Removal of Gas-Phase Elemental Mercury by Bromine-Impregnated Activated Carbon

Article Preview

Abstract:

Br-impregnated activated carbon for gas-phase elemental mercury adsorption experiments were carried out at a fixed-bed system to get the suitable mass fraction of KBr impregnation solution. Hg removal efficiency of 1% wt KBr-ACs was 69.0%, while that of 10% wt KBr-ACs was 57.9%. Both of them were higher than that of the raw activated carbon, 42.2%. The removal efficiency of Hg0 was not proportional to bromine concentration. Under 80-180°C, Hg removal efficiency of 1% wt KBr-ACs were 68.3%-71.8%, and at 140°C it reached the highest due to the increasing chemical adsorption ability of the functional groups which was on the surfaces of activated carbons by impregnating. At 160°C, Hg removal efficiency was lower than that at 140°C due to desorption making physical adsorption decrease, so that the total adsorption decreased.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 356-360)

Pages:

1660-1663

Citation:

Online since:

October 2011

Export:

Price:

[1] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Mercury Study Report to Congress, Volume1: Executive Summary, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards and Office of Research and development, EPA-452rr-97-003, December, 1997.

Google Scholar

[2] Hsing-chenghsi, Marki.Rood, Massoudrostam-Abadi, Shiaoguochen, Ramsaychang, Effects of Sulfur Impregnation Temperature on the Properties and Mercury Adsorption Capacities of Activated Carbon Fibers(ACFs), Environmental Science & Technology, 2001, 35(13): 2785-2791.

DOI: 10.1021/es001794k

Google Scholar

[3] Hancai Zeng, Feng Jin, Jia Guo, Removal of elemental mercury from coal combustion flue gas by chloride-impregnated activated carbon, Fuel, 2004, 83(1): 143–146.

DOI: 10.1016/s0016-2361(03)00235-7

Google Scholar

[4] W. Liu, R. Vidic, D. Brown Th, Optimization of sulfur impregnation protocol for fixed-bed application of activated carbon-based sorbents for gas-phase mercury removal, Environmental Science & Technology, 2004, 83(1): 143-146.

DOI: 10.1021/es970630+

Google Scholar

[5] G.P. Reed, A. ErguÈdenler, J.R. Grace, A.P. Watkinson, A.A. Herod, D. Dugwell,R. Kandiyoti, Control of gasifier mercury emissions in a hot gas filter : the effect of temperature, Fuel , 2001, 80 (5): 623-634.

DOI: 10.1016/s0016-2361(00)00148-4

Google Scholar

[6] Diamantopoulou, G. Skodras, G.P. Sakellaropoulos, Sorption of mercury by activated carbon in the presence of flue gas components, Fuel Processing technology, 2010, 91(2): 158–163.

DOI: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2009.09.005

Google Scholar