“Air Toxic Regulations and Control” was the Hot Topic on Thursday, May 6th
According to a settlement agreement reached last October in a federal lawsuit by a coalition of public health and environmental groups brought against the U.S. EPA, the agency must adopt rules reducing major toxic air pollutants from coal- and oil-fired power plants by November 2011. If the proposed cement MACT is any indicator, we can expect reductions of 90 percent or more in emissions of mercury, arsenic, hydrochloric acid, and other HAPs. Five presenters weighed in on the potential impact of these rules, relevant technology, and implementation problems.
Robert A. Ashworth Sr. of ClearStack Combustion Corporation discussed a three-stage pulverized coal oxidation technique that dramatically reduces the major air pollutants (NOx, SO2, Hg and other air metal toxics) associated with coal combustion. The unique aspect of this system is that the coal is combusted in a molten bath and results in solid–solid reactions as opposed to vapor–solids reactions.
John H. Pavlish of the Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC) University of North Dakota provided an overview from several projects showing trace metal emissions from several full-scale power plants of different configurations and coal types. The amount of particulate selenium can vary from 3% to over 90%. Vapor phase selenium capture can be high with certain technologies. Discrete toxic metals are captured efficiently in baghouses.
Jon Norman of United Conveyor Corporation showed how injection of hydrated lime, trona, or sodium bicarbonate can be used cost-effectively to remove mercury, HCl/HF, and other HAPs from coal-fired boilers for compliance with the impending MACT standards. He provided results from full-scale testing. Combining HAP removal along with capture of SO2 and SO3 minimizes cost.
Scott Evans of Clean Air Engineering discussed the difficulties in proving compliance by measuring flue gas because of the detection limits of currently available measurement technologies. There are a combination of variables including the arbitrary approach of some testing laboratories to provide erroneous conclusions.
Natalie Vaught of Weston Solutions discussed the extensive time requirement and difficulties in reporting the data for the “Information Collection Request” (ICR) for the Boiler MACT. This is an electronic form and has lots of “bugs.” She provided some warnings and ways to address some of the problems.
The Bios, Abstracts and Photos can be viewed as follows: BIOS, PHOTOS, ABSTRACTS - May 6, 2010.htm
The individual slides can be viewed in the Mercury Decision Tree as follows:
Natalie Vaught – Weston Solutions, Inc.
John Pavlish – EERC
Scott Evans – Clean Air Engineering
|
► |
► |
► |
U.S. |
Federal |
Hot Topic Hour May 6, 2010 - Air Toxic Regulations and Control
Hot Topic Hour May 6, 2010 - US Federal Regulations.htm
Jon Norman – United Conveyor
|
► |
► |
► |
► |
Sorbent Injection Prior to Particulate Device |
Mercury Continuing Decision Process For: Sorbent Injection Prior to Particulate Device
UCC Dry Sorbent Injection, presented by Jon Norman United Conveyor. Hot Topic Hour May 6, 2010.
Bob Ashworth – ClearStack slides can be viewed in the Universal Decision Tree as follows:
Bob Ashworth - ClearStack