Abstract
Slurry fuels based on wood and coal processing and petroleum refinery waste are an environmentally friendly and economically feasible alternative to the conventional solid fuel-coal. As part of this experimental research, we compared a set of fuels (coal and coal-water slurries with and without petrochemicals) by normalizing and calculating the specific concentrations of pollutants from their combustion. The pollutant concentrations were normalized with respect to the mass of burnt fuel, the thermal energy released by combustion, specific mass emissions per unit time, specific maximum mass emissions, and specific mass emissions per 1 kg of fuel equivalent or 1 MJ of thermal energy. The key objective of this research was to develop a method for comparing composite fuels in terms of their relative environmental friendliness. As part of the research, coal combustion was notable for the peak emissions of gaseous pollutants irrespective of the fuel mass and combustion chamber temperature. When slurries were burnt, CO2, SO2, and NOx concentrations were 12–90% lower as compared to coal. The research findings established that the most promising fuel of all the slurries under study is the one based on coal slime and sawdust due to its high environmental indicators.
Graphical abstract
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Afgan NH, Carvalho MG (2002) Multi-criteria assessment of new and renewable energy power plants. Energy 27:739–755. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-5442(02)00019-1
Akhmetshin MR, Nyashina GS, Strizhak PA (2020) Comparative analysis of factors affecting differences in the concentrations of gaseous anthropogenic emissions from coal and slurry fuel combustion. Fuel 270:117390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.117581
Alahmer A (2013) Influence of using emulsified diesel fuel on the performance and pollutants emitted from diesel engine. Energy Convers Manag 73:361–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2013.05.012
Ali T, Chiu YR, Aghaloo K et al (2020) Prioritizing the existing power generation technologies in Bangladesh’s clean energy scheme using a hybrid multi-criteria decision making model. J Clean Prod 267:121901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121901
All-Russia Thermal Engineering Institute (1998) RD 34.02.305–98. Method for the determination of gross atmospheric emissions of pollutants from boilers of thermal power stations
Amoatey P, Omidvarborna H, Baawain MS, Al-Mamun A (2019) Emissions and exposure assessments of SOx, NOx, PM10/2.5 and trace metals from oil industries: A review study (2000–2018). Process Saf Environ Prot 123:215–228
Anwar M, Rasul MG, Ashwath N (2019) The efficacy of multiple-criteria design matrix for biodiesel feedstock selection. Energy Convers Manag 198:111790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.111790
Armesto L, Bahillo A, Cabanillas A et al (2003) Co-combustion of coal and olive oil industry residues in fluidised bed. Fuel 82:993–1000. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-2361(02)00397-6
Bhuiyan AA, Blicblau AS, Islam AKMS, Naser J (2018) A review on thermo-chemical characteristics of coal/biomass co-firing in industrial furnace. J Energy Inst 91:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joei.2016.10.006
BP (2020) Energy Outlook. London
Chakraborty N, Mukherjee I, Santra AK et al (2008) Measurement of CO2, CO, SO2, and NO emissions from coal-based thermal power plants in India. Atmos Environ 42:1073–1082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.10.074
Cheng J, Zhou J, Li Y et al (2008) Effects of pore fractal structures of ultrafine coal water slurries on rheological behaviors and combustion dynamics. Fuel 87:2620–2627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2008.01.028
Dan Z, Zhou W, Zhou P et al (2021) Characterization of municipal solid waste incineration and flue gas emission under anoxic environment in Tibet Plateau. Environ Sci Pollut Res 2021:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-021-15977-X
Daood SS, Ord G, Wilkinson T, Nimmo W (2014) Fuel additive technology - NOx reduction, combustion efficiency and fly ash improvement for coal fired power stations. Fuel 134:293–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.04.032
Das D, Mohapatra RK, Belbsir H et al (2020) Combined effect of natural dispersant and a stabilizer in formulation of high concentration coal water slurry: Experimental and rheological modeling. J Mol Liq 320:114441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2020.114441
Dorokhov VV, Kuznetsov GV, Nyashina GS, Strizhak PA (2021) Composition of a gas and ash mixture formed during the pyrolysis and combustion of coal-water slurries containing petrochemicals. Environ Pollut 285:117390. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVPOL.2021.117390
Feng Y, Li Y, Zhang X et al (2021) Comparative study on the characteristics of condensable particulate matter emitted from three kinds of coal. Environ Pollut 270:116267. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVPOL.2020.116267
Finkelman RB, Wolfe A, Hendryx MS (2020) The future environmental and health impacts of coal. Energy Geosci 2:99–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engeos.2020.11.001
Fu P, Bai X, Yi W et al (2017) Assessment on performance, combustion and emission characteristics of diesel engine fuelled with corn stalk pyrolysis bio-oil/diesel emulsions with Ce0.7Zr0.3O2 nanoadditive. Fuel Process Technol 167:474–483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2017.07.032
Gaber C, Wachter P, Demuth M, Hochenauer C (2020) Experimental investigation and demonstration of pilot-scale combustion of oil-water emulsions and coal-water slurry with pronounced water contents at elevated temperatures with the use of pure oxygen. Fuel 282:118692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.118692
Glushkov DO, Lyrshchikov SY, Shevyrev SA, Strizhak PA (2016) Burning properties of slurry based on coal and oil processing waste. Energy Fuels 30:3441–3450. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.5b02881
Glushkov DO, Paushkina KK, Shabardin DP (2020) Co-combustion of coal processing waste, oil refining waste and municipal solid waste: Mechanism, characteristics, emissions. Chemosphere 240:124892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.124892
GOST55173–2012 (2014) Boiler plant. General technical requirements. Standardinform, Russia, Moscow
Guo F, Zhong Z (2018) Co-combustion of anthracite coal and wood pellets: Thermodynamic analysis, combustion efficiency, pollutant emissions and ash slagging. Environ Pollut 239:21–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2018.04.004
Huang IB, Keisler J, Linkov I (2011) Multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: Ten years of applications and trends. Sci Total Environ 409:3578–3594
Huang J, Opoku PA, Guang L et al (2021) A multi-emission analysis of organic and inorganic pollutants during the combustion of sludge with high and low calorific value coals. Environ Sci Pollut Res 2021:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-021-15301-7
International Energy Agency (2016) Energy, Climate Change and Environment: 2016 Insights
International Energy Agency (2020) Key World Energy Statistics
Jiang K, Yu H, Chen L et al (2020) An advanced, ammonia-based combined NOx/SOx/CO2 emission control process towards a low-cost, clean coal technology. Appl Energy 260:114316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114316
Li S, Li W, Xu M et al (2015) The experimental study on nitrogen oxides and SO2 emission for oxy-fuel circulation fluidized bed combustion with high oxygen concentration. Fuel 146:81–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.12.089
Li D, Wu D, Xu F et al (2018) Literature overview of Chinese research in the field of better coal utilization. J Clean Prod 185:959–980. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.216
Li C, Ye K, Mawusi S et al (2020) A 24-h real-time emissions assessment of 41 uncontrolled household raw coal combustion stoves in four provinces of Northern China. Atmos Environ 235:117588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117588
Liu H, Zhang S, Feng S et al (2021) Combustion characteristics and typical pollutant emissions of corn stalk blending with municipal sewage sludge. Environ Sci Pollut Res 28:9792–9805. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-020-11463-Y
Mendoza GA, Martins H (2006) Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: A critical review of methods and new modelling paradigms. For Ecol Manage 230:1–22
Miranda C, Soares AS, Coelho AC et al (2021) Environmental implications of stored cattle slurry treatment with sulphuric acid and biochar: A life cycle assessment approach. Environ Res 194:110640. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVRES.2020.110640
Moroń W, Rybak W (2015) NOx and SO2 emissions of coals, biomass and their blends under different oxy-fuel atmospheres. Atmos Environ 116:65–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2015.06.013
Mwangi JK, Lee WJ, Chang YC et al (2015) An overview: Energy saving and pollution reduction by using green fuel blends in diesel engines. Appl Energy 159:214–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.08.084
Nyashina GS, Legros JC, Strizhak PA (2018a) Impact of forest fuels on gas emissions in coal slurry fuel combustion. Energies 11:2491. https://doi.org/10.3390/en11092491
Nyashina GS, Shlegel NE, Vershinina KY, Strizhak PA (2018b) Industrial waste as part of coal-water slurry fuels. Energy Fuels 32:11398–11410. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.8b02826
Nyashina GS, Vershinina KY, Shlegel NE, Strizhak PA (2019) Effective incineration of fuel-waste slurries from several related industries. Environ Res 176:108559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2019.108559
Qian Y, Scherer L, Tukker A, Behrens P (2020) China’s potential SO2 emissions from coal by 2050. Energy Policy 147:111856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2020.111856
Qiu H, Wang L, Luo L, Shen M (2022) Gaseous air pollutants and hospitalizations for mental disorders in 17 Chinese cities: Association, morbidity burden and economic costs. Environ Res 204:111928. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVRES.2021.111928
Rokni E, Ren X, Panahi A, Levendis YA (2018) Emissions of SO2, NOx, CO2, and HCl from Co-firing of coals with raw and torrefied biomass fuels. Fuel 211:363–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2017.09.049
Santiago-De la Rosa N, Mugica-Álvarez V, Cereceda-Balic F et al (2017) Emission factors from different burning stages of agriculture wastes in Mexico. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24:24297–24310. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-017-0049-4
Sitorus F, Cilliers JJ, Brito-Parada PR (2019) Multi-criteria decision making for the choice problem in mining and mineral processing: Applications and trends. Expert Syst Appl 121:393–417
Staroń A, Kowalski Z, Staroń P, Banach M (2019) Studies on CWL with glycerol for combustion process. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:2835–2844. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-3814-0
Tang Q, Sheng W, Li L et al (2018) Alteration behavior of mineral structure and hazardous elements during combustion of coal from a power plant at Huainan, Anhui, China. Environ Pollut 239:768–776. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVPOL.2018.04.115
Tian J, Ni H, Han Y et al (2018) Primary PM2.5 and trace gas emissions from residential coal combustion: assessing semi-coke briquette for emission reduction in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region, China. Atmos Environ 191:378–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2018.07.031
Uçar S, Özkan AR, Karagöz S (2016) Co-pyrolysis of waste polyolefins with waste motor oil. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 119:233–241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2016.01.013
Vassilev SV, Baxter D, Vassileva CG (2013) An overview of the behaviour of biomass during combustion: Part I. Phase-mineral transformations of organic and inorganic matter. Fuel 112:391–449
Vlachokostas C, Michailidou AV, Achillas C (2021) Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis towards promoting Waste-to-Energy Management Strategies: A critical review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 138:110563
Wang R, Ma Q, Ye X et al (2019) Preparing coal slurry from coking wastewater to achieve resource utilization: Slurrying mechanism of coking wastewater–coal slurry. Sci Total Environ 650:1678–1687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.09.329
Wang X, Li Y, Zhang W et al (2020) Simultaneous SO2 and NO removal by pellets made of carbide slag and coal char in a bubbling fluidized-bed reactor. Process Saf Environ Prot 134:83–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2019.11.022
Werther J, Saenger M, Hartge EU et al (2000) Combustion of agricultural residues. Prog Energy Combust Sci 26:1–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1285(99)00005-2
Xu H, Smoot LD, Hill SC (1999) Computational Model for NOx Reduction by Advanced Reburning. Energy Fuels 13:411–420. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef980090h
Xu J, Huang Q, Wang F (2020) Co-combustion of municipal solid waste and coal for carbon emission reduction: A bi-level multi-objective programming approach. J Clean Prod 272:121923. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121923
Yang F, Li Z, Liu H et al (2021) Emission characteristics of condensable particulate matter and sulfur trioxide from coal-fired power plants. J Energy Inst 94:146–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joei.2020.12.003
Yilmaz E, Wzorek M, Akçay S (2018) Co-pelletization of sewage sludge and agricultural wastes. J Environ Manage 216:169–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.09.012
Zhan M, Sun C, Chen T, Li X (2019) Emission characteristics for co-combustion of leather wastes, sewage sludge, and coal in a laboratory-scale entrained flow tube furnace. Environ Sci Pollut Res 26:9707–9716. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-019-04347-3
Zhang Z, Zeng Q, Hao R et al (2019) Combustion behavior, emission characteristics of SO2, SO3 and NO, and in situ control of SO2 and NO during the co-combustion of anthracite and dried sawdust sludge. Sci Total Environ 646:716–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.286
Zhang Y, Shen Z, Zhang B et al (2020) Emission reduction effect on PM2.5, SO2 and NOx by using red mud as additive in clean coal briquetting. Atmos Environ 223:117203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.117203
Zhao B, Su Y, Liu D et al (2016) SO2/NOx emissions and ash formation from algae biomass combustion: Process characteristics and mechanisms. Energy 113:821–830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.07.107
Zhao Z, Wang R, Ge L et al (2019) Energy utilization of coal-coking wastes via coal slurry preparation: The characteristics of slurrying, combustion, and pollutant emission. Energy 168:609–618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.11.141
Zhou H, Li Y, Li N et al (2019) Conversions of fuel-N to NO and N2O during devolatilization and char combustion stages of a single coal particle under oxy-fuel fluidized bed conditions. J Energy Inst 92:351–363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joei.2018.01.001
Acknowledgements
The study was supported by a grant from the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Russia, Agreement No 075-15-2020-806 (Contract No 13.1902.21.0014).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
DV: Methodology, Investigation, Visualization. KG: Funding acquisition, Writing-review & editing. NG: Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Visualization, Writing-original draft. SP: Funding acquisition, Resources, Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing-review and editing.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
“Not applicable”.
Consent for publication
“Not applicable”.
Availability of data and materials
All relevant data are within the manuscript and available from the corresponding author upon request. Supplementary information is available at Environmental Science and Pollution Research’s website.
Competing interests
"The authors declare that they have no competing interests".
Additional information
Responsible Editor: Philippe Garrigues
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nyashina, G., Dorokhov, V., Kuznetsov, G. et al. Emissions from the combustion of high-potential slurry fuels. Environ Sci Pollut Res 29, 37989–38005 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17727-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-17727-5