4.5 Article

Techno-Economic Evaluation of Co-Removal of NOx and SOx Species from Flue Gases via Enhanced Oxidation of NO by ClO2-Case Studies of Implementation at a Pulp and Paper Mill, Waste-to-Heat Plant and a Cruise Ship

Journal

ENERGIES
Volume 14, Issue 24, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en14248512

Keywords

flue gas cleaning; co-absorption; NOx; SO2; gas-phase oxidation; ClO2

Categories

Funding

  1. Swedish Energy Agency and Nouryon-Grant [50368-1, 46438-1]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Co-absorption of NO2 and SO2, combined with enhanced oxidation of NO by ClO2(g), can achieve efficient removal of NOx and SO2 from flue gases. There are significant cost differences in treating different flue gas sources, and the selection of chemical additives plays a vital role in the economic feasibility of the technology.
Co-absorption of NO2 and SO2 from flue gases, in combination with the enhanced oxidation of NO by ClO2(g), is studied for three different flue gas sources: a medium sized waste-to-heat plant; the kraft recovery boiler of a pulp and paper mill; and a cruise ship. Process modeling results are used to present the technical potential for each site together with cost estimation and optimization using a bottom-up approach. A process set-up is proposed for each site together with equipment sizing and resulting flows of process fluids. The simulation results, supported by experimental results, show that removal rates equal to or greater than current best available technologies are achievable with more than 90% of NOx and 99% of SO2 removed from the flue gas. The resulting cost of removing both NOx and SO2 from the flue gases is 2100 euro/ton for the waste-to-heat plant, 800 euro/ton for the cruise ship and 3900 euro/ton for the recovery boiler. The cost estimation show that the consumption and cost of chemical additives will play a decisive role in the economic feasibility of the investigated concept, between 50% and 90% of the total cost per ton acid gas removed.

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