Alternative Approach to Current EU BAT Recommendation for Coal-Fired Power Plant Flue Gas Desulfurization Wastewater Treatment

被引:30
|
作者
Bogacki, Jan [1 ]
Marcinowski, Piotr [1 ]
Majewski, Maciej [1 ]
Zawadzki, Jaroslaw [1 ]
Sivakumar, Sridhar [1 ]
机构
[1] Warsaw Univ Technol, Fac Bldg Serv Hydro & Environm Engn, PL-00653 Warsaw, Poland
来源
PROCESSES | 2018年 / 6卷 / 11期
关键词
wastewater treatment; heavy metals; Fenton process; ZVI; flue gas desulfurization wastewater; FENTON PROCESS; REMOVAL; DEGRADATION; OXIDATION; GYPSUM; COAGULATION; NITRATE; METALS; IONS;
D O I
10.3390/pr6110229
中图分类号
TQ [化学工业];
学科分类号
0817 ;
摘要
Fossil fuel combustion is a serious environmental problem. Significant quantities of flue gasses and wastewater, requiring further treatment, are produced. This article compares three wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater treatment methods: coagulation with precipitation using iron(III) ionsrecommended by the European Union as the best available technique (BAT)and two alternative advanced oxidation processes (Fe2+/H2O2 and Fe-0/H2O2). Both oxidation processes that were used met the technical FGD wastewater treatment requirements of the BAT. The best treatment effects, expressed as pollutants' removal, were obtained for the Fe2+/H2O2 process for 150/300 mg/L reagent doses. It allows effective removal of boron up to 212 mg/L and heavy metals up to below the detection limit <0.010 mg/L for Pb and <0.005 mg/L for Cu. Therefore, the Fe2+/H2O2 process could be an option for FGD wastewater treatment as an alternative to the BAT recommended iron(III)-based coagulation with precipitation. Additionally, an analysis of variance was applied to check the significance of the two independent variables and their interactions. Statistical analysis confirmed high efficiency and applicability of treatment process.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Mercury isotope signatures of seawater discharged from a coal-fired power plant equipped with a seawater flue gas desulfurization system
    Lin, Haiying
    Peng, Jingji
    Yuan, Dongxing
    Lu, Bingyan
    Lin, Kunning
    Huang, Shuyuan
    ENVIRONMENTAL POLLUTION, 2016, 214 : 822 - 830
  • [42] Study on a Coal-Fired Power Plant with CO2 Flue Gas Scrubbing
    Heischkamp, Elizabeth
    Oeljeklaus, Gerd
    GREENHOUSE GAS CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES 9, 2009, 1 (01): : 1019 - 1025
  • [43] Effect of flue gas purification facilities of coal-fired power plant on mercury emission
    Li Bing
    Wang Hongliang
    ENERGY REPORTS, 2021, 7 : 190 - 196
  • [44] Coal-Fired Power Plant Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization Bromide Discharges to US Watersheds and Their Contributions to Drinking Water Sources
    Good, Kelly D.
    VanBriesen, Jeanne M.
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2019, 53 (01) : 213 - 223
  • [45] Online application oriented dynamic modeling for the flue gas desulfurization tower in coal-fired power plants
    Zou, Hengfei
    Yuan, Jingqi
    PROCESS SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, 2022, 159 : 698 - 707
  • [46] Stabilization of mercury in flue gas desulfurization gypsum from coal-fired electric power plants with additives
    Sun, Mingyang
    Hou, Jiaai
    Tang, Tingmei
    Lu, Rongjie
    Cheng, Lihua
    Xu, Xinhua
    FUEL PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY, 2012, 104 : 160 - 166
  • [47] THE FATE OF MERCURY IN COAL-FIRED POWER-PLANTS AND THE INFLUENCE OF WET FLUE-GAS DESULFURIZATION
    MEIJ, R
    WATER AIR AND SOIL POLLUTION, 1991, 56 : 21 - 33
  • [48] Speciation of Mercury in Coal-Fired Power Station Flue Gas
    Shah, Pushan
    Strezov, Vladimir
    Nelson, Peter F.
    ENERGY & FUELS, 2010, 24 (01) : 205 - 212
  • [49] The impact of wet flue gas desulfurization scrubbing on mercury emissions from coal-fired power stations
    Niksa, S
    Fujiwara, N
    JOURNAL OF THE AIR & WASTE MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION, 2005, 55 (07) : 970 - 977
  • [50] As, Hg, and Se flue gas sampling in a coal-fired power plant and their fate during coal combustion
    Otero-Rey, JR
    López-Vilariño, JM
    Moreda-Piñeiro, J
    Alonso-Rodríguez, E
    Muniategui-Lorenzo, S
    López-Mahía, P
    Prada-Rodríguez, D
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, 2003, 37 (22) : 5262 - 5267