Mercury Emissions ReductionMercury Emissions ReductionMercury Emissions ReductionMercury Emissions Reduction
  • Home
  • Services
    • Services Overview
    • Technical Training
    • Plant Engineering
    • Technology Transfer
    • Short Course Catalog
  • Industries Served
    • Power Generation
    • District Energy
    • Transmission & Distribution
    • Pulp and Paper
    • Water and Wastewater Treatment
    • Beverage
    • Heavy Industry
  • Who We Are
    • Our Team
    • Experience
    • Careers
  • Blog
  • Contact us
✕
Fossil Fuel Prices Over Time
October 7, 2022
MWh Generation Cost Factors
October 31, 2022
Show all

Mercury Emissions Reduction

Published by Jason Enge at October 26, 2022

Mercury and Air Toxins Standards (MATS)

An undesirable byproduct of the burning of coal is mercury emissions. On average, elemental mercury constitutes approximately 0.17 ppm of US coal. When coal is burned, mercury is vaporized and enters the atmosphere. These mercury emissions eventually condense and enter the food chain as methylmercury. Developing fetuses exposed to mercury emissions are incredibly vulnerable and may be born with learning disabilities.

The Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) rule is a United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule. It was developed to reduce the emissions of toxic air pollutants from power plants. One of the pollutants of concern is mercury emission from coal-fired electric generating units (EGUs). Since the rule’s implementation, several technologies have been implemented to reduce EGU mercury emissions.

Mercury Emissions Control Technologies

Some plants initially installed systems such as fabric filters (FF) or electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) to control particulate emissions. They also captured a small percentage of mercury emissions as a side effect. Plants later installed flue gas desulphurization (FGD) systems to remove sulfur oxides. Again, these also captured a small portion of mercury emissions as a side effect. After Implementing MATS, many plants installed another technology: activated carbon injection (ACI) to capture mercury. This simple and inexpensive modification sprayed powdered activated carbon into the cold flue gas stream to adsorb mercury. However, this additional particulate injection also increased the unplanned load on the FF and ESP systems.

Calcium Bromide Mercury Removal

To avoid a costly requirement to reconfigure or enlarge the FF or ESP, a less common technology is being added to supplement the mercury removal capability of these systems: calcium bromide (CaBr2) systems. This system sprays a CaBr2 solution onto the coal, usually as it enters the bunkers. The solution may also be sprayed directly into the boiler or the flue gas stream. The installation of these systems resulted in significant increases in mercury capture. As an added benefit, the amount of carbon injected was reduced, resulting in savings. The table below summarizes the results of each capture technology as a percentage of flue gas mercury removed.

Percentage of Mercury Removed by Technology

TechnologyFF AloneESP AloneESP +FGD
Baseline19%28%20%
With ACI58%73%n/a
With CaBr2 and ACI>90%>88%>80%

A GAO report on DOE data showed coal-fired power plants using technologies such as calcium bromide addition resulted in about a 90% reduction of mercury emissions across all coal types.

Summary

The relatively low capital cost of equipment and the high availability of the chemicals domestically make the technology a potentially cost-effective solution to meeting the MATS requirements. Those EGUs subject to MATS guidelines should weigh the cost of their existing mercury abatement systems to explore whether adding a new MATS system could act as a cost-saving measure. As shown in the discussion above, the system’s simplicity combined with the relatively low cost of the chemical could pay for itself almost immediately.

References:

  1. Mercury and Halogens in Coal. Retrieved from https://www.usgs.gov/publications/mercury-and-halogens-coal
  2. GAO, Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on the Clean Air and Nuclear Safety, Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, Mercury Control Technologies at Coal-Fired Power Plants Have Achieved Substantial Emissions Reductions, GAO-10-47. Retrieved from: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-10-47
  3. Calcium Bromide Technology for Mercury Emissions Reductions. Retrieved from http://greatlakes.com/deployedfiles/ChemturaV8/GreatLakes/News/BusinessPublications/GeoBrom_White_Paper.pdf

Previously Generated Blogs:

Ambient Factors Conditions and Combustion Turbine Performance

Reverse Osmosis

Steam Desuperheaters

Jason Enge
Jason Enge
Jason Enge is President of FCS and licensed First Grade Engineer who has been with FCS for ten years. Additionally, he holds a BS in Business Management. Previously, Jason spent 20 years as a nuclear power plant operator/mechanic and lead trainer in the US Navy, including a tour at the US Naval Academy. He specializes in operation and maintenance of steam plants, water treatment plants, district energy plants, and industrial heating and chiller plants. He has authored and instructed courses on several types of plants and environmental controls systems.

Related posts

March 10, 2023

Understanding VARs (without using math)


Read more
February 17, 2023

NOX Reduction in Combustion Turbines


Read more
January 20, 2023

Liquid Glass: The characteristics of Laminar Flow


Read more

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Blog Posts

  • 0
    Much Ado About Poo: An Overview of Wastewater Treatment
    March 24, 2023
  • 0
    Understanding VARs (without using math)
    March 10, 2023
  • 0
    NOX Reduction in Combustion Turbines
    February 17, 2023

Fossil Consulting Services, Inc.

6325 Woodside Court, Suite 222
Columbia, Maryland 21046
Telephone: (410) 312-6240
Email: FCS@FossilConsulting.com

NEW FCS Logo_White
© 2022 Fossil Consulting Services, Inc. All Rights Reserved.