United States
                     Environmental Protection
                     Agency
Air and Energy Engineering
Research Laboratory
Research Triangle Park NC 27711
                    Research and Development
EPA/600/S7-86/040 Mar. 1987
&EPA         Project Summary
                    Reactivity  Study of S02 Control
                    with Atmospheric  and  Pressure
                    Hydrated Sorbents

                    B. J. Overmoe, J. M. McCarthy, S. L Chen, W. R. Seeker, and D. W. Pershing
                      The purpose of this  study was to
                    develop an understanding of the factors
                    that control the reactivity of hydrated
                    sorbents toward S02  in coal fired
                    furnaces. The study  focused on the
                    impacts of hydrate  properties  (e.g.,
                    particle size, surface area, and chemical
                    composition) and the furnace tempera-
                    ture of the injection location. A bench
                    scale  hydrator was  used to produce
                    atmospheric and pressure  hydrated
                    'sorbents, with parameters pertinent to
                    the hydration process varied.  The
                    chemical and physical properties were
                    characterized for these and several
                    commercially  available  hydrates, and
                    they were tested for  SO2 sorption re-
                    activity on bench (17.6 kW) and pilot
                    scale (300 kW) furnaces.
                      The results of this study indicate that
                    pressure hydrates generated under well
                    controlled  conditions were  more re-
                    active than  commercially produced
                    atmospheric  hydrates. The important
                    production and operating  parameters
                    for the pressure hydration process in-
                    cluded the size and composition of the
                    quicklime,  the hydration temperature
                    and pressure, the rate of water addition,
                    and the pressure progression  during
                    discharge. Comparison  of commercial
                    atmospheric  hydrates showed signifi-
                    cant differences in reactivity, ranging
                    from 40 to 58 percent at a calcium to
                    sulfur molar ratio of 2. All  hydrates,
                    atmospheric and pressure, exhibited a
                    strong  dependence  on  injection
                    temperature.
                      This Project Summary was developed
                    by EPA's Air and Energy Engineering
                    Research Laboratory, Research Triangle
                    Park, NC, to announce key findings of
the research project that Is fully docu-
mented In a separate report of the same
title (see Project Report ordering in-
formation at back).


Introduction
  The  purpose of this study  was to
develop an understanding of the factors
controlling the reactivity of hydrates to
capture S02 when injected into a coal
fired furnace. The approach taken was to
generate hydrates, both atmospheric and
pressure, under well controlled conditions
and compare their reactivity with that of
the corresponding quicklimes and parent
limestones. A bench scale hydrator was
designed and constructed to  produce
batches (about 9.07 kg each) of atmo-
spheric and pressure hydrated limes.
Parameters pertinent to the hydration
process were varied, and the hydrates
were characterized in terms  of surface
area, particle  size, and pore size distri-
butions. These prepared hydrated limes,
together with commercially  available
hydrates, were tested for S02 absorption
reactivity on both the bench scale (17.6
kW) Control Temperature Tower (CTT) and
the pilot scale (300 kW) Boiler Simulator
Furnace (BSF).

Commercial Atmospheric
Hydrates
  In order to determine the relative re-
activity of commercial atmospheric hy-
drates with SO2, several hydrates which
exhibited a variety of physical properties
and chemical compositions were screened
on the CTT. A natural gas flame doped
with  H2S was used to obtain an SO2

-------
concentration of 2000 ppm (dry, 0 percent
02). This is similar to the SO2 levels found
in a coal fired system. Previous results
had shown that the  sorbent  capture
potential was not dependent on the fuel
used. The sorbent was injected  at a gas
phase temperature of 1230°C, which has
been shown to be at or near the optimum
injection temperature for several calcium
hydrates.  Data obtained for the com-
mercial sorbents at a molar calcium to
sulfur ratio (Ca/S)  of  2 are shown in
Figure  1a,  with Vicron,  a limestone,
shown for comparison. The hydrates ex-
hibited a range of capture from 58 percent
for the Linwood hydrate to 40 percent for
the Colton hydrate.  The performance of
all of the hydrates was significantly better
than that of Vicron.
  The particle size  distributions for the
sorbents are shown in Figure  1b. The
reduced particle size for hydrates relative
to limestone is  evident. Although the
most reactive hydrate had  the largest
percentage of particles less than 10 urn,
no direct correlation between reactivity
and particle size  could be determined for
the atmospheric hydrates. Chemical ef-
fects may have contributed to the  rela-
tively poor performances of the  Kemikal
and Colton hydrates. Analysis  showed
that Kemikal was not completely hydrated,
which is detrimental to sorbent reactivity.
The high level of silicon in Colton likely
led to the formation of calcium silicates,
which prevent reaction between calcium
and S02.
  The sorbent injection temperature was
a major concern for the reactivity tests.
This temperature must be high enough to
promote rapid progression of the calcina-
tion and sulfation reactions, but excessive
temperatures could  hinder  the overall
process due to sorbent particle sintering
or hard-burning  of  the particle surface
prior  to sulfation. The influence of in-
jection temperature  on sulfur capture at
a Ca/S of 2 is shown  in Figure 2. The
tests were performed on the BSF,  with
10 percent of the total air used for sorbent
transport. The sorbent injection  location
was moved  down  the  length  of  the
furnace while a constant exhaust sample
location was maintained, thus the sorbent
had a longer residence time in the furnace
at higher injection temperatures. The data
exhibited a strong dependence on injec-
tion temperature, with  an optimum of
1260 to 1315°C observed for all sorbents.
The disparity in capture between the dif-
ferent hydrates found at  most tempera-
tures was negated when excessively high
injection temperatures were employed.
            O)

            I
            2»
            a
               60
               50
               40
               30
               20
               10
-
Linwood I

Mercer I

| Longview | j
CTT

| Kemikal


-------
c

I
Q.
ST
  to
   to
   I
   Q.
  o
       60
       50
       40
    30
       20
       JO
              BSF
                                                                                    90
                                                                                       .   CTT
Figure 2.
      1000    1100    1200    1300    1400    1500

                Injection Temperature, °C

Influence of injection temperature.
                                                                 1600
Reactivity Tests
  As  shown in Figure 2,  the  pressure
hydrate offered higher capture  than any
of the commercial atmospheric  hydrates,
and exhibited a similar dependence on
injection temperature. In Figure 3, data
obtained on the  CTT at  an  injection
temperature of 1230°C with coal as the
fuel are presented. The pressure hydrate
(PH) performed significantly  better than
the quicklime from which it was produced,
and also yielded consistently higher cap-
ture than the commercial atmospheric
hydrate (AH) obtained from the  same
supplier. A  consistent  level of capture
was observed for pressure hydrates from
three  facilities which  used the  same
conditions for hydration.


Hydration Impact on
Sorbent Properties
  The influence of hydration  on physical
properties of the quicklime is shown  in
Figure 4. The pressure hydration process
results in a finer particle size, as shown
in Figure 4a, as well as a  larger pore
                                      volume, shown  in  Figure 4b  Both  of
                                      these factors dimmish  diffusion effects
                                      and result in enhanced sorbent reactivity
                                      The large peaks in Figure 4b at a pore
                                      diameter greater than  01. Mm can be
                                      attributed  to  interparticle voids  rather
                                      than actual  pores
                                        Pressure  hydrates were more reactive
                                      than quicklime or atmospheric hydrates
                                      One apparent advantage of  the  pres-
                                      sunzation process is that the quicklime
                                      hydrates more readily than under atmo-
                                      spheric  pressure Commercial manufac-
                                      turers generally recycle the atmospheric
                                      hydrate or remove unwanted material to
                                      attain a product hydrated in excess of 90
                                      percent  Pressure and atmospheric hydra-
                                      tion  of  a Longview  quicklime partially
                                      hydrated by atmospheric moisture yielded
                                      93 and 80 percent Ca(OH)2, respectively
                                      The sorbents were screened for reactivity
                                      on the CTT at an injection temperature of
                                      1230°C with the results shown in the left
                                      half  of  Figure 5 The different relative
                                      amount of hydrate present could account
                                      for the increased reactivity of the pressure
                                      hydrate The  right half of Figure 5 is  a
                                                                                    80 -
                                                                                    70
                                                                      o>
                                                                      CJ

                                                                      Q.
                                                                      
-------
    100
     SO
 I   60
 I
 I   40
     20
                                           EER Lmwood PH
        100    50               10         5              1
                       fa) Equivalent Spherical Diameter, nm
                                05
                                0.05             001
                                fb) Pore Diameter, fjm
                0.005
                               0001
\\ve to quicklime Both of these factors
enhance the sulfation reaction by dimin-
ishing diffusion effects The reactivity of
pressure  hydrates  was  dependent on
several  hydration parameters which in-
cluded the quicklime particle size and
extent of  hydration, the  mixing rate of
quicklime  with water,  the discharge
method,  and  the  process pressure,
temperature, and water stoichiometry A
deviation from the baseline condition for
any of these  variables resulted in  de-
creased reactivity Reactivity did not cor-
relate with hydrate  surface area, but did
correlate  with  the  surface  area of  the
calcined hydrate, with  an  increase  in
reactivity associated with a higher surface
area  Hydrated limes show considerable
promise for reduction of SO? from boilers,
with reductions in excess of 50 percent
possible
Figure 4.    Influence of hydration on particle and pore size distributions
 resulted in the more reactive sorbent due
 to a correspondingly  finer hydrate. The
 slower  mixing  rate between water and
 quicklime associated  with a  long water
 addition time and non-isobanc discharge
 of the hydrated product were also detri-
 mental  to sorbent reactivity. Analyses
 showed that the more reactive sorbent
 exhibited a finer particle size distribution.
 While this is not the only property which
 controls sorbent reactivity, it is a physical
 property of primary importance

 Conclusions
  The results of this  study supplied in-
 formation  on the  reactivity of various
 calcium based  sorbents toward SO2 m a
 coal fired furnace and determined factors
which influence the reactivity of calcium
hydrates Hydrated sorbents were judged
superior to limestone and quicklime for
the capture of SO2 from exhaust gases,
with the capture at a molar  Ca/S of 2
ranging from  40  to  58 percent for a
series  of  commercial atmospheric hy-
drates.  The  variations in  capture were
due to  both chemical and physical dif-
ferences between the sorbents. A pres-
sure hydrated  sorbent produced  under
controlled conditions offered slightly
higher capture. The performance of hy-
drates was  strongly dependent  on the
gas phase temperature  at the injection
location  with  an  optimum  of  about
1260°C  Hydrates showed a decreased
particle size  and increased porosity rela-
                                     4

-------
        50
        40
   Q.


   8

   2    30
   Q.
        20
        JO
                      EERPH
                           EERAH
                                                 Commercial AH
                                                                   EERPH
                                          Ca/S


Figure 5.    Influence of hydration on reactivity (Longview).

-------
    60
    SO

 o
 to
    30
    20
    10
              i        i
                     Coarse
           Quicklime Size
              i       i
                                    8Min.
                                              30 /M/n.
Water Addition Time
    i       i
                             Isobsric
                                                                Non-lsobaric
Discharge Method
              12               12
                                       Ca/S
Figure 6.   Impact of hydration process variables.
  B. J. Overmoe, J. M. McCarthy, S. L. Chen, W. /?. Seeker, and D. W. Pershing
    are with Energy and Environmental Research Corporation, Irvine, CA 92718-
    2798.
  Brian K. Gullett is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
  The complete report, entitled "Reactivity Study of SO* Control with Atmospheric
    and Pressure Hydrated Sorbents," (Order No. PB 87-129 250/AS;  Cost:
    $18.95, subject to change) will be available only from:
          National Technical Information Service
          5285 Port Royal Road
          Springfield. VA 22161
           Telephone: 703-487-4650
  The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
          Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory
          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
          Research Triangle Park. NC 27711

-------
United States                         Center for Environmental Research
Environmental Protection               Information
Agency                              Cincinnati OH 45268
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use S300

EPA/600/S7-86/040
           0000329

-------