Under the new environmental protection laws, exhaust emissions must be below 100; what is the most reliable method to achieve this?
Thread Content
This post was last edited by liaifeng on 2018-8-18 at 10:13. Our company is located in a special area, and starting from July 1, 2017, the new environmental protection laws will come into effect; the exhaust emission levels must be below 100. In response to these new environmental requirements, we have carried out some modifications, including installing new organic sulfur hydrolysis reactors for the hydrolysis of organic sulfur, as well as setting up separate systems for solvent regeneration. However, even after calculation, it is still uncertain whether it will meet the standards 100% when put into use. Ultimately, it’s advisable to add one more layer of safety, so that even if there are fluctuations in the previous steps, there will still be a way to address the issues before emission. So far, 2 feasible options have been considered. One approach is to add alkali for washing after the incinerator, but this method fails to address the issue of alkali residues; while the problem of gas emissions is resolved, the issue of COD in wastewater arises again. Secondly, a small hafnium-iron alloy is installed after the hydrogenation reactor; the problem is that this increases the investment cost and energy consumption. What other good solutions are there? Please offer some advice. . . . . .
What is the current process route? What is the production capacity of the device? What are the treatment methods before exhaust emissions are released nowadays? Try to make modifications using existing equipment; only add new equipment if that doesn’t achieve the desired results. But every option requires additional investment; it’s just a matter of choosing the one whose investment and outcomes are appropriate
Our company is also located in a special area, and in order to comply with strict environmental regulations, we plan to use alkaline solutions for absorption; we’re not sure yet what the results will be, as the project is currently in the review stage. What was your smoke emission level before the renovation? What was the effect after the renovation? How much is it usually? Can we communicate?
Direct incineration after the Klaus reaction + ionic liquid desulfurization not only results in low operating costs but also delivers good performance
Direct incineration after the Klaus reaction + ionic liquid desulfurization is relatively practical for newly built plants. For old units that use exhaust gas for hydrogenation, alkaline washing remains the reliable option; the saline wastewater can be directly fed into the refinery’s saline wastewater system, and since the volume is small, it has little impact
If it is exhaust gas from the Claus process, it is recommended to consider using high-efficiency hydrogenation catalysts, reducing the temperature of the quench gas, replacing the trays in the amine absorption tower, and adjusting the composition of the amine solution to improve its leanness
Are there any proven records of successful use? I heard that 3D is collaborating with West China University to use ionic liquids at Yantai Wanhua, but it seems that this cooperation has been halted.
Has work started yet? We’re about to go in too; could you give us an introduction?
This post was last edited by Clauspolunit on 2017-5-24 08:13. I don’t think either of the two methods mentioned by the original poster is the best. Because even if emission targets are reduced, new environmental problems will arise. In my personal opinion, during normal operation, to achieve a value below 100, it is possible to consider using high-quality MDEA and reducing the temperatures of the lean liquid and quench water. However, meeting environmental emission requirements during the shutdown period is a rather tricky issue.
For old units that use exhaust gas hydrogenation, it is reasonable to adopt a process of cooling first and then carrying out alkaline washing; the investment required is around 5 million yuan. Waste alkaline solution can be used for this purpose. The main component of desulfurization waste liquid is sodium sulfite, and in small quantities it can be directly discharged into the wastewater treatment system with little impact.