4.7 Article

Removing sulfur dioxide from smelting flue and increasing resource utilization of copper tailing through the liquid catalytic oxidation

期刊

FUEL PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY
卷 192, 期 -, 页码 36-44

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2019.03.030

关键词

Copper tailing; Flue gas desulfurization; Smelting flue; Resource utilization; Minimization

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFC0210500]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51868030, 51568027]
  3. Candidates of the Young and Middle Aged Academic Leaders of the Yunnan Province [2015HB012]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Increasing the utilization of copper tailing and flue gas desulfurization is significant for copper smelters. Copper tailing, derived from the copper production, was applied to flue gas desulfurization and increasing utilization of copper tailing and smelting gas with low concentrations of SO2 by preparing slurries composed of copper tailing and water. The effects of different factors, including the inlet SO2 concentration, the ratio of solid to liquid, the absorption temperature, the O-2 concentration, the gas flow rate, the initial copper tailing slurry pH, and the presence of a coexisting gas were investigated systematically. The resulting products and the mechanism driving the flue gas desulfurization were also studied. The results indicated that desulfurization efficiency was primarily influenced by the inlet SO2 concentration, the ratio of solid to liquid, the absorption temperature, and the gas flow rate. An appropriate amount of NO facilitated the desulfurization. The desulfurization efficiency was maintained at or above 80% for 60 h under optimal conditions. The total weight of the copper tailing was reduced by approximately 8%. Ferric sulfate and magnetite could be recycled through evaporation and magnetic separation. Liquid phase catalytic oxidation by metal ions, including ferric and manganese, played a vital role in the flue gas desulfurization.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据