Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Status of Mercury Emission from Coal Combustion Power Station

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Coal Fired Flue Gas Mercury Emission Controls

Part of the book series: Energy and Environment Research in China ((EERC))

Abstract

Mercury is considered a dangerous heavy metal to both humans and the ecosystem because it is highly toxic to the central nervous system and it tends to bioaccumulate in the human body. Coal-fired power plants are one of the main sources of mercury emission to the environment. During combustion, the mercury in the coal is transformed into three species: particle-bound mercury, vapor-phase elemental mercury, and vapor-phase oxidized mercury. Particle-bound Hgp is easily removed by dust control equipment such as baghouse filters and electrostatic precipitators (ESPs). Vapor-phase oxidized mercury is water soluble which makes its removal in wet flue-gas desulfurization units (FGD) possible. Vapor-phase elemental mercury is extremely volatile and insoluble. Therefore, the conversion of mercury from one form to another is important for selecting the appropriate mercury removal technology.

Coal-fired power plants have been considered to be the primary anthropogenic source of mercury into the atmosphere. For example, these account for about one-third of all anthropogenic mercury emissions in the USA. In China, mercury emission from nonferrous metals smelting, coal combustion, and miscellaneous activities contributed about 45 %, 38 %, and 17 %, respectively. Mercury contamination is widespread in different ecological compartments such as atmosphere, soil, and water. Mercury is a global pollutant. The research on mercury in America and Europe has been widely conducted. Anthropogenic emissions of mercury still increase in Asia because of increased burning of coal and increasedindustrialization.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Antonia Lopez-Anton M, Yuan Y, Ron P, Mercedes Maroto-Valer M (2010) Analysis of mercury species present during coal combustion by thermal desorption. Fuel 89:629–634

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Wang Q, Shen W, Ma Z (2000) Estimation of mercury emission from coal combustion in China. Environ Sci Technol 34:2711–2713

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Park KS, Seo YC, Lee SJ et al (2008) Emission and speciation of mercury from various combustion sources. Powder Technol 180:151–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chi Y, Yan N, Zan Q, Qiao S et al (2009) The performance of iodine on the removal of elemental mercury from the simulated coal-fired flue gas. J Hazard Mater 166:776–781

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kyung Bo Ko, Youngchul Byun, Moohyun Cho et al (2008) Influence of HCl on oxidation of gaseous elemental mercury by dielectric barrier discharge process. Chemosphere 71:1674–1682

    Google Scholar 

  6. Granite EJ, Pennline HW (2002) Photochemical removal of mercury from flue gas. Ind Eng Chem Res 41:5470–5476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lee TG, Hedrick E, Biswas P (2002) Hg reaction in the presence of chlorine species, homogeneous gas phase and heterogeneous gas–solid phase. J Air Waste Manage 52:1316–1323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. McLarnon CR, Granite EJ, Pennline HW (2005) The PCO process for photochemical removal of mercury from flue gas. Fuel Process Technol 87:85–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhao Y, Mann MD, Pavlish JH, Mibeck BAF, Dunham GF, Olson ES (2006) Application of gold catalyst for mercury oxidation by chlorine. Environ Sci Technol 40:1603–1608

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Galbreath KC, Zygarlicke CJ (1996) Mercury speciation in coal combustion and gasification flue gases. Environ Sci Technol 30:2421–2426

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Brown TD, Smith DN, Hargis RN, O’Dowd J (1999) Mercury measurement and its control, what we know, have learned, and need to further investigate. J Air Waste Manage 49:628–640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Pai P, Niemi D, Powers B (2000) A North American inventory of anthropogenic mercury emissions. Fuel Process Technol 65:101–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wang Q, Shen W, Ma Z (1999) The estimation of mercury emission from coal combustion in China. China Environ Sci 19:318–321

    Google Scholar 

  14. Seigneur C, Vijayaraghavan K, Lohman K et al (2004) Modeling the atmospheric fate and transport of mercury over North America, power plant emission scenarios. Fuel Process Technol 85:441–450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Yan Cao, Chin-Min Cheng, Chien-Wei Chen et al (2008) Abatement of mercury emissions in the coal combustion process equipped with a Fabric Filter Baghouse. Fuel 87:3322–3330

    Google Scholar 

  16. Crocker CR, Benson SA, Laumb JD (2004) SCR catalyst blinding due to sodium and calcium sulfate formation. Prep Pap-Am Chem Soc Div Fuel Chem 49:169–172

    Google Scholar 

  17. NBSC (National Bureau of Statistics of China) (2002) China statistical yearbook. www.stats.gov.cn/yearbook2001/indexC.htm (in Chinese)

  18. Rigby K, Johnson R, Neufort R, Gunther P, Hurns E, Klatt A et al (2000) SCR catalyst design issues and operation experience, coals with high arsenic concentrations and coals from power river basin. Presented at the international joint power generation conference, UPGC2000-15067, 23–26 July 2000

    Google Scholar 

  19. Senior CL, Linjewile T, Denison M, Swensen D, Shino D, Bockelie M et al. SCR deactivation mechanisms related to alkali and alkali earth elements. In: Conference on selective catalytic reduction (SCR) and selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) for NOx control, Pittsburgh, PA, 20–30 Oct 2003

    Google Scholar 

  20. Zhang L, Wong MH (2007) Environmental mercury contamination in China, sources and impacts. Environ Int 33:108–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Li P, Feng XB, Qiu GL, Shang LH, Li ZG (2009) Mercury pollution in Asia, a review of the contaminated sites. J Hazard Mater 168:591–601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. St. Louis VL, Rudd WM, Kelly CA, Hall BD, Rolfhus KR, Scott KJ, Lindberg SE, Don W (2001) Importance of the forest canopy to fluxes of methyl mercury and total mercury to a boreal ecosystem. Environ Sci Technol 35:3089–3098

    Google Scholar 

  23. Guor-Cheng Fang, Yuh-ShenWu, Tai-Hua Chang (2009) Comparison of atmospheric mercury (Hg) among Korea, Japan, China and Taiwan during 2000–2008. J Hazard Mater 162:607–615

    Google Scholar 

  24. Anna G, Pacyna JM (2009) Mercury emission from coal-fired power plants in Poland. Atmos Environ 43:5668–5673

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Pacyna EG, Pacyna JM, Steenhuisen F (2006) Global anthropogenic mercury emission inventory for 2000. Atmos Environ 40:4048–4063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Pacyna EG, Pacyna JM (2002) Global emission of mercury from anthropogenic sources in 1995. Water Air Soil Pollut 137(1–4):149–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Shia R-L, Seigneur C, Pai P, Ko M, Sze ND (1999) Global simulation of atmospheric mercury concentrations and deposition fluxes. J Geophys Res 104:23747–23760

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Pacyna EG, Pacyna JM, Steenhuisen F, Wilson S (2006) Global anthropogenic mercury emission inventory for 2000. Atmos Environ 40:4048–4063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. DME (Department of Minerals and Energy) (2005) Digest of South African Energy Statistics. Department of Minerals and Energy, Pretoria

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Shanghai University of Electric Power, Shanghai, China

    Jiang Wu & Weiguo Pan

  2. Western Kentucky University, Kentucky, KY, USA

    Yan Cao & Weiping Pan

Authors
  1. Jiang Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yan Cao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Weiguo Pan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Weiping Pan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Shanghai Jiao Tong University Press, Shanghai and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wu, J., Cao, Y., Pan, W., Pan, W. (2015). The Status of Mercury Emission from Coal Combustion Power Station. In: Coal Fired Flue Gas Mercury Emission Controls. Energy and Environment Research in China. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46347-5_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46347-5_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-46346-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-46347-5

  • eBook Packages: EnergyEnergy (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation