On the dust removal from catalytic cracking flue gas
Thread Content
At present, most of the catalytic flue gas desulfurization adopts wet method. During the desulfurization process, particulate matter is dragged out at the same time. However, one problem is that the fine catalyst powder in the circulating slurry is very difficult to handle. It is understood that Anqing and Shijiazhuang each have one set of catalytic dust removal using dry method (electrostatic precipitator, imported technology). Generally speaking, dry method should be more reasonable than wet method to remove catalyst. I wonder if there is a problem in the actual production process. In addition to price factors, are there any safety issues?
Since the process package adopted requires wet catalytic flue gas desulfurization, the vast majority of plants at home and abroad that utilize this process package employ wet desulfurization. From numerous owners of similar domestic installations, it has been learned that not only is the recycling and treatment of the circulating alkali solution used in wet flue gas desulfurization complicated due to the presence of fine catalyst particles, but there are also significant problems related to defoaming in chimney emissions. As a result, “acid rain” or “alkaline rain” often falls on the areas surrounding the chimneys. The adoption of a dry process in such installations is indeed a good attempt; however, it requires a bold owner who, at the initial stage of project design, demands that the designer modify the catalytic flue gas desulfurization process within the overall process package—shifting it from the conventional wet process to a dry one. Catalytic dry flue gas desulfurization requires the use of dry catalytic desulfurization during the desulfurization process, and its costs and operational flexibility are subject to challenges and tests. Furthermore, for dust removal from flue gas emissions, electrostatic dust removal cannot be the only option considered. Electrostatic precipitation has frequently demonstrated its incompatibility with actual operating conditions in the application of flue gas desulfurization, denitrification, and dust removal in power plants. Those familiar with electrostatic dust removal equipment know that this technology imposes strict requirements on the types of particles carried by the airflow, as well as on the size distribution of those particles in the airflow ； Otherwise, the operational efficiency is not satisfactory, and the operating costs are high. Regarding the application of electrostatic dust removal technology, if it is used in conjunction with dynamically efficient gas-solid separation technologies such as multi-factor cyclone separators, the multi-factor cyclone separators—which have very low operating costs—can remove most of the particulate matter present in the airflow in advance ； Let the electrostatic dust removal equipment capture the remaining, very small particles. This dry dust removal technology, which combines a “multi-factor cyclone primary and secondary separator + electrostatic precipitation”, can ensure smoother system operation, lower operation and maintenance costs, and better exhaust emission indicators. For more information regarding multi-factor cyclone separators and other high-efficiency dynamic separation technologies and equipment, please visit the direct link http://bbs.hcbbs.com/thread-1354813-1-1.html on the Haichuan Chemical Forum. For more professional separation technology solutions, please contact a professional separation technology company.