COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT

AIR TREATMENT METHODS

WITH PLASMA TREATMENT

PlasTEP 3rd Summer school and trainings

course 2012 Vilnius / Kaunas
Saulius Vasarevicius, VGTU

Part-financed by the European Union (European Regional Development Fund

Two Types of Air Pollutants

Particulate (Visible)
Gaseous

Stationary Source Control

Philosophy of pollution prevention (3Ps)

Modify the process: use different raw materials

Modify the process: increase efficiency
Recover and reuse: less waste = less pollution

Philosophy of end-of-pipe treatment

Collection of waste streams
Add-on equipment at emission points
Control of stationary sources
Particulates

Gases
3

Three Types Of Control

Mechanical
Chemical
Biological

Particulate Control
(Mechanical)

Electrostatic precipitator
Bag house fabric filter
Wet scrubber
High efficiency cyclones

Particulate Control Technologies

Remember this order:
Settling chambers
Cyclones
ESPs (electrostatic
precipitators)
Spray towers
Venturi scrubbers
Baghouses (fabric filtration)

All physical processes

Settling Chambers
Knock-out pots
Simplest, cheapest, no moving parts

Least efficient
large particles only

Creates solid-waste stream

Can be reused

Picture on next slide

8

Gravity settler

Disadvantages
Large space requirement
Relatively low overall collection
efficiencies (typical 20 - 60 %)

Flue Gas Cleaning The state of the art

Selection criteria
ESP

Emission
mg/Nm3

Reliability

Cost

Bag house Scrubber

Cyclones Spraycone
(normal) Cyclones

100

30

200

250

< 100

++

++

++++

++++

++++

++++

+++

Gas Cleaning The state of the art

Evaluation of ESP for industrial boilers:
High cost (investment, maintenance & operation)
Complex large size plant with sub-systems
Requires constant gas conditions (sulphur, temp, moisture)

Evaluation of bag filters for industrial boilers:

High cost (investment, maintenance & filter bags)
Difficult to handle sulphur and sparks
Not robust (one faulty bag destroys efficiency

Evaluation of wet scrubbers for industrial boilers:

High cost (large water treatment plant)
Difficult to separate fine particulate
Sulphur control costly & difficult

Flue Gas Cleaning The state of the art

Evaluation of cyclone grid arrestor :

Low collection efficiency due to:

Wrong design (see velocity analysis)
Air ingress
Bad manufacturing quality
Lack of maintenance (blockage of cyclone cells)

But cyclone system advantages are low cost and robust installation

Can a cyclone reach efficiencies of ESP / Bag filter / Wet scrubber?

This question triggered our cyclone development Program
in 1994 to improve cyclone efficiency and to invent the
dry spray agglomeration principle

Cyclone
Most Common
Cheapest
Most Adaptable

Mechanical Collectors
Cyclones
Advantages: Good for larger PM

Disadvantages: Poor efficiency for finer PM

Difficult removing sticky or wet PM

17

Cyclone Operating Principle

Dirty Air Enters The Side.
The Air Swirls Around The
Cylinder And Velocity Is
Reduced.
Particulate Falls Out Of The Air
To The Bottom Cone And Out.

Flue Gas Cleaning The state of the art

Commercial applications of high efficiency cyclones:

BurnerMax
Fluidized bed furnace
High efficiency cyclones
operating at 400 C

Multiple Cyclones
(Multi clone)
Smaller Particles Need Lower
Air Flow Rate To Separate.
Multiple Cyclones Allow
Lower Air Flow Rate, Capture
Particles to 2 microns

Air Filtration

Filtration Mechanisms
Diffusion
Q: How does efficiency change with
respect to dp?
a. Efficiency goes up as dp decreases
b. Efficiency goes down as dp decreases

Filtration Mechanisms
Impaction
Q: How does efficiency change
with respect to dp?
a. Efficiency goes up as dp decreases
b. Efficiency goes down as dp decreases

Filtration Mechanisms
Interception

Fat Mans Misery,

Mammoth Cave NP

Filter efficiency for individual mechanism

and combined mechanisms
1.0

Efficiency

0.8
0.6
0.4

Interception
Impaction
Diffusion
Gravitation
Total

0.2
0.0
0.01

0.1

1
dp (m)

10

FILTRATION
Q: Do filters function just as a strainer,
collecting particles larger than the strainer
spacing?
a: yes
b: no

Fiber filter

Filter Drag Model

P Pf Pp Ps

Ks

K1V K 2 LVt V

Areal Dust Density W LVt

Ke

Filter drag

P
S
V

S Ke1 K 2sW

Ke & Ks to be determined empirically

Pf: fabric pressure drop
Pf: particle layer pressure drop
Ps: structure pressure drop
Q: What is the pressure drop after 100 minutes of
operation? L = 5 g/m3 and V = 0.9 m/min.

Time
(min)
0
5
10
20
30
60

P, Pa
150
380
505
610
690
990

Case A: Pore blocking

Case B: Pore plugging
Case C1: Pore narrowing
Case C2: Pore narrowing w/lost pore
Case D: Pore bridging

Air Filtration
Impaction
Diffusion

Straining (Interception)
Electrostatics

Fabric Filter
(Baghouse)
Same Principle As Home
Vacuum Cleaner
Air Can Be Blown Through Or
Pulled Through
Bag Material Varies According
To Exhaust Character

Bags

Cleaned gas

Dirty gas

Dust discharge
Baghouse Filter only one to remove hazardous fine particles

Advantages/Disadvantages
Very high collection efficiencies
Pressure drop reasonably low (at beginning of operation,
must be cleaned periodically to reduce)
Cant handle high T flows or moist environments

34

Pulse-Air-Jet Type
Baghouse

35

Baghouse

About Baghouses
Efficiency Up To 97+%
(Cyclone Efficiency 70-90%)
Can Capture Smaller Particles
Than A Cyclone
More Complex, Cost More To
Maintain Than Cyclones

Types of Baghouses
The three common types of baghouses
based on cleaning methods
a. Reverse-air
b. Shaker
c. Pulse-jet

Electrostatic Precipitators
Types include:

Dry, negatively charged

Wet-walled, negatively charged
Two-stage, positively charged

 ELECTROSTATIC PRECIPITATOR
Advantages of Electrostatic Precipitators
Electrostatic precipitators are capable very high efficiency, generally of
the order of 99.5-99.9%.
Since the electrostatic precipitators act on the particles and not on the air,
they can handle higher loads with lower pressure drops.
They can operate at higher temperatures.
The operating costs are generally low.

Disadvantages of Electrostatic Precipitators

The initial capital costs are high.
Although they can be designed for a variety of operating conditions, they
are not very flexible to changes in the operating conditions, once
installed.
Particulate with high resistivity may go uncollected.

http://www.ppcbio.com/ppcdespwhatis.htm

Electrostatic Precipitator Drawing

How An ESP Operates

ESPs
Electrostatic precipitator
More expensive to install,
Electricity is major operating cost
Higher particulate efficiency than
cyclones
Can be dry or wet
Plates cleaned by rapping
Creates solid-waste stream
Picture on next slide

44

Electrostatic Precipitator Concept

45

Electrostatic Precipitator

46

Cleaned gas
Electrodes

Dust discharge

Dirty gas
Electrostatic Precipitator static plates collect particles

Wet Type

Venturi
Static packed
Moving bed
Tray tower
Spray towers

Scrubbers
Gas Contacts A Liquid Stream
Particles Are Entrained In
The Liquid
May Also Be A Chemical
Reaction
Example: Limestone Slurry
With Coal Power Plant Flue Gas

Wet Particle Scrubbers

Particulate control by impaction,
interception with water droplets
Can clean both gas and particle
phases
High operating costs, high
corrosion potential

 WET SCRUBBERS (CONTD.)

Advantages of Wet Scrubbers
Wet Scrubbers can handle incoming streams at high temperature, thus
removing the need for temperature control equipment.
Wet scrubbers can handle high particle loading.
Loading fluctuations do not affect the removal efficiency.

They can handle explosive gases with little risk.

Gas adsorption and dust collection are handled in one unit.
Corrosive gases and dusts are neutralized.
Disadvantages of Wet Scrubbers
High potential for corrosive problems
Effluent scrubbing liquid poses a water pollution problem.

Venturi Scrubber

Detail illustrates cloud atomization from highvelocity gas stream shearing liquid at
52
throat

53

Vertical Venturi Scrubber

Packed Bed Scrubber

Dry Scrubber System

http://www.fkinc.com/dirctspraydry.htm#top

Tower Scrubber

Spray Towers
Water or other liquid washes out PM
Less expensive than ESP but more than
cyclone, still low pressure drop
Variety of configurations
Higher efficiency than cyclones
Creates water pollution stream
Can also absorb some gaseous
pollutants (SO2)
58

Spray Tower

59

Gaseous Pollutant Control

Absorption
Adsorption

Combustion

Control of Air Pollutants

Gaseous pollutants - Combustion
3 types of combustion systems commonly
utilised for pollution control
direct flame,
thermal, and
catalytic incineration systems

Control of Air Pollutants

Gaseous pollutants - Adsorption
physical adsorption to solid surfaces
Reversible - adsorbate removed from the
adsorbent by increasing temp. or lowering
pressure
widely used for solvent recovery in dry
cleaning, metal degreasing operations,
surface coating, and rayon, plastic, and
rubber processing

Control of Air Pollutants

Gaseous pollutants - Adsorption
limited use in solving ambient air pollution
problems with its main use involved in the
reduction of odour
Adsorbents with large surface area to
volume ratio (activated carbon) preferred
agents for gaseous pollutant control
Efficiencies to 99%

Carbon Adsorption
Will do demonstration shortly
Good for organics (VOCs)
Both VOCs and carbon can be
recovered when carbon is
regenerated (steam stripping)
Physical capture
Adsorption
Absorption

64

65

Adsorb

Absorb

66

Control of Air Pollutants

Gaseous pollutants - Absorption
Scrubbers remove gases by chemical
absorption in a medium that may be a liquid
or a liquid-solid slurry
water is the most commonly used scrubbing
medium
Additives commonly employed to increase
chemical reactivity and absorption capacity

Pollutants Of Interest
Volatile Organic Compounds
(VOC)
Nitrogen Oxides (NOx)
Sulfur Oxides (SOx)

Controlling Gaseous Pollutants: SO2 &

NOx
Modify Process (recall 3Ps)
Switch to low-sulfur coals
Desulfurize coal (washing, gasification)
Increase efficiency
Low-NOx burners
Recover and Reuse (heat)
staged combustion
flue-gas recirculation
69

Scrubbers / Absorbers
SO2 removal: FGD (flue gas desulfurization)
Lime/soda ash/citrate absorbing solutions
Can create useable by-product OR solid waste
stream
NOx removalcatalytic and non-catalytic
Catalyst = facilitates chemical reaction
Ammonia-absorbing solutions
Process controls favored over this technology
CO & CO2 removal
Some VOC removal
71

Flue Gas SOx Control

SOx Forms Sulfuric Acid With
Moisture In Air Producing
Acid Rain.
Remove From Flue Gas By
Chemical Reaction With
Limestone

Control Technologies for Nitrogen

Oxides
Preventive
minimizing operating
temperature
fuel switching
low excess air
flue gas recirculation
lean combustion
staged combustion
low Nox burners
secondary combustion
water/steam injection

Post combustion
selective catalytic reduction
selective non-catalytic
reduction
non-selective catalytic
reduction

Thermal Oxidizers
For VOC Control
Also Called Afterburners

Thermal Oxidation
Chemical change = burn
CO2 and H2O ideal end products of all processes
Flares (for emergency purposes)

Incinerators
Direct
Catalytic = improve reaction efficiency
Recuperative: heat transfer between inlet /exit gas
Regenerative: switching ceramic beds that hold
heat, release in air stream later to re-use heat
75

Two Types Of Oxidizer

Catalytic
Non-Catalytic

Thermal Oxidizer
(Non-Catalytic)

Catalytic Thermal Oxidizer

Biological Method
Uses Naturally Occurring
Bacteria (Bugs) To Break
Down VOC
Bugs Grow On Moist Media
And Dirty Gas Is Passed
Through. Bugs Digest The
VOC.
Result Is CO2 And H2O

A Bio Filter For VOC Removal

Other Technologies
High-temp ceramic filter
Operates at T > 500 F (limit for
baghouses)

E-beam flue gas treatment process

(Prof. A.Chmielewski)

Pollutants removed by EB method

The method has been designed for simultaneous removal of:
SO2
NOx
Cl, HF etc.
Volatile Organic Hydrocarbons (VOC)
Dioxins
Mercury
Others

Electron beam effect on gas, primary radiolysis products:

4.43N2 - 0.29N2* + 0.885N(2D) + 0.295N(2P) + 1.87N(4S) + 2.27N2+ +

0.69N+ + 2.96e-

5.377O2 - 0.077O2* + 2.25O(1D) + 2.8O(3P) + 0.18O* + 2.07O2+ +

1.23O+ + 3.3e-

7.33H2O - 0.51H2 + 0.46O(3P) + 4.25OH + 4.15H +1.99 H2O+ + 0.01H2+

+ 0.57OH+ + 0.67H+ + 0.06O+ + 3.3e-

7.54CO2 - 4.72CO + 5.16O(3P) + 2.24CO2+ + 0.51CO+ + 0.07C+ +

0.21O+ + 3.03 e-

Electron beam effect on gas, secondary reactions:

O(1D) + H2O - 2OH*

N2+ + 2H2O - H3O+ + OH*+ N2
O(3P) + O2+ M - O3+ M
e-+ O2 + M - O2-+ M
H3O+ + O2- - HO2*+ H2O

As a result of these primary and secondary reactions OH*,

HO2 *, O*radicals, O3and other oxidizing species are
formed, that can oxidize NO, SO2 and Hg.

SO2 removal pathways

Radiothermal:
SO2 + OH* + M - HSO3 + M
HSO3 + O2 - SO3 + HO2*
SO3 + H2O - H2SO4
H2SO4 + 2NH3 - (NH4)2SO4
Thermal:
SO2 + 2NH3 - (NH3)2SO2
(NH3)2SO2 - (NH4)2SO4

NOx removal pathways

NO oxidation
NO + O(3P) + M - NO2+ M
O(3P) + O2+ M - O3+ M
NO + O3+ M - NO2+ O2+ M
NO + HO2* + M - NO2+ OH* +M
NO + OH* + M - HNO2+M
HNO2+ OH* - NO2+ H2O
NO2removal
NO2+ OH* + M -HNO3+ M
HNO3+ NH3-NH4NO3

Reaction mechanisms and sequenceof E-beam process

H. Namba: Materials of UNDP(IAEA)RCA Regional Training Course on
Radiation Technology for Environmental Conservation TRCE-JAERI,
Takasaki,

VOC-decomposition and deodorization methods

Thermal Processes: 1-TO, Thermal Oxidation; 2-RTO, Regenerative Thermal Oxidation; 3Catalytic Oxidation with Recuperation. Filtering/Adsorption: 4-Biofilters; 5-Scrubber; 7Adsorption Container; 8-Concentrator Unit with TO; 9-Filtering. Non-thermal Oxidation: 6aElectrical Non-thermal oxidation; 6b-UVS Non-thermal Oxidation.

VOC-decomposition
Non-thermal plasmas:
Decomposition of contaminants without heating
Wide range of pollutants (Gases ... Particulate Matter PM)
Decomposition of organic PM
High efficiency for low contamination (e.g. deodorization), ([VOCs] < 1 g
Corg/m3)
Negative aspects:
High energy cost/molecule_ high energy for high concentrations
Uncompleted conversion and by-products _ low selectivity (CO2)
Deposition of polymer films in reactors _ unstable plasma source

Possibilities - indirect treatment, hybrid methods = combination of plasma with:

catalysts, scrubbing, adsorbents

VOC decomposition by O2 plasma

Aromatic VOC decomposition mechanism. Positive ions

charget transfer reactions

M++ RH = M + RH+
Radical neutral particles reactions
OH radical reactions
OH + C6H5CH3= R1(OH radical addition)
C6H5CH3+ OH = R2 + H2O ( H atom abstraction)
C6H6+ OH = C6H5OH + H (H atom elimination)
Organic radicals reactions
R + O2= RO2
2 RO2 = 2RO + O2
RO2 + NO = RO + NO2
RO + O2= HO2 + products ( aromatic-CHO, -OH)
RO - aliphatic products

R. Atkinson: Chem. Rev. 85(1985) 69

Non thermal plasma

PDC for deodorization (commercial)

1200

By-products
Material resources

CML 2001, Experts IKP (Central Europe)

1000

1099.7

Electricity

800

600

400

200
74.4

0
EBFGT

WFGD + SCR

Total weighed environmental impact of plasma and non-plasma end-of-pipe

pollutant treatment technologies: the comparison of technologies for SOx/NOx
removal. 1) Electron Beam Flue Gas Treatment (EBFGT) versus 2) Wet Flue Gas
Desulphurization with Selective Catalytic Reduction (WFGD+SCR

50

By-products
Material resources

CML 2001, Experts IKP (Central Europe)

Electricity

41.1

40

30

26.1

20

10
4.2

0
DBD plasma

Adsorption
(zeolite rotor)

Biofilttration

Total weighed environmental impact of plasma and non-plasma end-of-pipe

pollutant treatment technologies: the comparison of technologies for VOCs
removal. 1) Dielectric barrier discharge (DBD) versus 2) adsorption by zeolite (for
LCA) and molecular sieves (for CBA), 3) biofiltration,

Flue gas treatment method

MW unit

>300

Investment costs
/kW

Annual operation costs

/MW

32-45

1290-1577

Wet deSO2 + SCR

176-247

4786-5350

Wet deSO2 + SNCR

144-190

3870-4223

Investment costs
/kW

Annual operation costs

/MW

EBFGT

113

5167

WFGT+SCR

162

5343

EBFGT

Emission control method

unit

120 MW

Investment and operation costs of EBFGT and combination of conventional deSO2 and deNOx
Full Report on Eco-Efficiency of Plasma-Based technologies for Environmental Protection and
Report on cost-benefit analysis of plasma-based technologies are available at the PlasTEP
project website (http://www.plastep.eu/fileadmin/dateien/Outputs/OP3-2.1_Ecoefficiency_report.pdf, http://www.plastep.eu/fileadmin/datein/Outputs/120208_CBA.pdf).

Thank You for Your attention!