This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Determination of Wet FGD Limestone Reactivity
Authors: S.R. Brown R.F. DeVault P.J. Williams Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group, Inc. Barberton, Ohio, U.S.A. Presented to: Electric Power 2010 Date: May 18-20, 2010 Location: Baltimore, Maryland U.S.A.
especially for systems producing commercial grade gypsum products. Larger reaction tanks required to improve utilization of limestones of lesser reactivity incur greater capital expense.F. Due to natural variation occurring in crystal structure among limestones. Reactivity is a direct measure of how readily a given limestone will provide alkalinity and react with the acid resulting from the dissolution of sulfur dioxide into water. In addition. Presented to: Electric Power 2010 May 18-20. U. Engineering design of wet FGD systems are based upon many factors including assumptions of the composition and reactivity. Higher limestone consumption. Brown R.R. rather than predicted from the results of compositional analysis. The most common method used to 1 . Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group Introduction Accurate determination of limestone composition and reactivity are crucial in selection of reagents for wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) applications. Limestone of acceptable quality is necessary for achieving design level performance. Presently. This term is used in estimation of the amount of limestone that must be fed into the absorber to maintain a given pH for a given Ca/S stoichiometry and solids residence time. 2010 Baltimore. development of a method to determine absolute reactivity in terms of reaction rate constant is very difficult. feed rates may increase and gypsum purity would decrease due to increased inerts and unreacted CaCO3 and MgCO3 fed to the dewatering system. Williams Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group. Accurate estimation of this parameter is necessary for absorber performance modeling and absorber design.A. limestone reactivity test methods would provide an absolute reactivity constant that could be directly used to evaluate a limestone and determine the performance of a specific absorber design. limestone consumption rate and system performance. This parameter is important because the liquid to gas ratios (L/G) and pressure drop of contacting devices increases with decreasing reactivity. limestone quality must be agreed upon early during system design because this parameter affects unit sizing. an industry standard is not available and a number of different procedures exist for conducting such measurements. reactivity is empirically determined. Ohio.S. which provides a measure of reactivity as compared to a reference limestone of known performance. Though lower quality limestone may provide an advantage in system operating cost. U. product quality.A. Most methods determine the relative reactivity. the benefit of these savings should be weighed against impacts on system performance. rather than predicted from the results of compositional analysis. in turn. When a limestone possessing lower than design reactivity is used. reaction tanks designed for more reactive limestones may be inadequate to fully dissolve the limestone. Inc.J. Herein is discussed methodology for determination of limestone reactivity. However. higher limestone consumption rates and larger reaction tanks would be needed to achieve comparable levels of SO2 removal than would be needed with more reactive limestones. may cause decreased gypsum purity or an increase in purge and waste streams. wastewater treatment. Ideally.S. this parameter has to be empirically determined. Maryland. The most common method used to determine reactivity is through bench-scale experimentation. While systems can be constructed to utilize a wide range of limestone composition and reactivity. Due to natural variation occurring in limestone mineralogical structure. BR-1835 Abstract Limestone reactivity is a determinant of limestone based wet flue gas desulfurization (FGD) system performance. Reactivity is a direct measure of how readily a limestone will provide alkalinity and react with the acid resulting from the dissolution of sulfur dioxide into water. DeVault P.Determination of Wet FGD Limestone Reactivity S. Barberton.
including sulfite oxidation (Equation 7) and gypsum formation (Equation 8). When a limestone possessing lower than design reactivity is used. reaction tanks designed for more reactive limestones may be inadequate to fully dissolve the limestone. The limestone is pulverized and mixed with water to form slurry that is fed into the 2 . Presently. gypsum purity would decrease due to increased inerts and unreacted CaCO3 and MgCO3 fed to the dewatering system. This can be accounted for in the initial design of the wet FGD system. this term is used in estimation of the amount of limestone that must be fed into the absorber to maintain a given pH for a given Ca/S stoichiometry and solids residence time (tank size). The methodology discussed herein was developed by and is presently used by B&W PGG to conduct limestone analysis. (B&W PGG). an industry standard is not available and a number of different procedures exist for conducting such measurements. Equation 6: 2H+ + CaCO3 (s) → Ca+2 + CO2 (aq) + H2O Limestone dissolution. Levels of calcium and magnesium carbonate within the gypsum cake will increase. Inc. Nomenclature NIST Reactivity National Institute of Standards and Technology A measure of the rate at which a limestone will provide alkalinity to react with the acid created during SO2 dissolution and hydrolysis Standard Reference Material Flue Gas Desulfurization Argillaceous limestone control Dolomitic limestone control Limestone Reactivity Testing Key parameters for relative reactivity measurement Critical parameters for methodologies aimed at relative measurement of limestone reactivity include. decreasing gypsum product quality. Limestone feed rates would need to increase to maintain design levels of SO2 removal efficiency. The hydrogen carbonate then undergoes acid-base neutralization. Unreacted limestone exits the absorber tower and is fed to the dewatering system. These reactions are provided in Equation 1 through Equation 5. development of a method to determine absolute reactivity in terms of reaction rate constant is very difficult. utilities. Equation 1: Equation 2: Equation 3: Equation 4: Equation 5: SO2 (g) ↔ SO2 (aq) SO2 (aq) + H2O ↔ HSO3. However. Further. yielding calcium cations and hydrogen carbonate anions within the slurry. when a limestone possessing lower than design reactivity is used. As reactivity is a measure of the rate at which a limestone will provide alkalinity to react with the acid created during SO2 dissolution and hydrolysis. limestone suppliers and other OEM providers are supporting this effort by serving on the task group. Sulfur dioxide in flue gas enters in the absorber. Therefore.+ H+ CaCO3 (s) + H+ ↔ Ca2+ + HCO3- HCO3. Additional reactions occur within the reaction tank. However. where it dissolves into the aqueous phase of the absorber slurry and dissociates to produce sulfurous acid. wet FGD absorber. producing carbon dioxide and water. Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group. but are not limited to the following: • Sample preparation • pH and automatic titrator control settings • Acid used for titration • Common ion concentration • Use of and type of wetting agent • Electrode type Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group SRM FGD 1d 88b Wet FGD system chemistry As limestone is mostly composed of carbonate species and as it is a prolific and readily available quarried stone. it is used to provide the alkalinity for reaction with SO2 within the wet FGD absorption process. The flow rates of waste streams may also be increased.↔ 2SO4-2 + 2H+ Equation 8: Ca2+ + SO4-2 + 2H2O ↔ CaSO4 • 2H2O Limestone reactivity is used during system design to determine the amount of limestone that must be fed into the absorber to maintain a given pH for a given Ca/S stoichiometry and solids residence time. which provides a measure of reactivity as compared to a reference limestone of known performance.determine reactivity is through bench-scale experimentation.+ H+ + ↔ CO2 (aq) + H2O CO2 (aq) ↔ CO2 (g) Background Determination of limestone reactivity is essential for accurate modeling and design of wet FGD systems. feed rates would increase over those developed for the reactive limestone in order to maintain pH and SO2 removal. The acid acts in a heterogeneous reaction at the surface of limestone particles. Ideally. reaction tanks designed for more reactive limestones may be inadequate to fully dissolve the limestone. Equation 7: O2 (g) + 2HSO3. limestone reactivity test methods would provide an absolute reactivity constant that could be directly used to evaluate a limestone and determine the performance of a specific absorber design. The overall reaction between limestone and acid is summarized in Equation 6. acid neutralization and CO2 stripping continues to occur within the absorber reaction tank. Most methods determine the relative reactivity. A test method is presently under development by ASTM.
especially PSD measurement. the rate of the reaction between limestone and H+ is affected by the relative concentrations of products and reactants within solution. B&W PGG used to perform reactivity testing using methanol. Consideration should also be given to the effect of common ion concentration on CaCO3 reactivity. therefore. Results are provided in Figure 1. For the B&W PGG method. to account for the bias introduced by deviances in sample PSD. any acid may be selected for use in limestone titration. the comparative rate of this reaction as compared to a control stone is the relative reactivity of a limestone. A decrease in the measured reactivity is observed as initial CaCl2 concentration increases. testing was performed using various molar concentrations of CaCl2 for the starting solution. Control of the pH is necessary because limestone dissolution is a function of pH. measured after 60% reaction of sample alkalinity. Use of H2SO4 may provide a more accurate basis for modeling of an entire wet FGD system. If the sample is not fully wetted. the sample would be expected to perform as if less sample were initially added. rendering results inconclusive. 1 Relative reactivity of the B&W PGG control limestone tested with different starting concentrations of CaCl2 as compared to the standard test conditions. The pH used should be representative of a wet FGD absorber. Limestone undergoes a reaction with the aqueous hydrogen ion. and a tight control system should be employed to ensure constant pH and controlled acid addition. but concerns over agglomeration have resulted in switching to use of Triton X-100 (Figure 2). B&W PGG uses Triton Fig. Limestone undergoes a heterogeneous reaction with aqueous H+ during titration. as this may introduce error in results due to differences in the limestone composition within each screened range as compared to that of the bulk limestone. it should be used for all samples. Methanol and Triton X-100 are two possible wetting agents. HCl may be used for limestone titration. Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group Fig. which uses HCl as the titrant. and a wetting agent may be needed to provide accurate results for such samples. B&W PGG uses an automatic titrator to provide system control. less limestone surface area would be available to react within the system per unit mass of sample. use of a double-screened fraction is not necessarily a solution. Repeatable sample preparation is essential. tested using either methanol or Triton X-100 as a wetting agent. Commonly. Due to differences in bond work index between different mineral structures within limestone. Further. As reactivity tests methods are aimed at measurement of this reaction rate. the concentration of the calcium ion will impact limestone dissolution. Use of a wetting agent ensures that all of the sample surface area is available for heterogeneous reaction. leaving unreacted limestone and inert species as the only particulate within the CaCl2 solution. In effect. NIST argillaceous limestone standard reference material 1d and reagent grade calcium carbonate. precluding measurement of limestone particle size after the start of reaction because of gypsum particle interference. 3 . gypsum product is produced. The resulting products remain soluble. using the same grind and sieve settings and techniques for all samples. all of the sample to be tested should pass through the specified mesh. Some limestones will float when added to solution. even relative test methods should seek to keep the concentration of Ca+2 within the solution relatively constant. The controller must be tuned such that undershoot and overshoot of pH is minimized. though other methods may be possible. Due to the principles of chemical equilibrium. 2 Sample Sauter mean diameter for the control limestone. but is not thought to offer an advantage when determining reaction rate. Swings in pH will change the rate of this reaction. as a solid product would be formed.• Selection of a control limestone • Correction for initial PSD. Initial calcium ion concentration of the solution should be set such that change in this ion concentration over the test duration is negligible. When H2SO4 is used as the titrant. If a wetting agent is selected. The acid used during titration affects various aspects of the method. Since direct reaction between limestone and the anion species does not occur once the acid has dissociated. Sample preparation methods should be as similar as possible. To explore the effect of initial Ca+2 ion concentration on reactivity. The effect of common ion concentration may be less of a factor when H2SO4 is used as a titrant. Therefore. electrode scaling and fouling may become issues when using H2SO4. HCl or H2SO4 are selected. as differences in limestone grind will produce different initial particle size distributions.
X-100. the surface area available for reaction must be known. causing the SMD of the limestone sample to change during partial reaction of a limestone’s alkalinity. The concentration of inert species relative to the limestone increases as limestone dissolves. However. A non-fouling electrode with fast response is to be used. This method uses an automatic titrator to add HCl to a fixed amount of limestone sample. One reason for this is that the particle size distribution of the reagent grade CaCO3 is not representative of a ground limestone. • Titration endpoint • Percentage of limestone reacted at titration endpoint • Effect of inerts The stat titration curve should produce a region wherein the derivative of the natural log of the fraction of limestone remaining with respect to time is constant. During the course of reaction. The control material should provide repeatable results and be widely available. the particle size distribution must be measured at the point in titration where the reaction rate constant is to be calculated. This is necessary in order to obtain the value for surface area used in calculation of the heterogeneous rate constant. Results from titration and PSD measurements are used to estimate the reactivity constant of a given limestone. Selection of a proper control material is considered essential for valid results. the PSD of a limestone sample is not constant over time. In addition. To obtain a reaction rate constant for limestone dissolution. Particle size distribution (PSD) measurements are taken to provide an estimate of the limestone surface area available for reaction. one should ensure that the titration endpoint occurs within this region of constant slope. the contribution of inert species is to be considered. Unfortunately. smaller particles will be preferentially exhausted. to account for the bias introduced by deviances in sample PSD. Results indicate that the empirically determined value for the reaction rate will not be constant unless corrected for PSD. reducing possible error from sample agglomeration. Methodology The B&W PGG limestone reactivity test method is used to ascertain the rate constant of a limestone sample and to qualify candidate limestones for suitability as wet FGD reagents with regard to this parameter. Therefore. a correction for initial PSD will likely be necessary. B&W PGG’s experience is that naturally occurring limestones perform differently in reactivity tests as compared to synthetic blends. B&W PGG feels that since the control limestone is meant to serve as a basis for relative comparison of reactivity. B&W PGG recommends the DGi-114-SC electrode in combination with an automatic titrator. The automatic titrator includes an agitator and provides precise control over the titration. As Additional parameters for absolute reactivity measurement Additional parameters needed for empirical quantification of a limestone reactivity reaction rate constant include: Fig. Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group . there were indications that even when correcting for PSD. Limestone particles breaking down during reaction may also release inert particles. 3 Volume of acid added as a function of time for 60% titration of one run of a wet FGD reagent limestone alkalinity using HCl. the reagent grade CaCO3 reactivity was higher than naturally occurring limestones of high alkalinity. B&W PGG has tested the same limestone that has been ground to different degrees of fineness. Therefore. which is necessary when determining the rate of reaction. as this chemical acts as a dispersant in addition to a wetting agent. Some would propose use of reagent grade CaCO3 as a standard control. Therefore. that this would not be adequate. This could be related to the crystal structure and composition of reagent grade CaCO3 as compared to natural limestone. even for relative techniques. 4 Fig. 4 Natural log of the fraction of limestone remaining as a function of time for 60% titration of one run of a wet FGD reagent limestone’s total alkalinity using HCl. B&W PGG compares limestone reactivity test results to results from limestone of known field performance to provide a relative comparison of reactivity while perfecting our method for determination of an absolute constant.
Additional testing of this sample preparation protocol is required. The rate constant is independent of the actual particle size. Results of the B&W PGG reactivity test method are exhibited in Figure 5. supporting the value of such measure- Fig. fractions of differing composition may result above and below the smallest screen. A PSD reading is taken on an aliquot of this diluted sample using a spectrophotometer or Microtrac particle size analyzer. These same limestones were tested using the B&W PGG 5-minute test method. limestone is thought to react with the hydrogen ions in solution resulting from SO2 dissolution and its subsequent hydrolysis in water. being a purely reactive species. PSD measurements may be taken at later stages in the reaction. NIST argillaceous limestone SRM 1d. This test measures the amount of limestone reacted over the course of five minutes. the limestone is pulverized in a disk mill and screened such that 100% passes through 325-mesh (45 µm). NIST SRM 1d provided acceptable results. The instantaneous slope of this curve at the endpoint of titration is used in calculation of the reaction rate constant. These include a field limestone of known performance (the B&W PGG laboratory control limestone). The Sauter Mean Diameter and the rate of acid addition are used to determine a reaction rate constant with units of microns of alkaline particles reacted per minute. theoretically. The alkaline particles are assumed to be spherical. NIST SRM 1d argillaceous limestone and NIST SRM 88b dolomitic limestone relative to the B&W PGG control. Another PSD reading is made to measure the inerts. results are presently compared to a limestone of known field performance. The reagent grade calcium carbonate. Results are recorded as volume of acid added as a function of time (Figure 3). rather. an excess of HCl is added to this sample. This sample is quantitatively transferred and diluted to 1-L in a volumetric flask with 0. reacts with the protons released from its absorption. During data analysis. The presence of gypsum within the system precludes limestone PSD measurement after reaction initiation. By using a constant mill setting during grinding and by screening the sample. Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group Next. obtaining two samples with the same PSD is highly unlikely. Through the use of HCl. unlike the gypsum that would be produced during reaction with H2SO4. synthetic blends cannot be created from spiking known materials. From these. The volume of acid added is recorded and this result is used to determine total alkalinity of the limestone sample. 5 . A one-gram sample of the prepared limestone is titrated with HCl in an automatic titrator until complete reaction at a pH of 3. the amount of HCl required to titrate 60% of the total alkalinity is calculated. of the alkaline species in the sample when 60% of the alkalinity has been reacted. as one would not be able to differentiate between limestone and gypsum particles during PSD analysis. From analysis of the titration results. Results and discussion Finding appropriate control limestones for reactivity testing can be complicated. This is primarily due to differences in the BWI of the different limestone samples. Results are presented in Figure 6. However. Therefore. any acid may be used to model the reaction of limestone and acid. Use of a compatible wetting agent is critical to allow wetting of the limestone sample and to ensure complete suspension of the limestone sample particles. expressed as the Sauter Mean Diameter (SMD). one finds that the test method is able to accurately differentiate limestone with varied reactivity.85. The two PSD readings are used to determine the specific surface area.6 M CaCl2 solution. To prepare the sample. The dolomite control barely reacted within the system. had the highest reaction rate. As limestone does not react directly with SO2. because such blends may not behave in the same manner as a cohesive natural stone. B&W PGG chooses to use HCl for limestone reactivity testing because the products of this reaction remain soluble in water. PSD measurements for the sample are obtained at the titration endpoint to correspond with this slope (Figure 4). Double screening is not used due to concern that error may be induced through such activity as. reacting the remainder of the sample’s alkalinity. requiring 13.5 hours to react to 60% of the total sample alkalinity. A second one-gram sample from the same screening is prepared and titrated at a pH of 5. even from the same screening. This becomes apparent from review of Equation 1 through Equation 6.0 until the calculated volume of acid required to react 60% of the total alkalinity has been added. the 60% titration data. with each species in the blend likely reacting independently during the course of titration. NIST dolomitic limestone SRM 88b and reagent grade calcium carbonate. some control over PSD is afforded. 5 Reactivity of reagent grade calcium carbonate. as compared to the reactivity of the B&W PGG control limestone. four known materials were tested. but. Within a wet FGD system.method refinement towards an absolute measure of limestone reactivity continues. original sample mass and total alkalinity of the sample are used to construct a curve for the natural log of the limestone fraction remaining as a function of time. Unlike controls for compositional analysis. One observes a similar ranking by this test method.
relative to the control limestone. From these results. After correction for particle size. 6 Five-minute relative titration test results for reagent grade calcium carbonate. plotted as a function of the fraction of alkalinity reacted. shown as a function of magnesium content. relative to the reactivity of the control limestone at standard test conditions. determined at different titration endpoints. as determined by the full titration performed as the first stage of testing. 50%. Results in the form of the derivative of the natural log of limestone remaining as a function of time taken at the titration endpoint are shown in Figure 7. Fig. ment. One measure of the dolomite content of limestone is magnesium content. such as magnesian calcite. one observes that the slope is not constant as titration progresses. The magnesium within the dolomite crystal matrix causes a stronger and more cohesive crystal matrix than the calcite phase. However. 60%. 70% and 80% of its original alkalinity. testing was performed during which the limestone control was reacted to 40%. that changing the titration endpoint could have on reactivity. rendering it less reactive. which is as expected. NIST SRM 1d argillaceous limestone and NIST SRM 88b dolomitic limestone. 8 Reactivity of the control limestone taken at different titration endpoints. This is not. for the control limestone. The data scatter may be attributed to other variations within the field limestones. 9 Reactivity of various limestone samples. Results from reactivity testing of a wide range of field limestones are presented in Figure 11. To ascertain the effect. one finds an overall trend of decreasing reactivity with increasing magnesium content. this method does have a known bias for some samples because it does not correct for particle size distribution. the B&W PGG control limestone. if any. with the outlying data point from NIST SRM 88b omitted. Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group . taken at the titration endpoint. as a function of dolomite content. The endpoint for the full B&W PGG reactivity test method is 60% reaction of a limestone’s original alkalinity. Limestone is thought to be less reactive as dolomite fraction increases. Figure 10 re-presents this data.Fig. an exact measure because magnesium could exist in other phases within the limestone. 7 Slope of the natural log of the fraction of limestone remaining as a function of time. A wide variety of field limestones were tested. Dolomite content may be directly measured by Thermogravimetric Analysis (TGA). Some OEM reactivity test procedures define the titration endpoint differently. Relative reactivity results are plotted as a function of magnesium content in Figure 9. however. R&D is presently underway to provide a factor for initial particle size distribution for use with this relative method. This data is presented again in Figure 12. such as inert content. 6 Fig. one finds that reactivity cannot be said to change at a value equal to or greater than 60% reacted (Figure 8). excluding the dolomite control NIST Fig. Though wide scatter exists in the data.
This unreacted CaCO3 and MgCO3. The data does exhibit a wide berth of scatter. Reactivity is one of the bases used during system design when sizing absorber reaction tanks and determining residence time. However. 11 Reactivity of various limestone samples. SiO2. Limestone reactivity as a function of silicon content is plotted in Figure 14 for a number of naturally occurring limestone samples. Limestone feed rates would be increased to achieve design SO2 removal. Since these samples are from naturally occurring limestone. relative to the control limestone. normalized to the control. lending validity to the test method. shown as a function of dolomite content. The silicon usually exists as quartz. such deviations are likely due to differences in chemical and/or mineralogical composition other than magnesium content. If no inerts were present. Fig. shown as a function of acid insoluble content. one or all of these factors are affected. This scatter could be due to other factors that were not held constant. gypsum purity and SO2 removal efficiency. relative to the control limestone – results from NIST SRM 88b omitted. as a function of percent inerts as determined by modified ASTM Method C 25-06. one observes that limestone reactivity decreases with increasing dolomite content – supporting the validity of this test method. A trend is observed such that measured reactivity decreases with increasing silicon content. or is bound to various clays in the inerts. shown as a function of dolomite content. Figure 13 displays the reactivity of various field limestones. Since inert areas are present in the stone.Fig. sending more unreacted limestone to the dewatering system and increasing the Ca/S stoichiometry. one observes a decrease in reactivity with increasing inert content. Inert content also affects limestone reactivity because the presence of inerts at the limestone surface decreases the active surface area of each limestone particle. the entirety of the limestone particle’s surface area would be available for heterogeneous reaction with acid. relative to the control limestone – results from NIST SRM 88b omitted. Again. SRM 88b. 10 Reactivity of various limestone samples. Summary Accurate measurement of limestone reactivity is needed to qualify limestones for use in wet FGD application. 13 Reactivity of various limestone samples. As anticipated. there is a wide degree of scatter among the data points. One of the most prevalent elemental inert species in limestone is silicon. relative to the control limestone. calculating limestone feed rates. such as dolomite content. shown as a function of magnesium content. 12 Reactivity of various limestone samples. Fig. they would be expected to decrease reactivity. Fig. When limestone with lesser reactivity than design is fed into the system. Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group 7 .
However. has an inherent bias. B&W PGG is working to develop a version that could be performed in a third-party laboratory. reactivity is expected to decrease – this trend was observed with the B&W PGG test method. it is unclear when that method would be released and what the scope would entail. An inert correction is necessary to account for the presence of acid insoluble constituents within the limestone bulk. Similarly. as this method has no correction for particle size distribution. Thus. Further. relative 5-minute test method for approximation of limestone reactivity. but this method is rather cumbersome for general use. along with the additional associated inerts. Various parameters would be considered essential for any test method adopted by industry. Use of a wetting agent that functions as a dispersant is recommended to avoid potential errors from particle agglomeration. sending greater material to wastewater treatment. preferably through the use of automatic titration. Method resolution is important. aimed at mimicking wet FGD conditions. B&W PGG has ongoing R&D for an improved method of correction. Foremost. At present. B&W PGG also utilizes a short. a higher fraction of purge may be used. tight system control must be maintained. shown as a function of silicon content. Though ASTM is actively working towards a standard method. The B&W PGG reactivity test method is an established method for determination of limestone reactivity. decreasing gypsum product quality. an industry standard is not available. and thus. As the dolomitic content of a limestone increases.Fig. have downstream ramifications. Though aspects of the method are proprietary. relative to the control limestone. the method should include a correction for particle size distribution. The pH at which testing is performed should represent system conditions. B7. These trends support the assertion that the B&W PGG method is accurate and useful for determination of wet FGD limestone reactivity. To improve gypsum quality with less reactive limestone. This method requires an automatic titrator and experienced technicians to perform properly. The reactivity procedure discussed in this paper is able to distinguish between wet FGD reagent quality limestones and dolomitic limestones. At present. many OEM suppliers and customers have their own methods to perform such testing. EPRI had also developed a method. 14 Reactivity of various limestone samples. to ensure that the rate measured is accurate. reactivity was also shown to decrease as inert content increased within a variety of field limestones. results are compared to a control limestone of known performance while method improvement is ongoing. Their concentration in the gypsum product is increased. as limestones that will not readily provide alkalinity need to be identified to prevent poor system performance. this paper documents one such method. which aims to determine a rate for limestone reaction within a wet FGD system. 8 Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group .
translated or reproduced in any form or by any means. P. Ohio. process or apparatus discussed in this work. or the inability to use. No part of this work may be published. with respect to the accuracy. 44203-0351. contact us from our Web site at www. and neither Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group. without the written permission of the copyright holder.com. Box 351.A. nor any of its employees shall be liable for any losses or damages with respect to or resulting from the use of. or representation. Barberton. process or apparatus discussed in this work. any information. Inc.babcock. Inc. whether expressed or implied. Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group. Inc. this work is published with the understanding that Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group. Disclaimer Although the information presented in this work is believed to be reliable. product. a Babcock & Wilcox company All rights reserved. nor any of its employees make any warranty. Neither Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group. and the authors are supplying general information and are not attempting to render or provide engineering or professional services. or incorporated into any information retrieval system.O. guarantee. completeness or usefulness of any information. product. Inc. Or. .Copyright © 2010 by Babcock & Wilcox Power Generation Group. Permission requests should be addressed to: Marketing Communications. U.S.