A variety of natural mineral sorbents were synthesized and tested on a lab-scale fixed-bed system to evaluate mercury removal efficiencies under a simulated flue gas condition that contains 84% N 2, 4% O 2, and 12% CO 2 in volume fraction. Three types of natural minerals, bentonite (Ben), mordenite (Mor), and attapulgite (Atp), were selected as raw sorbents, and several chemical promoters, such as CuCl 2, NaClO 3, KBr, and KI, were employed to enhance mercury removal abilities of the raw sorbents. The physical-chemical characteristics of these minerals were analyzed by an X-ray diffractometer (XRD), an accelerated surface area and porosimeter (ASAP) using the N 2 isotherm adsorption/desorption method, and X-ray fluorescence (XRF) spectrometry. The mercury concentration was detected continuously using a VM3000 online mercury analyzer. The results showed that CuCl 2 -impregnated Atp (Cu-Atp) and CuCl 2 -impregnated Ben (Cu-Ben) presented about 90% average Hg 0 removal efficiencies at 120 °C, respectively. In addition, as the temperature increased, the removal efficiencies decreased. Although NaClO 3 -impregnated Atp showed an average Hg 0 removal efficiency more than 90% at 120 °C, its performance was limited by the testing temperature, and that was probably due to the high iron oxide content in Atp. For the KI-impregnated sorbents, high mercury removal efficiencies could be observed, and the efficiencies increased steadily with the temperature increased from 70 to 150 °C. The three natural minerals presented poor adsorption abilities for bromine, which resulted in the disappointing mercury removal efficiencies. Generally, Cu-Atp, Cu-Ben, and KI-impregnated sorbents were promising cost-effective mercury sorbents.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ding et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: