Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In this article, the entire removal process was based on a cycle absorption system in which a primary-absorber was used to scrub SO 2 by urea, then residual NO and SO 2 could be oxidized by the vaporized H 2 O 2 /catalysts in the catalytic system, and finally, the soluble gaseous pollutants and the remaining gaseous oxidants were absorbed by ammonium sulfite that was produced from the primary-absorber. The complex catalysts formed by iron recovery from the bauxite residue (red mud) were restructured with adenosine triphosphate (ATP) to generate mesopores with surface-active sites (FeOH) for efficient H 2 O 2 catalysis. Further, 95.2% SO 2 and 88.6% NO were removed from flue gas under the operation conditions where SO 2 concentration was 2000 ppm, NO concentration was 500 ppm, O 2 concentration was 7%, CO 2 concentration was 10%, catalytic temperature was 140 °C, H 2 O 2 feeding rate was 1.5 mL/h, and the total gas flow rate was 1.5 L/min. The results suggested that the catalytic performance is closely related to the structure of support ATP, which was elucidated by a series of experiments in different Fe loadings and BET characterization. From electron spin resonance (ESR) results, H 2 O 2 generally decompose not only into the • OH free radical by iron oxide but also into • HOO and related reactive oxygen species. According to the results of X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) and temperature-programmed reduction (TPR), the content of FeOH and lattice oxygen in the modified ATP catalyst played an important role in the adsorption of H 2 O 2 on the protonated surface of the low-acid catalyst. Furthermore, the rational catalytic mechanism of catalyst/H 2 O 2 at low and high temperatures (corresponding to 140 and 200 °C) was proposed by transient response experiments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yang et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: