燃煤电厂碱性吸附剂脱汞性能研究

doi:10.11930/j.issn.1004-9649.201912098

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 燃煤电厂汞污染已受到广泛关注。目前燃煤电厂最成熟的脱汞技术是活性炭喷射技术，但活性炭需要进一步改性且应用成本较高，因此，各类吸附剂脱汞研究已成为国内外研究的热点问题。依托大唐阳城电厂7号机组碱性吸附剂脱除系统，利用安大略湿化学取样方法（OHM）对NaHCO₃干粉的汞脱除效果进行试验研究。结果表明，在SCR的反应温度下NaHCO₃能够将大部分Hg⁰和少量Hg²⁺转化为Hg^P，且当NaHCO₃喷射量为480 kg/h时，Hg^P转化率已接近最大。所做研究为燃煤烟气脱汞提供了一条切实可行的技术路线。

关键词: 燃煤电厂, OHM汞采样, 碱性吸附剂, 脱汞

Abstract: Mercury pollution in coal-fired power plants has received widespread attention. At present, being the most mature technology, the activated carbon injection technology has been implemented for mercury removal in coal-fired power plants. However, activated carbon needs to be further transformed which is accompanied with its relatively high application cost. Therefore, the mercury removal with various types of adsorbent has become a hot research topic both domestically and abroad. In this article, based on the alkaline adsorbent removal system of Unit 7 of Datang Yangcheng Power Plant, the mercury removal effect of dry NaHCO₃ powder is tested and explored using Ontario Hydro Method (OHM). The results show that at the reaction temperature of SCR, NaHCO₃ can convert most of Hg⁰ and a small amount of Hg²⁺ into Hg^P. Furthermore, the Hg^P conversion rate is close to maximum when the injection volume of NaHCO₃ reaches 480 kg/h. This study provides a practical and feasible technical route for mercury removal from coal-fired flue gas.

Key words: coal-fired power plant, OHM mercury sampling, alkaline adsorbent, mercury removal

赵柄, 王海刚, 胡冬, 陈坤洋, 金绪良, 殷爱鸣. 燃煤电厂碱性吸附剂脱汞性能研究[J]. 中国电力, 2020, 53(9): 208-213.

ZHAO Bing, WANG Haigang, HU Dong, CHEN Kunyang, JIN Xuliang, YIN Aiming. Study on Mercury Removal Performance of Alkali Adsorbent in Coal-Fired Power Plant[J]. Electric Power, 2020, 53(9): 208-213.

导出引用管理器 EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

链接本文: https://www.electricpower.com.cn/CN/10.11930/j.issn.1004-9649.201912098

https://www.electricpower.com.cn/CN/Y2020/V53/I9/208

参考文献

[1] XU H M, YUAN Y, LIAO Y, et al. [MoS₄]^2– cluster bridges in Co-Fe layered double hydroxides for mercury uptake from S-Hg mixed flue gas[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2017, 51(17): 10109–10116.
[2] 吴清茹, 赵子鹰, 杨帆, 等. 中国燃煤电厂履行《关于汞的水俣公约》的差距与展望[J]. 中国人口·资源与环境, 2019, 29(10): 52–60
WU Qingru, ZHAO Ziying, YANG Fan, et al. Gaps and prospects for the implementation of Minamata Convention on Mercury by China’ s coal-fired power plants[J]. China Population, Resources and Environment, 2019, 29(10): 52–60
[3] 中国环境与发展国际合作委员会. 2011年年会给中国政府的政策建议[R]. 北京: 中国环境与发展国际合作委员会, 2011: 1–35.
[4] 吴小琴, 王金星. 燃煤电厂汞的迁移转化特性的分析[J]. 广东化工, 2018, 45(14): 85–87
WU Xiaoqin, WANG Jinxing. Analysis on the migration and transformation characteristics of mercury in a coal-fired power plant[J]. Guangdong Chemical Industry, 2018, 45(14): 85–87
[5] 陶君, 谷小兵, 黄天放, 等. 燃煤烟气组分对喷射稻壳活性炭脱汞的影响[J]. 中国电力, 2019, 52(10): 150–154
TAO Jun, GU Xiaobing, HUANG Tianfang, et al. Effect of flue gas composition on mercury removal by injecting rice husk-derived activated carbon[J]. Electric Power, 2019, 52(10): 150–154
[6] 赵毅, 聂国欣, 贾里杨. 燃煤电厂烟气脱汞技术的研究[J]. 华北电力大学学报(自然科学版), 2019, 46(2): 103–110
ZHAO Yi, NIE Guoxin, JIA Liyang. Study on flue gas demercuration at coal plant[J]. Journal of North China Electric Power University (Natural Science Edition), 2019, 46(2): 103–110
[7] 周强, 段钰锋, 卢平. 燃煤电厂吸附剂喷射脱汞技术的研究进展[J]. 化工进展, 2018, 37(11): 4460–4467
ZHOU Qiang, DUAN Yufeng, LU Ping. Research progress on in-duct mercury removal by sorbent injection in power plant[J]. Chemical Industry and Engineering Progress, 2018, 37(11): 4460–4467
[8] PRABHU V, KIM T, KHAKPOUR Y, et al. Evidence of powdered activated carbon preferential collection and enrichment on electrostatic precipitator discharge electrodes during sorbent injection for mercury emissions control[J]. Fuel Processing Technology, 2012, 93(1): 8–12.
[9] 赵鹏飞. 固体吸附剂脱除燃煤烟气汞的实验与机理研究[D]. 武汉: 华中科技大学, 2010.
ZHAO Pengfei. Experimental and mechanism study of elemental mercury removal from coal combustion flue gases by solid sorbents[D]. Wuhan: Huazhong University of Science and Technology, 2010.
[10] STERLING M, JAMES B, STEVEN W. Combined Hg and SO₃ removal using a single sorbent—SBS injection[R]. Texas: Power Industry Services, 2014: 1–6.
[11] JIM M, FRANK M. SO₃ removal as a mercury control strategy[R]. Texas: Power Industry Services, 2008: 1–8.
[12] Environmental Protection Agency. Standard test method for elemental, oxidized, particle—bound and total mercury in flue gas generated from coal-fired stationary sources (OHM Method): ANSI/ASTM D 6784—2002[S]. West Conshohocken: ASTM, 2008.
[13] 李志超, 段钰锋, 王运军, 等. 300 MW燃煤电厂ESP和WFGD对烟气汞的脱除特性[J]. 燃料化学学报, 2013, 41(4): 491–498
LI Zhichao, DUAN Yufeng, WANG Yunjun, et al. Mercury removal by ESP and WFGD in a 300 MW coal-fired power plant[J]. Journal of Fuel Chemistry and Technology, 2013, 41(4): 491–498
[14] 刘杰, 陈敏敏. 燃煤电厂烟气中汞形态及含量的采样分析方法[J]. 煤气与热力, 2014, 34(12): 11–14
LIU Jie, CHEN Minmin. Sampling analysis methods for mercury morphology and content in flue gas from coal-fired power plants[J]. Gas & Heat, 2014, 34(12): 11–14
[15] 刘含笑, 郭滢, 章培南, 等. 燃煤电厂烟气中Hg的采样及测定方法研究[J]. 中国环保产业, 2017(11): 49–53
LIU Hanxiao, GUO Ying, ZHANG Peinan, et al. Research on sampling and determination method of Hg in flue gas of coal-fired power plant[J]. China Environmental Protection Industry, 2017(11): 49–53
[16] 王凤阳, 钟犁, 吕海生, 等. 燃煤电厂烟气三氧化硫控制冷凝法测试分析[J]. 洁净煤技术, 2017, 23(4): 58–62
WANG Fengyang, ZHONG Li, LYU Haisheng, et al. Detection of SO₃ in flue gas of coal-fired power plants with controlled cooling method[J]. Clean Coal Technology, 2017, 23(4): 58–62