Survey of catalysts for oxidation of mercury in flue gas

Environmental Science and Technology

Volumn 40, Issue 18, 2006, Pages 5601-5609

  Presto, Albert A ^a   Granite, Evan J ^a  

^a NATIONAL ENERGY TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CATALYTIC OXIDATION; MERCURY EMISSIONS;

CATALYSTS; DESULFURIZATION; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FLUE GASES; MERCURY (METAL); OXIDATION; REACTION KINETICS;

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL;

COAL; MERCURY;

AIR POLLUTION CONTROL; CATALYSTS; DESULFURIZATION; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; FLUE GASES; MERCURY (METAL); OXIDATION; REACTION KINETICS;

CATALYSIS; COAL-FIRED POWER PLANT; EMISSION CONTROL; ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION; MERCURY (ELEMENT); OXIDATION;

AIR POLLUTANT; AIR POLLUTION; AIR POLLUTION CONTROL; CATALYST; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DESULFURIZATION; FLUE GAS; GAS; KINETICS; OXIDATION; REACTION ANALYSIS; REVIEW; SOLUBILITY;

AIR POLLUTANTS; AIR POLLUTION; CATALYSIS; COAL; GASES; MERCURY; METALS; OXIDATION-REDUCTION; OXIDES;

EID: 33748781752     PISSN: 0013936X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/es060504i     Document Type: Review

References (91)

1. Mercury Study Report to Congress; U. S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, 1997.
2. A Study of Hazardous Air Pollutant Emissions from Electric Utility Steam Generating Units: Final Report to Congress; U. S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, 1998.
3. U. S. EPA Clean Air Mercury Rule; U. S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, 2005. http://www.epa.gov.
4. Galbreath, K.; Zygarlicke, C. Mercury speciation in coal combustion and gasification flue gases. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1996, 30, 2421.
5. Laudal, D.; Galbreath, K.; Heidt, M. A State-of-the-Art Review of Flue Gas Mercury Speciation Methods; EPRI Report No. TR-107080; Energy and Environmental Research Center, University of North Dakota: Grand Forks, ND, 1996.
6. Hargrove, O.; Carey, T.; Richardson, C.; Skarupa, R.; Meserole, F.; Rhudy, R.; Brown, T. Enhanced Control of Mercury and Other HAPs by Innovative Modifications to Wet FGD Processes, Report to DOE/FETC; U. S. Department of Energy Agreement No. DE-AC22-95PC95260; Radian International: 1997.
7. Galbreath, K.; Zygarlicke, C. Mercury transformations in coal combustion flue gas. Fuel Process. Technol. 2000, 65-66, 289.
8. Senior, C.; Sarofim, A.; Zeng, T.; Helble, J.; Mamani-Paco, R. Gas-phase transformations of mercury in coal-fired power plants. Fuel Process. Technol. 2000, 63, 197.
9. Laudal, D.; Brown, T.; Nott, B. Effects of flue gas constituents on mercury speciation. Fuel Process. Technol. 2000, 65-66, 157.
10. 3, and HCl on mercury transformations in a 7-kW coal combustion system. Fuel Process. Technol. 2004, 86, 429.
11. Wang, J.; Clements, B.; Zanganeh, K. An interpretation of flue-gas mercury speciation data from a kinetic point of view. Fuel 2003, 82, 1009.
12. Gerasimov, G. Investigation of the behavior of mercury compounds in coal combustion products. J. Eng. Phys. Thermophys. 2005, 78, 668.
13. Hassett, D.; Eylands, K. Mercury capture on coal combustion fly ash. Fuel 1999, 78, 243.
14. Serre, S.; Silcox, G. Adsorption of elemental mercury on the residual carbon in coal fly ash. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2000, 39, 1723.
15. Dunham, G.; DeWall, R.; Senior, C. Fixed-bed studies of the interactions between mercury and coal combustion fly ash. Fuel Process. Technol. 2003, 82, 197.
16. Senior, C.; Johnson, S. Impact of carbon-in-ash on mercury removal across particulate control devices in coal-fired power plants. Energy Fuels 2005, 19, 859.
17. Carey, T. Effect of mercury speciation on removal across wet FGD processes. In Proceedings of the Air and Waste Management Association's 92nd Annual Meeting, June 1999; Air and Waste Management Association: Pittsburgh, PA, 1999.
18. Pavlish, J.; Sondreal, E.; Mann, M.; Olson, E.; Galbreath, K.; Laudal, D.; Benson, S. Status review of mercury control options for coal-fired power plants. Fuel Process. Technol. 2003, 82, 89.
19. U. S. EPA Clean Air Interstate Rule; U. S. Environmental Protection Agency: Washington, DC, 2005. http://www.epa.gov.
20. Srivastava, R.; Hutson, N.; Martin, B.; Princiotta, F.; Staudt, J. Control of mercury emissions from coal-fired electric utility boilers. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40, 1385.
21. Jones, A.; Hoffmann, J.; Smith, D.; Feeley, T., III.; Murphy, J. DOE/NETL's Phase II Mercury Control Technology Field Testing Program: Preliminary Economic Analysis of Activated Carbon Injection, Report to U. S. DOE Office of Fossil Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory, U. S. Department of Energy: Pittsburgh, PA, 2006.
22. Granite, E.; Pennline, H. Photochemical removal of mercury from flue gas. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2002, 41, 5470.
23. Olson, E.; Sharma, R.; Miller, S.; Dunham, G. Identification of the breakthrough oxidized mercury species from sorbent in flue gas. In Proceedings of the Specialty Conference on Mercury in the Environment; 1999.
24. Dunham, G.; Olson, E.; Miller, S. Impact of flue gas constituents on carbon sorbents. In Proceedings of the Air Quality II: Mercury, Trace Elements, and Particulate Matter Conference; 2000.
25. Olson, E.; Sharma, R.; Pavlish, J. On the analysis of mercuric nitrate in flue gas by GC-MS. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2002, 374, 1045.
26. McLarnon, C.; Granite, E.; Pennline, H. The PCO process for photochemical removal of mercury from flue gas. Fuel Process. Technol. 2005, 87, 85.
27. Menke, R.; Wallis, G. Detection of mercury in air in the presence of chlorine and water-vapor. Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 1980, 41, 120.
28. Hall, B.; Schager, P.; Lindqvist, O. Chemical reactions of mercury in combustion flue-gases. Water, Air, Soil Pollut. 1991, 56, 3.
29. Sliger, R.; Kramlich, J.; Marinov, N. Towards the development of a chemical kinetic model for the homogeneous oxidation of mercury by chlorine species. Fuel Process. Technol. 2000, 65-66, 423.
30. Dickinson, R.; Sherrill, M. Formation of ozone by optically excited mercury vapor. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1926, 12, 175.
31. 2 and HCl over wide temperature ranges. J. Phys. Chem. A 1997, 101, 2323.
32. Niksa, S.; Fujiwara, N. Predicting extents of mercury oxidation in coal-derived flue gases. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2005, 55, 930.
33. Wang, J.; Anthony, E. An analysis of the reaction rate for mercury vapor and chlorine. Chem. Eng. Technol. 2005, 28, 569.
34. Gibb, W.; Clarke, F.; Mehta, A. The fate of coal mercury during combustion. Fuel Process. Technol. 2000, 65-66, 365.
35. Amrhein, G.; Bailey, R.; Downs, W.; Holmes, M.; Kudlac, G.; Madden, D. Advanced Emissions Control Development Program, Phase III Final Report to U. S. DOE/FETC and OCDO; U. S. Department of Energy Agreement No. DE-FC22-94PC94251- 22; McDermott Technology: 1999.
36. Pan, H.; Minet, R.; Benson, S.; Tsotsis, T. Process for converting hydrogen chloride to chlorine. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1994, 33, 2996.
37. Senior, C.; Bool, L., III.; Huffman, G.; Huggins, F.; Shah, N.; Sarofim, A.; Olmez, I.; Zeng, T. A fundamental study of mercury partitioning in coal fired power plant flue gas. In Proceedings of the Air and Waste Management Association's 90th Annual Meeting and Exhibition; Air and Waste Management Association: Pittsburgh, PA, 1997; Paper 97-WP72B.08.
38. Niksa, S.; Fujiwara, N. A predictive mechanism for mercury oxidation on selective catalytic reduction catalysts under coal-derived flue gas. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2005, 55, 1866.
39. Pilling, M.; Seakins, P. W. Reaction Kinetics; Oxford Science Publications: New York, 1995.
40. Granite, E.; Pennline, H.; Hargis, R. Novel sorbents for mercury removal from flue gas. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2000, 39, 1020.
41. Butz, J.; Turchi, C.; Broderick, T.; Albiston, J. Options for mercury removal from coal-fired flue gas streams: Pilot-scale research on activated carbon, alternative and regenerable sorbents. In Proceedings of the 17th Pittsburgh Coal Conference; 2000.
42. Mangun, C.; Benak, K.; Economy, J.; Foster, K. Surface chemistry, pore sizes, and adsorption properties of activated carbon fibers and precursors treated with ammonia. Carbon 2001, 39, 1809.
43. Laumb, J.; Benson, S.; Olson, E. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy analysis of mercury sorbent surface chemistry. Fuel Process. Technol. 2004, 85, 577.
44. Gale, T. Mercury Control with Calcium-Based Sorbents and Oxidizing Agents, Topical Report to U. S. DOE/NETL; U. S. Department of Energy Agreement No. DE-FC26-01NT41183; Southern Research Institute: 2002.
45. 2 ratio on mercury speciation in waste combustion. Environ. Eng. Sci. 2005, 22, 221.
46. Norton, G.; Yang, H.; Brown, R.; Laudal, D.; Dunham, G.; Erjavec, J. Heterogeneous oxidation of mercury in simulated post combustion conditions. Fuel 2003, 82, 107.
47. Zhao, Y.; Mann, M.; Pavlish, J.; Mibeck, B.; Dunham, G.; Olson, E. Application of gold catalyst for mercury oxidation by chlorine. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40, 1603.
48. Schofield, K. Let them eat fish: Hold the mercury. Chem. Phys. Lett. 2004, 386, 65.
49. Schofield, K. Mercury emission chemistry: The similarities or are they generalities of mercury and alkali combustion deposition processes? Proc. Combust. Inst. 2005, 30, 1263.
50. Maroto-Valer, M.; Zhang, Y.; Granite, E.; Tang, Z.; Pennline, H. Effect of porous structure and surface functionality on the mercury capacity of a fly ash and its activated sample. Fuel 2005, 84, 105.
51. Olson, E.; Miller, S.; Sharma, R.; Dunham, G.; Benson, S. Catalytic effects of carbon sorbents for mercury capture. J. Hazard. Mater. 2000, 74, 61.
52. Gutberlet, H.; Schluter, A.; Licata, A. SCR impacts on mercury emissions from coal-fired boilers. In Proceedings of the EPRI SCR Workshop; 2000.
53. x emission control conditions. In Proceedings of the DOE-EPRI-USEPA-AWMA Combined Power Plant Air Pollutant Control Symposium-The Mega Symposium; 2003.
54. Bock, J.; Hocquel, M.; Unterberger, S.; Hein, K. Mercury oxidation across SCR catalysts of flue gas with varying HCl concentrations. In Proceedings of the DOE-EPRI-USEPA-AWMA Combined Power Plant Air Pollutant Control Symposium-The MEGA Symposium; 2003.
55. Hocquel, M. The Behaviour and Fate of Mercury in Coal-Fired Power Plants with Downstream Air Pollution Control Devices; VDI Verlag: Düsseldorf, Germany, 2004.
56. x emission control conditions. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2004, 54, 1560.
57. Eswaran, S.; Stenger, H. Understanding mercury conversion in selective catalytic reduction (SCR) catalysts. Energy Fuels 2005, 19, 2328.
58. x on Merury Speciation, Report to U. S. DOE/NETL; U. S. Department of Energy Agreement No. DE-FC26-98FT40321; Energy and Environmental Research Center, University of North Dakota: Grand Forks, 2000.
59. Lee, C.; Srivastava, R.; Ghorishi, S.; Karwowski, J.; Hastings, T.; Hirschi, J. Effect of SCR catalysts on mercury speciation. In Proceedings of the DOE-EPRI-USEPA-AWMA Combined Power Plant Air Pollutant Control Symposium-The MEGA Symposium; 2003.
60. Blythe, G. Pilot Testing of Mercury Oxidation Catalysts for Upstream of Wet FGD Systems, Quarterly Technical Progress Report to U. S. DOEINETL; U. S. Department of Energy Agreement No. DE-FC26-01NT41185; URS Corporation: 2003.
61. x control processes on mercury speciation in utility flue gas. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2002, 52, 941.
62. Machalek, T.; Ramavajjala, M.; Richardson, M.; Richardson, C. Pilot evaluation of flue gas mercury reactions across an SCR unit. In Proceedings of the DOE-EPRI-USEPA-AWMA Combined Power Plant Air Pollutant Control Symposium-The MEGA Symposium; 2003.
63. Senior, C. Oxidation of Mercury across SCR Catalysts in Coal-Fired Power Plants Burning Low Rank Fuels, Final Report to DOEINETL; U. S. Department of Energy Agreement No. DE-FC26-03NT41728; Reaction Engineering International: 2004.
64. Benson, S.; Laumb, J.; Crocker, C.; Pavlish, J. SCR catalyst performance in flue gases derived from subbituminous and lignite coals. Fuel Process. Technol. 2005, 86, 577.
65. Senior, C. Oxidation of mercury across selective catalytic reduction catalysts in coal-fired power plants. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2006, 56, 23.
66. Carey, T.; Hargrove, C.; Richardson, C.; Chang, R. Factors affecting mercury control in utility flue gas using activated carbon. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 1998, 48, 1166.
67. Dunham, G.; Miller, S.; Laudal, D. Investigation of Sorbent Injection for Mercury Control in Coal-Fired Boilers, Final Report to EPRI and DOE; Energy and Environmental Research Center, University of North Dakota: Grand Forks, 1998.
68. 2 and NO selective adsorption properties of coal-based activated carbon. Fuel 2005, 84, 461.
69. Rubel, A.; Stencel, J. The effect of low-concentration SO on the adsorption of NO from gas over activated carbon. Fuel 1997, 76, 521.
70. 2 traces in air I. Adsorption capacities. Carbon 2002, 40, 2235.
71. 2 adsorption by activated carbons with various burnoffs obtained from a bituminous coal. Carbon 2001, 39, 1387.
72. 2 removal by carbon. Energy Fuels 1997, 11, 284.
73. Fujiwara, N.; Fujita, Y.; Tomura, K.; Moritomi, H.; Tuji, T.; Takasu, S.; Niksa, S. Mercury transformations in the exhausts from labscale coal flames. Fuel 2002, 81, 2045.
74. Fan, M.; Brown, R. Comparison of the loss-on-ignition and thermogravimetric analysis techniques in measuring unburned carbon in fly ash. Energy Fuels 2001, 15, 1414.
75. Styszko-Grochowiak, K.; Golas, J.; Jankowski, H.; Kozinski, S. Characterization of the coal fly ash for the purpose of improvement of industrial on-line measurement of unburned carbon content. Fuel 2004, 83, 1847.
76. Burris, S.; Li, D.; Riley, J. Comparison of heating losses and macro thermogravimetric analysis procedures for estimating unburned carbon in combustion residues. Energy Fuels 2005, 19, 1493.
77. x burners. Energy Fuels 2005, 19, 800.
78. Enhanced Control of Mercury by Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization Systems-Site 1 Results, Report to U. S. DOE/NETL; U. S. Department of Energy Agreement No. DE-AC22-95PC95260; Radian International: 1999.
79. Blythe, G.; Miller, S.; Richardson, C.; Searcy, K. Enhanced Control of Mercury by Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization Systems-Site 2 Results, Report to U. S. DOE/NETL; U. S. Department of Energy Agreement No. DE-AC22-95PC95260; Radian International: 2000.
80. Blythe, G.; Marsh, B.; Miller, S.; Richardson, C.; Richardson, M. Enhanced Control of Mercury by Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization-Site 3 Topical Report, Report to U. S. DOE/NETL; U. S. Department of Energy Agreement No. DE-AC22-95PC95260; URS Corporation: 2001.
81. Granite, E.; Freeman, M.; Hargis, R.; O'Dowd, W.; Pennline, H. The Thief process for mercury removal from flue gas. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International Pittsburgh Coal Conference, Pittsburgh, PA; 2005.
82. Granite, E.; Pennline, H. Catalysts for Oxidation of Mercury in Flue Gas. U. S. Patent Application, 2005.
83. Meischen, S.; Van Pelt, V. Method to Control Mercury Emissions from Exhaust Gases. U. S. Patent 6,136, 281, 2000.
84. Wu, C.; Lee, T.; Tyree, G.; Arar, E.; Biswas, P. Capture of mercury in combustion systems by in-situ generated titania particles with UV radiation. Environ. Eng. Sci. 1998, 15, 137.
85. 2 under various light sources. Chem. Lett. 2004, 33, 36.
86. Rodriguez, S.; Almquist, C.; Lee, T.; Furuuchi, M.; Hedrick, E.; Biswas, P. A mechanistic model for mercury capture with in-situ generated titania particles: Role of water vapor. J. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 2004, 54, 149.
87. 2 sorbent particles with UV irradiation. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2004, 43, 1411.
88. Lee, T.; Hyn, J. Structural effect of the in situ generated titania on its ability to oxidize and capture the gas-phase elemental mercury. Chemosphere 2006, 62, 26.
89. Babad, H.; Zeiler, A. The chemistry of phosgene. Chem. Rev. 1973, 73, 75.
90. Cicha, W.; Manzer, L. Process for Producing Oxochlorides of Sulfur. U. S. Patent 5,879,652, 1999.
91. Nottingham, W.; Sutter, J. Kinetics of the oxidation of nitric oxide by chlorine and oxygen in non-aqueous environments. Int. J. Chem. Kinet. 1986, 18, 1986.