IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/appene/v41y1992i1p1-94.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to reduce pollutant emissions from small fluidised-bed combustors

Author

Listed:
  • Findlay, K.
  • Probert, S.D.

Abstract

As a result of 27 series of tests, it was concluded that the maximum reduction of NOx emissions occurred when the sulphur retention was also at its highest, so emphasising the important role that CaSO4 plays as a catalyst in pollution-reducing reactions. Although the minimal emissions of both SO2 and NOx (at 85 and 45 ppm, respectively) presently recorded occurred at a bed temperature of 800°C, under two-stage combustion and a low oxygen-in-the-flue concentration (=2%), the combustion efficiency under these conditions was relatively low (at 72·9% without limestone and 84·5% with limestone added to the fluidised bed). Optimal conditions for achieving maximum combustion efficiency and minimum pollutant emission occurred at the highest bed-temperature (=1000°C) employed, under two-stage combustion conditions for a moderately high (~4%) oxygen-in-the-flue concentration. Under these conditions, the CaS, formed from the lime in the substoichiometric bed, was completely oxidised to CaSO4 by the moderately high O2 concentrations in the freeboard, so optimising the reductions of both the NOx and SO2 emissions. The addition of limestone was found to increase the combustion efficiency by just under 3%, to a maximum of 91·3%, under these conditions. Further, the presence of limestone (which gave an added Ca:S mole ratio of 2), resulted in reductions in the NOx emissions of 83% (i.e. from 283 to 47 ppm) and in the SO2 emission of 74% (i.e. from 455 to 117 ppm). Both the NOx and SO2 emissions were greatly reduced by this addition of limestone, under most operating conditions. The magnitude of the reduction varied according to the bed's temperature, e.g. at a bed temperature of 800°C, under two-stage conditions, the NOx emissions were reduced by 71% and teh SO2 emission by 76%, provided sufficient limestone was added to the bed to give a 2:1 Ca:S ratio. Similarly, the use of recycled gas, to achieve bed attemperation during these tests, led not only to a reduction in the NOx emissions of 33%, compared with only 15% achieved in previous experiments, but also to a 26% reduction in the SO2 emission. The latter was a direct result of the increased residence time for SO2 gas in the contact with the limestone/ash particles within the combustor. When burning S.A. Duff with: (i) the exhaust-gas recycled back to the bed; (ii) limestone added to the bed (to give a Ca:S mole ratio of 2); and (iii) the fluidised bed operated at a relatively high bed-temperature (~1000°C) under two-stage combustion conditions with a 4% concentration of O2-in-the-flue; then a 90% overall reduction in NOx emissions (compared with those occurring under oxidising conditions with no limestone added) and a sulphur retention of 74% were achieved. Larger sulphur retentions ensued by reducing the bed temperature to 800°C and using lower oxygen-in-the-flue concentrations (~2%), but this occurred to the detriment of the combustion efficiency. Nevertheless, the lower bed-temperature of ~800°C was needed to avoid the formation of clinker when burning a low-ash fusion coal, such as Maryport smalls. By contrast, the use of a high bed-temperature (~1000°C) with low values of the oxygen-in-the-flue concentration, resulted in no sulphur retention; all the CaS being partially oxidised to SO2 under these operating conditions, with or without limestone present.

Suggested Citation

  • Findlay, K. & Probert, S.D., 1992. "How to reduce pollutant emissions from small fluidised-bed combustors," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 1-94.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:41:y:1992:i:1:p:1-94
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0306-2619(92)90046-E
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:appene:v:41:y:1992:i:1:p:1-94. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/405891/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.