1 / 19

Reduction of Mercury Emissions from Manganese and Secondary Steel Industries

This text discusses the measures taken to reduce mercury emissions from the manganese and secondary steel industries in Norway. It covers the challenges faced, the adoption of gas cleaning technology, and future recommendations.

jmetzger
Download Presentation

Reduction of Mercury Emissions from Manganese and Secondary Steel Industries

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 “ Reduction of Mercury Emissions from Manganese Industryand Secondary Steel Industry • Tor Faerden • Senior Adviser • Norwegian Pollution Control Authority (SFT)

  2. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 The Norwegian goal for reduced emissions of mercury • Compared with 1995, the emissions • shall be significantly reduced by 2010.

  3. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 Emission and Deposition of Mercury in Norway

  4. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 • Reduced Hg emissions from the Manganese Industry • 2 manganese smelters formerly used ore from Australia and South Africa. • In 1999 the smelters were bought by a corporation which also is the owner of a mine in Gabon. • Change to ore from Gabon would increase mercury emissions from 10 to 600-1000 kg per year. • The smelters were instructed to apply for a pollution permit for Hg

  5. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 A permit was issued by SFT, allowing the two smelters to emit 36 and 15 kg mercury per year.The alternative routes for the smelters:1 To use ore from competitors2 To install gas cleaning equipmentThe company decided to go for alternative 2

  6. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 • The challenges: • No proven technology was available • The waste gas is explosive • The way ahead: • 4 possible suppliers carried out pilot tests at one of the plants to demonstrate possible technologies and to monitor cleaning efficiency.

  7. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 Manganese smeltersSimplified flow sheet for waste gas CO gas to consumer Smelting furnace Wet scrubber Wet ESP Hg adsorber Dust and PAH Hg Dust

  8. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 • The result: • Installation of full scale gas cleaning facilities were completed in 2001/2002. • Investment per smelter: 5 mill EUR • Cleaning efficiency Hg > 99 % • Dust emission < 1 mg/Nm3 • Other heavy metals: Low emissions

  9. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007

  10. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 The secondary steel plant • Product: Reinforcing bars • Capacity: 700 000 tons per year (medium-sized secondary steel plant) • Hg emission: 120-150 kg per year • Raw material: Steel scrap of low / medium quality, contaminated with heavy metals from surface treatment or from components previously connected to the steel • Steel scrap: 750 000 tons per year. 50 % is imported

  11. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 Hg-contamination of steel scrap: • Hg in electrical components • connected to steel constructions • in used cars • in instruments and electronic equipment • in various consumer goods • Hg in chemicals used for anti-fouling of steel A volume of Hg similar to 1 matchbox mixed into 2 000 tons of scrap per day is equal to 150 kg per year

  12. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 Testwork done by the steel plant: • Test smelting combined with monitoring of Hg in waste gas with • - Selected types of scrap • - Scrap from selected suppliers • Main conclusion: The only way of achieving significant reduction of Hg emissions is through waste gas cleaning

  13. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 The steel process

  14. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007

  15. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 The challenges: • - Significant short term variations in concentration of dust, Hg and other heavy metals • - No proven technology available • The way ahead: • A number of possible suppliers of gas cleaning technology were invited to make pilot scale tests and to monitor cleaning efficiency

  16. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 Probably possible to clean 95 % of Hg in primary waste gas and 85 % of total emissions from the furnace • Test result: • Possible future emission limit value: • 30 kg per year • Also stricter limit values for dust and other heavy metals

  17. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 • Decision on new emission limit values has been postponed until similar restrictions are given to other steel companies in EU. • Arguments: • Investment (6 mill EUR) and operating cost (1 mill EUR/year) would weaken the competitive strength of the company • Unfair to place this burden on a single company within the steel industry since the problem is global and not local

  18. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 News in 2006/2007 • The steel plant has been sold to Celsa Group, Spain. • The new owner has decided to convert the steel process to • the CONSTEEL process (preheating and continuous charging of scrap into the electric steel furnace). Investment 20 mill EUR • Environmenal adventage: • Easier to collect and treat all waste gas • The company has applied for a new pollution permit where treatment of Hg and improved treatment of dust will be included.

  19. LRTAP TFHM meeting Vienna 6-8 June 2007 • Future recommendations on the international level: • It is recommended that emissions of Hg from the steel industry should be examined closely. • Steps should be taken to regulate Hg emissions from relevant industries.

More Related