English   español  
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/128478
Share/Impact:
Statistics
logo share SHARE logo core CORE   Add this article to your Mendeley library MendeleyBASE

Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL
Exportar a otros formatos:

Title

Comparison of Mercury Retention by Fly Ashes Using Different Experimental Devices

AuthorsLópez Antón, María Antonia ; Abad Valle, Patricia ; Díaz Somoano, Mercedes ; Perry, Ron; Snape, Colin E.; Cheng-gong, Sun; Martínez Tarazona, María Rosa
KeywordsMercury
Fly ash
Coal combustion
Issue Date7-Oct-2009
PublisherAmerican Chemical Society
CitationIndustrial and Engineering Chemistry Research 48(23): 10702-10707 (2009)
AbstractTo study mercury (Hg) retention in solid sorbents, researchers generally employ similar laboratory-scale devices. However, despite their similarities, these devices are generally used under different experimental conditions. The Hg concentration in the gas phase, gas flow, and sorbent-bed characteristics are variables that influence the contact time, mass transfer, and kinetics and may greatly modify the quantities of Hg retained when the same sorbents are compared. These differences in the experimental conditions do not impede an evaluation of the sorbents as long as the results obtained points toward the same qualitative conclusions. However, the extent of variation needs to be defined to avoid misinterpretation. To illustrate the range of interpretations, the results of a preliminary approach using four experimental devices in two laboratories have been compared in this work. All the experiments were carried out under a nitrogen atmosphere and Hg0 in the gas phase. The same sorbents were employed in all the devices. These were fly ashes obtained from the combustion of coals of different rank and with different unburned carbon contents. From the results obtained it can be inferred that it is necessary to strictly control the influence of the experimental variables to infer a correct interpretation of the results.
Publisher version (URL)http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ie900766y
URIhttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/128478
DOI10.1021/ie900766y
ISSN0888-5885
Appears in Collections:(INCAR) Artículos
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Comparison_mercury_Lopez-Anton.pdf150,33 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Show full item record
Review this work
 


WARNING: Items in Digital.CSIC are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.