Efficient utilisation of flue gas desulfurization gypsum as a potential material for fluoride removal

Kang, Jianhua; Gou, Xiaoqin; Hu, Yuehua; Sun, Wei; Liu, Runqing; Gao, Zhiyong; Guan, Qingjun

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.08.416

Cited by 62 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The band observed at 874 cm À1 was assigned for the CO 3 group. The peak seen at 658 cm À1 is the characteristic peak of CaSO 4 (Kang et al 2019). Figure 3(b) represented the FT-IR spectrum of synthesized FGD-HAP.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Zinc and cadmium adsorption from wastewater using hydroxyapatite synthesized from flue gas desulfurization waste

Demir

Tuğrul

2021

Water Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this work is to produce an alternative cost-effective adsorbent to remove zinc and cadmium from wastewater using hydroxyapatite (HAP) synthesized with hydrothermal method from FGD (Flue gas desulfurization) waste generated by two different coal power plants. The effects of FGD type (Cayırhan and Orhaneli) and molar ratio (H3PO4/CaSO4) (0.6–4.79) on HAP synthesis were investigated. Afterwards effects of the adsorbent dose (1–2 g/L), heavy metal concentration (30, 40, 50 mg/L) and contact time (1, 2, 3, 4 h) on zinc and cadmium adsorption yield from synthetic wastewater using produced HAP were examined. FGD waste and synthesized FGD-HAP were characterized by X-Ray Diffraction (XRD), Fourier Transformed Infrared Spectroscopy (FT-IR), Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) and Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) instruments. The zinc and cadmium concentration was studied by Inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES). Maximum zinc adsorption capacity of the Cayırhan FGD-HAP was 49.97 and 49.99 mg/L, Orhaneli FGD-HAP was 49.96 and 49.99 mg/L, for 1 g/L and 2 g/L adsorbent dose respectively, for 50 mg/L heavy metal concentration and 4 h contact time. Maximum cadmium adsorption capacity of the Cayırhan FGD-HAP was 39.98 and 39.99 mg/L, Orhaneli FGD-HAP was 40 and 39.99 mg/L, for 1 g/L and 2 g/L adsorbent dose respectively, for 40 mg/L heavy metal concentration and 4 h contact time. Adsorption yields were calculated between 98.53 and 100%. The adsorption data were well explained by second order kinetic model and the Freundlich isotherm model fits the equilibrium data. The adsorption results demonstrated that FGD's waste is an effective source to synthesis HAP which is used as an adsorbent for zinc and cadmium removal from wastewater due to high adsorption capacity.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Zinc and cadmium adsorption from wastewater using hydroxyapatite synthesized from flue gas desulfurization waste

Demir

Tuğrul

2021

Water Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The implementation of FGD technology in coal power plants is approximately 93%, 2.5%, and 67% for these nations, respectively (CEA, 2018–2019; USEIA, 2018; Yu et al, 2011); for our calculations we assume that the remainder of the world has also applied FGD at 67%. FGD has been shown to be particularly efficient in F removal, capturing over 95% of F from flue gas during wet FGD operation (Álvarez‐Ayuso et al, 2006; Bing et al, 2018; Córdoba et al, 2012; Kang et al, 2019). Using these values, we calculate that with current worldwide implementation of FGD capture technologies, the flux of F that escapes to the atmosphere from coal combustion worldwide is 0.18 Tg F/yr, just below the low end of the range of 0.2 to 0.3 Tg F/yr estimated by Fuge (2019).…”

Section: Anthropogenic Impactsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…During combustion in coal‐fired power plants, F is almost completely vaporized (Meij, 1994) and, depending on the pollution control technologies, is captured in various CCRs. The main CCRs collected in modern power plants are the following: fly ash that is separated from flue gas; precipitates from FGD, such as gypsum; and bottom ash and slag (e.g., Álvarez‐Ayuso et al, 2006; Bing et al, 2018; Carlson & Adriano, 1993; Córdoba, 2015; Kang et al, 2019). While some proportion of CCRs are recycled for building materials and other uses (e.g., Asokan et al, 2005), worldwide most CCRs are either temporarily or permanently stored in waste ponds or landfills, which have the potential to contaminate associated surface water and groundwater.…”

Section: Anthropogenic Impactsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Global Biogeochemical Cycle of Fluorine

Schlesinger

Klein

Vengosh

2020

Global Biogeochemical Cycles

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review provides a synthesis of what is currently known about the natural and anthropogenic fluxes of fluorine on Earth, offering context for an evaluation of the growing environmental impact of human-induced F mobilization and use. The largest flux of F at the Earth's surface derives from the mobilization of F during chemical (2.2 Tg F/yr (where 1 Tg = 10 12 g) and mechanical (7 Tg F/yr) weathering of rocks. Humans supplement these fluxes by mining fluorospar and apatite ores to make a variety of industrial chemicals and fertilizers, mobilizing 2.9 and 7.6 Tg F/yr, respectively. Other large anthropogenic fluxes derive from the manufacture of bricks (1.8 Tg F/yr) and extraction of groundwater (0.9 to 1.7 Tg F/yr). Rivers deliver~3.6 Tg/yr of dissolved fluoride to the oceans, where the mean residence time of dissolved F in seawater is~500,000 yr. F is removed from the oceans by the deposition of terrigenous (4.3 Tg F/yr) and authigenic sediments (1.24 Tg F/yr), and approximately 10 Tg F/yr is removed from the surface of the Earth by subduction of the oceanic lithosphere. Humans have increased the flux of F to the atmosphere and in rivers by more than a factor of 2, with the largest impacts stemming from the use of phosphorus fertilizers, the production of brick, and extraction of groundwater. Despite their well-documented toxicity, perfluoroalkyl substances make only a small contribution to F emitted to the atmosphere and natural waters.

show abstract

“…FGDG was used as a new potential material for fluoride removal (Kang et al, 2019). The results showed that FGDG effectively removed 93.31% of fluoride within a pH range of 5–11 through calcium fluoride precipitation.…”

Section: Recycling Of Flue Gas Desulfurization Gypsum (Fgdg)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Power production waste

Cai

Zhang

Liang

et al. 2020

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The storage of large amount of power production waste occupies huge land resource; moreover, the stored or discarded waste may pollute the water environment through changing the water pH, releasing the trace and toxic elements even radioactive elements, and so on by leachate. Therefore, the recycling and disposal of power production waste are important and necessary. This paper reviews the research literatures published in 2019 on power generation waste from coal-fired and nuclear power plants, mainly including the recycling of fly ash and flue gas desulfurization gypsum in construction industry and environmental application, the recovery and immobilization of different metals from coal combustion products and selective catalytic reduction catalysts, and the treatment and disposal of radioactive elements from nuclear power plants.

show abstract

Efficient utilisation of flue gas desulfurization gypsum as a potential material for fluoride removal

Cited by 62 publications

References 45 publications

Zinc and cadmium adsorption from wastewater using hydroxyapatite synthesized from flue gas desulfurization waste

Zinc and cadmium adsorption from wastewater using hydroxyapatite synthesized from flue gas desulfurization waste

Global Biogeochemical Cycle of Fluorine

Power production waste

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About