No abstract

No abstract

A discussion of the commercialization of advanced technology to control emissions from the combustion of coal for the production of electricity is presented. A historical summary of the development of flue gas treatment technology, some approaches to process development, the factors affecting the success of new flue gas treatment concepts, and a general strategy that may be applied to the development of these new concepts are provided. The scrubbing of utility flue gas is a relatively new practice. Even though the first application of flue gas scrubbing for sulfur dioxide control occurred in London, England, in 1933, the application of this technology to coal-fired utility boilers in the United States did not begin until the 1970's. The difficulty in controlling emissions from coal-fired utility boilers lies in the tremendous volume of flue gas to be treated. The scale is so large, and the capital and operating expenses are so great that utility companies enter into flue gas treatment with great caution. Most newly conceived flue gas treatment systems do not advance beyond laboratory or small-scale pilot testing.Factors affecting the success of these new concepts are capital equipment costs, operating costs, system reliability and performance, and waste disposal requirements. The acceptance of a novel flue gas treatment technology requires that confidence in system reliability be built through intense, large-scale testing.

No abstract

and a culture adapted to leachate. The build-up of butyrate indicates a breakdown of other, larger organic species in the leachate. This was not observed when a similar experiment was performed using a culture selected for volatile fatty acid degradation. Apparently, the organisms responsible for the formation of butyrate from higher compounds are not present in this culture.Inhibition of methane occurs when the leachate adapted culture is dosed with leachate, presumably because of sulfate reducers. This problem could be eliminated by removing the sulfuric acid step from the pretreatment scheme or selecting a culture from a seed that does not contain sulfate reducers. The rate controlling step is probably acetate removal, hence the formation of methane. This is typical of anaerobic digestion systems [ I ] . Current research is using higher concentrations of leachate to study the effects on the microbial population. The degradation of other compounds in the leachate is being studied also.The ultimate fate of the components present in the process wastewaters produced by coal liquefaction and gasification facilities is of interest to those developing effective treatment strategies. Conversion processes generate wastewaters containing relatively high concentrations of phenol, ammonia, cyanide, and hydrogen sulfide, as well as other organic and inorganic compounds [ I ] . These components are not unique to coal conversion process Reference i n this report to a n y specific commercial product. process, or aervice IS to facilitate understanding and doel not necessarily imply Its endorsement or favoring b y the United States Departnrent of Energy. 26February , 1985 wastewaters and are also found in various combinations in wastewaters of the petroleum, steel, and chemical process industries, among others. The bulk of the contaminants must be removed from the wastewater prior to reuse or discharge to the environment. aper reports the results of a treatability study of H-Coal Yiquefaction process wastewater. Previous investigations have demonstrated the applicability of conventional treatment technology in controlling the wastewater from gasification and li uefaction pilot plants [2, 3, 41. It can be concluded from &es, earlier studies that no single treatment operation is capable of reducing all of the This