Skip to main content
Log in

Thermal Decomposition of COS to CO and Sulfur: Byproducts of Flue Gas Scrubbing

  • Published:
Solid Fuel Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Sulfur dioxide in flue gas from coal-fired power plants presents both ecological and health hazards. Scrubbing dilute, sulfurous flue gas with carbonate eutectic melt at 823K can mitigate these hazards, but for an efficient and economical process, the melt must be regenerated and any resulting contaminants, in particular carbonyl sulfide gas (COS), a known neurotoxin, eliminated. In order to characterize this final stage in the recycling process, the thermal decomposition of COS was studied. A laboratory-scale, quartz flow reactor operating in the temperature range 773–1123 K was selected, with the optional addition of one of three potential catalysts to promote decomposition: an untreated or aqua regia-treated catalytic convertor, γ-alumina powder and charcoal. The extent of decomposition and the reaction products were monitored via gas chromatography as a function of reactor temperature and gas residence time. The feed gas concentration of COS was generally held constant at 30 mol%, the remainder being N2. Under the conditions of our study, 7–44 min residence time, catalytic effects on the kinetics of the COS decomposition reaction were not observed. AddingCO2, thereby lowering the feed COS concentration to 20 mol%, resulted in increased COS decomposition for T < 923 K. Reducing the flow rate from 60 to10 ml/min led to marked increase in the extent of COS thermal decomposition : gas chromatography evaluated COS decomposition at ≈76% following 44 min residence time in the reactor at 823 K. Under no conditions of time or temperature, were reaction products other than CO and sulfur detected.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 6.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Kaplan, V., Wachtel, E., Dosmukhamedov, N., and Lubomirsky, I., Int. J. Oil, Gas Coal Technol., 2018, vol. 18, nos. 1–2, p. 25.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Kaplan, V., Wachtel, E., and Lubomirsky, I., RSC Adv., 2013, vol. 3, no. 36, p. 15842.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Yosim, S.J., Grantham, L.F., Mckenzie, D.E., and Stegmann, G.C., Adv. Chem. Ser., 1973, vol. 127, p. 174.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Salem, A., Soliman, A., and El-Haty, I., Air Quality, Atmosph. Health, 2009, vol. 9, nos. 2–3, p. 133.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Lee, J., Cho, H., Moon, I., Lubomirsky, I., Kaplan, V., Kim, J., and Ahn, J., Comput. Chem. Eng., 2021, vol. 146, p. 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Nannen, L.W., West, R.E., and Kreith, F., J. Air Pollut. Control Assoc., 1974, vol. 24, no. 1, p. 29.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Davenport, W.G., King, M., Schlesinger, M., and Biswas, A.K., Extractive Metallurgy of Copper, Oxford: Pergamon Press, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Nolan, P., Coal-Tech 2000 Int. Conf., Jakarta, 2000, p. 1.

  9. Klimont, Z., Smith, S.J., and Cofala, J., Environ. Res. Lett., 2013, vol. 8, p. 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Haas, L.A. and Khalafalla, S.E., J. Catal., 1973, vol. 30, p. 451.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Clark, P.D., Dowling, N.I., Huang, M., Svrcek, W.Y., and Monnery, W.D., Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2001, vol. 40, no. 2, p. 497.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Partington, J.R. and Neville, H.H., J. Chem. Soc. (London), 1951, p. 1230.

  13. Karan, K., Megrotra, A., and Behie, L., Chem. Eng. Commun., 2005, vol. 192, p. 370.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Sames, J.A. and Paskall, H.G., Sulphur, 1984, vol. 172, p. 47.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Turkdogan, E.T., Physical Chemistry of High Temperature Technology, New York: Academic Press, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Chase, M.W., NIST-JANAF Thermochemical Tables, New York: Am. Chem. Soc., 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Cardona-Vargas, A., Valencia, D., Arrieta, C.E., and Amell, A., J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 2020, vol. 1708, p. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Steven, S.C., Chuang, S., and Zhang, L., Handbook of Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation, New York: Springer, 2015.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors thank Dr. Konstantin Gartsman and Dr. Yishay Feldman for their expert assistance in identifying the elemental composition and X-ray diffraction phase, respectively, of the octasulfur crystals deposited in the cooled trap. This work is made possible in part by the historic generosity of the Harold Perlman Family.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. Kaplan.

Ethics declarations

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Taichman, O., Kaplan, V., Wachtel, E. et al. Thermal Decomposition of COS to CO and Sulfur: Byproducts of Flue Gas Scrubbing. Solid Fuel Chem. 56, 21–28 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3103/S0361521922010074

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3103/S0361521922010074

Keywords:

Navigation