TECHNOLOGY FOR AIR

POLLUTION CONTROL PART1

TECHNIQUES WITHOUT USING
EMISSIONS CONTROL DEVICES
Process Change

Wind, Geothermal, Hydroelectric, or Solar Unit instead of Fossil

fired Unit.

Change in Fuel
e.g. Use of Low Sulfur Fuel, instead of High Sulfur fuel.

Good Operating Practices

Good Housekeeping
Maintenance

Plant Shutdown
COMMONLY USED METHODS FOR AIR
POLLUTION CONTROL
PARTICULATE
Cyclones
Electrostatic Precipitators
Fabric Filter
Wet Scrubbers

GASES
Adsorption Towers
Thermal Incernation
Catalytic Combustion
SOX CONTROL
GENERAL METHODS FOR CONTROL
OF SO2 EMISSIONS
Change to Low Sulfur Fuel
Natural Gas
Liquefied Natural Gas
Low Sulfur Oil
Low Sulfur Coal

Use Desulfurized Coal and Oil Increase

Effective Stack Height
Build Tall Stacks
Redistribution of Stack Gas Velocity Profile
Modification of Plume Buoyancy
GENERAL METHODS FOR
CONTROL OF SO2 EMISSIONS
(CONTD.)
Use Flue Gas Desulfurization Systems

Use Alternative Energy Sources, such as

Hydro-Power or Nuclear-Power
FLUE GAS
DESULFURIZATION
SO2 scrubbing, or Flue Gas Desulfurization
processes can be classified as:
Throwaway or Regenerative, depending upon whether the
recovered sulfur is discarded or recycled.
Wet or Dry, depending upon whether the scrubber is a liquid
or a solid.

Flue Gas Desulfurization Processes

The major flue gas desulfurization ( FGD ), processes are :
Limestone Scrubbing
Lime Scrubbing
Dual Alkali Processes
Lime Spray Drying
Wellman-Lord Process
LIMESTONE SCRUBBING
LIMESTONE SCRUBBING
Limestone slurry is sprayed on the incoming
flue gas. The sulfur dioxide gets absorbed
The limestone and the sulfur dioxide react as
follows :
CaCO3 + H2O + 2SO2 ----> Ca+2 + 2HSO3-+ CO2

CaCO3 + 2HSO3-+ Ca+2 ----> 2CaSO3 + CO2 + H2O

LIME SCRUBBING
LIME SCRUBBING
The equipment and the processes are similar to
those in limestone scrubbing Lime Scrubbing offers
better utilization of the reagent. The operation is
more flexible. The major disadvantage is the high
cost of lime compared to limestone.
The reactions occurring during lime scrubbing are :
CaO + H2O -----> Ca(OH)2
SO2 + H2O <----> H2SO3
H2SO3 + Ca(OH)2 -----> CaSO3.2 H2O
CaSO3.2 H2O + (1/2)O2 -----> CaSO4.2 H2O
DUAL ALKALI SYSTEM
Lime and Limestone scrubbing lead to deposits inside
spray tower.
The deposits can lead to plugging of the nozzles
through which the scrubbing slurry is sprayed.
The Dual Alkali system uses two regents to remove the
sulfur dioxide.
Sodium sulfite / Sodium hydroxide are used for the
absorption of sulfur dioxide inside the spray chamber.
The resulting sodium salts are soluble in water,so no
deposits are formed.
The spray water is treated with lime or limestone, along
with make-up sodium hydroxide or sodium carbonate.
The sulfite / sulfate ions are precipitated, and the
sodium hydroxide is regenerated.
LIME SPRAY DRYING
Lime Slurry is sprayed into the chamber

The sulfur dioxide is absorbed by the slurry

The liquid-to-gas ratio is maintained such that the spray

dries before it reaches the bottom of the chamber

The dry solids are carried out with the gas, and are
collected in fabric filtration unit

This system needs lower maintenance, lower capital

costs, and lower energy usage
WELLMAN LORD
PROCESS
Schematic process flow diagram SO2 scrubbing and recovery system
WELLMAN LORD
PROCESS
This process consists of the following
subprocesses:
Flue gas pre-treatment.
Sulfur dioxide absorption by sodium sulfite
Purge treatment
Sodium sulfite regeneration.
The concentrated sulfur dioxide stream is processed
to a marketable product.

The flue gas is pre - treated to remove the particulate.

The sodium sulfite neutralizes the sulfur dioxide :
Na2SO3 + SO2 + H2O -----> 2NaHSO3
WELLMAN LORD PROCESS
(CONTD.)
Some of the Na2SO3 reacts with O2 and the SO3
present in the flue gas to form Na2SO4 and NaHSO3.

Sodium sulfate does not help in the removal of sulfur

dioxide, and is removed. Part of the bisulfate stream is

chilled to precipitate the remaining bisulfate. The

remaining bisulfate stream is evaporated to release

the sulfur dioxide, and regenerate the bisulfite.

NOX CONTROL
BACKGROUND ON
NITROGEN OXIDES
There are seven known oxides of nitrogen :
NO
NO2
NO3
N2O
N2O3
N2O4
N2O5

NO and NO2 are the most common of the seven

oxides listed above. NOx released from stationary
sources is of two types
GENERAL METHODS FOR
CONTROL OF NOX EMISSIONS
NOx control can be achieved by:
Fuel Denitrogenation
Combustion Modification
Modification of operating conditions
Tail-end control equipment
Selective Catalytic Reduction
Selective Non - Catalytic Reduction
Electron Beam Radiation
Staged Combustion
FUEL DENITROGENATION

o One approach of fuel denitrogenation is to remove a large part of

the nitrogen contained in the fuels. Nitrogen is removed from liquid
fuels by mixing the fuels with hydrogen gas, heating the mixture
and using a catalyst to cause nitrogen in the fuel and gaseous
hydrogen to unite. This produces ammonia and cleaner fuel.

This technology can reduce the nitrogen contained in both

naturally occurring and synthetic fuels.
COMBUSTION
MODIFICATION
Combustion control uses one of the following
strategies:
Reduce peak temperatures of the flame zone. The
methods are :
increase the rate of flame cooling
decrease the adiabatic flame temperature by dilution
Reduce residence time in the flame zone. For this we
change the shape of the flame zone
Reduce Oxygen concentration in the flame one. This
can be accomplished by:
decreasing the excess air
controlled mixing of fuel and air
using a fuel rich primary flame zone
CATALYTIC COMBUSTION
CATALYTIC EMISSION
CONTROL
MODIFICATION OF OPERATING
CONDITIONS
The operating conditions can be modified to
achieve significant reductions in the rate of
thermal NOx production. the various methods
are:
Low-excess firing
Off-stoichiometric combustion ( staged combustion )
Flue gas recirculation
Reduced air preheat
Reduced firing rates
Water Injection
TAIL-END CONTROL
PROCESSES
o Combustion modification and modification of
operating conditions provide significant
reductions in NOx, but not enough to meet
regulations.
For further reduction in emissions, tail-end control
equipment is required.
Some of the control processes are:
Selective Catalytic Reduction
Selective Non-catalytic Reduction
Electron Beam Radiation
Staged Combustion
SELECTIVE CATALYTIC
REDUCTION (SCR)
Schematic process flow diagram NOX control
SELECTIVE CATALYTIC
REDUCTION (SCR)
In this process, the nitrogen oxides in the flue gases are
reduced to nitrogen
During this process, only the NOx species are reduced
NH3 is used as a reducing gas
The catalyst is a combination of titanium and vanadium
oxides. The reactions are given below :
4 NO + 4 NH3 + O2 -----> 4N2 + 6H2O
2NO2 + 4 NH3+ O2 -----> 3N2 + 6H2O

Selective catalytic reduction catalyst is best at around 300

too 400 oC.
Typical efficiencies are around 80 %
SELECTIVE NON-CATALYTIC
REDUCTION (SNR)
At higher temperatures (900-1000oC), NH3 will
reduce NOX to nitrogen without a catalyst.

At NH3 : NOX molar ratios 1:1 to 2:1, about 40-

60%reduction is obtained.

SNR is cheaper than SCR in terms of operation

cost and capital cost.

Tight temperature controls are needed. At lower

temperatures, un-reacted ammonia is emitted. At
higher temperatures ammonia is oxidized to NO.
ELECTRON BEAM
RADIATION
This treatment process is under
development, and is not widely used. Work is
underway to determine the feasibility of
electron beam radiation for neutralizing
hazardous wastes and air toxics.
Irradiation of flue gases containing NOx or SOx
produce nitrate and sulfate ions.
The addition of water and ammonia produces
NH4NO3, and (NH4)2SO4
The solids are removed from the gas, and are
sold as fertilizers.
STAGED COMBUSTION
STAGED COMBUSTION
PRINCIPLE
Initially, less air is supplied to bring about incomplete
combustion
Nitrogen is not oxidized. Carbon particles and CO are
released.
In the second stage, more air is supplied to complete
the combustion of carbon and carbon monoxide.

30% to 50% reductions in NOx emissions are

achieved.
CARBON MONOXIDE
CONTROL
FORMATION OF CARBON
MONOXIDE
Due to insufficient oxygen

Factors affecting Carbon monoxide formation:

Fuel-air ratio

Degree of mixing

Temperature
GENERAL METHODS FOR
CONTROL OF CO EMISSIONS
Control carbon monoxide formation.
Note : CO & NOx control strategies are in conflict.

Stationary Sources
Proper Design
Installation
Operation
Maintenance

Process Industries
Burn in furnaces or waste heat boilers.
CARBON DIOXIDE
CONTROL
SOURCES OF CARBON
DIOXIDE
Human-Related Sources
Combustion of fossil fuels: Coal, Oil, and Natural

Gas in power plants, automobiles, and industrial

facilities
Use of petroleum-based products

Industrial processes: Iron and steel production,

cement, lime, and aluminum manufactures

Natural Sources
Volcanic eruptions

Ocean-atmosphere exchange

Plant photosynthesis
SOURCES OF CO2
EMISSIONS IN THE U.S.

(x-axis units are teragrams of CO2 equivalent) Source: USEPA

CO2 EMISSIONS FROM FOSSIL
FUEL COMBUSTION BY SECTOR
AND FUEL TYPE

(y-axis units are teragrams of CO2 equivalent) Source: USEPA

GENERAL METHODS FOR CONTROL
OF CO2 EMISSIONS
Reducing energy consumption, increasing the
efficiency of energy conversion

Switching to less carbon intensive fuels

Increasing the use of renewable sources

Sequestering CO2 through biological,

chemical, or physical processes
CONTROL OF MERCURY
EMISSIONS
MERCURY EMISSIONS
Mercury exists in trace amounts in
Fossil
fuels such as Coal, Oil, and Natural Gas
Vegetation
Waste products
Mercury is released to the atmosphere through
combustion or natural processes
It creates both human and environmental risks

Fish consumption is the primary pathway for

human and wildlife exposure
United states is the first country in the world to
regulate mercury emissions from coal-fired power
plants (March 15, 2005).
 Types of
Sources

Source: Seingeur, 2004 and Mason and Sheu, 2002.

Worldwide Distribution of
Emissions

Source: Presentation by J. Pacyna and J. Munthe at mercury workshop in Brussels,

March 29-30, 2004
CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES FOR
MERCURY EMISSIONS
Currently installed control devices for SO 2, NOX, and
particulates, in a power plant, remove some of the mercury
before releasing from the stack

Activated Carbon Injection:

Particles of activated carbon are injected into the exit gas
flow, downstream of the boiler. The mercury attaches to the
carbon particles and is removed in a particle control device

Thief process for the removal of mercury from flue gas:

It is a process which extracts partially burned coal from a
pulverized coal-fired combustor using a suction pipe, or
"thief," and injects the resulting sorbent into the flue gas to
capture the mercury.
 PARTICULATE MATTER
CONTROL

Range: 20 to 40000 mg/m**3

First step: Process control
Second step: Use of collection device
INDUSTRIAL SOURCES OF
PARTICULATE EMISSIONS
Iron & Steel Mills, the blast furnaces, steel making
furnaces.
Petroleum Refineries, the catalyst regenerators, air-
blown asphalt stills, and sludge burners.
Portland cement industry
Asphalt batching plants
Production of sulfuric acid
Production of phosphoric acid
Soap and Synthetic detergent manufacturing
Glass & glass fiber industry
Instant coffee plants
EFFECTSOFPARTICULATE
EMISSIONS
Primary Effects
Reduction of visibility

size distribution and refractive index of the particles

direct absorption of light by particles
direct light scattering by particles
150 micro g / m3 concentration ~ average visibility of 5
miles
( satisfactory for air and ground transportation )

Soiling of nuisance
increase cost of building maintenance, cleaning of
furnishings, and households
threshold limit is 200 - 250 micro g / m 3 ( dust )
levels of 400 - 500 micro g / m3 considered as nuisance
GENERAL METHODS FOR
CONTROL OF PARTICULATE
EMISSIONS
Five Basic Types of Dust Collectors :

Gravity and Momentum collectors

Settling chambers, louvers, baffle chambers

Centrifugal Collectors
Cyclones
Mechanical centrifugal collectors

Fabric Filters
Baghouses
Fabric collectors
GENERAL METHODS FOR
CONTROL OF PARTICULATE
EMISSIONS (CONTD.)
Electrostatic Precipitators
Tubular
Plate
Wet
Dry

Wet Collectors
Spray towers
Impingement scrubbers
Wet cyclones
Peaked towers
Mobile bed scrubbers
PARTICULATE COLLECTION
MECHANISM
Gravity Settling
Centrifugal Impaction
Inertial Impaction
Direct Interception
Diffusion
Electrostatic Effects
Tubular Dust Collector Arrangement for an
ESP
 Overall Collection

Ci inlet concentration
Co outlet concentration

Note: The smaller the particle, the

lower is
efficiency of removal.
PROBLEM
A cyclone operates removes 75% of
particulate matter fed to it. The filter is then
fed to an ESP which operates with 90%
efficiency. What is the overall efficiency of
this particulate system?
Step 1:
Assuming an initial feed of 100%, determine the
percentage of the stream fed to the ESP.
100% - (100% x 0.75) = 25%

Step 2:
Determine final composition after ESP.
25% - (25% x 0.9) = 2.5%

Step 3:
Determine overall efficiency
hoverall= (initial final)/ initial
= 100% - 2.5%100% = 97.5%