4.5 Article

A combination process of mineral carbonation with SO2 disposal for simulated flue gas by magnesia-added seawater

Journal

FRONTIERS OF CHEMICAL SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING
Volume 13, Issue 4, Pages 832-844

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11705-019-1871-7

Keywords

mineral carbonation; wet SO2 disposal; sea-water; desulfurization

Funding

  1. Science and technology project of Hebei Province [17273101D]
  2. Chinese Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2017M611142]
  3. National Key Research and Development Program [2016YFB0600500]
  4. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21306037]
  5. Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University [IRT14R14]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The desulfurization by seawater and mineral carbonation have been paid more and more attention. In this study, the feasibility of magnesia and seawater for the integrated disposal of SO2 and CO2 in the simulated flue gas was investigated. The process was conducted by adding MgO in seawater to reinforce the absorption of SO2 and facilitate the mineralization of CO2 by calcium ions. The influences of various factors, including digestion time of magnesia, reaction temperature, and salinity were also investigated. The results show that the reaction temperature can effectively improve the carbonation reaction. After combing SO2 removal process with mineral carbonation, Ca2+ removal rate has a certain degree of decrease. The best carbonation condition is to use 1.5 times artificial seawater (the concentrations of reagents are 1.5 times of seawater) at 80 degrees C and without digestion of magnesia. The desulfurization rate is close to 100% under any condition investigated, indicating that the seawater has a sufficient desulfurization capacity with adding magnesia. This work has demonstrated that a combination of the absorption of SO2 with the absorption and mineralization of CO2 is feasible.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available