Study on mechanism of mercury oxidation by fly ash from coal combustion

Chinese Science Bulletin

Volumn 55, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 163-167

  Zhao, Yong Chun ^a   Zhang, Jun Ying ^a   Liu, Jing ^a   Diaz Somoano, Mercedes ^b   Martinez Tarazona, M Rosa ^b   Zheng, Chu Guang ^a  

^a HUAZHONG UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (China)

^b INSTITUTO NACIONAL DEL CARBÓN   (Spain)

Author keywords

Adsorption desorption; Flue gas; Fly ash; Mercury; Oxidation

Indexed keywords

EID: 75649097431     PISSN: 10016538     EISSN: 18619541     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11434-009-0567-7     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Gale T K, Lani B W, Offen G R. Mechanisms governing the fate of mercury in coal-fired power systems. Fuel Process Technol, 2008, 89: 139-151.
2. Agarwal H, Stenger H G, Wu S, et al. Effects of H2O, SO2, and NO on Homogeneous Hg oxidation by Cl2. Energy Fuels, 2006, 20: 1068-1075.
3. Laudal D L, Brown T D, Nott B R. Effects of flue gas constituents on mercury speciation. Fuel Process Technol, 2000, 65-66: 157-165.
4. Agarwal H, Romero C E, Stenger H G. Comparing and interpreting laboratory results of Hg oxidation by a chlorine species. Fuel Process Technol, 2007, 88: 723-730.
5. Zhao Y, Mann M D, Olson E S, et al. Effects of sulfur dioxide and nitric oxide on mercury oxidation and reduction under homogeneous conditions. J Air Waste Manag Assoc, 2006, 56: 628-635.
6. Lopez-Anton M A, Abad-Valle P, Diaz-Somoano M, et al. The influence of carbon particle type in fly ashes on mercury adsorption. Fuel, 2009, 88: 1194-1200.
7. Lu Y, Rostam-Abadi M, Chang R, et al. Characteristics of fly ashes from full-scale coal-fired power plants and their relationship to mercury adsorption. Energy Fuels, 2007, 21: 2112-2120.
8. Dunham G E, DeWall R A, Senior C L. Fixed-bed studies of the interactions between mercury and coal combustion fly ash. Fuel Process Technol, 2003, 82: 197-213.
9. Galbreath K C, Zygarlicke C J, Tibbetts J E, et al. Effects of NOx, α-Fe2O3, γ-Fe2O3, and HCl on mercury transformations in a 7 kW coal combustion system. Fuel Process Technol, 2005, 86: 429-448.
10. Feng X, Tang S, Li Z, et al. Landfill is an important atmospheric mercury emission source. Chinese Sci Bull, 2004, 49: 2068-2072.
11. Presto A A, Granite E J, Karash A. further investigation of the impact of sulfur oxides on mercury capture by activated carbon. Ind Eng Chem Res, 2007, 46: 8273-8276.
12. Widmer N C, Cole J A, Seeker W R, et al. Practical limitation of mercury speciation in simulated municipal waste incinerator flue gas. Combust Sci Technol, 1998, 134: 315-326.
13. Hall B, Schager P, Weesmaa J. The homogeneous gas phase reaction of mercury with oxygen, and the corresponding heterogeneous reactions in the presence of activated carbon and fly ash. Chemosphere, 1995, 30: 611-627.
14. Luo Z, Hu C, Zhou J, et al. Stability of mercury on three activated carbon sorbents. Fuel Process Technol, 2006, 87: 679-685.
15. Presto A A, Granite E J. Survey of catalysts for oxidation of mercury in flue gas. Environ Sci Technol, 2006, 40: 5601-5609.
16. He S, Zhou J, Zhu Y, et al. Mercury oxidation over a vanadia-based selective catalytic reduction catalyst. Energy Fuels, 2009, 23: 253-259.
17. Granite E J, Pennline H W, Hargis R A. Novel sorbents for mercury removal from flue gas. Ind Eng Chem Res, 2000, 39: 1020-1029.