EPA-650/2-73-029




September 1973     ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION TECHNOLOGY SERIES







-------
          INTERACTIONS

    OF  STACK GAS  SULFUR

    AND  NITROGEN  OXIDES

       ON  DRY SORBENTS
                  by
J.W. Brown, D.W. Pershing, J.H. Wasser, andE.E. Berkau
          Control Systems Laboratory
       National Environmental Research Center
        Research Triangle Park, N.C. 27711
             Project No. 21ADG42
          Program Element No. 1A2014
               Prepared for

    NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER
      OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
     U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
  RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NORTH CAROLINA 27711

              September 1973

-------
This report has been reviewed by the Environmental Protection Agency and



approved for publication.  Approval does not signify that the contents



necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Agency, nor does



mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement



or recommendation for use.
                                 ii

-------
                        ABSTRACT

     It was noted that the standard analytical system used for
the measurement of NO emissions gave incorrect NO concentrations
in the presence of SO..  The problem was traced to the dry sorbents
used to remove water vapor prior to the NO analysis.  A brief
test series demonstrated that both Drierite and molecular sieve
sorbents can cause incorrect NO results if SO. is present.  Further
testing revealed that the materials are capable of simultaneous
removal of both NO and SO. even in low concentrations.  More work
is needed to define the actual fate of these species; however,
it appears that this might offer a possible NO /SO  control
                                              X   X
technique since the data indicate that the sorbent effect is
thermally regenerable.
                            iii

-------
                       CONTENTS
Abstract                                                           ill
List of Figures                                                    v
List of Tables                                                     v
Introduction                                                       1
Isothermal Testing with Known Gas Concentrations                   3
Hot-Flow Testing — Propane Combustion Doped with SO.              ^
Hot-Flow Testing — Residual-Oil-Fired Package Boiler              13
Conclusions/Recommendations                                        17
Bibliography                                                       18
                        FIGURES
No.,                                                                ^
1   Isothermal Test Facility                                       4
2   Hot-Flow Test Facility                                         8
3   Recorded Traces for Tests B-l, B-5, B-7, and B-8               H
4   Package Boiler Hot-Flow Test Facility                          12
5   Emission Reduction Across a 65-Gram Molecular                  16
       Sieve Bed
                        TABLES
                                                                   Page
No.
1   Series 1 Results
2   Series 2 Results
3   Series 3 Results — Emissions After 5 Minutes
        of Sampling

-------
                     INTRODUCTION

     During recent experimental testing, the Combustion Research
Section (CRS) of EPA's Control Systems Laboratory observed that
sampling and analytical procedures previously utilized for measuring
NO  emissions from natural gas and light oil combustion  were not
  x                                       i
satisfactory for measuring nitrogen oxides (NO ) in sulfur oxide (SO )
                                          j    X                     X
laden gases.  For example,.sulfur dioxide.(SO ) levels of 1600 ppm
(equivalent of 2.5 percent sulfur fuel) resulted in measured NO
                                                               X,
concentrations of less than half the actual level.  The problem
was finally isolated to the dry sorbent system used to remove water
from the gas sample prior to the analytical Instrumentation.
                                               2
     It is well known (e.g., Sundaresan et al.)  that certain
drying materials such as commercial zeolites and silica gel have
the ability to selectively adsorb 110  from nitric acid tail gases
                                    X
where the NO  concentration is in excess of 2000 ppm.  Previous
            x                                    rr
CRS work had shown that NO adsorption and/or reaction did not
occur with the molecular sieve and Drierite drying agents utilized
in the standard CRS analytical train;  however, all prior work
had been done with essentially s.ulfur free flue gases.  The
purpose of the work reported herein was to briefly investigate the
observed  SO /NO /drying agent interactions  and to define what further
            X   X
work, if any, should be done in the area.
     A three part approach was utilized.  First, controlled mixtures
of ambient air, nitric oxide  (NO), and S0_ were prepared, passed
through various types of drying systems, and then sampled to de-
termine exactly what interferences and/or interactions should be
expected.  Next, the tests were repeated using actual flue gas
from a propane flame with arid without SO- present.  Finally, the
work was extended to full scale testing on a package boiler burning
residual oil with 0.9 percent sulfur.

-------
         ISOTHERMAL TESTING WITH KNOWN GAS CONCENTRATIONS

     Under combustion conditions it is not possible to measure the
amount of NO in a given flue gas stream without first removing the
water of combustion.  (Failure to do so will result in water vapor
condensation in the sample cell and/or instrument interference.)
Therefore, in the first test series ambient air (with appropriate
NO and SO. added) was utilized instead of actual flue gas so
that the sample could be run directly to the appropriate analyzer.
The purpose of this series was to define which elements if any of
the standard drying system needed further investigation.
     The experimental facility used for this test series is
shown in Figure 1.  Basically, it was designed to allow sampling
a gas flow of ambient air with and without NO and/or SO .  Eoth
the NO and SO. came from laboratory cylinders through precalibrated
rotameters into the sampling duct ahead of the mixing section.
Sampling was accomplished via a standard quartz combustion probe.
From the probe the sample went either directly to the analyzer
(baseline tests) or to the system component being checked (e.g.,
the ice bath) then to the analyzer. All  NO analysis  in  this  series
was done with a chemiluminescent analyzer.

     The results of these tests are shown in Table 1.   In Tests
A-l through A-5 the stream being sampled contained only ambient
air and approximately 200 ppm NO. As  the data indicate, none of
the common drying schemes had any significant effect on the measure-
ment.  In Tests A-6 through A-10 sufficient SO. was added to the
air stream to give about 1600 ppm in  the mixture.  As the data
indicate both the Drierite and the molecular sieve led  to radical
reductions in the measured NO level initially; however, with time
both appeared to "saturate" and the NO asymptotically approached
the correct value.  These data suggest that some type of NO /SO
                                                           X   X

-------
  TO
  AIR
SUPPLY
                 QUARTZ SAMPLE
                     PROBE
                    DIRECT TO
                    ANALYZER
                                                              TEST
                                                             SORBENT
       TO
CHEMILUMINESCENT
  NO ANALYZER
                 MIXING
                  ZONE
                                                               "  NO
                                                               CYLINDER
   S02
CYLINDER
                           Figure 1. Isothermal test facility.

-------
                        Table 1.   SERIES 1 RESULTS
Chemilumlnescent
Test No. Test gas composition Sample conditions measured NO, ppm
A-l
A-2
A-3
A-4
A-5
A-6
Ambient air + :200 ppm NO Direct to analyzer
Drierite,b 15 gc
11 Molecular sieve, d "
CaCl2.2H20,e
" Ice bath
Ambient air + S200 ppm NO Direct to analyzer
194
204
189
195
193
ISA
A-7
A-8
        + =1600 ppm S02
                                  Drierite,
15 g
                                  Molecular sieve, "
                                  CaCl2.2H20,
A-9

A-10               "              Ice bath

A-ll  Ambient air + =1600 ppm S0~ Direct to analyzer

A-12               "              Drierite,     15 R

A-13               ''              Molecular sieve, "

A-14

A-15
                                  CaCl2.2H20,
                                  Ice bath
(2 min.)  141,
(10 min.) 176

(2 min.)  67,
(10 min.  ) 159

      185

      183

      0.98

      0.60

      0.25

      0.78

      0.95   .
 Total sample flow was 71 liters/hr  (2.5 scfh).  The flue gas sample  •
 flowed  through a particulate filter to prevent clogging instrument
 sampling lines.  (There was no evidence that this filter adversely
 affected measured NOX readings.)  A dry layer air filter pack #99/97
 Microsorban made by Delbag Co. was used to remove particulates.

 New "Drierite" - anhydrous CaSO_, W. A. Hammond Drierite Co.

 •^
 'Fresh drying agent materials were weighed on a triple-beam balance
 for each sample requiring an agent.

 New molecular sieve - 0022-006-3A, #1 pellet, Guild Corp. (clay base).
 "CaC1..2H 0 - Calcium chloride, reagent grade, Matheson, Coleman & Bell.

-------
interaction was occurring; however, unfortunately during this
series it was not possible to measure SO. to determine its fate.
It was also noted, that if the bulk of the flow (the ambient air)
was replaced by pure nitrogen no NO/SO  interaction was observed.
This suggests that 0- and/or water vapor was also involved.
     In Tests A-ll through A-15 the NO was turned off to investigate
possible negative interference effects by SO. on the analyzer
and the system components.  As the data show SCL had essentially
no positive or negative effect on the chemiluminescent NO analyzer
since all readings were less than 1 ppm.  The data do show, however,
that even at the ambient level of about 1 ppm NO, molecular sieve
and Drierite reduced the NO in the presence of S02-

-------
                   HOT-FLOW TESTING — PROPANE
                    COMBUSTION DOPED WITH S0_

     In the second test series flue gas from propane combustion
was artificially doped with S0~ on a controlled basis.  The purpose
of this series was to investigate the NO /SO  Interaction on as
                                        X   X
nearly a practical system as possible and still be able to control
the SO. concentration in the flue gas stream being sampled.
Figure 2 shows the test facility used for this portion of the work.
Basically, it was an upright multi-fuel combustor, with a 40.6 cm
(16-in.) ID refractory combustion chamber, and hot-air heat exchanger.
Combustion air was supplied by several air blowers in a variety
of combinations so that ambient air, preheated air, or flue gas
can be supplied to the primary, axial, or swirl streams.  The
combustor, burner, and support facilities were identical to
                               3
those used in previous studies.   In this series a six-hole
radial propane injector was utilized and the combustor was fired
at 75 million cal/hr (300,000 Btu/hr) and 5 percent excess air.

     The NO in this test series was the result of the normal pro-
pane combustion (as compared to the first test series where
with no flame the NO level was simulated by injection of concen-
trated NO).  The SO. was injected after the combustion zone to
prevent flame zone reactions and at a flow to give a concentra-
tion of 1600 ppra inside the combustor.  As before NO was measured
with a chemiluminescent analyzer.  Instrumentation was not available
for SO..

     The results of this test series are presented in Table 2.
In tests B-l through B-4 the only major pollutant in the flue gas
being sampled was NO (since propane contains no sulfur and this

-------
                 AIR  I  * FUEL
                    / / / /
                             /
1*1-*^   ROTAMETER
     kP
          ,   SO?
           CYLINDER
                                                    HEAT
                                                                    EXHAUST
                                                                     STACK
                                                 EXCHANGER
                                                                                     QUARTZ SAMPLING
                                                                                         PROBE
                                                                                            ICE
                                                                                           BATH
                                                                                            TEST
                                                                                          SORBENT
       TO
CHEMILUMINESCENT
  NO ANALYZER
                                             Figure 2.  Hot-flow test facility.

-------
Table 2.
                                SERIES 2 RESULTS
Test
No.
B-l
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
Test gas Chemiluminescent
composition Sample conditions measured NO, ppm
Combustion gas Ice bath
" Drierite,b 15 g° + ice bath
Molecular sieve/ "
CaCl2.2H20,e
Combustion gas + Ice bath
94
96.5
98.5
94
94
B-6
1-7
B-8
         =1600 ppm S02
      Drierite,     15 g  + ice bath
      Molecular sieve
(2 min.)  41,
(30 min.) 89

(2 min.)  33,
(30 min.) 92

     94
 aThe total sample flow was 71 liters/hr (2.5 scfh) .   In all cases  '
  the flue gas sample flowed through a particulate filter to prevent
  clogging the instrument sampling lines.  (There was no evidence
  that this filter had any adverse effect on measured NO  readings.)
  A dry layer air filter pack #99/97 Microsorban made by Delbag Co.
  was used to remove particulates.

  New "Drierite" - anhydrous CaSO,, W. A. Hammond Drierite Co.

 r*
  Fresh drying agent materials were weighed out on a  triple beam
  balance for each sample where an agent was required.

 dNew molecular sieve - //022--006-3A, #1 pellet, Guild Corp. (clay base)
 eCaCl9.2H 0 - Calcium chloride, reagent grade, Matheson, Coleman & Bell,
      £,   £•

-------
combustor does not produce significant carbon monoxide, unburned
hydrocarbons, or NO.). As in the first test series all of the
drying methods gave essentially the same NO concentration level;
there was no evidence of any unusual interactions.  (The sample
could not be run directly to the analyzer without the ice bath
due to water condensation in the analyzer cell.)
     During Tests B-5 through B-8,  S0« was added  to the flue gas
stream and as before' the use of both Drierite and molecular
sieve gave incorrect NO readings.  Figure 3 shows the recorder
traces for the CaCl. and molecular  sieve tests.   As these data
indicate 15 grams of molecular sieve material required almost
30 minutes before equilibration occurred, while the CaCl .2H.O gave
the correct reading almost immediately.
                                 10

-------
                  4           5           6




                  NO, millivolts (xlOO ppm RANGE)
10
Figure 3.  Recorded traces for tests B-1.  B-5,  B-7, and B-8.

-------
                                                     EXHAUST
                                                      STACK
                                            STEAM
 to
AIR
                                            COMBUSTION
                                             CHAMBER
             FUEL
                                                                                       WETS02
                                                                                      COLLECTOR
                                                                                 . STAINLESS STEEL
                                                                                 'SAMPLING PROBE
                                                                          REFRIGERATION
                                                                              COOLER
                     TEST
                   SORBENT
       TO
CHEMILUMINESCENT
  NO ANALYZER
                                                                                         f
 TONDIR
   NO
ANALYZER
                                     Figure 4. Package boiler hot-flow test facility.

-------
                  HOT-FLOW TESTING « RESIDUAL-
                    OIL-FIRED PACKAGE BOILER

     The final test series was conducted in a 60-hp residual-
oil-fired package boiler.  The purpose of this series was to
confirm the previous results with flue gas from a typical
commercial system and to quantify the actual effects.  Figure 4
shows the experimental setup used for this series.  Basically,
it consisted of a 64-liter/hr (17-gph) Scotch-Marine boiler
operating at 25 percent excess air.  NO was measured by both
chemiluminescent and NDIR analyzers.  S0~ was determined by
                                   4    *•
wet chemical analysis (Shell method ).  During each experiment
the flue gas sample from the boiler stack was passed through' a
cooler and the test bed before going to the appropriate analyzer.
     The results of Tests C-l through C-5 are shown in Table 3.
In Test C-l no drying agent (other than the refrigeration cooler)
was used to remove water vapor prior to the emission analysis.
The 232 ppm NO is considered to be the baseline emission for this
unit.  In the next four tests new and regenerated molecular
sieve and Drierite samples were used for final sample drying.
(New implies the material had just been received from the
manufacturer; regenerated implies the material had been used on
several prior occasions for water removal and then "regenerated"
by heating to drive off absorbed water.)  The data indicate that:
     1.  With both molecular sieve and Drierite some reduction in
NO does occur across the drying material, confirming the Series
A and B results.
     2.  The process involves simultaneous reaction of both
NO and SO..
     3.  Regenerated molecular sieve gave the largest reductions
in both NO and SO .
                                 13

-------
         Table 3.  SERIES 3 RESULTS ~ EMISSIONS AFTER

                          5 MINUTES OF SAMPLING3
Test
No.
C-l
C-2

C-3
C-4
C-5
NO by NO by S02 by
Drying chemiluminescent, NDIR, wet chemistry, d
agent" ppmc ppm ppm
None 232
New molecular 138
sieve
Regenerated molecular 99
sieve
New Drierite 122
Regenerated 183
Drierite
ND6 421
143

105 25
185
174
 60-hp residual-oil-fired package boiler at 25 percent excess air.

 In all cases refrigeration cooling was used to remove the initial
 portion of the water.

 As measured, dry.
d
 Shell method (for details see Reference 1).

 'since water vapor strongly interferes with NDIR analyzers it
 was not possible to use these analyzers without moisture removal.
                                14

-------
     It should be noted, however, that eventually the measured
emissions approached the baseline level as the drying material
"saturated".  To quantify this phenomenon three tests were
run where flue gas was drawn through 65 grams of regenerated
molecular sieve  and the emissions were monitored in turn for
NO by chemiluminescent analysis, SO. by NDIR, and NO by NDIR,
all as a function of cime.  The reduced results are shown in
Figure 5.  C /C  is the ratio of the concentration of pollutant
            t  o
after a given number of liters of gas had passed through the
sieve bed to the correct (baseline) emission level.  (Thus a
C /C  of 1.0 means no reduction in pollutant concentration is
occurring across the bed and a C /C  of 0.0 indicates complete
reduction:  zero pollutant concentration after the bed.)  The
data show that for the test case of 65 grams of molecular sieve
a 75 percent reduction in S02 and a 55 percent reduction in NO
occurred for the first 25 to 30 liters of gas.  From these data
an SO. removal of 0.59 mg/g of sieve was estimated; the NO removal
was 0.077 mg/g of sieve.  The relative volumes also appear to
be 3 parts of S02 for 1 part of NO.
     To investigate the possible use of dry sorption as a
possible simultaneous NO /SO  control technique the data were
                        X   *V
used to estimate a system for a 1000 mw power plant burning 1
percent sulfur fuel.  (It should be clearly noted that this
type calculation is crude at best because no attempt was made
to experimentally optimize conditions, sorbent, bed configuration
etc., and all work was done on a very small scale system, 65
grams of material.)  The calculations indicated that 5.9 x 10  Kg/hr
(13 x 10  Ib/hr) of molecular sieve would be required to reduce
SO- concentration from 421 ppm to <25 ppm and simultaneously
reduce NO concentration from 232 ppm to 99 ppm.
                               15

-------
ONO BY CHEMILUMINESCENCE
DNO BY NDIR
ASO? BY NDIR
                                   TOTAL GAS VOLUME, liters
           Figure 5. Emission reduction across a 65-gram molecular sieve bed.

-------
                   CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS

     1.  Use of a solid sorbent drying material prior to NO
analysis can lead to erroneously measured NO concentrations in
SO. laden flue gases.  Drierite and molecular sieve have both
been shown to be susceptible to this problem in varying degrees;
calcium chloride dehydrate appears to be a possible alternative
but needs a more complete analysis.  The results are rudimentary
at best but even so they suggest the serious need for a detailed
chemical-analytical study to provide definitive guidelines for
NO  sampling.
  A
     2.  Both Drierite and molecular sieve have been shown
capable of simultaneous NO and SO. "removal" when both are present
even in low concentrations.  Experimental work should be under-
taken to define the fate of the specie; i.e., is the NO being
retained on the surface of the sorbent in some form or is it
coming through the bed in a form not detected by the analyzer
(e.g., N02)?
     3.  Since this concept potentially offers simultaneous
NO  and SO  removal work should be undertaken to assess the
  x       x
feasibility of using it for flue gas treatment.  Future work
should develop data on the effect of sorbent composition and
structure, NO  and SO  concentrations, and regeneration times so
             X       X
that a reasonable economic analysis can be conducted.
                                17

-------
                           BIBLIOGRAPHY
1.  Martin, G. B., D. W. Pershing, and E. E. Berkau.  Effects of
    Fuel Additives on Air Pollutant Emissions from Distillate
    Oil-Fired Furnaces.  EFA. Research Triangle Park, N. C.
    Office of Air Programs Publication No. AP-87. June 1971.  91.

2.  Sundaresan, B. B., C. I. Harding,  F.  P. May, and E. R.
    Hendrickson.  Adsorption of Nitrogen Oxides from Waste  Gas.
    Environ. Sci. Techuol. 1:151-156,  February 1967.

3.  Pershing, D. V.,  J. W. Brown, and  E.  E. Berkau.  Relationship
    of Burner Design to the Control of NO  Emissions Through
    Combustion Modification. EPA.  (Presented at Coal Combustion
    Seminar.  Research Triangle Park,  N.  C.  June 19-20, 1973.)  53.

4.  Shell Development Company, Analytical Department.  Determina-
    tion of Sulfur Dioxide and Sulfur  Trioxide in Stack Gases.
    Emeryville, Calif.  1959.
                                18

-------
    INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING  FORM  NTIS-35 (10-70) (Bibliographic Data Sheet based on COSATI
   Guidelines to Format Standards for Scientific and Technical Reports Prepared by or for* the Federal Government,
   PB-180 600).

    1.  Report Number.  Each individually bound report shall carry a unique alphanumeric designation  selected by the performing
       organization or provided by the sponsoring organization.  Use uppercase letters and  Arabic numerals only.  Examples
       FASKB-NS-87 nnd FAA-RD-68-09-

    2.  Leave blank.

   3.  Recipient's Accession Number.  Reserved for use by each report recipient.

   4.  Title and Subtitle.  1 itle should indn.itc clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the  report, and be displayed promi-
       nently.  Set subtitle, if used, in smallir type or otherwise subordinate it to main  title.  When a report is prepared in more
       than one volume, repeat the primary title, .uit1 volume.- number and include subtitle  for ihe specific volume.

   5-  Report Date. I .ich report .shall carry a dan  indicating ai least month and year.  Indicate the basis on which it was selected
       (c.fj., date of issue, date of approval, date of preparation.


   6-  Performing Organization Code.  Leave blank.

   7.  Author(>).  Give  name(s) in conventional order  (e.g., John K. Doc, or j.Robert Dor).  List author's affiliation  if it differs
       from (he performing organization.

   8.  Performing Organisation Report Number.  Insert if performing organisation wishes  to  assign this number.

   9.  Performing Organisation Name and  Address,  dive name, street, city, state, and zip < <><.U-.  List no more than two  levels of
       .in organisational hierarchy.  Display (hi name of the organization exactly as  it should appear  in Government indexes such
       as  USGRDR-I.

  10.  Project 'Task, Work Unit Number.   I si  the project, task and work unit numbers under winch the report was prepared.

  11.  Contract'Grant Number.  Insert conir.u t  >>r grant number under whuh report was prepared.

  12-  Sponsoring Agency Nome and Address.  In* lude /ipcodr.

  13.  Type of Report and Period  Covered  InJu .itc- im< rim, final, t tc., and, if applicable, date s covered.

  14.  Sponsoring Agency Code.   Leave  hl.ink.

  15.  Supplementary Notes.  Kntcr information nut nu luilcd elsewhere  but useful, such  a--  Prepared in cooperation  with . .  .
       translation of ... Presented at  eonfcremc  ol .  . .  'I o h« published in ...   Supersedes  . . .       Supplements  . . .

  16.  Abstroct.   Include a brief  (.'00 wortU or less) faetual summary  of the most significant information contained in the report.
       If the report contains a significant bibliography or literature- survey, mention it here.

  17.  Key Words and Document Analysis, (a). Descriptors,  .Select  from the Thesaurus of  (•.nc.inec-ring and Scientific Terms the
       proper  authorised terms that idennf> the major concept of  the re-search and  are sufficiently specific and precise to be used
       as index entries for cataloging.
      (b).  Identifiers and Open-Ended Terms.  1,'se identifiers for protect names, code names, equipment designators, etc.  Use
       open-ended terms written in descriptor  form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.
      (c).  COSATI  Field/Group.  Field and Croup assignments are to be taken from the  1965 COSATI 'subject  Category List.
       Since- the  majority of documents are- multidisc iplmary in nature,  the primary Field/Group assignment(s) will be the specific
       discipline, area of human endeavor, or  type of physical object.  The applications) will be cross-referenced with secondary
       Field/Group assignments that will  follow the primary postmg(s).

  18.  Distribution Statement.  Denote relcasability to the public or limitation for reasons  other than  security for  example  "Re-
       lease unlimited". Cite- any availability to the public, with address  and price.

  19 & 20.  Security  Classification.  Do not submit classified reports to the National Technical

  21.  Number of Pages.  Insert the total  number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but excluding distribution
       list, if any.

  22.  Price.  Insert the price set by the  National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known.
FORM NTIS-33 IREV. 3-72)                                                                                  USCOMM-DC I4992-P72

-------
 BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA
 SHEET
                    . Report No.
                    EPA-650/2-73-02 9
3. Recipient's Accession No.
                                                                5. Re-port Date
                                                                 September 1973
4. 1 nlc and Subtitle
 Interactions of Stack Gas Sulfur and Nitrogen Oxides
   on Dry Sorbents
                                                                6.
7. Author(s)
 J.W. Brown, D. W. Pershjng, J.H.Wasser. and E.E.Berkau
                                                                8. Performing Organization Rcpt.
                                                                  No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address
 EPA, Office of Research and Development
 NERC-RTP, Control Systems Laboratory
 Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
                                                                10. Project/Task/Work Unit No.
                                                                   21ADG42
                                                                11. Coniract/Crant No.
                                                                In-House Report
12. Sponsoring Organisation Name ->nd Address
                                                                13. Type of Report & Period
                                                                  Covered
                                                                      Final
                                                                14.
15. Supplementary Notes
16. Attracts The repOrt describes a brief test series that demonstrates that both Drierite
 and molecular  sieve sorbents can cause incorrect NO results if SO2 is present. It
 was noted that  the standard analytical system used for measuring NO emissions gave
 incorrect NO emissions in the presence of SO2. The problem was traced to the dry
 sorbents used to remove water vapor prior to the NO analysis.  Further testing
 revealed that the materials can simultaneously remove both NO and SO2, even in  low
 concentrations. Although more work is needed to define the actual fate of these
 species, it appears that this might offer a  oossible NOx/SOx control technique
 since the data  indicate that the sorbent effect is thermally regenerable.
17. Ko\ Words and Document Analysis  17o IU s<
Air Pollution
Flue Gases
Sulfur Oxides
Nitrogen Oxides
Sorbents
Des ice ants
17b. Idenuf icrs/Opcn-l£nded Terms
Air Pollution Control
Stationary Sources
Dry Sorbents
Molecular Sieves
17e. COSATI Field/Group
                        Q7B
18. Availability Statement
                    Unlimited
                                                     19. Security Class (This
                                                        Report)
                                                     	UNCLASSIFIED
                                                     20. Security (".lass (This
                                                        Page
                                                          UNC1.ASSIFILP
          21. No. of Pages

              24
                                                                         22. Price
FORM NTIS-33 IREV. 3-72)
                                          19
                                                                         USCOMM-OC M932-P7Z

-------