Investigation of selective catalytic reduction for control of nitrogen oxides in full-scale dairy energy production

Applied Energy

Volumn 106, Issue , 2013, Pages 328-336

  Camarillo, Mary Kay ^a   Stringfellow, William T ^a,b   Hanlon, Jeremy S ^a   Watson, Kyle A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THE PACIFIC   (United States)

^b LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

Anaerobic digestion; Combined heat power; Dairy manure; Selective catalytic reduction (SCR)

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHMS; ANAEROBIC DIGESTION; BIOGAS; CONVERSION EFFICIENCY; ENGINES; MANURES; METABOLISM; NITROGEN OXIDES; SELECTIVE CATALYTIC REDUCTION; UREA;

AIR FUEL RATIOS; AMMONIA SOURCE; ANAEROBIC DIGESTER; AUTOMATED CONTROL; COMBINED HEAT; COMBINED HEAT AND POWER SYSTEM; DAIRY MANURES; ENERGY PRODUCTIONS; ENERGY PROJECT; ENGINE LOAD; EQUIVALENCE RATIOS; INTEGRATED PROCESS CONTROL; PROVIDE GUIDANCES; REDUCTION REACTION; REGULATORY LIMIT; SCR CATALYSTS;

REDUCTION;

ALGORITHM; AMMONIA; BIOGAS; BIOMASS POWER; CATALYSIS; COMBINED HEAT AND POWER; DAIRY FARMING; ENERGY EFFICIENCY; ENGINE; NITROGEN OXIDES; POWER GENERATION; REDUCTION; RENEWABLE RESOURCE;

EID: 84874555016     PISSN: 03062619     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.01.066     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Market opportunities for biogas recovery systems at U.S. livestock facilities. Washington D.C.: AgSTAR, Program; 2010.
2. Masse D.I., Talbot G., Gilbert Y. On farm biogas production: a method to reduce GHG emissions and develop more sustainable livestock operations. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2011, 166-167:436-445.
3. Abbasi T., Tauseef S.M., Abbasi S.A. Biogas energy 2012, Springer, New York (NY, USA).
4. Anders S.J. Biogas production and use on California's dairy farms: a survey of regulatory challenges 2007, University of San Diego School of Law Energy Policy Initiative Center, San Diego, CA.
5. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Biomass combined heat and power catalog of technologies. In: Energy and Environmental Analysis Inc., Eastern Research Group Inc., editor. Combined heat and power partnership report. Washington D.C.; 2007.
6. Lusk P.D. Methane recovery from animal manures: the current opportunities casebook 1998, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden (CO).
7. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Nitrogen dioxide. Washington D.C.; 2011. . http://www.epa.gov/oaqps001/nitrogenoxides/.
8. Finlayson-Pitts B.J., Pitts J.N. Tropospheric air pollution: ozone, airborne toxics, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and particles. Science 1997, 276:1045-1052.
9. De Nevers N. Air pollution engineering 2000, McGraw-Hill, Boston (MA, USA). 2nd ed.
10. Roubaud A., Favrat D. Improving performances of a lean burn cogeneration biogas engine equipped with combustion prechambers. Fuel 2005, 84:2001-2007.
11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). Menu of control measures. Washington D.C.; 2012. . http://www.epa.gov/air/pds/MenuOfControlMeasures.pdf.
12. Strik D., Domnanovich A.M., Holubar P. A pH-based control of ammonia in biogas during anaerobic digestion of artificial pig manure and maize silage. Process Biochem 2006, 41:1235-1238.
13. x in a circulating fluidized bed system. Powder Technol 2005, 151:61-67.
14. Hackam R., Akiyama H. Air pollution control by electrical discharges. IEEE Trans Dielect Elect Insul 2000, 7:654-683.
15. x removal in bubble column and airlift reactors. J Ferment Bioeng 1998, 86:421-423.
16. x by activated carbons: bench-scale and pilot-plant testing. Carbon 1997, 35:1321-1327.
17. State of California. Determination of reasonably available control technology and best available retrofit control technology for stationary spark-ignited internal combustion engines. Sacramento, CA: Air Resources Board; 2001.
18. American Lung Association. State of the air. Washington, D.C.; 2012.
19. Hixson M., Mahmud A., Hu J.L., Bai S., Niemeier D.A., Handy S.L., et al. Influence of regional development policies and clean technology adoption on future air pollution exposure. Atmos Environ 2010, 44:552-562.
20. x SCR catalysis. Appl Catal A 2001, 222:221-236.
21. x by ammonia over oxide catalysts: a review. Appl Catal B 1998, 18:1-36.
22. Matsuda S., Kamo T., Kato A., Nakajima F., Kumura T., Kuroda H. Deposition of ammonium bisulfate in the selective catalytic reduction of nitrogen oxides with ammonia. Ind Eng Chem Prod Res Dev 1982, 21:48-52.
23. 2 catalyst. Chem Eng Sci 2012, 79:177-185.
24. x: chemical and mechanistic aspects. Catal Today 2005, 107-108:139-148.
25. x reduction in the exhaust of mobile heavy-duty diesel engines by urea-SCR. Top Catal 2004, 30-31:43-48.
26. Rasi S., Veijanen A., Rintala J. Trace compounds of biogas from different biogas production plants. Energy 2007, 32:1375-1380.
27. Camarillo M.K., Stringfellow W.T., Jue M.B., Hanlon J.S. Economic sustainability of a biomass energy project located at a dairy in California, USA. Energy Policy 2012, 48:790-798.
28. x and hydrocarbon emissions from a diesel engine fueled on digester gas. Combust Sci Technol 1997, 123:63-82.
29. Huang J.D., Crookes R.J. Assessment of simulated biogas as a fuel for the spark ignition engine. Fuel 1998, 77:1793-1801.
30. Lee K., Kim T., Cha H., Song S., Chun K.M. Generating efficiency and NO(x) emissions of a gas engine generator fueled with a biogas-hydrogen blend and using an exhaust gas recirculation system. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2010, 35:5723-5730.
31. Porpatham E., Ramesh A., Nagalingam B. Effect of compression ratio on the performance and combustion of a biogas fuelled spark ignition engine. Fuel 2012, 95:247-256.
32. State of California. California irrigation management information system. Sacramento, CA: Department of Water Resources; 2012.
33. State of California. Method 20: determination of nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide and diluent emissions from stationary gas turbines. Sacramento, CA: Air Resources Board; 1999.
34. Eastern Research Group. Protocol for quantifying and reporting the performance of anaerobic digestion systems for livestock manures. Lexington, MA: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 2011.
35. Perry R.H., Green D.W. Perry's chemical engineers' handbook 1997, McGraw Hill, New York (NY). 7th ed.
36. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Gas-fired distributed energy resource technology characterizations. Golden, CO: U.S. Department of Energy; 2003.
37. Federal Ministry of Food Agriculture and Consumer Protection (MBELV). Biogas - an introduction, 2nd ed. Gülzow, Germany: Fachagentur Nachwachsende Rohstoffe e.V. (FNR); 2009.
38. Laaber M., Kirchmayr R., Braun R. Development of an evaluation system for biogas plants. 4th International symposium on anaerobic digestion of solid waste 2005, 631-635. IWA, Copenhagen, Denmark. B.K. Ahring, H. Hartmann (Eds.).
39. Bilcan A., Le Corre O., Delebarre A. Thermal efficiency and environmental performances of a biogas-diesel stationary engine. Environ Technol 2003, 24:1165-1173.
40. Tippayawong N., Promwungkwa A., Rerkkriangkrai P. Long-term operation of a small biogas/diesel dual-fuel engine for on-farm electricity generation. Biosyst Eng 2007, 98:26-32.