Sorption and stability of mercury on activated carbon for emission control

Graydon, J. W.; Zhang, Xinzhi; Kirk, Donald W.; Jia, Charles Q.

doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.02.118

Cited by 81 publications

(51 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Various strategies have been used to manage mercury-bearing activated carbon or charcoal wastes and other mercury-bearing wastes arising from industrial operations, including coal power plants. These strategies include direct land disposal or stabilization and solidification (S/S) before disposal (Graydon et al 2009, Liu et al 1999. The S/S methods that have been used or evaluated for activated carbon include immobilization in Portland cement (Zhang and Bishop 2002) and chemically bonded phosphate ceramics (Wagh et al 2000, Randall andChattopadhyay 2004).…”

Section: Carbon Bedsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Potential Candidate Stabilization Technologies for Liquid and Solid Secondary Waste Streams

Pierce¹,

Mattigod²,

Westsik³

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Executive SummaryPacific Northwest National Laboratory has initiated a waste-form testing program to support the longterm durability evaluation of a waste form for secondary wastes generated from the treatment and immobilization of Hanford radioactive tank wastes. The purpose of the work discussed in this report is to identify candidate stabilization technologies and getters that have the potential to successfully treat the secondary waste stream liquid effluent, mainly from off-gas scrubbers and spent solids, produced by the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). Down-selection to the most promising stabilization processes/waste forms is needed to support the design of a solidification treatment unit (STU) to be added to the Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF). To support key decision processes, an initial screening of the secondary liquid waste forms must be completed by February 2010. Later, more comprehensive and longer term performance testing will be conducted, following the guidance provided by the secondary waste-form selection, development, and performance evaluation roadmap. The resulting waste form will be compliant to regulations and performance criteria and will lead to cost-effective disposal of the secondary wastes.This report starts with a brief review of some of the most commonly used solidification formulations that would be candidates for secondary liquid waste streams. In this review, the available data on performance are discussed, and some preliminary recommendations are provided for materials that should undergo additional screening testing. We also 1) discuss options for disposal of WTP secondary solid waste streams, 2) provide a brief overview of standard regulatory test methods used for measuring contaminant leachability and waste-form physical strength (with emphasis on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's [EPA's] new methods as a screening tool for comparing waste solidification materials of interest), and 3) provide an overview of factors that must be considered in long-term performance testing, including state-of-the-art characterization tools that can provide the data needed to technically defend predictive modeling simulations of long-term material behavior. The long-term wasteform testing and solid and leachate characterization must be robust enough to effectively predict material performance in the Integrated Disposal Facility over the 10,000-year period of performance for the engineered system. The solidification technologies for liquid waste streams include cement/grout, containerized Cast Stone, phosphate-bonded ceramics, alkali-aluminosilicate geopolymers, hydroceramics, L-TEM, and fluidized-bed steam reforming (FBSR). In addition to these, other mature technologies and two compounds, namely goethite and sodalite (that are still being developed), that show considerable promise as waste forms or getters are also discussed. It is our recommendation, based upon the available literature, that Cast Stone, chemically bonded phosphate ceramics (Ceramicrete...

show abstract

Section: Carbon Bedsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Potential Candidate Stabilization Technologies for Liquid and Solid Secondary Waste Streams

Pierce¹,

Mattigod²,

Westsik³

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…11 The results showed that the mercury was very stable on the AC sorbents and the leaching of mercury was not anticipated to be a concern. Graydon et al 6 also conducted a sequential leaching test that uses increasingly more acidic conditions. Depending on the steps during which the Hg was found to be leached out, the leaching tests allow the type of Hg species present on the sorbent to be inferred.…”

Section: ■ Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential Hazards of Brominated Carbon Sorbents for Mercury Emission Control

Bisson

2015

Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mercury is a toxic air pollutant, emitted from the combustion of coal. Activated Carbon (AC) or other carbon sorbent (CS) injection into coal combustion flue gases can remove elemental mercury through an adsorption process. Recently, a brominated CS with biomass ash as the carbon source (Br-Ash) was developed as an alternative for costly AC-based sorbent for mercury capture. After mercury capture, these sorbents are disposed in landfill, and the stability of bromine and captured mercury is of paramount importance. The objective of this study is to determine the fate of mercury and bromine from Br-Ash and brominated AC after their service. Mercury and bromine leaching tests were conducted using the standard toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP). The mercury was found to be stable on both the Br-Ash and commercial brominated AC sorbents, while the bromine leached into the aqueous phase considerably. Mercury pulse injection tests on the sorbent material after leaching indicate that both sorbents retain significant mercury capture capability even after the majority of bromine was removed. Testing of the Br-Ash sorbent over a wider range of pH and liquid:solid ratios resulted in leaching of <5% of mercury adsorbed on the Br-Ash. XPS analysis indicated more organically bound Br and less metal-Br bonds after leaching.

show abstract

“…Elemental mercury also has a high vapor pressure at typical operating and emission temperatures making it more difficult to remove [6]. Many studies have been performed to find an effective technology for the removal of elemental mercury from flue gas, such as coal washing, activated carbon injection and low NOx combustion [7][8][9][10]. The results of investigations conducted by many researchers in last decade suggested that the adsorption of Hg using AC is one of the most promising techniques for elemental mercury removal.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synthesis of activated carbon from coal pitch for mercury removal in coal-fired power plants

Zhong

Zhang

et al. 2015

J Therm Anal Calorim

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Activated carbon (AC) is an effective adsorbent that is used in a wide range of applications. This is due to its high adsorption capacity and fast removal rate. This study evaluated processing conditions for synthesizing AC from coal pitch. The objective was to establish what processing conditions produced AC with the best adsorption performance. Factors such as carbonization temperature, activation temperature, steam flow rate and the addition of additives have been studied. A real-time, fixed-bed mercury adsorption system was used to evaluate the AC prepared from coal pitch. Results showed that the temperature and the KOH mixing rate in the carbonization process play an important role in the formation of the functional groups on the surface of the char. Additionally, the temperature and the steam flow rate in the activation process significantly affects AC surface area and pore distribution, important factors relating to mercury adsorption performance.

show abstract

Sorption and stability of mercury on activated carbon for emission control

Cited by 81 publications

References 17 publications

Review of Potential Candidate Stabilization Technologies for Liquid and Solid Secondary Waste Streams

Review of Potential Candidate Stabilization Technologies for Liquid and Solid Secondary Waste Streams

Potential Hazards of Brominated Carbon Sorbents for Mercury Emission Control

Synthesis of activated carbon from coal pitch for mercury removal in coal-fired power plants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About