C by a heating collar. The Hg0 concentration is continuously measured using an atomic absorption
spectrometer VM 3000 by Mercury Instruments GmbH. According to DIN
12846, a tin(II) chloride solution is used to reduce Hg2+ and Hg+ to Hg0. It is not possible to distinguish
between Hg2+ and Hg+. Therefore, this part of
Hg is referred to as HgCl2 in the manuscript. Because the gas flow upstream of the measurement
device is passed either through the tin(II) chloride solution or the
bypass, a distinction is made between the Hg0 and Hgtotal concentrations. If the Hg0 concentration is
equal to the Hgtotal concentration, only the Hg0 concentration curve is shown in the diagrams below.To investigate
the chemisorption of Hg0, coupled adsorption
and desorption experiments with temperature-programmed desorption
(TPD) were performed. The experiments can be divided into three sections:
adsorption, concentration swing desorption (CSA), and TPD. In the
adsorption part of the experiment, the mercury-containing nitrogen
stream is passed over the fixed bed at a constant temperature for
a defined time of 1 h. The loading of the adsorbent XAds can be calculated by integrating the area between
the inlet concentration and the measured breakthrough curve. Assuming
that the density of the gas is constant and only mercury is adsorbed,
the global mass balance around the adsorbent yieldsHere, mHg,Ads is the mass of the adsorbed
mercury in μg m–3, ms is the mass of the adsorbent in g, is
the volume flow of the gas in L min–1,cHgis the mercury concentration
in μg m–3, and ρG is the
gas density in kg m–3.After the adsorbent
has been loaded for 1 h, concentration swing
desorption follows, in which the physisorptively bound mercury is
desorbed. For this purpose, the adsorber is purged with pure nitrogen
at the same temperature at which adsorption took place until no mercury
could be detected. After that, TPD starts during which the chemisorptively
bound mercury is desorbed. The temperature is continuously increased
in a ramp of 5 °C min–1 to 560 °C. The
desorbed mass of mercury during concentration swing desorption (loading
XCSA) and TPD (loading XTPD) is calculated according
to eq . Then, the input
concentration, cHg,in, corresponds to
the zero line of the measuring instrument. The mass ratio of adsorption
and desorption (CSA and TPD) can be calculated using eq .
Results and Discussion
Dynamics of Adsorption
Figure shows the Hg0 concentration curves
during elemental mercury adsorption at 100 °C for 1 h with a
mercury concentration of 264 μg m–3 on the
basic activated carbons and the HCl-modified activated carbons AC
01 (left) and AC 02 (right).
Figure 4
Breakthrough curves of Hg0 at 100
°C with 264 μg
m–3 on the basic and HCl-modified activated carbons
AC 01 (left) and AC 02 (right).
Breakthrough curves of Hg0 at 100
°C with 264 μg
m–3 on the basic and HCl-modified activated carbons
AC 01 (left) and AC 02 (right).The Hg0 concentration curves of the adsorption for 1
h are identical to the Hgtotal concentration curves in
all experiments, no Hg2+ or Hg+ (e.g., in the
form of HgCl2) was detected.
The Hg0 concentration curves of the basic activated carbons
have an early breakthrough and a rapid increase in concentration.
After about 15 min, a state of equilibrium is reached, in which the
input concentration equals the output concentration. The concentration
curves of activated carbons AC 01 modified with 0.2 M and 0.6 M HCl
are identical to the concentration curve for the basic activated carbon.
The activated carbon AC 01 treated with 1 M HCl also has an initial
breakthrough, followed by a very slow increase in concentration, so
that no equilibrium state is reached after the specified experimental
time. The very slow kinetics and the high capacity of adsorption indicate
chemisorptive interactions between Hg0 and the activated
carbon surface.The concentration curves of the modified activated
carbons AC 02
have an initial breakthrough, followed by a very slow increase in
concentration. The capacities of these activated carbons increase
with the molarity of the hydrochloric acid used during the preparation.
The concentration curves of all modified activated carbons AC 02 also
indicate a chemisorptive adsorption mechanism with slow kinetics and
high capacity.
Temperature-Programmed Desorption of Mercury
For a
detailed study of mechanisms involved, coupled adsorption and desorption
experiments were performed with CSA and TPD. For this purpose, 0.6
g of the activated carbon was first loaded with a mercury concentration
of 264 μg m–3 at 100 °C for 1 h. Subsequently,
physisorptively bound mercury was desorbed by CSA, and chemisorptively
bound mercury was desorbed by continuously increasing the temperature
in a ramp function of 5 °C min–1 (TPD). Figure shows the Hg0 and Hgtotal concentration curves of the TPD experiments
on the basic and the chlorine-modified activated carbons AC 01 (left)
and AC 02 (right).
Figure 5
Hg0 and Hgtotal concentration curves
of the
TPD experiments on the basic and on the chlorine-modified activated
carbons AC 01 (left) and AC 02 (right).
Hg0 and Hgtotal concentration curves
of the
TPD experiments on the basic and on the chlorine-modified activated
carbons AC 01 (left) and AC 02 (right).Table shows the
loadings and mass ratios of the coupled adsorption and desorption
experiments with CSA and TPD. The concentration curves for Hg0 and Hgtotal are identical for all adsorption and
CSA measurements.
Table 3
Mercury Loadings and Mass Ratios of
the Coupled Adsorption and Desorption Experiments of the Basic Activated
Carbons and the Modified Activated Carbons AC 01 and AC 02
loading [μg g–1]
activated carbon
Ads.
Hg0
CSA Hg0
TPD Hg0
TPD Hgtotal
mass ratio Hg0
mass ratio Hgtotal
AC 01
0.254
0.149
0.097
0.97
AC 01–0.2 M HCl
0.364
0.255
0.119
1.03
AC 01–0.6 M HCl
2.675
0.995
1.588
0.97
AC 01–1 M HCl
48.069
0.081
37.440
46.697
0.78
0.97
AC 02
0.237
0.204
0.038
1.02
AC 02–0.2 M HCl
6.748
0.786
6.350
1.06
AC 02–0.6 M HCl
32.728
0.275
28.100
31.197
0.87
0.96
AC 02–1 M HCl
38.888
0.181
30.966
36.903
0.80
0.95
The maximum concentrations
of the two basic activated carbons and
the activated carbon AC 01 modified with 0.2 and 0.6 M HCl are very
low because hardly any chemisorptively bound mercury is present (Table ). The desorption
curves for Hg0 and Hgtotal of activated carbon
AC 01 treated with 1 M HCl (Figure , left) have two peaks with maximum concentrations
at temperatures of 350 and 480 °C, respectively. The curves for
Hg0 and Hgtotal are almost identical, with the
Hg0 concentration consistently below the Hgtotal concentration. From the difference, it can be concluded that Hg2+ or Hg+ — in the form of HgCl2 — forms and desorbs during
TPD. The temperature interval, in which HgCl2 desorbs is identical to the temperature interval,
in which Hg0 desorbs. It is also evident by the coupled
adsorption and desorption curves that HgCl2 formed is exclusively from the desorption of mercury
chemisorptively bound to the activated carbon. No physisorptively
bound HgCl2 is detected in
the experiments. The calculated mass ratios of Hg0 and
Hgtotal suggest that about 20% of the chemisorptively bound
mercury desorbs in the form of HgCl2. The chemisorptively bound mercury is thermally stable up
to a temperature of 240 °C. The TPD concentration curves show
that two different chemisorptive adsorption mechanisms are present,
whose reaction products desorb at different temperatures and therefore
have different bonding strengths to the surface. Comparing the chemisorptive
loadings of the AC 01-activated carbon with the chlorine content of
the activated carbons (Table ), it is concluded that surface-bound chlorine must be present
for significant chemisorption of mercury. It is assumed that mercury–chlorine
surface complexes with different energetic values are formed.
Table 4
Chlorine and the
Chloride Content
of the Adsorbents in Mass % of Dry Mass (m % dm)
activated carbon
Cl on surface [m % dm]
Cl– in salts [m % dm]
AC 01
0.024
0.005
AC 01–0.2 M HCl
0.036
0.005
AC 01–0.6 M HCl
0.026
0.005
AC 01–1 M HCl
0.690
0.005
AC 02
0.051
0.050
AC 02–0.2 M HCl
0.037
0.008
AC 02–0.6 M HCl
0.130
0.006
AC 02–1 M HCl
0.510
0.004
The concentration curves of activated carbon AC 02 modified with
HCl (Figure right)
also show two peaks. The desorption peaks of activated carbon treated
with 0.2 M HCl are the smallest. More mercury is chemisorptively bound
on AC 02 treated with 0.6 and 1 M HCl (Table ). Maximum concentrations are reached at
temperatures of 260 and 360 °C for the activated carbon modified
with 0.6 M HCl. The concentration curves of the carbon modified with
1 M HCl are similar to those of the carbon modified with 0.6 M HCl.
However, the maximum concentrations are shifted to about 15 °C
higher temperatures. From the concentration curves of Hg0 and Hgtotal, it is evident that only in the case of the
carbon modified with 0.6 M HCl and 1 M HCl, HgCl2 is formed during desorption. This HgCl2 formed on the surface of the activated
carbon is exclusively chemisorptively bound, which could also be observed
in the experiments with AC 01. The percentage of mercury in the form
of HgCl2 is about 13% on AC
02 treated with 0.6 M HCl and about 20% on AC 02 treated with 1 M
HCl (Table ). The
mass of chemisorptively bound mercury also correlates with surface-bound
chlorine for activated carbon AC 02 (Table ). The concentration
curves of AC 02 modified with 0.6 M HCl and 1 M HCl also show two
Hg bonding mechanisms with products of different energetic values.
The bound mercury is thermally stable up to 220 °C in these activated
carbons. AC 02 treated with 0.2 M HCl is the only activated carbon
that shows significant chemisorption of mercury, although no surface-bound
chlorine is present (Table ). It is suggested that the increase in capacity here is due
to an accumulation of mercury on oxygen functional groups formed or
exposed during modification of the carbons. This mechanism has been
proposed in a previous publication[27] and
could also provide a small contribution to chemisorption of mercury
in other modified materials. Compared to the loadings found in this
work, the loadings described in ref.[27] are
significantly lower.Table shows the
chlorine content of the basic activated carbons and the modified activated
carbons AC 01 and AC 02 with chlorine bound on the surface and chloride
in salts in the pores.The mass fraction of chloride containing
salts present in the pore
structure is very low for all activated carbons with a maximum value
of 0.05 m % dm. The proportion of surface-bound chlorine is of a similar
order of magnitude for the basic AC 01 and the AC 01 treated with
0.2 and 0.6 M HCl and increases significantly only after modification
with 1 M HCl. For the basic AC 02 and the AC 02 modified with 0.2
M HCl, the mass fraction of chlorine on the surface is low. The coal
AC 02 treated with 0.6 M HCl and 1 M HCl show a significant increase
in surface-bound chlorine compared to the basic material. A mechanism
for the attachment of chlorine in the aqueous phase is proposed in
the literature.[43,44] During modification of activated
carbon, hydrochloric acid dissociates and a hydrogen ion protonates,
for example, a carbonyl group of a pyrone group. The positive charge
is shifted to the ether oxygen by mesomeric stabilization, and the
chloride ion stabilizes the positive charge as a counter ion. During
drying of the activated carbons, the chloride ion deposits on the
surface. The kinetics of this mechanism have not been investigated.
Therefore, it cannot be conclusively explained why the activated carbon
AC 01 shows an increase in surface-bound chlorine only after treatment
with 1 M HCl, while surface-bound chlorine is detected in the activated
carbon AC 02 already after treatment with 0.6 M HCl. The results of
the elemental analyses were verified by replicate measurements.To further investigate the mechanisms, experiments were performed
with a variation of the adsorbent mass. In the coupled adsorption
and desorption experiments, 0.6 and 6 g activated carbon were used. Figure shows the concentration
curves of the TPD experiments on AC 01 (left) and AC 02 (right) modified
with 1 M HCl.
Figure 6
Hg0 and Hgtotal concentrations of
the TPD
experiments with 6 and 0.6 g activated carbons treated with 1 M HCl,
AC 01 (left) and AC 02 (right).
Hg0 and Hgtotal concentrations of
the TPD
experiments with 6 and 0.6 g activated carbons treated with 1 M HCl,
AC 01 (left) and AC 02 (right).Loadings and mass ratios of the experiments with variation of adsorbent
mass are shown in Table . Only the Hg0 value is given for the adsorption and CSA
loadings, and no Hg2+ or Hg+ was detected.
Table 5
Mercury Loadings and Mass Ratios of
Coupled Adsorption and Desorption Experiments with 6 and 0.6 g Activated
Carbon
loading [μg g–1]
activated carbon
mass
[g]
ads. Hg0
CSA Hg0
TPD
Hg0
TPD Hgtotal
mass ratio Hg0
mass ratio Hgtotal
AC 01–1 M HCl
0.6
48.069
0.081
37.440
46.697
0.78
0.97
6
5.194
0.053
3.754
4.825
0.73
0.94
AC 02–1 M HCl
0.6
38.888
0.181
30.966
36.903
0.80
0.95
6
5.447
0.003
3.482
5.171
0.64
0.95
The TPD concentration curves of the
experiments with 6 g activated
carbon have a different peak geometry compared to the concentration
curves of the experiments with 0.6 g activated carbon, and desorption
takes place at higher temperatures. The adsorption experiments (Figure ) showed that the
carbons treated with 1 M HCl have a very high capacity for elemental
mercury. Experiments with an adsorption temperature of 260 °C
(Supporting Information Figure S2) demonstrated
that mercury is still chemisorptively bound to the carbon even at
very high temperatures. Therefore, the changed peak geometry and the
shift of the desorption peaks to higher temperatures in the experiments
with 6 g activated carbon are probably due to readsorption effects.
Mercury is desorbed in the front part of the fixed bed with 6 g activated
carbon and passes to unloaded activated carbon in the upper part of
the bed, where it is adsorbed again. This effect leads to a shift
of desorption peaks to higher temperatures and higher maximum concentrations.
In the experiments with 0.6 g activated carbon, readsorption effects
can be neglected due to the shorter activated carbon bed.The
reduction of the adsorbent mass leads to a significant increase
in the loading of the activated carbons (Table ) because an identical amount of mercury
is passed over the fixed bed during adsorption, and the adsorbent
mass is lower. The ratio of adsorptively bound mercury to surface-bound
chlorine atoms is shifted in favor of the bound mercury in the experiments
with 0.6 g activated carbon. As a result, the Hg0 mass
ratio of adsorbed to desorbed mercury increases significantly in experiments
with lower adsorbent mass. Consequently, a higher loading of mercury
on the activated carbon yields less HgCl2. This tendency is confirmed by experiments with variation
of the loading duration (Supporting Information Figure S3 and Table S1). A proposed mechanistic explanation for
this effect is shown in Figure .
Figure 7
Proposed reaction sequence for the formation of HgCl2 and Hg0 during TPD after chemisorption of Hg0 to surface-bound chlorine.
Proposed reaction sequence for the formation of HgCl2 and Hg0 during TPD after chemisorption of Hg0 to surface-bound chlorine.During adsorption, mercury from the gas phase forms surface complexes
with chlorine atoms. The distinct Hg0 desorption peaks
probably result from decomposition of surface complexes of one Hg0 atom and one surface-bonded chlorine atom. Formation of HgCl2, on the other hand, could be due to interactions of one Hg0 atom with two surface-bonded chlorine atoms (Figure left). This complex decomposes
to HgCl2 during TPD. A higher loading of mercury on activated
carbon may result in a further addition of Hg0 from the
gas phase to the existing HgCl2 complex (Figure right). This new complex decomposes
to HgCl2 and Hg0 during TPD. Klöfer et
al.[45] examined the gaseous products released
during heating of solid HgCl2 and solid Hg2Cl2. When solid HgCl2 is heated, only HgCl2 is present in the gas phase. In contrast, when solid Hg2Cl2 is heated, both HgCl2 and Hg0 are present in the gas phase. Because Hg0 is formed in
the gas phase during decomposition of Hg2Cl2, this step may be an explanation for the higher Hg0 mass
ratio at higher loadings. These results support the assumptions described
above about rearrangement and subsequent decomposition of surface
complexes in Figure . It must be emphasized that this mechanistic discussion of Hg0 chemisorption is speculative and sketchy. However, it can
be assumed that mercury forms two covalent bonds. In corresponding
complexes, mercury has oxidation numbers +1 and +2, respectively,
as in many known mercury compounds. The complexes in Figure meet these conditions. The
attachment of chlorine atoms to the surface of activated carbon has
already been described in detail in the previous paragraphs, and is
only shown schematically in Figure .
Conclusions
The influence of chlorine
on the adsorption of mercury was investigated
by measuring breakthrough curves and by TPD experiments. Two activated
carbons were used as basic materials and modified with 0.2, 0.6, and
1 M HCl. Elemental analyses proved that only surface-bound chlorine
is present after modification of AC 01 with 1 M HCl and AC 02 with
0.6 and 1 M HCl. Coupled adsorption and desorption experiments with
TPD showed that mercury forms surface complexes with chlorine, greatly
increasing the chemisorptive capacity of the carbons. The detection
of several desorption peaks at different desorption temperatures suggests
different chemisorptive mechanisms with mercury and surface-bound
chlorine. The influence of hydrochloric acid remaining in the pores
after modification can be excluded in all experiments due to thorough
washing.Measurements of the concentration of Hg0 and Hgtotal showed that during the desorption of mercury
from the
surface of the modified activated carbons, HgCl2 is formed. On the contrary, HgCl2 (s) as a solid compound in the pores can be excluded because no
HCl is available in the pores. Experiments with a variation in adsorbent
mass showed that the fraction of HgCl2 depends on the mercury loading of the activated carbon, with
a maximum mass fraction of 27% of Hg in HgCl2. A mechanistic proposal describes the conversion of
a bound HgCl2 complex by incorporation of a Hg atom into
a Hg2Cl2 complex at higher mercury loadings.The complex process of mercury chemisorption on different surface-bound
heteroatoms should be studied in detail in subsequent work. For this
purpose, the surface of activated carbons should be systematically
modified by chemical reactions. The base materials and the modified
materials can then be used to study the mechanisms of adsorption and
desorption of mercury. The characterization of the materials should
be based on different measurement methods such as volumetric measurements
of nitrogen isotherms, Boehm titration, SEM, or XPS. Especially, XPS
measurements could help to detect different mercury species on the
surface of the materials.