Mercury in desulfurization gypsum and its dependence on coal properties in coal-fired power plants

被引:8
|
作者
Wang, Qingfeng [1 ,2 ]
Wang, Dan [2 ]
Li, Zhonggen [1 ,2 ]
Zhang, Leiming [3 ]
Feng, Xinbin [1 ]
机构
[1] Chinese Acad Sci, Inst Geochem, State Key Lab Environm Geochem, Lincheng West Rd 99, Guiyang 550081, Peoples R China
[2] Zunyi Normal Coll, Dept Resources & Environm, Zunyi 563006, Guizhou, Peoples R China
[3] Environm & Climate Change Canada, Sci & Technol Branch, Air Qual Res Div, Toronto, ON M3H 5T4, Canada
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Mercury; Desulfurization Gypsum; Coal-fired power plants; Coal properties;
D O I
10.1016/j.fuel.2021.120413
中图分类号
TE [石油、天然气工业]; TK [能源与动力工程];
学科分类号
0807 ; 0820 ;
摘要
To disclose possible influencing factors on mercury (Hg) contents in flue gas desulfurization (FGD) gypsum of coal-fired power plants (CFPPs), 11 major CFPPs in Guizhou province of southwest China were surveyed for analyzing Hg contents in feed coal, limestone and gypsum as well as coal properties. It was found that Hg contents in the desulfurization gypsum of the 11 CFPPs varied greatly from 160 to 1482 mu g kg(-1), with an average of 595 +/- 353 mu g kg(-1). The majority of Hg in gypsum was introduced from the flue gas downstream of the particulate matter control devices, while a much lesser portion (average 3.43 +/- 3.85%) was stemmed from limestone. Hg content in gypsum has a strong positive correlation with chlorine content, a weak positive correlation with Hg content and a weak negative correlation with sulfur content in feed coal. Multiple regression analysis results showed that Hg and Cl contents in feed coal were the major determinants of Hg content in flue gas FGD gypsum despite the proportioning of Hg went in wet FGD system was not been evaluated. Results from the present study suggested that coal characteristics are important factors affecting Hg contents in gypsum.
引用
收藏
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Future coal-fired power plants
    Pruschek, R
    [J]. BWK, 2001, 53 (12): : 40 - +
  • [32] Advanced coal-fired power plants
    Ruth, LA
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENERGY RESOURCES TECHNOLOGY-TRANSACTIONS OF THE ASME, 2001, 123 (01): : 4 - 9
  • [33] Modern coal-fired power plants
    Scheffknecht, G
    Stamatelopoulos, GN
    Lorey, H
    [J]. BWK, 2002, 54 (06): : 46 - +
  • [34] Mercury transportation in soil via using gypsum from flue gas desulfurization unit in coal-fired power plant
    Wang, Kelin
    Orndorff, William
    Cao, Yan
    Pan, Weiping
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES, 2013, 25 (09) : 1858 - 1864
  • [35] Mercury transportation in soil via using gypsum from flue gas desulfurization unit in coal-fired power plant
    Kelin Wang
    William Orndorff
    Yan Cao
    Weiping Pan
    [J]. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 2013, (09) : 1858 - 1864
  • [36] Mercury transportation in soil via using gypsum from flue gas desulfurization unit in coal-fired power plant
    Kelin Wang
    William Orndorff
    Yan Cao
    Weiping Pan
    [J]. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 2013, 25 (09) : 1858 - 1864
  • [37] Utilization Alternatives and Potentiality for FGD Gypsum from Coal-Fired Power Plants
    Tian Hezhong1
    [J]. Electricity, 2006, (02) : 47 - 48
  • [38] Mercury emissions and partitioning from Indian coal-fired power plants
    Hridesh Agarwalla
    Rabi Narayan Senapati
    Tarit Baran Das
    [J]. Journal of Environmental Sciences, 2021, 100 (02) : 28 - 33
  • [39] Urban impacts of mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants
    Sullivan, Terry M.
    Adams, Jay
    Blake, Reginald
    [J]. JOURNAL OF URBAN TECHNOLOGY, 2006, 13 (02) : 53 - 70
  • [40] Coal-Fired Power Plants Alternative Petcoke Fired Power Plants
    Ozcelik, Ozlem
    Boran, Kurtulus
    [J]. JOURNAL OF POLYTECHNIC-POLITEKNIK DERGISI, 2016, 19 (04): : 531 - 535