Speciation and mass distribution of mercury in a bituminous coal-fired power plant

Sung Jun Lee, Yong Chil Seo, Ha Na Jang, Kyu Shik Park, Jeom In Baek, Hi Soo An, Kwang Chul Song

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

123 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Characterization and mass balance of mercury in a coal-fired power plant were carried out in a 500 MW, bituminous coal consuming electric utility boiler. This facility is equipped with a cold-side electrostatic precipitator (ESP) and a wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) in series as air pollution control devices (APCDs). Mercury sampling points were selected at both the up and down streams of the ESP and outlet of the FGD, which is at stack. Two different types of sampling methods were employed, one is the Ontario Hydro (OH) method (ASTM D6784) and the other is US EPA101A. Various samples were collected from the coal-fired power plant such as fuel coals, fly ash in hopper, lime/lime stone, gypsum, and effluent water from FGD. These samples were analyzed by US EPA 7470A and 7471A to understand the behavior and mass balance of mercury in the process of a coal-fired power plant. There are no significant differences between the two sampling methods, but the OH method seems to have more advantages for Hg sampling from a coal-fired power plant because mercury speciation is quite an important factor to estimate the mercury emission and control efficiency from combustion flue gas. Approximate Hg mass balance could be obtained from various samples in the study; however, a series of long-term and comprehensive study is required to evaluate the reliable Hg mass distribution and behavior in a coal-fired power plant.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2215-2224
Number of pages10
JournalAtmospheric Environment
Volume40
Issue number12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2006 Apr 1

Fingerprint

bituminous coal
coal-fired power plant
mass balance
sampling
lime
pollution control
fly ash
gypsum
atmospheric pollution
combustion
mercury
distribution
effluent
coal
flue gas
method
water

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Environmental Science(all)
  • Atmospheric Science

Cite this

Lee, Sung Jun ; Seo, Yong Chil ; Jang, Ha Na ; Park, Kyu Shik ; Baek, Jeom In ; An, Hi Soo ; Song, Kwang Chul. / Speciation and mass distribution of mercury in a bituminous coal-fired power plant. In: Atmospheric Environment. 2006 ; Vol. 40, No. 12. pp. 2215-2224.
@article{5bb7dade2ef1462e99e07dfa80c00d94,
title = "Speciation and mass distribution of mercury in a bituminous coal-fired power plant",
abstract = "Characterization and mass balance of mercury in a coal-fired power plant were carried out in a 500 MW, bituminous coal consuming electric utility boiler. This facility is equipped with a cold-side electrostatic precipitator (ESP) and a wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) in series as air pollution control devices (APCDs). Mercury sampling points were selected at both the up and down streams of the ESP and outlet of the FGD, which is at stack. Two different types of sampling methods were employed, one is the Ontario Hydro (OH) method (ASTM D6784) and the other is US EPA101A. Various samples were collected from the coal-fired power plant such as fuel coals, fly ash in hopper, lime/lime stone, gypsum, and effluent water from FGD. These samples were analyzed by US EPA 7470A and 7471A to understand the behavior and mass balance of mercury in the process of a coal-fired power plant. There are no significant differences between the two sampling methods, but the OH method seems to have more advantages for Hg sampling from a coal-fired power plant because mercury speciation is quite an important factor to estimate the mercury emission and control efficiency from combustion flue gas. Approximate Hg mass balance could be obtained from various samples in the study; however, a series of long-term and comprehensive study is required to evaluate the reliable Hg mass distribution and behavior in a coal-fired power plant.",
author = "Lee, {Sung Jun} and Seo, {Yong Chil} and Jang, {Ha Na} and Park, {Kyu Shik} and Baek, {Jeom In} and An, {Hi Soo} and Song, {Kwang Chul}",
year = "2006",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.12.013",
language = "English",
volume = "40",
pages = "2215--2224",
journal = "Atmospheric Environment",
issn = "1352-2310",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "12",

}

Speciation and mass distribution of mercury in a bituminous coal-fired power plant. / Lee, Sung Jun; Seo, Yong Chil; Jang, Ha Na; Park, Kyu Shik; Baek, Jeom In; An, Hi Soo; Song, Kwang Chul.

In: Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 40, No. 12, 01.04.2006, p. 2215-2224.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Speciation and mass distribution of mercury in a bituminous coal-fired power plant

AU - Lee, Sung Jun

AU - Seo, Yong Chil

AU - Jang, Ha Na

AU - Park, Kyu Shik

AU - Baek, Jeom In

AU - An, Hi Soo

AU - Song, Kwang Chul

PY - 2006/4/1

Y1 - 2006/4/1

N2 - Characterization and mass balance of mercury in a coal-fired power plant were carried out in a 500 MW, bituminous coal consuming electric utility boiler. This facility is equipped with a cold-side electrostatic precipitator (ESP) and a wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) in series as air pollution control devices (APCDs). Mercury sampling points were selected at both the up and down streams of the ESP and outlet of the FGD, which is at stack. Two different types of sampling methods were employed, one is the Ontario Hydro (OH) method (ASTM D6784) and the other is US EPA101A. Various samples were collected from the coal-fired power plant such as fuel coals, fly ash in hopper, lime/lime stone, gypsum, and effluent water from FGD. These samples were analyzed by US EPA 7470A and 7471A to understand the behavior and mass balance of mercury in the process of a coal-fired power plant. There are no significant differences between the two sampling methods, but the OH method seems to have more advantages for Hg sampling from a coal-fired power plant because mercury speciation is quite an important factor to estimate the mercury emission and control efficiency from combustion flue gas. Approximate Hg mass balance could be obtained from various samples in the study; however, a series of long-term and comprehensive study is required to evaluate the reliable Hg mass distribution and behavior in a coal-fired power plant.

AB - Characterization and mass balance of mercury in a coal-fired power plant were carried out in a 500 MW, bituminous coal consuming electric utility boiler. This facility is equipped with a cold-side electrostatic precipitator (ESP) and a wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) in series as air pollution control devices (APCDs). Mercury sampling points were selected at both the up and down streams of the ESP and outlet of the FGD, which is at stack. Two different types of sampling methods were employed, one is the Ontario Hydro (OH) method (ASTM D6784) and the other is US EPA101A. Various samples were collected from the coal-fired power plant such as fuel coals, fly ash in hopper, lime/lime stone, gypsum, and effluent water from FGD. These samples were analyzed by US EPA 7470A and 7471A to understand the behavior and mass balance of mercury in the process of a coal-fired power plant. There are no significant differences between the two sampling methods, but the OH method seems to have more advantages for Hg sampling from a coal-fired power plant because mercury speciation is quite an important factor to estimate the mercury emission and control efficiency from combustion flue gas. Approximate Hg mass balance could be obtained from various samples in the study; however, a series of long-term and comprehensive study is required to evaluate the reliable Hg mass distribution and behavior in a coal-fired power plant.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=32844465714&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=32844465714&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.12.013

DO - 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2005.12.013

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:32844465714

VL - 40

SP - 2215

EP - 2224

JO - Atmospheric Environment

JF - Atmospheric Environment

SN - 1352-2310

IS - 12

ER -