SEPA
                                   United States
                                   Environmental Protection
                                   Agency
                                   Industrial Environmental Research
                                   Laboratory
                                   Research Triangle Park NC 27711
                                   Research and Development
                                   EPA-600/S7-82-026   June 1982
Project  Summary
                                   Mechanisms  <*£  Dry  SO2
                                   Control  Processes
                                  Cathy Apple and Mary€.
                                                            ..,
                                    This report identifies and eyptua&s
                                   the  postulated physical^rlanges,  .
                                   chemical  reactions, antf" reaction^X
                                   mechanisms involved in two dry flue*'
                                   gas  desulfurization  (FGD) technolo-
                                   gies: line spray drying and dry injec-
                                   tion of  sodium compounds.'"^pftjcs
                                   covered are: (1) chemical reactions
                                   and  physical changes, (2) proposed
                                   reaction mechanisms and mathemati-
                                   cal models, (3) process parameters
                                   which affect the reactions and rate
                                   controlling steps, and (4) needs for
                                   additional data to verify the proposed
                                   mechanisms and the effects of the
                                   various process parameters. The infor-
                                   mation used in developing this report
                                   was obtained  from a review of pub-
                                   lished articles and technical papers.
                                    The reactions involved in lime spray
                                   drying are gas-liquid phase reactions.
                                   SOz removal depends on the moisture
                                   content of the drying  lime slurry
                                   droplet. Initially, the moisture content
                                   of the droplet is high and the rate of
                                   reaction is controlled by the diffusion
                                   of SO2  to the surface of the slurry
                                   droplet. It appears that the greatest
                                   amount of SOa is removed at this time,
                                   and  Babcock and Wilcox has mathe-
                                   matically modelled SOa removal
                                   during this period. As the moisture
                                   content of the droplet is reduced by
                                   evaporation,  the  dissolution of
                                   Ca(OH)2 into ions becomes  the rate
                                   limiting factor. SO2 removal by the
                                   spray-dried solids is limited by the
                                   dissolution of Ca(OH)a  and by the
                                   diffusion of SO2 through the CaSO3 •
                                   1/2H2O product that has precipitated
                                   on the surface of the lime particle.
                                                                        y
                                    The reactions involved  in the  re-
                                   moval of SO2 by the dry injection of
                                   finely ground sodium compounds  are
                                   gas-solid phase reactions.  Two steps
                                   are involved in the removal of SO2: (1)
                                   NaHCO3 is thermally decomposed to
                                   Na2CO3 (producing small pores in  the
                                   sorbent particles, which increase  the
                                   available surface area and the  re-
                                   activity  of the sorbent); and (2)  the
                                   SO2 reacts with Na2CO3 to produce
                                   Na2SO3 (beginning at the  surface of
                                   the  particle  and  moving inward,
                                   leaving behind a layer of reacted ash
                                   which tends to  plug the  pores that
                                   were formed by thermal decomposi-
                                   tion, reducing the reactivity of the
                                   sorbent). Therefore, it  has  been
                                   postulated that  initially the rate of
                                   reaction is controlled by the thermal
                                   decomposition of NaHCO3 to NaaCOs
                                   and then becomes controlled by the
                                   diffusion of SO2 through the ash layer.
                                   Mathematical  models describing SO2
                                   removal for these cases can be derived
                                   from the classical  unreacted core
                                   model.
                                    This Project Summary was devel-
                                   oped by EPA's Industrial Environ-
                                   mental Research Laboratory, Research
                                   Triangle Park, NC, to announce key
                                   findings of the research project that is
                                   fully documented in a separate report
                                   of the same title (see Project Report
                                   ordering information at back).

                                   Summary
                                    This report identifies and evaluates
                                   the postulated physical changes, chem-
                                   ical reactions, and reaction mechanisms
                                   involved in dry flue gas desulfurization

-------
(FGD). Basically, this work is a review of
the available published theories describ-
ing the reactions involved in lime spray
drying and  dry  injection of sodium
compounds.  The  topics covered  in this
report are:

  • The physical changes and chemical
    reactions that occur in  the dry
    scrubbing systems
  • Proposed reaction mechanisms
    and mathematical models.
  • Process  parameters  which affect
    the reactions and the rate controll-
    ing steps
  • Additional data needed to verify or
    expand  on the proposed mechan-
    isms and the effects of the various
    process parameters

  The  information  used in developing
this report was obtained from previously
published articles and technical papers
Much of the information was  obtained
from papers presented at the October
1980 EPA  Symposium on Flue  Gas
Desulfurization.
  The  information  on spray drying is
more complete and consistent than the
information  on  dry injection.  Spray
drying  has  been  investigated  more
thoroughly and is presently being
applied to commercial-scale units. Dry
injection is  still  being  investigated on
the pilot scale,  although  recent tests
have been  conducted  on a  system
designed to treat 20 MWe equivalent of
flue gas.1
  Note that the term stoichiometry used
in this report represents  the moles of
fresh sorbent introduced to the system
divided by the moles of SC>2 entering the
system. For lime, the moles of sorbent is
based on the equivalent males of  CaO
introduced, and for sodium compounds
the moles of sorbent is based  on the
equivalent moles of NazO entering the
system. This method of describing dry
scrubbing stoichiometry  is commonly
used by system vendors, and the results
they report are based on this definition.
The  conventional  FGD definition for
stoichiometry in wet systems  is the
moles of sorbent  introduced  to the
system divided  by the moles of  SC>2
removed by the system. Compared with
the  conventional  FGD  definition of
stoichiometry, the definition used by dry
scrubbing vendors  makes the system
look more favorable because it does not
account for SC>2  removal efficiency.
However, note that the dry scrubbing
definition of stoichiometry is the same
definition that is  conventionally used in
chemistry (i.e., the moles of A needed to
react  completely  with  B without ac-
counting for efficiency).

Lime Spray Drying
  Spray drying involves contacting SO2-
laden flue gas with an atomized sorbent
slurry in a  spray dryer The SO2  is
absorbed by the slurry droplets, while
the droplets are dried by the hot flue gas.
An ESP or fabric filter is used to collect
the dried solids exiting the spray dryer.
  Information  on dry  FGD  with lime
spray drying was evaluated to determi ne
the reactions and reaction mechanisms
involved in the  removal of SC>2. The
results of pilot-scale lime spray drying
tests were examined to establish the
reaction mechanisms  and rate con-
trolling steps. Proposed qualitative and
quantitative models  describing the
spray drying  process were also  eval-
uated.  Additionally,  the  important
process parameters affecting the  spray
drying  reactions were qualitatively
evaluated to determine their influence
on the  rate  controlling steps of the
reaction and  on the degree of S02
removal achievable. Finally, data gaps
in published literature were identified.
These data gaps prevent complete
verification  and  expansion of the
proposed models.

Qualitative and Quantitative
Reaction Models for Lime
Spray  Drying
  Models developed  for lime spray
drying  must take into account the
simultaneous physical  changes and
chemical reactions that occur in the
spray dryer.  The overall chemical
reaction takes place  between the
gaseous S02 and the dissoluted lime
sorbent  to  form calcium sulfate and
sulfite salts:
(1 )
  Ca(OH)2(s)
  CaSOa • 1/2H2O(S, + 3/2 H2Om
  CaSO3 • 1/2H2O(Si + 1/2O2 + 3/2
  HaOm^CaSO • = 2H2Ois,       (2)

Simultaneously, the reaction surface is
physically changed as the slurry droplet
dries.
  The reactions that occur are basically
gas-liquid phase reactions, because
moisture must be present for the
reactions to  occur. Thus, the moisture
content and composition of the slurry
droplet dur.ing and after  drying are
extremely important in determining the
nature of the rate controlling steps. The
slurry droplet  is typically composed of
       many small  particles of porous solid
       lime in an aqueous medium. As  the
       slurry droplet dries,  water evaporates
       from its surface, leaving behind a solid
       agglomerate composed mainly of sulfite
       and sulfate product solids and unreacted
       lime. The dried solids also may contain
       significant amounts of residual moisture,
       depending on the length of drying time
       and the approach to saturation at  the
       dryer outlet.
         The most widely accepted qualitative
       model suggests  that the chemical
       reactions that occur  are intimately
       linked to three stages of droplet drying.2
       These  drying stages have been char-
       acterized as:
         • Constant rate period. The greatest
           amount of water  is evaporated from
           the droplet during this period, and
           drying  is controlled by the  rate of
           diffusion of water vapor from  the
           saturated surface of the droplet.
         • First falling rate period. During this
           period, the lime particles  in  the
           slurry droplet begin  to touch one
           another due to the loss of moisture,
           and drying is controlled by the rate
           of diffusion of water vapor from an
           unsaturated surface.
         • Second falling rate period.  Drying
           during this period  is controlled by
           the rate  of diffusion of moisture
           through  and around  the  tightly
           packed lime particles.
         During the constant  rate stage of
       drying, the rate of SO2 removal appears
       to be  controlled by the diffusion of the
       S02 in the flue gas to the surface of the
       slurry droplet. The reaction that occurs
       between the gaseous SCbandthewater
       in the droplet  is characterized by  the
       following equation:
                S02(g)
                  S02
                             :(aql
(3)
As evaporation proceeds during the two
falling  rate  periods,  less water  is
available for the dissolution of the solid
Ca(OH)2 into ions; therefore the dissolu-
tion of the Ca(OH)2 becomes the rate
limiting factor.3
  If the  spray-dried solids maintain
adequate moisture, further  reaction
may continue in  the downstream
collection device. This is  termed the
pseudo-equilibrium period. Reactions
during this period are limited by the rate
of diffusion of S02 through the CaS03 •
1/2 H20 that has formed on the surface of
the lime particles and through the pore
system of the lime particles.
  This  qualitative model provides the
basis for development of theoretical and

-------
empirical quantitative (mathematical)
models. Once these models have been
evaluated and verified against test data,
they can  be used with confidence to
predict  S02 removal  under given
conditions
  A mathematical model was developed
by Babcock and  Wilcox (B&W)4 to
characterize  the  reactions that occur
during the constant rate drying period.
The  qualitative model states that  the
rate  of reaction  is controlled by  the
diffusion of S02 to the  slurry droplets
during this period. From this assump-
tion  the  following mathematical rela-
tionship was developed:
         r   tP   i
          Tin-Tsat
                     0.62
(4)
where  E = SO2 removal efficiency, frac-
           tion
    Tsat =Adiabatic saturation tem-
           perature of the flue gas, °F*
    Tin  = Inlet temperature of the
           flue gas, °F
    tp    = Approach  to the adiabatic
           saturation  temperature  at
           the spray dryer outlet (Tout-
           Tsat), °F
    Tout = Spray dryer outlet tempera-
           ture of the flue gas, °F

  Test data obtained  by Buell2 at the
Martin Drake Station seem to show that
the model  is valid for relatively large
spray dryers (greater than 8,500 acfm),
but it  underpredicted S02  removal  at
B&W's Alliance Research Center 1500
acfm spray dryer.4 These  conflicting
results may be due to the different spray
dryer designs  used by Buell and B&W,
or they may be due to "wall effects."
These wall effects involve chemical
reactions between the S02 and the lime
that coats the walls of the spray dryer.
This coating provides sites for additional
S02 removal. There is  more wall surface
area per molecule of gas in a small spray
dryer,  so that more reaction sites are
available per SOa molecule. Therefore,
under the same test conditions greater
S02 removal  would be expected in a
small dryer.
  Another  mathematical model devel-
oped by B&W correlates S02 removal
efficiency with the stoichiometric ratio
The model states that
            E = 1-e"
(5)
 'English Engineering  units are used, Metric-
 English conversion factors are given in the
 Appendix
where: E  = SO2  removal  efficiency,
           fraction
       SR = Stoichiometric ratio =

            moles CaO in
            moles SO2 in

       K'  = Correlation coefficient

The  variable K' is  a function of  the
specific surface of  the lime (in  ft2 of
surface per Ib of lime) and the residence
time of the flue gas in the spray dryer.
Test data collected by B&W4 and Buell2,
utilizing a  close approach to saturation
temperature  and S02 concentrations
less than  2000  ppm, fit  the above
relationship extremely well. Therefore,
it seems that this general  correlation
can  be used  to  predict  SO2  removal
efficiency for these operating conditions.

Process Parameters Affecting
the Lime Spray Drying
Reactions
  It has been postulated that the spray
drying reaction rate is controlled initially
by the diffusion of S02 into the droplet
and  then  becomes controlled by  the
dissolution of Ca{OH)2 into ions. The
rate of dissolution of Ca(OH)2 changes
as the slurry droplet dries. Initially, Ca++
and OH~ ions saturate the slurry droplet
and  are easily dissoluted,  but as  the
droplet dries  dissolution  becomes
limited by the amount of moisture left in
the  droplet.  Therefore,  three major
processes can be postulated:

  1) Gas-phase SO2 absorption into
     the slurry droplet.
  2) Ca(OH)2 dissolution  in the slurry
     droplet.
  3) Ca(OH)2 dissolution  in the spray-
     dried solid.
The  parameters  that  affect these
processes  are presented below
  Both the approach to saturation
temperatures and the size of the initial
slurry droplet affect mass transfer
during these three processes and  are
therefore crucial process variables. The
process variables can be categorized as1

  1) Variables affecting SO2  mass
     transfer into the slurry droplet—
       Approach to saturation temper-
       ature.
       Size of the slurry-droplet method
       of atomization.
       Mixing of the gas  and droplets.
       Residence time of flue gas in the
       dryer.
       Inlet SCb concentration.
       Inlet flue gas temperature.
   2) Variables affecting  Ca++ mass
     transfer in the slurry droplet—
        Stoichiometric ratio.
        Approach to saturation temper-
        ature.
        Size of the slurry droplet.
        Residence time of flue gas in the
        dryer.
   3) Variables affecting  Ca++ mass
     transfer in the spray-dried solids—
        Approach to saturation temper-
        ature.
        Size of the initial slurry droplet.
        Slaking.
        Stoichiometric ratio.
        Off-product recycle.

   These variables and their effects are
 discussed  briefly in  the  following
 sections.

 Approach to Saturation
   Operating the spray dryer outlet at a
 close approach to saturation  tempera-
 ture increases the residual  moisture
 level  in the  spray-dried  solids  and
 affects all three mass transfer processes.
 The closer the approach to saturation
 temperature, the cooler  and  more
 humid the flue gas becomes. Increased
 humidity lengthens the evaporation
 period and also increases the amount of
 moisture retained by the solids. By
 reducing the outlet temperature from
 the spray dryer by 10°F (from a 30°F
 approach to 20°F),  S02 removal ef-
 ficiency  can be increased by approxi-
 mately 10 percent5.
Slurry Droplet Size -
Method of Atomization
  The  size of  the slurry droplets also
affects all three mass transfer processes.
The  spray of  slurry droplets  must be
finely  atomized to provide the large
surface area  required for rapid S02
absorption. However, the droplets must
be large enough so that they do not dry
out  before a  satisfactory degree of
reaction has  occurred,  the  reaction
being highly dependent on the presence
of water. (The drying time varies with
the  square  of the initial  droplet
diameter.)4 Typically,  1  ft3 of  reagent
properly atomized has a surface area of
18,000 ft2.6  Proper atomization  is
extremely  important for mass transfer
during  the pseudo-equilibrium period,
where  the spray-dried solids exit the
spray dryer with an equilibrium moisture
content, because the size of the final
agglomerate is directly  related to the
initial droplet size.

-------
Residence Time
  The effect of residence time is most
important  during  the first  two mass
transfer processes, SO2  mass transfer
to the slurry droplet and Ca++ mass
transfer in the slurry droplet, because it
determines the amount of time the flue
gas and slurry droplets will be in contact
in the spray dryer. The flow rate of gas
through the  absorber must  be high
enough for efficient mixing of the gas
and spray, but not so high that a proper
degree  of drying cannot occur  in the
chamber. The residence time, defined
as the chamber volume  divided  by the
absorber outlet gas flow volume, must
be controlled to an optimum value so
that high  SOa removal  rates are ob-
tained. The slower the drying process,
the longer surface moisturewill existon
the droplet, allowing for  more reaction.

Stoichiometric  Ratio
  The Stoichiometric ratio  is most
important during  the last  two mass
transfer processes, those that involve
Ca++ mass transfer. The stoichiometry
determines the amount of lime that will
be present to react with the S02 and
significantly  affects SOa removal in
spray drying. The relationship between
SOa removal efficiency andthe Stoichio-
metric ratio (SR)  is  expressed by the
proposed mathematical model.4
           E = 1 -e"
(5)
This model proposesthat SOa removal is
a function of Stoichiometric ratio. Pilot
spray dryer test data is well correlated to
the mathematical model; thus, it would
appear that  the  model  is valid for the
operating conditions  used in these
tests.
  The obvious method for increasing
SOa removal would be  to increase the
lime  stoichiometry,  but  there  are
several factors which limit the amount
of lime which can be  added. First of all,
the amount  of slurry  that can be added
to the flue gas is set by energy balance
considerations to ensure the solids will
be properly dried Secondly, the amount
of lime that can be added to the slurry is
limited,  because  an  upper limit  is
reached on the weight percent of lime in
the slurry.  Finally, the effect  of the
Stoichiometric ratio  on SOa removal
efficiency begins  to level off at SR
values greater than 3.0

Droplet - Gas Mixing
  Mixing of  the slurry droplets and the
flue gas affectsthe mass transfer of S02
to the droplet. To  provide  for good
contact between the flue gas and the
slurry droplets, intimate mixing must be
achieved. This requires fineatomization
of the slurry droplets, as well as proper
gas flow patterns. Some designs rely on
gas  dispersers placed  around  the
atomizer  that impart a swirling down-
ward motion to the gas. These  gas
dispersers cause the slurry droplets and
spray-dried solids to be carried along m
the helical  pattern of the  entering  flue
gas. This helps to ensure more complete
mixing of the slurry droplets and  flue
gas as it passes through the chamber.7
Another design also includes a "central
gasdisperser" that ducts part of the flue
gas flow  up toward the atomizer

Lime Slaking
  The quality  of the  slaking process
determines how large,  porous,  and
reactive  the  lime  particles are.  The
amount of pore surface area is important
for  reaction to  proceed  in the spray-
dried solids. Therefore, slaking has the
greatest effect on the mass transfer of
Ca++  in  the  spray-dried solids.  The
techniques used in the slaking of  lime
can significantly affect its reactivity and
surface area. Thus, slaking methods are
among the first important design con-
siderations in a dry scrubbing system.
Slaking involves hydratmg the lime to
form calcium hydroxide in the presence
of  excess water,  as described by
Equation 6.2

CaOisi + HaOm - Ca(OH)2ISi +
27,500 Btu/lb-mole               (6)

When high calcium, soft-burned pebble
lime  is slaked with clean water  at a
water-to-lime ratto of 3:1 or 4:1,  the
lime pebbles rapidly disintegrate in an
explosive, chain-slaking reaction. This
produces a si urry of extremely fine (0.5 -
4.0 /jm),  porous slaked lime particles
suspended in water with a large total
surface area, which is ideal for use in
the  spray  absorption process.2  The
water used for slaking must be of good
quality. The water should not only be
softened  to prevent scaling problems,
but it must be low in sulfates and other
chemicals which can cause a reduction
in the reactivity of the lime.  For  best
results, slaking  should take place  at a
relatively constant temperature of 190-
200° F.2
                                               droplet. The inlet SOa concentration has
                                               only a moderate affect on S02 removal
                                               over the range of concentrations which
                                               have been investigated and for which
                                               data are available.

                                               Flue Gas Inlet Temperature
                                                 The inlet temperature of the flue gas
                                               affects S02  diffusion  and,  therefore,
                                               influences the mass transfer of S02 to
                                               the slurry droplet. Contradicting results
                                               have been obtained regarding the effect
                                               of the flue gas inlet temperature on S02
                                               removal efficiency. In a test  performed
                                               by Babcock  and Wilcox,  the  inlet
                                               temperature was reduced from 280°Fto
                                               230°F at a  constant  approach to
                                               saturation of 20°F.5 The decrease in
                                               temperature  resulted in a  10-percent
                                               decrease in S02  removal efficiency.
                                               However, a series of tests performed by
                                               Buell indicate that the inlet gas temper-
                                               ature  has a negligible effect  on SOa
                                               removal.2
                                                 The mathematical model  developed
                                               by B&W,
                                                 =1-  r   tp    i
                                                       Tin-Tsat
                   0.62
                               (4)
       Inlet SOa Concentration
         The concentration of SOa in the flue
       gas that enters the spray dryer affects
       the mass transfer of SO2 to the slurry
predicts that higher flue gas  inlet
temperature will result in higher SOa
removal  efficiency. An attempt was
made to numerically evaluate the effect
of changing the inlet flue gas tempera-
ture by using this mathematical model.
Since  it is difficult to assess the
adiabatic saturation temperature with-
out knowing the flue gas humidity, this
temperature was assumed to be 125°F.
A reduction  in the flue  gas  inlet
temperature from 280 to 230°F, at a
constant approach of 20°F, results in a
decrease in SOa removal efficiency of 8
percent. This seems to  support the
results of the test performed by B&W.
Further  testing  may be required to
clarify the effect  of  inlet flue gas
temperature on SOa collection efficiency.

Spray-Dried Off-Product Recycle
  The use  of off-product  (reacted and
unreacted sorbent and fly ash) recycle
may provide more available lime surface
which  allows for increased  mass
transfer of Ca++ in the spray-dried solids.
Recycling of the spray dryer off-product
permits the reuse  of unreacted lime
reagent,  and if the fly ash is high in
available alkalinity,  it may reduce the
amount of required lime by substituting
fly  ash  alkalinity  for  lime.6  Fly ash
recycle  may improve spray dryer per-
formance in two ways: (1) by providing

-------
available alkalinity, and (2) by acting as a
surface catalyst  to enhance the lime-
SO2 reaction.  The fly  ash acts  as a
surface catalyst by providing an alternate
site  for CaSO3  to  precipitate,  thus
decreasing the solid deposits  on the
lime particles  which cause  increased
resistance to mass transfer.
  Since making  additional alkaline
material available for reaction with S02
is the primary objective of recycling part
of the off-product, care must be taken in
the design of the recycle system so that
the maximum benefit is realized. The pH
of  the  slurry  to which the recycle
material is added must  be sufficiently
low so that a reasonable amount of the
recycle alkali will go into solution. Tests
performed by Buell showed that if off-
product was added to the  lime slurry,
which was saturated with Ca(OH)2 at a
pH  of  12,  no  measurable benefit
resulted, regardless  of  the  amount of
process off-product  added. When a
separate slurry of process off-product
and  water alone was  prepared in a
separate tank and mixed with the lime
slurry at the point of injection to the
absorber, however, considerable bene-
fit  resulted.2

Fabric Filter versus ESP
Paniculate Collection
  For the spray drying system either an
ESP or a  fabric  filter can  be used to
remove particulates from  the spray
dryer exhaust  to meet environmental
emission  requirements The type of
paniculate collection device used will
influence  mass transfer in  the spray-
dried solids. Some tests have shown
that the downstream collection device
can  increase  the total system SO2
removal by approximately 10 percent.8
  Initially,  it was felt that a fabric filter
would provide better SC>2 removal than
an  ESP,6  and only one commercial
system purchased to date uses an ESP;
the rest use fabric filters. As the fabric
filter operates,  a cake of the spray-dried
solids builds up on the filter. If this cake
contains unreactedsorbent, itcanactto
remove S02 as  the  flue gas  passes
through the filter. However, test results
obtained by B&W at the Jim Bndger
Station have shown that both ESPs and
fabric filters provide about the same
degree of S02 removal.5
  One of  the advantages of using  an
ESP instead of a  fabric filter is that the
ESP allows the spray dryer  to  be
operated at a  closer approach to the
saturation temperature without causing
maintenance problems in the collection
device. A closer approach  to  the
saturation temperature  will provide
greater SO2 removal in the spray dryer.
ESPs have been found to perform very
well in collecting the particulates from
the spray dryer exhaust. The spray-dried
product  does  not build up on  the
discharge  and  collecting electrodes.
Due to the humidity of the flue gas, the
fly  ash becomes conditioned, which
results in  higher particulate migration
velocities than would be expected. Also,
the  low outlet  temperature from the
spray dryer reduces the resistivity of the
fly  ash.  In addition,  ESPs can  be
operated  at  lower system pressure
drops than fabric filters.
  Fabric filters have also been found to
collect the spray-dried solids very well.
The main  advantage of a baghouse is
that  it is a  bulk collection device
whereas  an ESP is  a percentage
collector. Tests on recirculation have at
times produced dust loading as high as
25  gr/ft3  as  an extreme condition. If
environmental restrictions were to call
for  a maximum outlet loading of 0.01
gr/ft3, the precipitation efficiency would
have to be 99.96 percent - a number
that may  be  difficult to  achieve con-
sistently with a  precipitator in a power
plant. Properly designed baghouses, on
the other hand, should be able to meet a
0.01 gr/ft3 outlet emission regardless of
inlet loading.  In addition, the cost of an
ESP for the above duty could be far more
than the comparable baghouse, and the
baghouse will generally be more reliable
in producing low opacity.6
Data Gaps in Literature

  To test the  proposed mathematical
models and the effects of the variables
listed above,  detailed test data are
required.  Much  of the published test
data lack detailed and complete infor-
mation  on  inlet SC>2 concentration,
stoichiometric ratio,  or  approach to
saturation.

  There is a  particular lack of informa-
tion on spray dryer performance when
the SO2 concentration exceeds 2500 -
3000 ppm S02. This  information is
necessary to test the  applicability of
lime spray drying for use in units firing
coals containing more than 3 percent
sulfur. Additional analysis mightalsobe
required  to resolve conflicting theories
on the effects of certain variables (e g.,
inlet gas temperature,  off-product
recycle) on SO2 removal efficiency.
Dry Injection of
Sodium Compounds
  Dry injection involves contacting SO2-
laden flue gas with a dry sorbent. The
sorbent is pneumatically injected into
the duct carrying the flue gas and/or
precoated on fabric filter bags. The SC>2
is removed  from the flue gas by
adsorption by the sorbent.
  Information on dry injection of sodium
compounds was evaluated to charac-
terize the reactions and reaction mech-
anisms involved in the desulfurization
process. The sodium sorbents that were
investigated were nahcolite ore  (pre-
dominantly  NaHCOs) and trona ore
(Na2CO3 • NaHCOs • 2H2O). The results
of laboratory-  and pilot-scale dry
injection tests  were  evaluated to
establish the  reaction  mechanism and
rate controlling steps. There was a great
deal of inconsistency in  the experi-
mental results, which madeitdifficultto
draw conclusions about the dry injec-
tion  process  However, qualitative and
quantitative models describing the dry
injection process have been proposed '
and  are presented in  this  report. In
addition, important process parameters
which  influence the  dry  injection
reactions were qualitatively evaluated.
Finally, data gaps and conflicting results
identified in  published  literature are
discussed to  identify  areas that  may
require further investigation.

Qualitative and Quantitative
Reaction Models for Sodium
Compound Dry Injection
  The dry injection reactions that occur
when  the SO2 is contacted with the
sorbent are strictly gas-solid phase
reactions. The overall chemical reac-
tions that occur during dry injection for
nahcolite and trona, respectively,  are:
(7)
  2CO2(gl+H2O,g,
2(Na2C03 •  NaHC03 • 2H20) (s> + 3S02(g)
+ 3/2 O2(g) - 3Na2SO4(S> + 4CO2(g) +
5H2O,g,                           (8)

These reactions  do not occur in the
single steps written above, but instead
involve  a series of three steps:  (1)
thermal  decomposition of NaHCOs to
Na2C03, (2)  reaction between Na2CO3
and  S02 to form  Na2S03, and  (3)
oxidation of Na2S03 to Na2S04 Several
changes in  the physical characteristics
of the  sorbent  accompany these
reactions.

-------
  When the NaHCO3 is thermally de-
composed  to Na2C03,  small pores
(approximately 0.3 /jm  in diameter)
develop in the sorbent particle as H2O
and 062 gas are evolved. These pores
provide an  increased surface area for
chemical reaction, thus increasing the
reactivity of the sorbent. The rate of
decomposition of NaHCOs is extremely
temperature dependent, and temper-
atures between 300 and 600°F  are
required for adequate  pore develop-
ment.
  Test results have shown that trona is
less reactive  than nahcolite.10 It is
postulated that trona is less reactive
because it already  contains 1  mole of
Na2CC>3 for every  mole of NaHCOs
present. Therefore, trona does  not
contain as much NaHCOa as nahcolite,
and the decomposition of the sorbent
does not generate as much pore volume
per particle of trona. It has been found
that the sorbent  with  the greatest
amount of sodium bicarbonate (NaHCOa)
parts for total sodium parts present will
generally be the most effective for S02
removal.
  The  reaction of  the  SO2 with  the
sodium sorbent proceeds from  the
exterior of the sorbent particle inward,
leaving behind an inert layer of Na2S04
on the surface  of the sorbent particle.
The molar volume  of this reacted  Na2
S04 layer is approximately 26 percent
greater than the molar volume of the
unreacted Na2C03.7This increase in the
molar volume tends to plug the internal
pores  that  were  generated by  the
decomposition  of the sorbent. The
plugging of the pores tends to reduce
the reactivity of the sorbent. Scanning
electron micrographs (SEMs) of halved
sorbent particles recovered after reac-
tion with SO2 showed a surface zone of
Na2SO4, an intermediate reaction zone,
and a central unreacted core of Na2COa.
  The SEMs of the reacted  sorbent
particles warrant the application of the
classical unreacted-core model. This
model  proposes three major steps
involved in the reaction of S02 with the
sorbent:
   1) Diffusion of gaseous SO2 to the
     surface of the sorbent  particle
     through  the  stagnant  gas film
     surrounding the particle.
   2) Penetration and diffusion  of gas-
     eous SO2 through the Na2S04 ash
     layer to the unreacted core.
   3) Chemical reaction of gaseous S02
     with the sorbent at the  reaction
     surface
Each  of  these  steps  has a different
resistance to the rate of reaction, but the
step with the  highest resistance is
considered to be rate controlling. Test
results indicate that the diffusion of
gaseous SO2 through the stagnant gas
film is not a rate controlling step.9 It has
been proposed9 that initially the rate of
reaction is  controlled  by chemical
reaction,  and as the ash layer builds up,
the rate of reaction becomes controlled
by the diffusion of S02 through the ash
layer.
  The rate of chemical reaction may be
controlled by either the rate of thermal
decomposition of NaHCOs to Na2C03 or
the rate of uptake of S02 by the Na2C03
to form Na2SC>3. However, most experi-
mental results  7'9'10 seem to indicate
that thermal decomposition is the rate
controlling chemical reaction.
  Mathematical  relationships have
been developed11  for the case  where
each of the three reaction steps (gas film
diffusion, ash  layer diffusion, and
chemical reaction) controls the rate of
reaction.  However, for the dry injection
process  the rate of SO2 removal is
controlled by either the rate of chemical
reaction  or  diffusion through the  ash
layer.  Expressions  describing  SO2
removal  efficiency  as a function of
reaction time for these two cases are:

Ash Layer Diffusion  Controls
  - = 1 -3(1-E/SR)23
  T   2(1-E/SR)
              (9)
where:
        T =
PR2
              6DvCso2-g(MW)    (10)
(The above equation  cannot be solved
directly for E.)

Chemical Reaction Controls
where:
       SR    (11)

             (12)
             ks Cso  -g(MW)

         The variables  included in
         these equations are defined
         as:

  t     = Time, sec
  T     =Time needed for complete
         conversion of  the sorbent,
         sec
  E     = SO2 removal  efficiency,

             mole SO2 removed
              mole S02 in flue gas
   SR'   = Stoichipmetric ratio,
              mole Na2 O injected
              mole SO2 in flue gas

  R     = Initial particle radius, ft
  p     = Density of the sorbent, Ib/ft3
  Cso -g = Concentration of SO2 in the
          gas phase, Ib-mole/ft3
  (MW) = Molecular weight of sorbent,
          Ib/lb-mole
  Dv    =Mass diffusivity of  SO2
          through the ash layer, ft2/sec
  ks     = First-order rate constant for
          chemical reaction,  ft/sec
These mathematical models  were not
evaluated because test data  published
thus far  have been incomplete,  and
many of the variables required for the
determination of T (i.e., Dv, ks, R, andp)
were  not provided  and could not be
easily  estimated from the  available
literature.

Process Parameters Affecting
the Dry Injection Process
  Many process parameters affect S02
removal efficiency  in the dry injection
process. These parameters were evalu-
ated and were ranked  in the approxi-
mate order of their relative importance.
  In general, the parameters that may
affect SO2 removal in dry injection are
those that affect the diffusion of SO2 to
the surface of the sorbent particle, diffu-
sion of SOa through the inert ash layer
on the  particle  surface,  or  chemical
reaction.  Parameters that influence
these three reaction steps are charac-
terized below.
  1)  Variables affecting SO2 mass
     transfer to the sorbent particles:
       Particle size.
       Residence time of the  reactants
       in the duct.
       Inlet SO2 concentration.
       Gas  velocity and air-to-cloth
       ratio.
       Mode of sorbent injection.
       Gas temperature.
  2)  Variables affecting SO2 mass
     transfer  through the inert  ash
     layer:
       Sorbent preparation.
       Particle size.
       Residence time of the  reactants
       in the duct.
       Filter cleaning intervals.
       Stoichiometric ratio.
  3)  Variables affecting chemical re-
     action:
       Sorbent type.
       Sorbent preparation.
       Temperature.
       Stoichiometric ratio.

-------
  These variables and their effects are
discussed briefly in  the following
sections.

Sorbent  Type
  The  type  of  sorbent used for dry
injection will directly affect the chemical
reactions that occur. Tests with a wide
variety of sorbents have shown that only
sodium compounds produce significant
S02  removal at typical air preheater
outlet  temperatures (approximately
300°F). Lime and limestone have been
demonstrated to achieve S02 removal
only  at much higher gas temperatures
(600°F+).1 Sorbents that have  been
shown to  have  good  potential for S02
removal  are  sodium  bicarbonate,
nahcolite ore, and trona ore. Nahcolite
ore  is  a  naturally occurring  mineral
which typically contains 70 - 90 percent
sodium bicarbonate. Trona ore is also a
naturally occurring  mineral which
contains approximately 40 - 50 percent
sodium carbonate (Na2CO3) and 20 -30
percent sodium  bicarbonate (NaHC03).
  Experimental results from tests using
sodium carbonates and sodium  bi-
carbonates indicate that the bicarbonate
form is  much  more reactive. The
increased reactivity  of  NaHC03 is
thought to result from the pores that
develop when  NaHCOs particles are
thermally  decomposed to NaaCCh. In
general, the sorbent with the highest
percentage of "bicarbonate parts"  for
"total sodium parts"  present would be
expected to perform the best.10

Sorbent Preparation
  Treatment of the  sorbent prior to
injection influences both the chemical
composition and porosity of the sorbent.
Any  changes in  porosity will influence
the ability of SOa to diffuse through the
ash  layer that  surrounds the sorbent
particles,  and  changes in  chemical
composition will affect  the  rate of
chemical reaction. Sorbent preparation
generally involves grinding the particles
to increase the surface area available
for reaction and heating  to thermally
decompose the  NaHCO3 to  Na2CC>3,
causing an increase in the pore volume
of the  particles.  The effects of thermal
decomposition will be discussed in this
section; particle  size effects  are dis-
cussed m the following section.
  The thermal decomposition of NaHCOs
to Na2CO3 increases the porosity of the
sorbent, which  increases the  surface
area available  for contact with S02.
Howatson'2 investigated the pore devel-
opment of nahcolite at 300°F with a
scanning electron microscope (SEM)
and found scattered development of 0.1
- 0.7 /urn pores after  10 minutes. After
20 minutes the surface was completely
covered with pores averaging about 0.3
/urn. The Na2CO3 particles produced in
this manner have a  much larger void
space than the parent NaHCOs particle.13
These pores provide  a greater surface
area for chemical reaction and a greater
volume for S02 diffusion. The  reactivity
of the sorbent particles has been found
to  increase by up to a factor of 60
because of thermal decomposition.14
   Investigations have been conducted15'16
to  determine  if decomposition  of the
sorbent prior to injection enhances SO2
removal and to determine the optimum
decomposition temperature.  These
experiments have often produced con-
flicting results. However, a majority of
the tests show that predecomposition of
the sorbent  at  high  temperatures
reduces S02 removal efficiency.
Carson15 reported that predecomposi-
tion of NaHCO3 to Na2C03 significantly
reduced the desulfurization capacity of
the sorbent, however, the decomposi-
tion temperature was not specified. A
' bench-scale study by Genco et al.14 with
a fluidized-bed reactor also showed  a
reduction in S02 removal with  nahcolite
that had been predecomposed  at 600°F.

Particle Size
   The size  of the sorbent  particles
affects the mass transfer of SO2 through
the gas film that surrounds the particle,
because it determines the surface area
through which the SO2 must diffuse.
Particle  size also  influences  diffusion
through the inert ash layer because the
rate  of  Decomposition  of NaHC03 to
Na2CO3 is  somewhat  dependent on
particle size, and the decomposition rate
influences the porosity of the sorbent
particle. Results characterizing the role
of particle size in S02 removal efficiency
are often conflicting.  However, the
general  consensus  is that better re-
 moval is obtained with smaller particles.

Temperature
   The  temperature  of the  flue gas
 influences  the diffusivity of  the SOs
 molecules and the mass transfer of SO2
to the sorbent particles. However, SO2
 mass  transfer properties will  vary only
slightly in the typical flue gas temper-
ature  range (300° - 400°F). The tem-
perature at which the sorbent is injected
 into the flue  gas affects the thermal
decomposition of  NaHCO3 to NaaCOs.
This in turn influences the reactivity of
the sorbent. Many tests have been
performed trying  to characterize  the
effect of temperature on S02 removal.
Again, these tests  have  yielded con-
flicting results. However, it appears that
the best SO2 removal occurs when the
sorbent is injected into the duct at
approximately 600°F, and the baghouse
is operated at approximately 300°F. The
high injection  temperature allows for
rapid decomposition of NaHCO3 to
Na2C03, and a temperature of 300°F is
optimum  for  the  reaction between
Na2C03 and  S02 to form NaaSOs.
  Two methods of elevating theflue gas
temperature above air preheater outlet
temperatures have  been  employed in
pilot-scale systems.  One  method in-
volves using a stream of  hot flue  gas
which bypasses the air preheater; the
other method  utilizes heaters or heat
exchangers at the air preheater outlet
duct.

Stoichiometric  Ratio
  Since the  Stoichiometric ratio deter-
mines the quantity of sodium available
to  react with a given quantity of SO2, it
affects the chemical utilization  of the
sorbent particles and the degree of
completion of the chemical reaction.
Also, at  lower stoichiometries  the
utilization of the sorbent should  be
greater than at higher stoichiometries.
That is, the individual sorbent particles
will be more highly reacted at lower
stoichiometries because fewer particles
are injected into the flue gas. Therefore,
at  low stoichiometries the ash layer
surrounding the particles should  be
thicker and  tend  to  limit S02 mass
transfer.
  The Stoichiometric ratio in dry injec-
tion is defined  as.

        SR    = Me/MSO2     (13)
where:  Me   =  Mole equivalent of
                Na2O in the sorbent
        MSO2 =  Moles of SO2 in the
                 inlet flue gas

Work by  several organizations  (EPRI,
University of Tennessee, Battelle-
Columbus, Air Preheater, American Air
Filter, Wheelabrator-Frye, and  Buell)
has shown an increase in  S02 removal
with increased Stoichiometric ratio.

Mode of Injection
  The mode of sorbent injection affects
the external mass transfer of SO2 to the
entrained sorbent particles  in the
ductwork and through the filter cake in
the fabric filter.  The  sorbent can  be
injected into the system in three ways:

-------
  1) Continuous.  After  the bag  is
    cleaned, sorbent is continuously
    supplied  to  the flue  gas from
    injection points  in the ductwork,
    upstream of the baghouse. The
    sorbent them accumulates on the
    bags to produce a filter cake.
  2) Batch. After the bag is cleaned, all
    sorbent is added to the bag as  a
    precoat before flue gas isresumed.
  3) Semi-batch. This feeding method
    is a combination of methods 1 and
    2. After bag cleaning, some sorbent
    is precoated onto the bags and the
    remainder is added continuously
    upstream.
In  a  typical  semi-batch system, 20
percent of the ground ore is used  to
precoat the filter bags. The additional
sorbent is added  continuously in the
duct. A maximum grain  loading of 10
gr/acf for continuous injection was
used by Genco et al. to prevent particle
settling in the duct.14
  The effects of precoat on SO2 removal
have been analyzed by KVB for EPRI.
They found  that precoating  the bags
with  nahcolite increased S02 removal
from 42 to 66 percent, with all other
conditions held constant.13
  Tests have also been conducted in an
attempt  to  characterize where SO2
removal occurs, in the ductwork or in
the filter. These tests indicate that S02
removal in the ductwork is variable and
is  a  strong  function of the flue gas
temperature in the duct. In general, very
little S02 removal will occur in the duct
at  temperatures  around SOOT; how-
ever, substantial SO2 removal will be
achieved in  the duct at temperatures
around 600°F.

Residence Time of the
Reactants in the Duct
  The  residence time determines the
amount of time that the flue gas and
sorbent will be in  contact in the duct.
Therefore, it affects the extent of mass
transfer through both the gas film and
the ash layer that surround the sorbent
particles. Residence time is defined as
the volume  of the duct divided by the
volumetric flow of gas through the duct
and is normally expressed in seconds.  In
general, S02  removal  in  the duct
increases with  increased residence
time 7

Filter Cleaning  Intervals
  The  longer  the  baghouse  operates
between cleanings, the greater the
sorbent utilization. An increase  in
sorbent utilization causes the ash layer
surrounding the particles to become
thicker. Thie  increase  in  ash layer
thickness decreases the  mass transfer
of SC>2 through the ash. When  the
sorbent being used is nahcolite,  the
filter cells should be operated for at least
40  minutes between cleanings,  be-
cause  it takes 40 minutes to achieve
maximum steady state  SO2 removal
with nahcolite.1 However,  maximum
steady state removal with trona is
achieved  very rapidly.1  Genco et  al.
operated  the filter  cells for approxi-
mately 70 minutes between  cleanings
for  a  nahcolite  sorbent.14  The filter
cleaning  interval must  be  balanced
against the rate of SO2 removal. After a
certain amount of sorbent  has been
utilized, the rate of S02 removal begins
to level off, and a  longer  filter cleaning
interval will result in  very little addi-
tional SO2 removal.
 Inlet S02 Concentration

  The inlet SO2 concentration affects
the mass transfer of SO2 to the sorbent
particles, because  it  determines the
driving force for S02 mass transfer to
the particle surface.  Several studies
measuring the  effect  of S02 concen-
tration on  removal  efficiency showed
that the  inlet SO2  concentration  had
only a small  effect on  removal for a
given stoichiometric  ratio.  Work by
Wheelabrfctor-Frye, with a nahcolite
sorbent and inlet S02 concentrations of
800 - 2800 ppm, showed that removal
was slightly higher for higher inlet SOa
levels. It was felt that the slight increase
in  removal resulted  from  a higher
driving force for the diffusion of  SO2
from the bulk gas to the solid particle.
However, the increase in removal  was
somewhat offset because at higher inlet
SO2 concentrations more nahcolite had
to  be fed to maintain  stoichiometric
ratios, which necessitated more  fre-
quent bag cleaning and  resulted in
lower nahcolite residence  time in the
system.1  Note t hat Wheelabrator-Frye's
reasoning is  not consistent with the
reaction  models developed in  this
report, because the diffusion of  S02
from  the gas to the particle  was not
considered to be a rate controlling step.
  The dry injection system has not been
tested with S02 concentrations greater
than approximately  3500 ppm. There-
fore the applicability  of dry  injection
with coals containing  greater than 3.5
percent sulfur is not known.
Gas Velocity and
Air-to-Cloth Ratio
  The velocity of the flue gas relative to
the sorbent  particles affects the mass
transfer of S02 through the stagnant
gas film to the surface of the sorbent
particle. Gas velocity affects  the dif-
fusional properties of the SOa and the
time the sorbent  and flue  gas are in
contact. The lower the velocity of the
flue gas, the longer it remains in the dry
injection  system  to  react with  the
sorbent. However, studies  by several
sources (Buell,  EPRI, American Air
Filter,  University of Tennessee, and
Wheelabrator-Frye) showed that the
velocity of the gas had no significant
effect on SO2 removal. The air-to-cloth
ratio, which represents the velocity of
the gas through the filter cloth and is
described  as the volumetric flow of the
gas through a specified filter area, was
varied from  1 .4 to 5.0 ft/min with no
observable effect on SO2 removal.10'14'1

Data Gaps in Literature
  It is proposed that the un reacted core
model can be applied to the reactions
that occur  during  dry injection.10
However, this model was not evaluated
against experimental data; therefore, it
may not be valid.
  To evaluate the applicability of the
unreacted core model, experimental
data describing  sorbent  conversion
versus  time will be  required. The
mechanism  by which the  desulfuriza-
tion reaction
Na2CO3(sl + SO2(Qi - Nas-SOscsi + COzigi (14)
proceeds also needs to be established,
and the  influence of the flue gas
moisture  content on  desulfurization
should be examined.
  It would be useful to characterize SO2
removal at  inlet SO2  concentrations
greater than  2000 ppm to determine if
dry injection is  applicable to systems
that burn coal  with a higher sulfur
content In addition, parametric testing
should be performed to clear up conflict-
ing experimental results concerning the
effects  of particle size, injection tem-
perature, and thermal predecomposition
of the sorbent on S02 removal. Finally, it
may be beneficial to test dry injection on
a flue gas produced from combustion
under  low excess air conditions.  Mini-
mizing the oxygen content of the flue
gas could reduce the  oxidation of
Na2SO3 to   Na2SC>4.  If in  fact the
oxidation of Na2SOs causes the pores in
the sorbent  particle to  plug, then a
reduction in the  amount  of  Na2SC>4
                                  8

-------
13.
14.
15.
16.
generated should reduce plugging and     12.
allow for  better S02 removal.
Literature Cited
1.  Kelly, M.E. and S.A. Shareef. Third
    Survey of Dry S02 Control Systems.
    EPA-600/7-81-097 (NTIS PB81-
    218976)  June 1981.
2.  Parsons,  E.L. et  al. "S02 Removal
    by Dry FGD."  In:  Proceedings
    Symposium on Flue Gas Desulfun-
    zation—Houston,  October 1980;
    Vol. 2.  EPA-600/9-81-019b (NTIS
    PB81-243164), pp 801-852. April
    1981.
3.  Getler,  J.L. et al.  "Modelling the
    Spray Absorption Process for SO2
    Removal." In: Journal of the Air
    Pollution Control Association, 29:12,
    p. 1270. December 1979.
4.  Downs, W., W.J. Sanders, and C.E.
    Miller.  "Control  of SO? Emissions
    by Dry Scrubbing."  (Presented  at
    the American Power Conference.
    Chicago, IL. April 21-23, 1980.)
5.  Hurst, T.B. and G.T. Bielawski. "Dry
    Scrubber Demonstration  Plant  -
    Operating Results". In: Proceedings:
    Symposium on Flue Gas Desulfuri-
    zation—Houston,  October 1980;
    Vol. 2.  EPA-600/9-81-019b (NTIS
    PB81-243164), pp. 853-860. April
    1981.
6.  Meyler, J.A. "Dry Flue Gas Scrub-
    bing: A Technique for the  1980's"
    (Presented at 1980 Joint Power
    Conference. Phoenix, AZ. Septem-
    ber 1980.)
7.  Dickerman, J.C.  et al. "Evaluation
    of Dry Alkali FGD Systems." Draft.
    EPA  Contract No. 68-02-3190.
    March  1978.
8.  Stevens,  NJ.  "Dry S02 Scrubbing
    Pilot Test Results." In: Proceedings:
    Symposium on Flue Gas Desulfuri-
    zation—Houston,  October 1980;
    Vol.  2  EPA-600/9-81-O19b (NTIS
    PB81-243164), pp. 777-800 April
    1981.
9.  Davis, WT. andT.C. Keener. "Phase
    I: Chemical Kinetic Studies on Dry
    Sorbents, Literature Review." Uni-
    versity  of Tennessee. August 10,      ft2-hr-°F
    1980.
10. Samuel, E.A. and D.E. Lapp. "Test-     1 Btu
    ing and Assessment of a Baghouse      lb-°F
    for Dry SO2 Removal, Task 4: SO2
    Removal  Using Dry Sodium Com-     1 ft2
    pounds."  September  1980.  Draft      sec
    report  prepared  for  U.S.  EPA,
    Contract No. 68-02-3119.             1 Jb_
11. Levenspiel, 0. Chemical Reaction      ft3
    Engineering, 2nd edition. New
    York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., pp.     1  Ib
    357-377. 1972.                       ft-hr
Howatson,  J., J.W. Smith, D.A.
Outka, and H.D. Dewald. "Nahcolite
Properties  Affecting Stack Gas
Pollutant Absorption." In: Proceed-
ings of 5th National Conference on
Energy and the Environment, Cin-
cinnati, OH. November 1977.
"SO2 Control by Dry Sorbent Injec-
tion." In: EPRI Journal. June 1980.
p. 52.
Genco,  J.M.  et al.  "The Use  of
Nahcolite Ore and  Bag  Filters for
S02 Emission Control." In: Journal
of Air Pollution Control Association,
25:12, p. 1244. December 1975.
Carson,  J.R.  "Removal of Sulfur
Dioxide and Nitric Oxide from a Flue
Gas Stream by Two Sodium Alkalis
of Various Sizes." Master's Thesis,
University of Tennessee, Knoxville.
August 1980.
Davis, W.T. and T.C. Keener. "Re-
search on the Removal of S02  by
Additive Injection Techniques on a
Stoker-Fired Boiler." (Presented at
the 71 st Annual Meeting of the Air
Pollution Control Association, June
25, 1980.)
Appendix
Conversion
British
1 ft
1 Ib
1 000 cf m
1 gal./1000ft
1 Btu
1 gal
1 ft3
1 Ib-mole
1 atm
1 Btu

Factors
Metric
= 0.3048m
= 0.454 kg
= 0.5 mVs
= 0.13 liters/m
= 1 .055 kJ
= 3.79 liters
= 28.32 liters
= 453.6 g-mole
= 1.013x 105Pa
= 5.678 J
                        m2-s-K
                            kg-K

                 = 9.29x10'2mi
                            s

                 = 16.018Jia-
                         m3

                 = 4.133x 10"4Pa-s

-------
C. Apple and M. E. Kelly are with Radian Corporation. Durham. NC 27705.
Theodore G. Brna is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
The complete report, entitled "Mechanisms of Dry S02 Control Processes,"
  (Order No. PB 82-196 924; Cost: $ 13.50, 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:
       Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
       U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
       Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
                                                                             10

-------
                                                             Q) O

                                                             a
                                                             c
                                                             V)
                                                             (D
                                                             CO
                                                             8
n   *-«
J>W
 T> m
                                                                     -af< i  i3
                                                                     TJ(Q
                                                                     W O O  O
                                                                     W< tt 3
                                                                     w   o  g
                                                                          D  ®
                                                                             3
                                                                             •-»
                                                                             0)

-------