2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.cjche.2014.10.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Experimental study on SO2 recovery using a sodium–zinc sorbent based flue gas desulfurization technology

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As shown in Table 1, many scholars have studied the flue gas desulfurization process by experiment or simulation [25][26][27][28][29]. Table 1 shows that research on circulating fluidized bed flue gas desulfurization is mostly focused on improving the adsorbent's adsorbability [30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37], improving the pore structure of the adsorbent [31,[38][39][40], and establishing different desulfurization models [41][42][43] to improve the utilization rate of the desulfurizing agent. Li et al [42] established a mass balance model using fast hydrating adsorbents, and predicted the system status from the aspects of particle wear, particle residence time, particle segregation, and the desulfurization process, and optimized operating conditions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As shown in Table 1, many scholars have studied the flue gas desulfurization process by experiment or simulation [25][26][27][28][29]. Table 1 shows that research on circulating fluidized bed flue gas desulfurization is mostly focused on improving the adsorbent's adsorbability [30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37], improving the pore structure of the adsorbent [31,[38][39][40], and establishing different desulfurization models [41][42][43] to improve the utilization rate of the desulfurizing agent. Li et al [42] established a mass balance model using fast hydrating adsorbents, and predicted the system status from the aspects of particle wear, particle residence time, particle segregation, and the desulfurization process, and optimized operating conditions.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…4 Like gas permeation discussed above, the membrane mass transfer coefficients are also proportional to membrane porosity and inversely proportional to membrane thickness and membrane tortuosity. Because the absorption time was 30 min, the SO 2 absorption flux of PES membrane was 8.67E-4 mol/m 2 s, but the SO 2 absorption flux of PES/fSiO 2 organic–inorganic composite membrane was 7.87E-4 mol/m 2 s. The membrane mode of operation was assumed to be non-wetted case, owing to the shorter operation time (30 min). The membrane mass transfer coefficient of PES/fSiO 2 organic–inorganic composite membrane was lower than the membrane mass transfer coefficient of the PES membrane because of the lower gas permeation deduced previously.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The adsorption processes are already used and are well known for SO 2 removal as well as for H 2 S removal. Common sorbents for SO 2 removal are mostly calcium-based oxide/hydroxide (CaO/Ca(OH) 2 ), zinc oxide-based (ZnO), sodium hydroxide based (NaOH) and ammonia-based [3]. Limestone, slaked lime or a mixture of slaked lime with fly ash is commercially used in FGD systems [4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%