Advertisement

Numerical simulation of the simultaneous removal of particulate matter in a wet flue gas desulfurization system

  • Yueqi Huang
  • Chenghang ZhengEmail author
  • Qingyi Li
  • Jun Zhang
  • Yishan Guo
  • Yongxin Zhang
  • Xiang Gao
Research Article
  • 37 Downloads

Abstract

The particulate matter (PM) could be simultaneously removed during the wet flue gas desulfurization (WFGD) process. To analyze the underlying mechanism and removal efficiency, the PM removal process in a desulfurization system was numerically simulated based on the population balance model and general dynamics equation in this study. The equation was solved using the fixed-step Monte Carlo method to determine the PM removal characteristics under different working conditions (such as spray intensity, velocity of the flue gas, and layers of slurry spray). When the flue gas velocity decreased from 7 to 3 m/s, the removal efficiency increased from 90.93 to 93.52%, and when the mean geometric droplet size decreased from 3 to 1 mm, the removal efficiency increased from 67.18 to 99.14%. Besides, large diameter PM was more easily removed by the desulfurization system. Thus, the numerical simulation method was proven to be feasible by comparing these results with field measurements of a WFGD system in a coal-fired power plant.

Keywords

Simultaneous removal PMs Numerical simulation Coal-fired power plant 

Notes

Funding information

This study is funded by the National key research and development program of China 2017YFB0603205 and National Natural Science Foundation of China U1609212, 51621005.

Supplementary material

11356_2019_6773_MOESM1_ESM.docx (38 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 37 kb).

References

  1. Bae SY, Chang HJ, Yong PK (2009) Relative contributions of individual phoretic effect in the below-cloud scavenging process. J Aerosol Sci 40(7):621–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bae SY, Chang HJ, Yong PK (2010) Derivation and verification of an aerosol dynamics expression for the below-cloud scavenging process using the moment method. J Aerosol Sci 41(3):266–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ballester F, Granero D, Pérezcalatayud J, Casal E, Puchades V (2004) Monte Carlo dosimetric study of best industries and Alpha Omega Ir-192 brachytherapy seeds. Med Phys 31(12):3298–3305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bao J, Yang L, Song S, Xiong G (2012) Separation of fine particles from gases in wet flue gas desulfurization system using a cascade of double towers. Energy Fuels 26(4):2090–2097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bao J, Yang L, Song S, Xiong G (2012) Separation of Fine Particles from Gases in Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization System Using a Cascade of Double Towers. Energy & Fuels 26(4):2090–2097Google Scholar
  6. Cao R, Tan H, Xiong Y, Mikulčić H, Vujanović M, Wang X, Duić N (2017) Improving the removal of particles and trace elements from coal-fired power plants by combining a wet phase transition agglomerator with wet electrostatic precipitator. Journal of Cleaner Production 161: 1459-1465Google Scholar
  7. Chang HJ, Yong PK, Lee KW (2003) A moment model for simulating raindrop scavenging of aerosols. J Aerosol Sci 34(9):1217–1233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fan FX, Yuan ZL, Zhao B, Yao G (2008) Numerical Simulation on Fine Particle Coagulation in Standing Wave Sound Field. Journal of Combustion Science and Technology 14(3):253-258Google Scholar
  9. Fan F, Yang L, Yan J, Bao J, Shen X (2009) Experimental investigation on removal of coal-fired fine particles by a condensation scrubber. Chem Eng Process Process Intensif 48(8):1353–1360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Feng J (2010) Analysis of dedusting influencing factors and effect of sprayer in desulphurization system. Environ Eng 28(3):70–72Google Scholar
  11. Garshasbi S, Kurnitski J, Mohammadi Y (2016) A hybrid Genetic Algorithm and Monte Carlo simulation approach to predict hourly energy consumption and generation by a cluster of Net Zero Energy Buildings. Appl Energy 179:626–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gong HF, Chen ZS, Zhu QX, He YL (2017) A Monte Carlo and PSO based virtual sample generation method for enhancing the energy prediction and energy optimization on small data problem: An empirical study of petrochemical industries. Applied Energy 197: 405-415Google Scholar
  13. Hansen BB, Kiil S, Johnsson JE (2010) Quantification of gypsum crystal nucleation, growth, and breakage rates in a wet flue gas desulfurization pilot plant. AIChE journal 55(10):2746-2753Google Scholar
  14. Kaldor TG, Phillips CR (1976) Aerosol scrubbing by foam. Ind Eng Chem Process Des Dev 15(1):199–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kiil S, Michelsen ML, Dam-Johansen K (1998) Experimental investigation and modeling of a wet flue gas desulfurization pilot plant. Ind Eng Chem Res 37(7):2792–2806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kiil S, Nygaard H, Johnsson JE (2002) Simulation studies of the influence of HCl absorption on the performance of a wet flue gas desulphurisation pilot plant. Chem Eng Sci 57(3):347–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kilburn R, Gregory A, Murray AG (2012) Using a Markov-Chain Monte-Carlo modelling approach to identify the relative risk to farmed Scottish Rainbow trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) in a multi-sector industry of Viral Haemorrhagic Septicaemia Viruses from introduction and emergent sources. Ecol Model s 237–238(1739):34–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kim H, Jung C, Oh S, Lee K (2001) Particle removal efficiency of gravitational wet scrubber considering diffusion, interception, and impaction. Environ Eng Sci 18(2):125–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kim HG, Kim HJ, Lee MH, Kim JH (2014) Experimental Study on the Enhancement of Particle Removal Efficiency in Spray Tower Scrubber Using Electrospray. Asian Journal of Atmospheric Environment (AJAE) 8(2)Google Scholar
  20. Li L, Tan Z, Wang J, Xu J, Cai C, Hou Y (2011) Energy conservation and emission reduction policies for the electric power industry in China. Energy Policy 39(6):3669–3679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Li R, Xiao-Qing D, Zheng-Yang H, Shi-Jie LI, Zhun HJEE (2018) Air flow distribution and optimization for desulfurization tower-wet electrostatic precipitator integrated equipmentGoogle Scholar
  22. Li C, Ji B, Song Q, Yao Q (2019) Numerical Simulation of Synergetic Removal of Particulate Matter by Spraying During Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization. Proceedings of the Chinese Society of Electrical Engineering 39(4):1070-1078Google Scholar
  23. Liu J, Wang X, Gao J, Zhang Y, Lu Q, Liu M (2016) Hollow porous carbon spheres with hierarchical nanoarchitecture for application of the high performance supercapacitors. Electrochim Acta 211:183–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Liu J, Chen D, Lu J (2017) Experiment on fine particle purification by flue gas condensation for industrial boilers. Fuel 199:684–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. NOR (2004) Emission standard of air pollutants for thermal power plants. Energy of ChinaGoogle Scholar
  26. Park S, Jung C, Jung K, Lee B, Lee K (2005) Wet scrubbing of polydisperse aerosols by freely falling droplets. J Aerosol Sci 36(12):1444–1458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Šolc J, Dryák P, Moser H, Branger T, García-Toraño E, Peyrés V, Tzika F, Lutter G, Capogni M, Fazio A (2015) Characterisation of a radionuclide specific laboratory detector system for the metallurgical industry by Monte Carlo simulations. Radiation Physics and Chemistry 116:189-193Google Scholar
  28. Vithayasrichareon P, Macgill IF (2012) A Monte Carlo based decision-support tool for assessing generation portfolios in future carbon constrained electricity industries. Energy Policy 41(4):374-392Google Scholar
  29. Wang ZS, Pan LB (2014) Implementation Results of Emission Standards of Air Pollutants for Thermal Power Plants: a Numerical Simulation. Huan jing ke xue= Huanjing kexue 35(3):853-863Google Scholar
  30. Wang A, Song Q, Yao Q (2014) Numerical simulation of single droplet capturing particles in the WFGD. J Eng Thermophys 35(9)Google Scholar
  31. Wang DG, Zhu FH, Yu-Ping YI, Liu Z, Xiao-Ming LI, Meng LY (2015) Removal efficiency of WFGD system to particles based on field tests. Administration & Technique of Environmental MonitoringGoogle Scholar
  32. Wang A, Song Q, Ji B, Yao Q (2016) Effect of droplet deformation on inertial and thermophoretic capture of particles. Atmos Environ 127:187–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wang S, Shuiqing LI, Duan L, Shi W, Xue J, Liu JJPotC (2017) Study on the coagulation of vapor condensates and fine particulates in a phase-change agglomeratorGoogle Scholar
  34. Williams DG (2007) U.S. nuclear plant decommissioning funding adequacy — by individual funds, utilities, reactors, and industry-wide — assessed by Monte Carlo and baseline trend methods: 1998, 2000, 2001, and 2004 ☆. Energy Econ 29(5):1050–1100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Willigers BJA, Hansen TL (2008) Project valuation in the pharmaceutical industry: a comparison of least‐squares Monte Carlo real option valuation and conventional approaches. R&d Management 38(5):520–537Google Scholar
  36. Wu H, Pan D, Huang R, Hong G, Yang B, Peng Z, Yang L (2016a) Abatement of Fine Particle Emission by Heterogeneous Vapor Condensation During Wet Limestone-Gypsum Flue Gas Desulfurization. Energy & Fuels 30(7): 6103-6109Google Scholar
  37. Wu H, Pan D, Xiong G, Jiang Y, Yang L, Yang B, Peng Z, Hong G (2016b) The abatement of fine particles from desulfurized flue gas by heterogeneous vapor condensation coupling two impinging streams. Chem Eng Process Process Intensif 108:174–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wu H, Yang LJ, Yan JP, Hong GX, Yang B (2016c) Improving the removal of fine particles by heterogeneous condensation during WFGD processes. Fuel Process Technol 145:116–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Xu J, Yu Y, Zhang J, Meng Q, Zhong H (2017) Heterogeneous condensation of water vapor on particles at high concentration. Powder Technol 305:71–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Yan J, Chen L, Lin Q (2017) Removal of fine particles in WFGD system using the simultaneous acoustic agglomeration and supersaturated vapor condensation. Powder Technol 315:106–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Yang L, Bao J, Yan J, Liu J, Song S, Fan F (2010) Removal of fine particles in wet flue gas desulfurization system by heterogeneous condensation. Chemical engineering journal 156(1):25-32Google Scholar
  42. Yang YH, Lin SJ, Lewis C (2009b) Reduction of acidification from electricity — generating industries in Taiwan by life cycle assessment and Monte Carlo optimization. Ecol Econ 68(6):1575–1582CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Yang Z, Ji P, Li Q, Jiang Y, Zheng C, Wang Y, Gao X, Lin R (2019) Comprehensive understanding of SO3 effects on synergies among air pollution control devices in ultra-low emission power plants burning high-sulfur coal. J Clean Prod 239:118096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Yao M, Nie J, Zhang L, Hongzhi LI (2016) Integrative flue-gas pollutants removal technology for coal-fired utility boilers. Thermal Power GenerationGoogle Scholar
  45. You C, Li Y (2013) Population balance for CFB–FGD systems. Powder technology 235:859-865Google Scholar
  46. Yuan Y, Liqiang QI (2007) Mathematical model for studying dust-removal efficiency in sprayer of limestone/gypsum wet flue gas desulfurization system in power plants. Science & Technology ReviewGoogle Scholar
  47. Zhao H, Zheng C (2006a) Monte Carlo simulation for simultaneous particle coagulation and deposition. Science in China Series E 49(2):222-237Google Scholar
  48. Zhao H, Zheng C (2006b) Monte Carlo solution of wet removal of aerosols by precipitation. Atmos Environ 40(8):1510–1525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zhao H, Zheng C, Xu M (2005a) Multi-Monte Carlo approach for general dynamic equation considering simultaneous particle coagulation and breakage. Powder Technol 154(2-3):164–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zhao H, Zheng C, Xu M (2005b) Multi-Monte Carlo method for coagulation and condensation/evaporation in dispersed systems. J Colloid Interface Sci 286(1):195–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zhao H, Zheng C, Xu M (2005c) Multi-Monte Carlo method for particle coagulation: description and validation. Appl Math Comput 167(2):1383–1399Google Scholar
  52. Zhao H, Maisels A, Matsoukas T, Zheng C (2007) Analysis of four Monte Carlo methods for the solution of population balances in dispersed systems. Powder Technol 173(1):38–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zhao Y, Wang S, Nielsen CP, Li X, Hao J (2010) Establishment of a database of emission factors for atmospheric pollutants from Chinese coal-fired power plants. Atmos Environ 44(12):1515–1523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhong Y, Gao X, Huo W, Luo ZY, Ni MJ, KFJFPT C (2008) A model for performance optimization of wet flue gas desulfurization systems of power plants. 89(11):1025–1032Google Scholar
  55. Zhu F (2017) Methodologies on choosing appropriate technical route for ultra low emission of flue gas pollutants from coal-fired power plants. Electric PowerGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yueqi Huang
    • 1
  • Chenghang Zheng
    • 1
    Email author
  • Qingyi Li
    • 1
  • Jun Zhang
    • 1
  • Yishan Guo
    • 1
  • Yongxin Zhang
    • 1
  • Xiang Gao
    • 1
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Clean Energy Utilization, National Environmental Protection Coal-fired Air Pollution Control Engineering Technology CenterZhejiang UniversityHangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations