Status of Mercury Control Technologies
for Coal-Fired Power Plants
URGE EPA TO REDUCE MERCURY NOW!
In response to laws and regulations that are being developed to control mercury from power plants (see Mercury and the Bush Administration), technology vendors have been working for years on finding ways to effectively and inexpensively reduce mercury that is released when power plants burn coal (see list of current vendors). Many different strategies have been discovered, which usually involve adding a substance that combines with the mercury so that it can be removed by filters and scrubbers already installed at the power plant to control other pollutants. While success depends on the type of coal burned and the existing control technologies present at the plant, technologies exist today that can control more than 90% of mercury emissions - and they will only improve in the near future.
Below is a list of reports and websites where you can see the latest on mercury control options at coal plants:
- Even back in 2001, U.S. EPA said that a mercury MACT rule (based on current technology) would likely control mercury by 90% by 2007, even if they subcategorized for coal types – see Dec.4, 2001 presentation to Edison Electric Institute
- NESCAUM Report Detailing Over 90% Reductions Are Feasible, November, 2003. “The Clean Air Act requires that EPA establish a Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) “floor” that is based on the average emissions reductions achieved by the top 12 percent of power plants for which EPA has data. If these boilers are ranked according to the percent reduction achieved, the average of the top 12 percent is a 91 percent reduction from the mercury in the combusted coal.”
- Massachusetts Dept. of Environmental Protection Mercury Feasibility Report, December 2002, which concluded that “the removal of 85-90+% of mercury in flue gas has been demonstrated to be technologically and economically feasible”
- National Wildlife Federation’s compilation of recent mercury control tests at coal plants across the country, June 2003, showing that over 90% control is feasible at plants burning bituminous and subbituminous coal (view report)
- EPA February 2004 Mercury Technology Report (pdf, 211k), in which EPA's own scientists say that 90% mercury reductions are achievable at all coal plants with any type of coal by 2010, using combinations of technologies that are available today (see conclusion #2 and Table 3)
- Mercury and Power Plants: Can Technology Meet the Challenge?, Matt Little, Northeast-Midwest Economic Review, Nov/Dec 2001
- Clean Air Task Force, National Wildlife Federation, and Natural Resources Defense Council’s joint report, July 2003, “Controlling Mercury from Power Plants: Current State of Technology”, concluding that emissions can be dramatically and affordably reduced from all types of existing boilers burning all types of coals (view report)
- US Status Report on Mercury Activities, EPA, February, 2000, noting that mercury control technology research has found: 1) Phase I testing of flue gas cooling using moisture or heat exchangers resulted in more than 90% capture of the mercury found upstream of the efficiency electrostatic precipitators (ESPs), 2) Wet Flue Gas Desulfurization systems have the potential to remove more than 95% of elemental mercury once it is converted to a more soluble form, and 3) a highly reliable advanced hybrid particular collector can provide >99.99% collection efficiency rate for all particle sizes (pg 24-25).
- Over 20 technical articles and presentations on mercury control by ADA Environmental Solutions (a vendor of mercury control technologies) – go to www.adaes.com and click on “publications”
- Report Update: Technology Options and Recommendations for Reducing Mercury Acid Rain Precursor Emissions from Boilers, Conference of New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers, August 2002, “the Workgroup has concluded that data continue to demonstrate that control technologies … exist that can reduce mercury emissions in excess of 90%, in fact substantial date indicates that reductions >95% are possible, especially for bituminous coal-fired boilers” (pg 5).
- Testimony of the Energy and Environmental Center at the University of North Dakota in front of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, June 3, 2003, concluding that “combinations of available control methods may be able to provide up to 90% control for some plants but not for others, depending upon coal type.”
- Papers and Presentations from the Department of Energy’s “Mercury Control Technology R&D Program Review Meeting” August 12-13, 2003
- Capitol Hill briefing by vendors of technologies and power plants, July 2001
- Full Scale Evaluation of Sorbent Injection for Mercury Control on Coal-Fired Power Plants, Presented at Air Quality III, September 12, 2002, “tests show that 90% mercury removal is possible when sorbants are injected upstream of a fabric filter.” (click on “Full Scale Testing of Mercury Control Via Sorbent Injection” and scroll down)
- Tesimony Before the U. S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works on Status of Sorbent Injection Mercury Control Technology, January 29, 2002, noting that short-term removal levels in excess of 90% were obtained with COHPAC, and activated carbon was effective in removing both elemental and oxidized mercury.
- Mercury Control Technology article in American Coal Council, 2003, by Michael Durham (a vendor of mercury control technologies) discussing control options of 50-90+%
- ADA-ES/DOE Mercury Control Program at Wisconsin Electric Pleasant Prairie Power Plant, Michael E. Durham, long term test conclusions found a mercury removal efficiency of 60-70% (slide 32) January 23, 2002, (go to www.netl.doe.gov/coalpower/environment/mercury/control_index.html, click on “Full Scale Testing of Mercury Control Via Sorbent Injection” and scroll down)
- Full-Scale Evaluation of Mercury Control with Sorbent Injection and COHPAC at Alabama Power E.C. Gaston, updated January 28, 2002, “effective mercury removal, up to 90% efficiency, was obtained for short operating periods (8 hrs) by injecting powdered activated carbon (PAC) upstream of COHPAC … on average, around 78% mercury removal was obtained when PAC was injected into COHPAC 24 hr/day during long-term tests.” (pg 20).
- Wet FGD Mercury Control for Coal-Fired Utility Boilers, SCIENTECH Mercury Emissions Control Workshop, Presenter: Kevin E. Redinger, Babcock & Wilcox, January 22, 2002, stating that current level of wet FGD mercury control is 90% for bituminous and 75% for sub-bituminous with near-term potential (2007-2008) of 90% for bituminous and 85% for sub-bituminous (slide 28); wet FGD mercury control has 90+% removal potential for bituminous coal (slide 29).
- Full-Scale Testing of Mercury Control for Wet FGD Systems, Presented at the 27th International Technical Conference on Coal Utilization and Fuel Systems, Presenter: McDermott Technology, Inc., March 4-7, 2002, long-term mercury removal performance at MSCPA Endicott Station in 2001 was 79%, average mercury removal at Zimmer was 45%.
- Mercury: Mercury and Midwest Power Plants, Clean Air Task Force, February 2003, “fabric filters … in combination with sulfur dioxide controls captured more than 90% of the mercury at some power plants.”
- Analysis of Strategies for Reducing Multiple Emissions from Electric Power Plants: Sulfur Dioxide, Nitrogen Oxides, Carbon Dioxide, and Mercury and a Renewable Portfolio Standard, Energy Information Administration, July 2001, stating that a cold-side electrostatic precipitator could remove up to 87% of mercury, and fabric filters can remove nearly 100% of mercury (pg 42).
Questions? Comments? Concerns? Contact Matt Little, Sierra Club Clean Air Program Coordinator at 612-659-9124 or matt.little@sierraclub.org