DOCSLIB.ORG

COAL CONFERENCE University of Pittsburgh · Swanson School of Engineering ABSTRACTS BOOKLET

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
COAL CONFERENCE University of Pittsburgh · Swanson School of Engineering ABSTRACTS BOOKLET Thirty-Fifth Annual INTERNATIONAL PITTSBURGH COAL CONFERENCE University of Pittsburgh · Swanson School of Engineering ABSTRACTS BOOKLET Clean Coal-based Energy/Fuels and the Environment October 15-18, 2018 New Century Grand Hotel Xuzhou Hosted by: The conference acknowledges the support of Co-hosted by: K. C. Wong Education Foundation, Hong Kong A NOTE TO THE READER This Abstracts Booklet is prepared solely as a convenient reference for the Conference participants. Abstracts are arranged in a numerical order of the oral and poster sessions as published in the Final Conference Program. In order to facilitate the task for the reader to locate a specific abstract in a given session, each paper is given two numbers: the first designates the session number and the second represents the paper number in that session. For example, Paper No. 25.1 is the first paper to be presented in the Oral Session #25. Similarly, Paper No. P3.1 is the first paper to appear in the Poster Session #3. It should be cautioned that this Abstracts Booklet is prepared based on the original abstracts that were submitted, unless the author noted an abstract change. The contents of the Booklet do not reflect late changes made by the authors for their presentations at the Conference. The reader should consult the Final Conference Program for any such changes. Furthermore, updated and detailed full manuscripts, published in the Conference Proceedings, will be sent to all registered participants following the Conference. On behalf of the Thirty-Fifth Annual International Pittsburgh Coal Conference, we wish to express our sincere appreciation and gratitude to Ms. Kristen Harper for her meticulous leadership and control of the entire operation of the conference and to Mr. Rui Wang and Mr. Husain Ashkanani for their invaluable assistance in preparing this Abstracts Booklet. Special thanks go to Ms. Xinyuan ZHANG (Summer), CUMT for her great help of this year’s conference. Thank you, Badie I. Morsi, Editor Professor and Executive Director of the Conference Copyright © 2018 Pittsburgh Coal Conference TABLE OF CONTENTS Oral Sessions Page 1. Power Plants - 1 ....................................................... 1 35. Gasification Technologies - 6 ................................ 30 2. Combustion Technologies - 1 .................................. 1 36. Coal Science – 6 ..................................................... 30 3. Rare Earth Elements In Coal And Coal Byproducts 2 37. Sustainability And Environment - 1 ....................... 31 4. Value-Added Products From Coal - 1 ..................... 3 38. Clean Coal And Gas To Fuels - 2 .......................... 32 5. Gasification Technologies - 1 .................................. 4 39. Coal Bed And Shale Gas - 4 .................................. 33 6. Coal Science - 1 ....................................................... 5 40. Coal Mining And Beneficiation - 1 ........................ 34 7. Power Plants - 2 ....................................................... 6 41. Gasification Technologies - 7 ................................ 35 8. Combustion Technologies - 2 .................................. 7 42. Coal Science - 7 ..................................................... 36 9. Clean Coal Demonstration And Commercial Projects 43. Sustainability And Environment - 2 ....................... 37 ................................................................................. 8 44. Clean Coal And Gas To Fuels - 3 .......................... 38 10. Value-Added Products From Coal - 2 ..................... 9 45. Coal Science - 10 ................................................... 38 11. Gasification Technologies – 2 ................................. 9 46. Coal Mining And Beneficiation - 2 ........................ 39 12. Coal Science - 2 ..................................................... 10 47. Gasification Technologies - 8 ................................ 39 13. Power Plants - 3 ..................................................... 11 48. Coal Science - 8 ..................................................... 41 14. Combustion Technologies - 3 ................................ 12 49. Sustainability And Environment - 3 ....................... 42 15. Clean Coal Demonstration And Commercial Projects 50. Coal Science - 11 ................................................... 43 - 2 ........................................................................... 13 51. Coal Mining And Beneficiation - 3 ........................ 44 16. Value-Added Products From Coal - 3 ................... 14 52. Gasification Technologies - 9 ................................ 45 17. Gasification Technologies - 3 ................................ 15 53. Coal Science - 9 ..................................................... 46 18. Coal Science - 3 ..................................................... 16 19. Carbon Management - 1 ........................................ 17 20. Combustion Technologies - 4 ................................ 18 Poster Sessions Page 21. Coal Bed And Shale Gas - 1 .................................. 18 22. Value-Added Products From Coal – 4 ................... 19 1. Gasification Technologies ...................................... 47 23. Gasification Technologies - 4 ................................ 20 2. Clean Coal Demonstration And Commercial Projects 24. Coal Science - 4 ..................................................... 21 ................................................................................ 48 25. Carbon Management - 2 ........................................ 22 3. Combustion Technologies ...................................... 48 26. Combustion Technologies - 5 ................................ 22 4. Clean Coal And Gas To Fuels ................................ 48 27. Coal Bed And Shale Gas - 2 .................................. 23 5. Carbon Management .............................................. 49 28. Value-Added Products From Coal - 5 ................... 24 6. Coal Science ........................................................... 49 29. Gasification Technologies - 5 ................................ 24 7. Coal Bed And Shale Gas ........................................ 51 30. Coal Science - 5 ..................................................... 25 8. Power Plants ........................................................... 52 31. Carbon Management - 3 ........................................ 26 9. Sustainability And Environment ............................ 52 32. Clean Coal And Gas To Fuels – 1 ......................... 27 10. Value-Added Products From Coal ......................... 53 33. Coal Bed And Shale Gas - 3 .................................. 28 34. Value-Added Products From Coal - 6 ................... 29 1.4- Preparation of Low Ash Coal by a Green Chemical Method SESSION 1 POWER PLANTS - 1 Lijun Zhao, National Institute of Clean-and-Low-Carbon Energy, PR CHINA. A green chemical method has been developed for ash removal from coals. By using the sintering reaction of alkali and minerals in coals, the chemical digestion has been greatly 1.1- Case Studies of Biomass Co-Firing in Full-Scale Pulverized intensified even under mild conditions, by comparison with conventional chemical Coal-Fired Power Plants in China methods. The green chemical method has been applied to a raw coal of 35.55% ash, and achieved a high ash removal rate of >95%, preparing a low ash coal of <2%. By Wang Xuebin, Xi’an Jiaotong University, PR CHINA. comparison with the available results for high ash coals, it has been found that about half the alkali would be spared by the green chemical method with the lower temperatures of Biomass co-firing in pulverized coal-fired (PC) power plants is becoming more and 100-150 °C, and the resulting low ash coal can be used in many advanced fields. more popular in China recently, aiming to reduce CO2 emission, encouraged by the Chinese government. In China, four kinds of biomass co-firing modes have been tested 1.5- Hybrid Eulerian-Lagrangian Simulation of Gas-Solid Fluidized Bed or long-term operated in the full-scale PC power plants in the past 13 years, since the first successful case of Guodian Shiliquan Power Plant in 2005, which case imported the Chen Yang, Haochuang Wu, Chongqing University. technologies and fuel pretreatment equipment from Denmark. The other three typical modes developed in China include (1) molding-biomass co-firing, (2) biomass powde The fluidized reactor is widely used in a number of chemical processes due to its high r direct co-firing, and (3) biogas co-firing, in which, the modes (1) - (2) were designed gas-particle contacting efficiency and excellent performance on solid mixing. and conducted by the authors. In this report, these four kinds of biomass co-firing modes An improved numerical framework based on MP-PIC (multi-phase-particle-in-cell) and the corresponding tested results are introduced, the economic analysis and the method has been developed to simulate the processes of gas-solid flow and chemical existing problems of different modes are compared. reactions in a fluidized bed. In the MP-PIC method, the solid phase is treated as both continuum and discrete phase, the particle stress gradient is calculated on the Eulerian 1.2- Pilot Test of Urea Hydrolysis to Ammonia with Steam Stripping grid and the particle properties are mapped from Eulerian grid to Lagrangian coordinates by the use of interpolation functions and particle size distribution. Every particle Lu Xu, Zhang Xiangyu, Zhang Bo, Xu Hongjie, Xi’an Thermal Power Research composed of similar
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Update on Lignite Firing
    Update on lignite firing Qian Zhu CCC/201 ISBN 978-92-9029-521-1 June 2012 copyright © IEA Clean Coal Centre Abstract Low rank coals have gained increasing importance in recent years and the long-term future of coal -derived energy supplies will have to include the greater use of low rank coal. However, the relatively low economic value due to the high moisture content and low calorific value, and other undesirable properties of lignite coals limited their use mainly to power generation at, or, close to, the mining site. Another important issue regarding the use of lignite is its environmental impact. A range of advanced combustion technologies has been developed to improve the efficiency of lignite-fired power generation. With modern technologies it is now possible to produce electricity economically from lignite while addressing environmental concerns. This report reviews the advanced technologies used in modern lignite-fired power plants with a focus on pulverised lignite combustion technologies. CFBC combustion processes are also reviewed in brief and they are compared with pulverised lignite combustion technologies. Acronyms and abbreviations CFB circulating fluidised bed CFBC circulating fluidised bed combustion CFD computational fluid dynamics CV calorific value EHE external heat exchanger GRE Great River Energy GWe gigawatts electric kJ/kg kilojoules per kilogram kWh kilowatts hour Gt billion tonnes FBC fluidised bed combustion FBHE fluidised bed heat exchanger FEGT furnace exit gas temperature FGD flue gas desulphurisation GJ
    [Show full text]
  • 278 Subpart B—Coal Preparation Plants and Coal Preparation Plant
    § 434.20 40 CFR Ch. I (7–1–16 Edition) treat coal rine drainage, coal prepara- ration plants and coal preparation tion plant process wastewater, or plant association areas, as indicated, drainage from coal preparation plant including discharges which are associated areas, which remove pollut- pumped, siphoned, or drained from the ants regulated by this part from such coal preparation plant water circuit waters. This includes all pipes, chan- and coal storage, refuse storage, and nels, ponds, basins, tanks and all other ancillary areas related to the cleaning equipment serving such structures. or beneficiation of coal of any rank in- (p) The term ‘‘coal refuse disposal cluding, but not limited to, bitu- pile’’ means any coal refuse deposited minous, lignite, and anthracite. on the earth and intended as perma- nent dispoal or long-term storage § 434.21 [Reserved] (greater than 180 days) of such mate- rial, but does not include coal refuse § 434.22 Effluent limitation guidelines deposited within the active mining representing the degree of effluent area or coal refuse never removed from reduction attainable by the applica- tion of the best practicable control the active mining area. technology currently available (q) The term ‘‘controlled surface (BPT). mine drainage’’ means any surface mine drainage that is pumped or si- (a) Except as provided in 40 CFR phoned from the active mining area. 125.30–125.32, 40 CFR 401.17, and §§ 434.61, (r) The term ‘‘abandoned mine’’ 434.62 and 434.63 of this part, the fol- means a mine where mining operations
    [Show full text]
  • 'Retrofitting CCS to Coal: Enhancing Australia's Energy
    RETROFITTING CCS TO COAL: ENHANCING AUSTRALIA’S ENERGY SECURITY RETROFITTING CCS TO COAL: ENHANCING AUSTRALIA’S ENERGY SECURITY any representation about the content and suitability Disclaimer of this information for any particular purpose. The document is not intended to comprise advice, and is This report was completed on 2 March 2017 and provided “as is” without express or implied therefore the Report does not take into account warranty. Readers should form their own conclusion events or circumstances arising after that time. The as to its applicability and suitability. The authors Report’s authors take no responsibility to update the reserve the right to alter or amend this document Report. without prior notice. The Report’s modelling considers only a single set of Authors: Geoff Bongers, Gamma Energy Technology input assumptions which should not be considered Stephanie Byrom, Gamma Energy Technology entirely exhaustive. Modelling inherently requires Tania Constable, CO2CRC Limited assumptions about future behaviours and market interactions, which may result in forecasts that deviate from actual events. There will usually be About CO2CRC Limited: differences between estimated and actual results, CO2CRC Limited is Australia’s leading CCS research because events and circumstances frequently do not organisation, having invested $100m in CCS research occur as expected, and those differences may be over the past decade. CO2CRC is the first organisation material. The authors of the Report take no in Australia to have demonstrated CCS end-to-end, responsibility for the modelling presented to be and has successfully stored more than 80,000 tonnes considered as a definitive account. of CO2 at its renowned Otway Research Facility in The authors of the Report highlight that the Report, Victoria.
    [Show full text]
  • Effect of Water Quality on Coal Thermoplasticity Feng Zhang
    Effect of water quality on coal thermoplasticity Feng Zhang A thesis in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Philosophy in Engineering School of Minerals and Energy Resources Engineering Faculty of Engineering June 2018 II III Acknowledgements I would like to thank my supervisors Associate Professor Seher Ata and Dr. Ghislain Bournival for their support, guidance and encouragement throughout my research study. I am especially grateful to Seher, who was the supervisor of my undergraduate thesis, for trusting my ability to complete this research degree. Special thanks to Professor Alan Buckley for his help with my understanding on coal surface chemistry and surface analysis. Also, many thanks to Mr. Noel Lambert, for providing valuable information related to this research topic, as well as preparing and transporting the coal and process water samples. I appreciate Dr. Bin Gong, Dr. Yin Yao for their help with the XPS analysis and SEM analysis. I would like to thank Australian Coal Association Research Program (ACARP) for funding this research project and providing the coal and process water samples. Lastly, thanks to my family and friends, especially to my girlfriend, Hongni Yin, for their endless support throughout these two years. IV Abstract Process water reuse is a common practice in Australian coal preparation plants. It is an effective solution to on-site water scarcity and to minimize environmental impacts. This study investigates the effect of inorganic mineral salts in the process water on the thermoplastic properties of metallurgical coals after a short period of mild oxidation. Two different Australian metallurgical coals were treated with the process water received from a coal preparation plant based in Queensland, AU, and exposed to air at ambient temperature.
    [Show full text]
  • Wave Liquefaction™ Combines Gaseous and Solid Hydrocarbons to Cleanly and Efficiently Produce Liquid Fuels Or Chemicals and Ca
    Wave Liquefaction™ The Novel Coal-Biomass to Liquids Process George Skoptsov [email protected] H Quest Vanguard, Inc James Strohm [email protected] 750 William Pitt Way : Pittsburgh, PA 15238 Wave Liquefaction™ With only 15% biomass feed combines gaseous and solid and no CCS, lifecycle CO2 hydrocarbons to cleanly and emissions are 22% less than efficiently produce liquid fuels or for transportation fuels from chemicals and carbon char. Gases Solids Liquids Carbon conventional oil refining. SYNCRUDE COMPOSITION BACKGROUND TECHNOLOGY VERSATILITY Wave Liquefaction™ syncrude yields are Wave Liquefaction™ process was originally developed with the specific goal of establishing Properties of the Wave Liquefaction™ liquid product (aromaticity, density, 50%-65% wt (on dry, ash-free basis). the vast US coal resources as an alternative, cost-effective domestic source of military jet H:C ratio) can be widely varied by adjusting energy input, feedstock and Liquid product flows at room temperature, fuel with the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions below those of a conventional crude oil gas composition. The product aromaticity can be made close to 100%, has API > 10, and < 50% aromaticity. Low refining process. Blending coal with 15% biomass by weight will decrease lifecycle CO2 with as much as 20% of the liquid yield consisting of the BTEX fraction. asphaltene content reduces requirements emissions by more than 20% relative to conventional gasoline production without use of Industrial non-fuel uses for these liquid and solid products include: for downstream hydrotreating needed to any carbon capture or sequestration solutions. Carbon pitch for production of aluminum smelting anodes: produce finished fuels.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigation of the Gasification Performance of Lignite Feedstock and the Injection Design of an E-Gas Like Gasifier
    Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Pittsburgh Coal Conference, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, October 15 - 18, 2012 Investigation of the Gasification Performance of Lignite Feedstock and the Injection Design of an E-Gas like Gasifier Yan-Tsan Luan and Yau-Pin Chyou* Ting Wang Chemistry Division Energy Conversion & Conservation Center Institute of Nuclear Energy Research University of New Orleans Atomic Energy Council New Orleans, Louisiana 70148, USA Longtan, Taoyuan, Taiwan (R.O.C.) ABSTRACT CO2 capture among the four reference power plants: coal In the last three years, the Institute of Nuclear Energy combustion, integrated gasification combine cycle (IGCC), Research (INER) has been developing the E-GAS gasification oxy-combustion, and natural-gas combustion. In the second numerical model and analyzing the gasification performance column, coal pre-combustion carbon capture has the lowest by conducting several parametric studies. A preliminary cost of CO2 avoided, which makes it more competitive and a numerical model considering coal particles tracking, two-step welcoming choice when it comes to low-carbon electricity volatiles thermal cracking, and nine chemical reactions has generation. With its inherence of low emissions and cost been established. In last year’s results, the single lateral including CCS, IGCC has the potential to replace traditional injector design in the 2nd stage of E-GAS gasifier is found PC plants. Therefore, conducting research in coal gasification non-ideal for the gasificaiton process. Therefore, one of the and CO2 capture technology to improve its availability, objectives in this study is to modify the 2nd stage injection increase its efficiency, and reduce the cost is essential for and investigate its effect on gasification performance.
    [Show full text]
  • Solutions for Energy Crisis in Pakistan I
    Solutions for Energy Crisis in Pakistan i ii Solutions for Energy Crisis in Pakistan Solutions for Energy Crisis in Pakistan iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This volume is based on papers presented at the two-day national conference on the topical and vital theme of Solutions for Energy Crisis in Pakistan held on May 15-16, 2013 at Islamabad Hotel, Islamabad. The Conference was jointly organised by the Islamabad Policy Research Institute (IPRI) and the Hanns Seidel Foundation, (HSF) Islamabad. The organisers of the Conference are especially thankful to Mr. Kristof W. Duwaerts, Country Representative, HSF, Islamabad, for his co-operation and sharing the financial expense of the Conference. For the papers presented in this volume, we are grateful to all participants, as well as the chairpersons of the different sessions, who took time out from their busy schedules to preside over the proceedings. We are also thankful to the scholars, students and professionals who accepted our invitation to participate in the Conference. All members of IPRI staff — Amjad Saleem, Shazad Ahmad, Noreen Hameed, Shazia Khurshid, and Muhammad Iqbal — worked as a team to make this Conference a success. Saira Rehman, Assistant Editor, IPRI did well as stage secretary. All efforts were made to make the Conference as productive and result oriented as possible. However, if there were areas left wanting in some respect the Conference management owns responsibility for that. iv Solutions for Energy Crisis in Pakistan ACRONYMS ADB Asian Development Bank Bcf Billion Cubic Feet BCMA
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Advances in Direct Coal Liquefaction
    Energies 2010, 3, 155-170; doi:10.3390/en3020155 OPEN ACCESS energies ISSN 1996-1073 www.mdpi.com/journal/energies Review Recent Advances in Direct Coal Liquefaction Hengfu Shui 1, Zhenyi Cai 1 and Chunbao (Charles) Xu 2,* 1 School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Anhui University of Technology, Maanshan 243002, Anhui, China; E-Mails: [email protected] (H.S.); [email protected] (Z.C.) 2 Department of Chemical Engineering, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay, Ontario P7B 5E1, Canada * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-807-343-8761; Fax: +1-807-343-8928. Received: 16 November 2009 / Accepted: 19 January 2010 / Published: 27 January 2010 Abstract: The growing demand for petroleum, accompanied by the declining petroleum reserves and the concerns over energy security, has intensified the interest in direct coal liquefaction (DCL), particularly in countries such as China which is rich in coal resources, but short of petroleum. In addition to a general introduction on the mechanisms and processes of DCL, this paper overviews some recent advances in DCL technology with respect to the influencing factors for DCL reactions (temperature, solvent, pressure, atmospheres, etc.), the effects of coal pre-treatments for DCL (swelling, thermal treatment, hydrothermal treatment, etc.), as well as recent development in multi-staged DCL processes, DCL catalysts and co-liquefaction of coal with biomass. Keywords: direct coal liquefaction (DCL); processes; influencing factors; coal pre-treatment; catalysts; co-liquefaction; biomass 1. Introduction Due to the rapid increase in demand for petroleum and its declining reserves, the concern over energy security has intensified the interest in coal liquefaction, especially for those countries which are short of oil resources but have abundant coal reserves, such as the United States and China, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • The Dirty Secrets of Coal Cleaning: Pollution and Enforcement Options At
    The Dirty Secrets of Coal Cleaning: Pollution and Enforcement Options at Pennsylvania Coal Preparation Plants October 14, 2014 The Environmental Integrity Project • Lisa Widawsky Hallowell Grant funding was made possible through the Foundation for Pennsylvania Watersheds (FPW), and is intended to support Clear Water Conservancy’s work in advancing the quality of our environment. FPW is a nonprofit, grant-making organization supporting water quality needs throughout Pennsylvania. Table of Contents I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 2 II. OVERVIEW OF COAL PREP PLANT PERMITS ............................................................... 4 III. ANALYSIS: WATER POLLUTION .................................................................................. 5 A. Summary of Laws Related to Releases to Water and Land ............................................. 6 1. The Clean Water Act .................................................................................................... 6 2. Other Laws Requiring Disclosure of Chemicals and Releases .................................... 9 B. Storage of Large Volumes of Chemicals at Coal Preparation Plants ............................. 10 C. Incomplete Permit Applications that Fail to Disclose Metals and other Coal Pollutants in Permit Applications .............................................................................................................. 12 D. No Limits for Metals or Coal Cleaning Pollutants Commonly
    [Show full text]
  • Voice 2012 01Febmar.Pdf
    AppalachianThe February / March 2012 VOICE Forty years ago, a wave of coal slurry swept away Then communities along Buffalo Creek, killing 125. Some problems from our past have improved — others & Now seem stuck in time. Have we learned our lesson? ALSO INSIDE: The Habits of Hibernating Bears • Georgia’s Historic Blood Mountain • Standing Up for Clean Water TheAppalachian VOICE Yesterday and Today: Defending the Clean Water Act A publication of A Note From Our Executive Director By Jamie Goodman AppalachianVoices TOP: Councilmen from Cleveland, Forty years ago, it took a Ohio, examine a white cloth that came 191 Howard Street • Boone, NC 28607 There’s a common saying in Appalachia: what we do to the land, 1-877-APP-VOICE flaming river to spur our nation up dripping with oil after being dipped we do to the people. www.AppalachianVoices.org to protect its waterways. in the Cuyahoga River in 1964. The [email protected] What the coal industry is doing to the citizens in our region is river notoriously caught fire in June The river that played a promi- unforgivable. In the last several years, 21 peer-reviewed studies have 1969, bringing it national attention nent role in the creation of the EDITOR ....................................................... Jamie Goodman confirmed the worst of our fears -- that mountaintop removal coal min- and leading to renewed efforts toward MANAGING EDITOR ........................................... Brian Sewell Clean Water Act and the Envi- ing is destroying not only the land, but also the people of Appalachia. improving water quality (Photo ASSOCIATE EDITOR ............................................Molly Moore ronmental Protection Agency is by Jerry Horton).
    [Show full text]
  • 2008 Abstract Booklet
    TWENTY - FIFTH ANNUAL INTERNATIONAL PITTSBURGH COAL CONFERENCE COAL - ENERGY, ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ABSTRACTS BOOKLET September 29 - October 2, 2008 The Westin Convention Center Pittsburgh, PA USA The Westin Hotel and Convention Center Hosted By: University of Pittsburgh Swanson School of Engineering A NOTE TO THE READER This Abstracts Booklet is prepared solely as a convenient reference for the Conference participants. Abstracts are arranged in a numerical order of the oral and poster sessions as published in the Final Conference Program. In order to facilitate the task for the reader to locate a specific abstract in a given session, each paper is given two numbers: the first designates the session number and the second represents the paper number in that session. For example, Paper No. 25-1 is the first paper to be presented in the Oral Session #25. Similarly, Paper No. P3-1 is the first paper to appear in the Poster Session #3. It should be cautioned that this Abstracts Booklet is prepared based on the original abstract that was submitted, unless the author noted an abstract change. The contents of the Booklet do not reflect late changes made by the authors for their presentations at the Conference. The reader should consult the Final Conference Program for any such changes. Furthermore, updated and detailed full manuscripts are published in the CD-ROM Conference Proceedings will be sent to all registered participants following the Conference. On behalf of the Twenty-Fifth Annual International Pittsburgh Coal Conference, we wish to express our sincere appreciation to Ms. Heidi M. Aufdenkamp, Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Carbon Footprint for Mercury Capture from Coal-Fired Boiler Flue Gas
    energies Article Carbon Footprint for Mercury Capture from Coal-Fired Boiler Flue Gas Magdalena Gazda-Grzywacz 1,* , Łukasz Winconek 2 and Piotr Burmistrz 1 1 Faculty of Energy & Fuels, AGH University of Science and Technology, Mickiewicz Avenue 30, 30-059 Krakow, Poland; [email protected] 2 Grand Activated Sp. z o.o., Białostocka 1, 17-200 Hajnówka, Poland; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: Power production from coal combustion is one of two major anthropogenic sources of mercury emission to the atmosphere. The aim of this study is the analysis of the carbon footprint of mercury removal technologies through sorbents injection related to the removal of 1 kg of mercury from flue gases. Two sorbents, i.e., powdered activated carbon and the coke dust, were analysed. The assessment included both direct and indirect emissions related to various energy and material needs life cycle including coal mining and transport, sorbents production, transport of sorbents to the power plants, and injection into flue gases. The results show that at the average mercury concentration in processed flue gasses accounting to 28.0 µg Hg/Nm3, removal of 1 kg of mercury from flue gases required 14.925 Mg of powdered activated carbon and 33.594 Mg of coke dust, respec- tively. However, the whole life cycle carbon footprint for powdered activated carbon amounted to −1 89.548 Mg CO2-e·kg Hg, whereas for coke dust this value was around three times lower and −1 amounted to 24.452 Mg CO2-e·kg Hg. Considering the relatively low price of coke dust and its lower impact on GHG emissions, it can be found as a promising alternative to commercial powdered Citation: Gazda-Grzywacz, M.; activated carbon.
    [Show full text]