Enen 619-03 Final Research Project
Enen 619-03 Final Research Project
Enen 619-03 Final Research Project
Instructor: Dr. Dissanayake Pollution Control & Prevention in Energy Industry 11/30/2010
Declaration
I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct also declare that as required by these rules and conduct have fully referenced all materials and results that are not original to this work.
Salman Noor
Abstract
Increased population and industrial development demands sustainable electricity, the majority of which is produced by thermal power stations, which utilize coal as a fuel all over the world. Coal burning results in generation of large quantities of coal residues, which contains very fine particles that tend to become air-borne and which contribute to the formation of suspended particulate matter (SPM). Hence, in order to safeguard the environment against the emission of SPM, pollution control devices, such as cyclone separators, bag filters and electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) have been employed. In addition, flue gas conditioning (FGC) is practiced to increase the efficiency of ESPs, with the addition of chemical additives, or sprinkling water to the flue gas. This process increases the collection efficiency of the electrostatic precipitators, and thereby results in reduction of the SPM level. However, the effects of the process, which play an important role in efficient FGC, need to be investigated thoroughly before utilizing this method. With this in view, a critical review of various flue gas conditioning techniques employed for controlling the SPM level in thermal power stations is presented in this paper.
Contents.
1).Introduction 2).Pollution Control Devices 2.1). Cyclone Separator 2.2). Bag Filter 2.3). Electrostatic Precipitator 3).Flue Gas Conditioning 3.1).Water/Steam conditioning 3.2).Sodium conditioning 3.3).Sulphur trioxide conditioning 3.4).Ammonia conditioning 3.5).Dual flue gas conditioning 3.6).Injection rae of FGC agents 4).A Critical Analysis of FGC systems 5).Concluding Remarks References
1.Introduction:
Modern society primarily depends on coal fired thermal power stations for the generation of sustainable electricity. However, the combustion of coal results in production of a large quantity of the ash, which essentially constitutes bottom and fly ash. The fly ash particles, which are in the form of suspension in the flue gas, from combustion units, contribute to an increased suspended particulate matter (SPM) in the surrounding environment. Therefore, in order to safeguard the environment, reduction in emission levels of SPM becomes essential. In order to achieve this, various devices, such as cyclone separators [16], bag filters [711] and/or electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) [1219] are employed. Electrostatic precipitation is a technique that employs the application of an electric field to separate out the suspended particles from the flue gas [12]. In addition, to minimize the emission of sulphur dioxide from the chimneys of coal fired power plants, low sulphur coal is currently used at power stations [20,21]. However, it has been noted that the electrical resistivity of the fly ash generally increases as the ratio of sulphur-to-ash content in the coal decreases, which results in a very low collection efficiency of ESP [19,22,23]. Previous studies reveal that the ash collection efficiency of ESP can be enhanced by utilizing flue gas conditioning (FGC) techniques, which involves addition of different types of chemical additives (viz., sulphur trioxide, ammonia, salts of sodium) and/or sprinkling of water to the flue gas, altering the properties of the fly ash and resulting in increased collection efficiency [20,2433]. The researchers have also demonstrated that sulphur trioxide conditioning reduces the electrical resistivity of fly ash particles [25], whereas ammonia conditioning improves the surface charge density and cohesive properties of the particles [21]. Hence, a critical review of various techniques and methodologies employed for controlling the SPM in thermal power stations will
be quite useful to the power plant authorities. With this in view, a critical review of the various FGC techniques and methodologies adopted for controlling the SPM level at thermal power stations is presented in this paper. Efforts have also been made to highlight the influence of different FGC systems on reduction of the SPM level
2.1.Cyclone separator
A cyclone separator is a device that applies centrifugal force to separate suspended particles from the flue gas streams [1,5]. The coarser particles are moved towards the cyclone separator wall due to the applied centrifugal force, as depicted in Fig. 1. This force is locally opposed by aerodynamic drag in the radial direction; hence, the particles get carried towards the bottom of the cyclone separator. However, the finer particles exit at the top with the flue gas [8]. The efficiency of the cyclone separator depends on the size and density of the particle, flue gas inlet velocity and its viscosity, cone length and diameter of the cyclone separator, and flue gas inlet and outlet diameters . Various industries use cyclone separators because of inherent advantages such as simple structures, low cost, less space requirement and the capability to withstand high pressure and high temperature conditions [24,6]. Also, cyclone separators have no moving parts, which results in minimum maintenance and less energy consumption . Cyclone separators can be operated at higher inlet
dust concentrations than fine particle control devices. Therefore, cyclone separators are most often chosen for the first stage of industrial dust collection systems . There are several limitations associated with cyclone separators, such as low collection efficiency for fine particles, which is not desirable for industrial application . As a result, cyclone separators are normally used for removal of coarse particles [18], which may result in abrasion of the cyclone parts.
2.2.Bag Filter
Bag filters, as depicted in Fig. 2, are employed for removing fine particles from the flue gas [7,8,10]. Dust laden flue gas passesthrough the porous filter media, which filters off the particles and allows the clean gas to pass through. In this process, a layer of dust forms on the filter surface , resulting in increased pressure drop across the filter. The filter cake must be removed when the pressure drop reaches maximum limit, or at a pre-set filtration time, in order to maintain the filter operation without any problems. The process units and the bag filters are normally operated at steady gas flow, which is maintained by a downstream fan, to overcome the increased pressure drop across the filter. The filter cake is frequently removed by applying highpressure reverse jet pulses [9,10]. This operation involves injecting high pressure back pulse air into the filter bags for a very short time [11], causing sudden expansion of the filter medium and dislodgement of a particle cake from the filter surface . Parameters that affect the performance of bag filters are temperature, dew point and moisture of the flue gas, particle size distribution characteristics, chemical composition of dust and the operating pressure of the system [18]. The advantages of a bag filter system are (i) high collection efficiency; (ii) no corrosion problems; and (iii) ability to collect particles with high, as well as low, electrical resistivity (fly ash from low sulphur coals or fly ash containing high unburned carbon) . Though there are certain disadvantages in this system, such as (i) high maintenance costs; (ii) temperature limitations (it should not exceed 290C); (iii) during excess temperature, the system requires special refractory material, which can be expensive; and (iv) larger size and which makes it difficult to use when space is at a premium; and (v) it requires special care for dimensional stability of filter
openings that may lead to low ash collection efficiency due to the escape of particles .
2.3.Electrostatic precipitator
The application of ESPs for collecting fly ash generated due to coal combustion is a well-established technology by thermal power plants [16]. An ESP is an apparatus, or equipment, which utilizes an electric field to separate the suspended particles from the dust laden flue gas [12,18]. The fundamental principle of operation of an ESP is that the flue gas is forced to pass through an electrical field wherein the suspended particles get electrically charged . Charged particles are then deflected across the field and collected on a grounded plate, as depicted in Fig. 3. As such, the process of electrostatic precipitation involves (i) charging of particles flowing between electrodes, (ii) migration and collection of the particles on oppositely charged plates, (iii) dislodging the particles off the plates and into hoppers, and (iv) removal of the material from the hoppers [1315,17,19].
To ensure that the collection process in a dry precipitator is continuous, the collector electrodes are usually mechanically tapped after a period of time to remove the deposited material. The frequency and intensity of the rapping is important, for it is necessary to minimize rapping re-entrainment and maximize collection efficiency [8]. The rapping should facilitate dislodgement of the deposited particulate media from the collector surface in an agglomerated form, large enough to fall through the gas flow into receiving hoppers, rather than exploding the layer from the collection surface, which may result in severe particle re-entrainment . Electrical resistivity of the ash particles is one of the critical parameters which influence the fly ash collection in ESPs [20]. Fly ashes with resistivity less than 104 cm can be charged and collected very easily. Because of their conductive nature, they bled of their charge to the grounded collection plate rapidly and are prone to escape from the collection plate, either because of electrical repulsion back into the flue gas stream, or because of simple re-entrainment due to the flue gas. However, fly ashes with resistivity over 1011 cm exhibit opposite phenomena where the fly ash collected on the collecting plates will be tightly held in place by a corona current. Because of the high resistivity of the fly ash, the voltage drop can build up to such levels so as to cause the well-known back corona phenomenon, which leads to reduction in ESP collecting efficiency [21]. The electrical resistivity of the fly ash depends on its chemical composition, the constituents of the flue gases and the temperature. Fly ash composition is largely determined by the type and composition of the feed (coal), and the furnace operating conditions [20]. The fly ash electrical resistivity is determined by two different conduction mechanisms: surface and volume conduction; the former being prominent at low temperatures while the latter dominates at high temperatures. Surface
conductivity is dependent on interaction between the flue gas and the ash particles. During this interaction, electrical conduction on the surface of the ash particles is produced due to the movement of ions in the molecular coatings on the particles .
Fig 3.Details Of Electrostatics precipitator In addition, other variables which have a significant influence on effective functioning of ESPs are flue gas velocity, particle concentration and particle size, type of electrodes and the plate spacing, applied voltage and current, rapping frequency [16]. The main advantages of the electrostatic precipitation method are (i) high collection efficiency (99.9%) on removal of submicron particulates; (ii) low-operating costs; (iii) low-pressure drop; (iv) relatively large gas flows, which can be easily handled; and (v) its suitability for dealing with particles of different sizesand variable flue gas volumes .
efficiency of ESPs increases substantially [20,22,23,25,28]. The main objective is to condition the particles of fly ash/dust in the gas to increase their size, which results in increased collection efficiency . However, FGC assumes a broader connotation as conditioning involves several processes other than resistivity modification. FGC of fly ash basically aims at one or more of these effects: (i) modification of the surface electrical conductivity of the fly ash/ dust; (ii) increasing the inter-electrode space charge; and (iii) increasing fly ash/dust cohesion to reduce losses during rapping . When coal is combusted, more than 95% of the sulphur is converted to SO2, and a small fraction gets converted to gaseous SO3. However, when the temperature of the flue gas drops below 315 C, SO3 begins to react with the water vapor to yield sulphuric acid vapor. This reaction is completed when the temperature drops to about 150175 C, the temperature at which precipitators normally operate. Hence, conditioning results from the sulphuric acid vapor, rather than absorption of SO3 onto the surface of the fly ash particles. When coal with high sulphur content is combusted, there is generally enough SO3 formed to bring the electrical resistivity of 4 13 the fly ash into a range (10 10 cm) which results in good precipitator operation. However, coal with low sulphur content deteriorates the ESP performance [21]. Thus, SO3 injection is necessary to modify the electrical resistivity to a level that produces optimum precipitator performance . Basic criteria for selection of a proper FGC agent are (i) the ability to effect the desired changes in the surface properties, and improve collecting efficiency even when dosed in reasonably small amounts; (ii) it should not harm the equipment, nor constitute a health hazard or despoil the environment after being released into the atmosphere; (iii) the extra costs involved in this conditioning treatment must be acceptably low, as weighed
against the expected benefits of the treatment . The FGC system requires no modifications to the ESP; it is cost effective and it requires less installation time .
3.1.Water/steam conditioning
The injection of water by employing an atomizer, or steam, to a flue gas stream not only reduces its temperature but also increases its relative humidity. Water, or steam, is adsorbed on the particles of the fly ash, or dust, to form a very thin conductive film. This causes reduction in their surface resistivity and hence in order to have more charge carriers, the critical electrical field strength has to be overcome, for which, high voltage has to be applied. This results in an increased collection efficiency of the ESP [1,20,22] without any significant reduction in the volume or temperature of the incoming flue gases . It has been demonstrated that the atomizer type also plays an important role in this process of FGC [20]. The demerits of this system are (i) reduction in temperature, which may lead to acid dew point and cause corrosion problems; and (ii) formation of ash lumps in hoppers which makes the ash conveying system more difficult.
3.2.Sodium conditioning
The modification of fly ash resistivity can also be carried out by adding the chemical compounds that alter the composition or properties of the coal [22,23]This process increases the number of charge carrier sites on the fly ash particles. Sodium carbonate and sodium sulphate are normally used for ash modification (i.e., to decrease its resistivity) and can be directly added to the coal. Sodium has an influence on the morphological characteristics of the fly ash and lowers the ash fusion temperature during which the surface conduction is dominant [22].
Gooch et al. have evaluated the effectiveness of sodium conditioning as a means of improving the efficiency of the ESPs. It has been concluded that the conditioning depends on ash composition, and design and operating parameters of the ESP. Also, it has been suggested that high calcium concentrations in coal require the addition of more sodium to achieve the same degree of resistivity reduction as required by the coal, which contains moderate concentration of calcium.
leads to corrosion. While in an acid vaporization system, sulphuric acid is heated above its boiling point, vaporized and diluted with air. Then it is injected into the flue gas, ahead of the ESP. Water vapor is always present in the acid vaporization system, so, heating is necessary to keep gas temperature above the dew point. The manifold inside the flue gas is insulated to prevent corrosion and premature condensation [22]. In catalytic conversion of SO2 to SO3, liquid SO2 is vaporized in a steam-heated vaporizer; the SO2 vapor can then be mixed with enough air to produce a mixture containing approximately 8% of SO2 by volume. This mixture is heated at 450 C, during which about 7075% of SO2 is converted to SO3. The resulting mixture can be injected into the flue gas [22]. In a sulphur burning system, molten sulphur is pumped from a storage tank to the sulphur burner. Liquid sulphur is atomized with high velocity air and completely burned to SO2 in the combustion chamber at 870 C. After cooling to 340C in an air cooler, the gas is converted catalytically in a vanadium oxide bedto SO3. The conversion efficiency is about 72%. The dilute SO3 gas, at 600C, is transported to the ESP distribution manifold for gas conditioning purpose.Wagoner and Woracek have investigated the FGC process with sulphur trioxide in a thermal power station. The coal with different sulphur content (2.75%, 1.26% and 0.49%) is used and the corresponding efficiency of the ESP and the SO3 feed rate are monitored. It has been concluded that the SO3 helps to restore the precipitator performance while burning the wide range of sulphur coal in the process. Fig. 4 illustrates the flow diagram employed by sulphur trioxide conditioning for a coal-based thermal power station. As depicted in the figure, this FGC system consists of a sulphur storage facility, an SO3 production unit, and a piping and nozzle arrangement for distribution into the flue gas path. The basic
process deals with storing molten sulphur in an insulated steam heated tank, maintained at 148 C. The molten sulphur piping is also heated with the steam and the temperature is maintained the same as that of the storage tank. This helps to achieve the ideal flow characteristics for sulphur. From the tank, the molten sulphur is pumped into the sulphur burner, where it is atomized with the heated air, which helps in its conversion to sulphur dioxide. SO2 is then passed through a catalytic converter, where it is oxidized to SO3 with the aid of Vanadium pentoxide, which acts as a catalyst. The hot SO3 is mixed with the air and conveyed through insulated piping system to the nozzles located in the flue gas ducts. The temperature is maintained above the acid vapor dew point temperature all the way through the piping arrangement to the exit (i.e., the injection probes). This helps to avoid acid condensation. which aids in the proper supply of acid to the flue gas, and prevents the corrosion of the piping and injection nozzles. Each nozzle is fitted with a thermocouple to monitor the flue gas temperature. The blower delivers filtered air to the process and the catalytic converter has two stages designed to improve SO2 to SO3 conversion efficiency. The entire system is equipped with control valves and a flow monitoring system connected to the control panel, which helps to monitor boiler load, opacity signalwhich indicates the emission of SPM and the ESP operational conditions.
collecting electrodes, which produces a space charge enhancement of the electric field [23]. Ammonia is used as a coagulating agent to create larger fly ash particles; therefore it provides a fly ash that is receptive to the available SO3. When the flue gas temperature is above 150C, ammonium bisulfate melts and become a semiliquid, acting like a glue when mixed with the fly ash. This produces highly cohesive and relatively large particles, resulting in high collection efficiency due to the reduced rapping losses and re-entrainment. This effect is also referred to as agglomeration [22]. This mechanism assists in particle-to particle interaction, or particle-to-collection plate interaction of the ESP greatly improves . The electrical and intermolecular forces are generally active in very fine particles (o1 mm), and the agglomerates can form from these particles spontaneously, especially under agitation. Fig. 5 illustrates a typical arrangement employed for ammonia conditioning for a coal fired thermal power station. As depicted in the figure, this system consists of an anhydrous ammonia storage facility, an ammonia vapor production unit, and a piping and nozzle arrangement for distribution into the path of the flue gas. The basic process deals with storage of the anhydrous ammonia in a tank. From this tank, the ammonia is pumped into the vaporizer, where it is converted into vapor form, mixed with the air and conveyed through pipes to the nozzles located in the flue gas ducts. Each nozzle is fitted with a thermocouple to indicate the flue gas temperature, and the blower delivers filtered air to the process. The entire system is equipped with control valves and a flow monitoring system, connected to a control panel, which helps to monitor the boiler load, opacity signal and the ESP operational conditions.
resistivity of fly ash occurs at 140 C in the presence of sulphuric acid vapor. Author has opined that the amount of SO3, which is naturally generated from the coal sulphur, can be estimated by using these correlations . However, the injection rate of the FGC agent predicted by controlled bench scale experiments (which maintain a constant volume of acid vapor concentration in the flue gas over a relatively long period of time at a constant temperature) differs from realistic conditions in which the fly ash is exposed to these agents for a very short duration, and under varied temperatures . Since the acid vapor film formation on the surface of the fly ash particle is related to the conditioning process, the coal ash content and the composition of the ash particles affects the amount of conditioning agent to be injected . Coe and Krigmont have employed regression analysis (Eq. (3)) to study various possible factors that influence the rate of injection of the FGC agents and factors influencing coal characteristics: y = K1 + K2(X1) a, where y corresponds to the amount of injected SO3 and natural SO3 from the coal sulphur; X1 is an independent variable, which represents overall coal characteristics such as sulphur content and ash content; and K1, K2 and a are empirical constants. It is very important to identify the most appropriate FGC agent(s) and their injection rate(s) in order to establish the efficient performance of the ESP. Some approaches that are employed to optimize the FGC system are (i) a theoretical approach, based on the computer models, which helps to estimate the relationship between SO3 and the flue gas temperature; (ii) a procedural approach, which helps in the adjustment of one variable at a time; and (iii) a statistical methods, which consider more than one independent variable for designing an experiment.
However, the issues to be considered for optimizing the FGC system are (i) an individual should be identified for executing the process so that it will be easy to adjust the dosing level in the FGC system to control the emission of SPM, based on the knowledge about the total system in a particular power station; (ii) the meters on the precipitator power supply controls should be in good operating condition and should run under automatic control, which helps in ESP performance; (iii) opacity monitors whichindicates the emission of SPM should be in calibration and operating correctly, as this is the device to be used for reference in making injection rate adjustments; (iv) system data should be collected at regular intervals to assist the optimization efforts. The data that should be collected for FGC system optimization pertain to (i) the boiler unit (viz., boiler load, coal flow, coal proximate analysis, economizer outlet temperature, air heater temperature, precipitator outlet temperature, steam flow and stack opacity); (ii) the ESP unit (viz., primary power consumption, secondary power consumption, spark rate, rapping cycle schedule and number of supplies in/or out of service); (iii) the SO3 FGC system unit (viz., injection rate, boiler load signal, air heater control setpoint, converter inlet temperature, converter outlet temperature, air flow and sulphur flow); and (iv) the NH3 FGC system unit (viz., injection rate, boiler load signal, ammonia tank pressure and air flow).
operating temperatures, and their suitability for corrosive environmental conditions. Though, cyclone separators [16,18] and bag filters [711,18] have also been employed to remove particulate matter, these techniques also have limitations. It has been demonstrated in previous research [7] that the performance of ESP can be improved by changing the feed coal, increasing the collection plate area to the existing ESP, employing wet ESP to minimize re-entrainment, increasing or lowering the gas temperature, and by the addition of chemicals to modify the fly ash or the electrical conditions in the ESP. However, most of these options are difficult to implement at a power station, mainly due to the constraints associated with feed coal (i.e., cost associated with import, washing of the coal and environmental issues associated with it, and ash content etc.); addition of more collection plate area in ESP (which requires more space and is very expensive), installation and operating costs for employing wet ESPs, which are too high apart from lump formation of the ash and its degradation as a construction material . Under these circumstances, FGC becomes the inevitable choice. Based on the critical review of the literature, it has been observed that an FGC system has several advantages over other systems such as (i) lower cost input compared to the establishment of additional ESPs; (ii) shorter execution time; (iii) more flexibility and versatility even if variations in operating parameters occur (such as coal variation, boiler load, ESP voltage and current change), SPM levels can be controlled/maintained easily by simply adjusting the amount of FGC agents. These agents are quite useful in reducing resistivity, and hence improving the surface conduction characteristics of the particles of fly ash/dust. In order to demonstrate the influence of FGC agents and their effectiveness in reducing SPM levels, investigations were conducted on various coal-based thermal power stations in India;
the results are reported in the following section. Some results from power stations in other parts of the world are also included.
6. Concluding remarks
An effort has been made to review the existing literature on the devices which are employed by various thermal power stations for reducing SPM levels. It has been observed that ESPs are widely employed for this purpose. However, the other SPM emission control methods are less effective, FGC becomes the inevitable choice for improving the performance of the ESPs in which sulphur trioxide and ammonia are commonly employed. These agents are quite helpful in altering (e.g., reducing the resistivity) the properties of fly ash/dust particles and hence improving collection efficiency. Efforts were also made to develop relationships between various parameters that can be used as guidelines by thermal power stations employing FGC systems. However, extensive studies should be conducted to check the validity of these equations for various thermal power stations where the operational conditions may be entirely different.
References
[1] Hesketh HE. Air pollution controltraditional and hazardous pollutants. Pennsylvania: Technomic Publishing Company; 1991. [2] Xiang R, Park SH, Lee KW. Effects of cone dimension on cyclone performance. J Aerosol Sci 2001;32:54961. [3] Zhao B. Development of a new method for evaluating cyclone efficiency. Chem Eng Process 2005;44:44751. [4] Qian F, Zhang J, Zhang M. Effects of the prolonged vertical tube on the separation performance of a cyclone. J Hazard Mater 2006;136:8229. [5] Jiao J, Zheng Y. A multi-region model for determining the cyclone efficiency. Sep Purif Technol 2007;53:26673. [6] Chen J, Shi M. A universal model to calculate cyclone pressure drop. Powder Technol 2007;171:18491. [7] Ross RD. Air pollution and industry. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company; 1972. [8] Parker AC. Industrial air pollution handbook. UK: McGraw-Hill Book Company (UK) Limited; 1978.
[9] Mycock JC, McKenna JD, Theodore L. Handbook of air pollution control engineering and technology. New York: Lewis Publishers; 1995. [10] Saleem M, Krammer G. Effect of filtration velocity and dust concentration on cake formation and filter operation in a pilot scale jet pulsed bag filter.J Hazard Mater 2007;144:67781 .[11] Simon X, Chazelet S, Thomas D, Bemer D, Regnier R. Experimental study of pulse-jet cleaning of bag filters supported by rigid rings. Powder Technol 2007;172:6781. [12] White HJ. Industrial electrostatic precipitation. USA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company; 1963. [13] Perkins HC. Air pollution. International student edition. McGraw-Hill Kogakusha; 1974. [14] Engelbrecht HL. Rapping systems for collecting surfaces in an electrostatic precipitator. Environ Int 1981;6:297305. [15] Corbin RG. A method for the location of sparks in electrostatic precipitators. Appl Acoustics 1987;22:297317. [16] Navarrete B, Canadas L, Cortes V, Salvador L, Galindo J. Influence of plate spacing and ash resistivity on the efficiency of electrostatic precipitators. J Electrostat 1997;39:6581. [17] Bottner CU. The role of the space charge density in particulate processes in the example of the electrostatic precipitator. Powder Technol 2003;135136:28594. [18] Ray TK. Air pollution control in industriestheory, selection & design of air pollution control equipment, vol. 1. New Delhi: TechBooks International; 2004. [19] Bennett R. Fly ash conditioning to improve precipitator efficiency with low sulphur coals. /www.benetechusa.comS [accessed 13.03.06]. [20] Ray TK. Air pollution control in industriesapplication of air pollution control equipment, vol. 2. New Delhi: TechBooks International; 2004. [21] Krigmont HV. Ammonia conditioning of flue gases. /www.alentecin.comS [accessed 18.02.06]. [22] Oglesby S, Nichols GB. Electrostatic precipitation. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc.; 1978. [23] EPA. Stationary source control techniques document for fine particulate matter. Final technical report. USEPA. Report no. EPA-452/R-97-001, 1998. [24] Reese JT, Greco J. Experience with electrostatic fly ash collection equipment serving steam-electric generating plants. J Air Pollut Control Assoc 1968;18: 5238. [25] Dalmon J, Tidy D. A comparison of chemical additives as aids to the electrostatic precipitation of fly ash. Atmos Environ 1972;6:72134. [26] Archer WE. Fly ash conditioning update. Power Eng 1972:503. [27] Kukin I, Bennett R. Particulate emission control through chemical conditioning. Combustion 1976:425. [28] Borsheim R. Fly ash conditioning brings particulate emissions into compliance. Power Eng 1977:4850. [29] Cheremisinoff PN. Advanced fly ash conditioning technology. Power Eng 1977:1102. [30] Brown TD, Lee GK, Reeve J, Sekhar N. Improved electrostatic precipitator performance by use of fly ash conditioning agents. J Inst Fuel 1978:1958. [31] Harker JR, Pimparkar PM. The effect of additives on the electrostatic precipitation of fly ash. J Inst Fuel 1988:13442. [32] ACRL. Electrostatic precipitation of fly ash from Australian bituminous coal. ACARP report. Australian Coal Research Limited, Issue no. 4, January 1998. [33] Alvarez E, Blanco J, Knapp C, Olivares J, Salvador L. Pilot plant performance of a SO2 to SO3 oxidation catalyst for flue-gas conditioning. Catal Today 2000;59:41722.