4.7 Article

Experimental study on the stability of the ClHgSO3- in desulfurization wastewater

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 24, 期 20, 页码 17031-17040

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-017-9359-9

关键词

Mercuric complexes; Stabilization estimate; Desulfurization wastewater; Decomposition mechanism

资金

  1. The National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [51176058]
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology, China [2014CB238904, 2013CB228504]
  3. Science and Technology Research and Development, Shenzhen [JCYJ20160531194612911]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Wet flue gas desulfurization technologies have received much concern for their superior performance on co-controlling the acid gases and mercury. However, high concentrations of mercury-containing desulfurization wastewater, which discharge from wet flue gas desulfurization system regularly, have received researchers' attention since it might generate the risk of secondary pollution. In this paper, the species of mercuric complexes in the desulfurization wastewater was investigated. It speculated that ClHgSO3- might determine the residual rate of Hg2+ in the desulfurization wastewater. Besides, the stability of ClHgSO3- on the condition of various wastewater features was also evaluated. The experiment revealed that the high temperature and high pH level promoted the decomposition of ClHgSO3-. SO32- could restrain the decomposition of ClHgSO3- gently; the Hg2+ residual rate was determined by the new mercury complexes which compounded by Hg2+ and SO32-. The decrease of SO42- and increase of Ca2+ concentrations could also stimulate the stability of ClHgSO3- in wastewater. Cu2+ and Fe2+ disturbed the stability of complexes for their catalysis and reduction activities. The study proposed that the ClHgSO3- probably decomposes and releases Hg-0 in two pathways. Furthermore, changes of the water's features could disturb the balance of Hg2+-Cl--SO32- systems, which might stimulate the decomposition of ClHgSO3.

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