The aim of this study was to develop and examine the morphology and distribution of mercury (Hg) in flue gas desulfurization (FGD) by-product.</span></span><span><span><span style="font...The aim of this study was to develop and examine the morphology and distribution of mercury (Hg) in flue gas desulfurization (FGD) by-product.</span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Mercury in the coal of coal-fired power plants is concentrated in the by-products of desulfurization process, and it is widely used as an additive in cement, building materials and other industries. Due to the different stability of various forms of mercury in the environment, subsequent use of products containing desulfurization by-product additives will continue to be released into the environment, endangering human health. Therefore, it is very necessary to study the form and distribution of mercury in the by-products of desulfurization in coal-fired power plants to provide a theoretical basis for subsequent harmless treatment.</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">For content and morphology of mercury analysis, 1 sample of dry FGD ash and 6 samples of wet FGD gypsum were analyzed. The total 7 samples were extracted using a modification of sequential chemical extractions (SCE) method, which was employed for the partitioning Hg into four fractions: water soluble, acid soluble, H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub> soluble, and residual. The Hg analysis was done with United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) method</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">7471B. Comparing with the wet FGD gypsums of coal-fired boilers, the total Hg content in the dry FGD by-product was as high as</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">1.22 mg/kg, while the total Hg content in the FGD gypsum is 0.23</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">-</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""><span style="font-family:Verdana;">0.74 mg/kg, which was 2 times over the wet FGD gypsum. The concentration of water soluble Hg in the dry FGD by-product was the highest amount (0.72 mg/kg), accounting for 59.02% of the total mercury. While residual Hg content was 0.16 mg/kg, only about 13.11% of the total mercury. Mercury content in FGD gypsum was expressed in the form of <i></span><i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ρ</span></i><span style="font-family:Verdana;"></i></span></span></span></span><span><span><i><span style="font-family:""> </span></i></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">(residual Hg) ></span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><i></span><i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ρ</span></i><span style="font-family:Verdana;"></i></span></span></span></span><span><span><i><span style="font-family:""> </span></i></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""><span style="font-family:Verdana;">(H</span><sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;">2</span></sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;">O</span><sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;">2</span></sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> soluble Hg)</span></span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">></span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><i></span><i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ρ</span></i><span style="font-family:Verdana;"></i></span></span></span></span><span><span><i><span style="font-family:""> </span></i></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">(water soluble Hg)</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">></span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><i></span><i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ρ</span></i><span style="font-family:Verdana;"></i></span></span></span></span><span><span><i><span style="font-family:""> </span></i></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">(acid soluble Hg). The morphology and distribution of mercury in FGD by-products is supposed to be analyzed before utilization, and the impact of mercury on the environment should be considered.展开更多
在“两山”理论、“双碳”目标的新形势下,我国发布了一系列政策及优惠条件鼓励以工业副产石膏为原料制备石膏胶凝材料,包括建筑石膏、α型高强石膏、混合相石膏等。迄今为止,国内鲜有关于石膏胶凝材料的碳足迹核算报告。本文基于生命...在“两山”理论、“双碳”目标的新形势下,我国发布了一系列政策及优惠条件鼓励以工业副产石膏为原料制备石膏胶凝材料,包括建筑石膏、α型高强石膏、混合相石膏等。迄今为止,国内鲜有关于石膏胶凝材料的碳足迹核算报告。本文基于生命周期评价方法,针对工业副产石膏制备石膏胶凝材料建立碳足迹核算模型,并以磷石膏制备α型高强石膏为例进行验证。结果表明,α型高强石膏产品原料获取、生产、运输三个阶段的碳足迹分别为3.95、288.04、14.31 kg CO_(2) eq/t,总量为306.3 kg CO_(2) eq/t,其中生产阶段碳排放量最大,是降低能耗、减少碳排放、节约成本的重要环节。本文建立的碳足迹核算模型适用于建筑石膏、α型高强石膏、无水石膏、混合相石膏等产品碳足迹核算。展开更多
文摘The aim of this study was to develop and examine the morphology and distribution of mercury (Hg) in flue gas desulfurization (FGD) by-product.</span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Mercury in the coal of coal-fired power plants is concentrated in the by-products of desulfurization process, and it is widely used as an additive in cement, building materials and other industries. Due to the different stability of various forms of mercury in the environment, subsequent use of products containing desulfurization by-product additives will continue to be released into the environment, endangering human health. Therefore, it is very necessary to study the form and distribution of mercury in the by-products of desulfurization in coal-fired power plants to provide a theoretical basis for subsequent harmless treatment.</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">For content and morphology of mercury analysis, 1 sample of dry FGD ash and 6 samples of wet FGD gypsum were analyzed. The total 7 samples were extracted using a modification of sequential chemical extractions (SCE) method, which was employed for the partitioning Hg into four fractions: water soluble, acid soluble, H<sub>2</sub>O<sub>2</sub> soluble, and residual. The Hg analysis was done with United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) method</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">7471B. Comparing with the wet FGD gypsums of coal-fired boilers, the total Hg content in the dry FGD by-product was as high as</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">1.22 mg/kg, while the total Hg content in the FGD gypsum is 0.23</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">-</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""><span style="font-family:Verdana;">0.74 mg/kg, which was 2 times over the wet FGD gypsum. The concentration of water soluble Hg in the dry FGD by-product was the highest amount (0.72 mg/kg), accounting for 59.02% of the total mercury. While residual Hg content was 0.16 mg/kg, only about 13.11% of the total mercury. Mercury content in FGD gypsum was expressed in the form of <i></span><i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ρ</span></i><span style="font-family:Verdana;"></i></span></span></span></span><span><span><i><span style="font-family:""> </span></i></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">(residual Hg) ></span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><i></span><i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ρ</span></i><span style="font-family:Verdana;"></i></span></span></span></span><span><span><i><span style="font-family:""> </span></i></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""><span style="font-family:Verdana;">(H</span><sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;">2</span></sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;">O</span><sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;">2</span></sub><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> soluble Hg)</span></span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">></span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><i></span><i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ρ</span></i><span style="font-family:Verdana;"></i></span></span></span></span><span><span><i><span style="font-family:""> </span></i></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">(water soluble Hg)</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">></span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><i></span><i><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ρ</span></i><span style="font-family:Verdana;"></i></span></span></span></span><span><span><i><span style="font-family:""> </span></i></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">(acid soluble Hg). The morphology and distribution of mercury in FGD by-products is supposed to be analyzed before utilization, and the impact of mercury on the environment should be considered.
文摘在“两山”理论、“双碳”目标的新形势下,我国发布了一系列政策及优惠条件鼓励以工业副产石膏为原料制备石膏胶凝材料,包括建筑石膏、α型高强石膏、混合相石膏等。迄今为止,国内鲜有关于石膏胶凝材料的碳足迹核算报告。本文基于生命周期评价方法,针对工业副产石膏制备石膏胶凝材料建立碳足迹核算模型,并以磷石膏制备α型高强石膏为例进行验证。结果表明,α型高强石膏产品原料获取、生产、运输三个阶段的碳足迹分别为3.95、288.04、14.31 kg CO_(2) eq/t,总量为306.3 kg CO_(2) eq/t,其中生产阶段碳排放量最大,是降低能耗、减少碳排放、节约成本的重要环节。本文建立的碳足迹核算模型适用于建筑石膏、α型高强石膏、无水石膏、混合相石膏等产品碳足迹核算。