Combustion and reaction

Influence of Limestone Addition on Combustion and Emission Characteristics of Coal Slime in the 75 t/h CFB Boiler with Post-Combustion Chamber

Expand
  • 1. Institute of Engineering Thermophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China
    2. School of Engineering Science, University of Science & Technology of China, Hefei 230026, China
    3. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
    4. Dalian National Laboratory for Clean Energy, Dalian 116023, China

Online published: 2023-10-23

Supported by

This work was financially supported by the “Transformational Technologies for Clean Energy and Demonstration”, Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Grant No. XDA21040100.

Copyright

Science Press, Institute of Engineering Thermophysics, CAS and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2023

Abstract

Coal slime can be disposed in quantity and fully utilized in a well-designed circulating fluidized bed (CFB) boiler, but the nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions generated in the combustion of coal slime have contributed to serious atmospheric pollution. High Temperature & Post-combustion Technology, a novel and high-efficient way to reduce the NOx emission in the process of combustion, is applied to a 75 t/h CFB boiler burning exclusively coal slime, which will succeed to meet the ultra-low NOx emission standard. To further explore an appropriate method to reduce the SO2 emission under the condition of new technology, the experiments were conducted on a 75 t/h CFB boiler with post-combustion chamber to study the influence of limestone addition on the combustion and emission characteristics of coal slime. The experimental results showed that High Temperature & Post-combustion Technology combined with the sorbent injection in the furnace is a very promising technology to control the NOx and SO2 emissions simultaneously. Limestone addition can cause the slight decrease in combustion temperature. Limestone addition will lead to the increase in NOx emission in the combustion of coal slime. In 75 t/h coal slime CFB boiler, the desulfurization efficiency of limestone injection in furnace is close to 98%, achieving the ultra-low SO2 emission. To meet the standard of ultra-low NOx and SO2 emission, the two technologies for simultaneous removal of NOx and SO2 emissions are economical and feasible currently: Removal of SO2 under ultra-low NOx emission and Removal of NOx under ultra-low SO2 emission.

Cite this article

WANG Chao, SONG Guoliang, YANG Zhao, XIAO Yuan, YANG Xueting, JI Zengcai, LYU Qinggang . Influence of Limestone Addition on Combustion and Emission Characteristics of Coal Slime in the 75 t/h CFB Boiler with Post-Combustion Chamber[J]. Journal of Thermal Science, 2023 , 32(5) : 1849 -1857 . DOI: 10.1007/s11630-023-1805-z

References

[1] Zhang Y., Zhu J., Lyu Q., et al., The ultra-low NOx emission characteristics of pulverized coal combustion after high temperature preheating. Fuel, 2020, 277: 118050.
[2] China’s National Economy and Social Development Statistical Bulletin in 2015, National Bureau of Statistics of China, 2015.
[3] Gui X., Liu J., Cao Y., et al., Coal preparation technology: Status and development in China. Energy & Environment, 2015, 26(6–7): 997–1013.
[4] Zheng J.H., Xu C.Y., Hu P.F., Study on flotation process of coal slime. Advanced Materials Research, 2013, 734–737: 1093–1096.
[5] Yang H., Guangxi Y., Junfu L., et al., An update of circulating fluidised bed combustion (CFB) technology in China. VGB PowerTech, 2012, 92(12): 75–79.
[6] Yue G., Cai R., Lu J., et al., From a CFB reactor to a CFB boiler – The review of R&D progress of CFB coal combustion technology in China. Powder Technology, 2016. DOI: 10.1016/j.powtec.2016.10.062
[7] Koornneef J., Junginger M., Faaij A., Development of fluidized bed combustion-An overview of trends, performance and cost. Progress in Energy & Combustion Science, 2007, 33(1): 19–55.
[8] Carlos Lupiáez., Guedea I., Bolea I., et al., Experimental study of SO2 and NOx emissions in fluidized bed oxy-fuel combustion. Fuel Processing Technology, 2013, 106: 587–594.
[9] Adams D., Oh D., Kim D., et al., Prediction of SOx-NOx emission from a coal-fired CFB power plant with machine learning: Plant data learned by deep neural network and least square support vector machine. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2020, 270: 122310.
[10] Miccio F., Gerhard Löffler., Wargadalam V.J., et al., The influence of SO2 level and operating conditions on NOx and N2O emissions during fluidised bed combustion of coals. Fuel, 2001, 80(11): 1555–1566.
[11] Spliethoff H., Basic effect on NOx emission in air staging and reburning at a bench-scale test facility. Fuel, 1996, 75(5): 560–564.
[12] Lyngfelt A., Åmand L.E., Leckner B., Reversed air staging-a method for reduction of N2O emissions from fluidized bed combustion of coal. Fuel, 1998, 77(9): 953–959.
[13] Smart J.P., Morgan D.J., The effectiveness of multi-fuel reburning in an internally fuel-staged burner for NOx reduction. Fuel, 1994, 73(9): 1437–1442.
[14] Mereb J.B., Wendt J.O.L., Air staging and reburning mechanisms for NOx abatement in a laboratory coal combustor. Fuel, 1994, 73(7): 1020–1026.
[15] Emis, https://emis.vito.be/en/techniekfiche/selective-catalytic-reduction, 2018.
[16] Emis, https://emis.vito.be/en/techniekfiche/selective-non-catalytic-reduction, 2018.
[17] Mok Y.S., Lee H.J., Removal of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides by using ozone injection and absorption-reduction technique. Fuel Processing Technology, 2006, 87(7): 591–597.
[18] Arthur L. Kohl., Richard B., Nielsen., gas purification, fifth Ed., Gulf Professional Publishing, 1997, pp. 466–669.
[19] IEA (2006). Flue gas desulfurization (FGD) for SO2 control. http://www.iea-coal.org.uk/. 
[20] Warych J., Szymanowski M., Optimum values of process parameters of the wet limestone flue gas desulfurization system. Chemical Engineering & Technology, 2015, 25(4): 427–432.
[21] Ma S., Chai J., Jiao K., et al., Environmental influence and countermeasures for high humidity flue gas discharging from power plants. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2017, 73: 225–235.
[22] Zhang L., Dong X., Hou F., et al., Study on optimization experiment of SCR denitrification technologies in a coal-fired power plant. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Weihai, China, 2018.
DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/108/5/052100. 
[23] Yang W., Summary of flue gas denitration technology for coal-fired power plants. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Wuhan, China, 2019, 300: 032054. DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/300/3/032054. 
[24] Hu Z., Jiang E., Ma X., Numerical simulation on operating parameters of SNCR process in a municipal solid waste incinerator. Fuel, 2019, 245: 160–173.
[25] Zhou T., Gong Z., Lu Q., et al., Experimental study on enhanced control of NOx emission from circulating fluidized bed combustion. Energy & Fuels, 2015, 29(6): 3634–3639. 
[26] Gong Z., Zhou T., Lu Q., et al., Combustion and NOx emission characteristics of Shenmu char in a circulating fluidized bed with post-combustion. Energy & Fuels, 2016, 30(1): 31–38.
[27] Zhou T., Lu Q., Cao Y., et al., Study on the combustion and NOx emission characteristics of low rank coal in a circulating fluidized bed with post-combustion. The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 2017, 95(12): 2333–2340.
[28] Xiao Y., Song G.L., Song W.J., et al., Influence of feeding position and post-combustion air arrangement on NOx emission from circulating fluidized bed combustion with post-combustion. Fuel, 2020, 269: 117394.
[29] Lyngfelt A., Bergqvist K., Johnsson F., et al., Dependence of sulphur capture performance on air staging in a 12 MW circulating fluidized bed boiler. Springer Netherlands, 1993.
[30] Saastamoinen J.J., Particle-size optimization for SO2 capture by limestone in a circulating fluidized bed. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 2007, 46(22): 7308–7316.
[31] Montagnaro F., Salatino P., Scala F., The influence of temperature on limestone sulfation and attrition under fluidized bed combustion conditions. Experimental Thermal & Fluid Science, 2010, 34(3): 352–358.
[32] Anders L., Bo L., Sulphur capture in fluidized bed boilers: The effect of reductive decomposition of CaSO4. The Chemical Engineering Journal, 1989, 40: 59–69.
[33] Jensen A., Johnsson J.E., Dam-Johansen K., Nitrogen chemistry in FBC with limestone addition. Symposium on Combustion, 1997, 26(2): 3335–3342.
[34] Diego L.F.D., Londono C.A., Wang X.S., et al., Influence of operating parameters on NOx and N2O axial profiles in a circulating fluidized bed combustor. Fuel, 1996, 75(8): 971–978.
[35] Wang H., Guo S., Liu D., et al., Influence of water vapor on surface morphology and pore structure during limestone calcination in a laboratory-scale fluidized bed. Energy & Fuels, 2016, 30(5): 3821–3830.
[36] Jensen A., Johnsson J.E., Dam-Johansen K., Nitrogen chemistry in FBC with limestone addition. Symposium on Combustion, 1997, 26(2): 3335–3342.
[37] Derek G. Gavin., Mark A. Dorrington., Factors in the conversion of fuel nitrogen to nitric and nitrous oxides during fluidized bed combustion. Fuel, 1993, 72: 381–388.
[38] Tadaaki S., Yutaka T., Ayumu K., et al., Effect of SO2 removal by limestone on NOx and N2O emissions from a bubbling fluidized-bed combustor. Fuel, 1992, 71: 841–844.
[39] Johnsson J.E., Formation and reduction of nitrogen oxides in fluidized-bed combustion. Fuel, 1994, 73(9): 1398–1415.
[40] Dam-Johansen K., Amand L.E., Leckner B., Influence of SO2 on the NO/N2O chemistry in fluidized bed combustion: 2. Interpretation of full-scale observations based on laboratory experiments. Fuel, 1993, 72(4): 565–571.
Outlines

/