The issue with exhaust gas recovery?
Thread Content
We are planning to introduce sulfur recovery, but after research, it turns out that the residual exhaust gas recovery units generally cannot be operated after the Claus reaction, due to blockages in the downstream trays. Is this caused by design issues or operational problems? Please ask an expert to explain. Is it necessary to remove it?
Most are due to operational reasons. Online analyzers for hydrogen sulfide and sulfur dioxide in Klaus exhaust gases, as well as an online analyzer for hydrogen content in the exhaust gases, are essential; otherwise, problems may arise in exhaust gas treatment.
Air distribution is very important for sulfur recovery units. If too much air is supplied, sulfur dioxide in the exhaust gas hydrogenation reactor does not get fully hydrogenated to form hydrogen sulfide; the sulfur generated as a result of the further reaction between hydrogen sulfide and sulfur dioxide deposits in the quench tower, blocking the tray surfaces.
Ours isn’t turned on either; I think there are reasons related to both design and operation – there’s a big gap between computer simulations and actual operations. The emission control process can only be carried out when the load is sufficient, the on-site instruments are of good quality, and the operations are performed with precision. If environmental regulations are strict, then operate it; if they’re not strict, it’s better not to operate it. It’s too troublesome. :handshake
Our facility started operations last June. During academic studies and site inspections, it was found that the exhaust gas treatment systems of many sulfur-related facilities were not in use; some did so to save costs, while others were reluctant to activate them for fear that they wouldn’t be able to operate properly.
We have installed a new sulfur plant that includes exhaust gas treatment and solvent regeneration. For the Claus unit, it is necessary to ensure proper air supply; for the exhaust gas section, attention must be paid to the temperature of the hydrogenation reactor, while for solvent regeneration, the temperature and liquid level need to be properly controlled.
Two points to note: 1. Starting and stopping the exhaust gas treatment is very simple (for SSR); basically, once sulfur treatment is initiated, the exhaust gas issue is resolved. 2. The absence of exhaust fumes does cause environmental pollution. I suggest that if you have the means, try to drive as much as possible
The poster might not be referring to state-owned enterprises at all; for state-owned companies like CNPC and Sinopec, the utilization rate of exhaust gas purification units is 100%. If older facilities don’t have such units, that’s one thing, but how can they dare not use them even when they do exist? The environmental protection agency’s fines are too high to afford! Private enterprises design sulfur recovery systems solely to meet environmental assessment requirements and to obtain loans; a Claus unit can produce some sulfur, which does bring certain benefits. However, investing in online analysis for exhaust gas purification increases the energy consumption of the facility significantly – how many private owners are aware of this?
Ensure stable operation of Klaus ahead. . . . . The hydrogenation reactor should ensure complete reaction to prevent the formation of S in the quench tower, which could clog the tray plates
I think what was said on the 8th floor is great! In fact, sulfur also has its benefits; products related to environmental protection devices are exempt from taxes. As those involved in the sulfur industry and in environmental protection, we must firmly support environmental efforts and work to reduce emissions!
Adding sulfur scavengers in the Klaus section to recover sulfur can reduce blockages in the quench tower. If there is one, check its capture efficiency. It can also cause the tray to become clogged if it’s not good