Page 243 - Air Pollution Control Engineering
P. 243

05_chap_wang.qxd  05/05/2004  3:46 pm  Page 222
                    222                                                    Lawrence K. Wang et al.


                                             F = 1.81 × 10 −4  (Q ) (P) (HRS)                 (23)
                                              p              e,a
                    where F is the fan power requirement (kWh/yr), Q  is the actual emission stream flow
                           p                                     e,a
                    rate (acfm), P is the system pressure drop (in. H O), and HRS is the system operating
                                                               2
                    hours (h/yr).
                       The cost of scrubbing liquor (most likely water) is given by

                                                  WR = 0.6 (Q ) HRS                           (31)
                                                            e,a
                    where WR is the water consumption (gal/yr).
                       A general assumption of needed operator labor is 2 h for each 8-h shift. Management
                    labor costs are assumed to be 15% that of operator labor costs. Labor costs are presented
                    in Table 7. Maintenance is normally estimated in industry as requiring 1 h from each 8-h
                    shift. This cost is also provided in Table 7. Materials required for normal maintenance
                    are assumed to equal cost of maintenance.
                       It should be noted that the cost of the wastewater generated by a Venturi scrubber is
                    potentially quite high. Although not discussed here, such cost should be included when
                    considering the use of a Venturi scrubber for an air pollution control project. Table 7
                    also includes such indirect costs as property taxes, capital recovery, administrative
                    costs, and so forth. Table 10 presents both the US Environmental Protection Agency’s
                    conservative control efficiencies (CE) and the typical actual control efficiencies (CE) of
                    a wet scrubber for removal of various hazardous air emissions. Either a fabric filter system
                    or a four-field electrostatic precipitator is used as the pretreatment to the wet scrubber.

                    3. DRY SCRUBBERS

                    3.1. Dry Absorbents
                       A dry chemical absorbent scrubber will almost always use either a calcium- or
                    sodium-based absorbent. These absorbents are classified as alkali absorbents, which
                    have excellent to good absorbent properties for most of the acid gases as well as for
                    some organic air pollutants. Additionally, the dry alkali absorbent most commonly
                    used is slaked lime or Ca(OH) . In some instances, dry (powdered) activated carbon
                                                2
                    is also added to the dry absorbent. This is done so that the dry (or semidry) scrubber
                    will also be able to remove heavy metals and/or trace (and often very toxic) organic
                    pollutants. After the dry scrubbing, the solids (used and unused absorbent as well as
                    particulate matter) are accumulated at the bottom of the scrubber tower or possibly
                    directed to a baghouse (or other particulate collector). The removal efficiency of a wet
                    scrubber is primarily dependent on the acid/alkali ratio used in the scrubber as well
                    as outlet air temperature.

                    3.2. Dry Scrubbing Systems
                       Three dry scrubbers commonly found in air pollution control operations in industry are
                    presented (15) in Fig. 6A,B. They are dry–dry, semi–dry, and spray dryer absorber systems.

                    3.2.1. Dry–Dry Systems
                       When injecting hydrated lime or pulverized limestone directly into a furnace (or
                    other combustion chamber) or into the ducting downstream from a combustion process,
   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248