Journal of Petroleum Science and Technology

Journal of Petroleum Science and Technology

Elemental Mercury Removal from Natural Gas by Cupper Sulfide Supported Alumina as a Sorbent

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors
Ali Karimi 1
Sepehr Sadighi 1
Maryam Mashayekhi 1
Amir Zarei 2
Masoumeh Ghalbi Ahangary 2
1 Catalysis Development Technologies Division, Research Institute of Petroleum Industry (RIPI), Tehran, Iran
2 Research Inistitute for the Development of Chemistry, Polymer and Petrochemical Technolog,, Research Institute of Petroleum Industry (RIPI), Tehran, Iran
10.22078/jpst.2023.5279.1908
Abstract
Feed streams of natural gas refineries and petrochemical industries contain mercury traces, threatening the environment and human health. Moreover, brazed aluminum heat exchangers are susceptible to being attacked by this component. The current research discusses the mercury removal capacities of alumina-based sorbents containing copper sulfide as an active metal. Cat-A and MRU-4 are synthesized and characterized using XRD, BET, TEM, XRF, and LECO methods. The experiments were carried out by loading the sorbents in a fixed-bed reactor, and they were sulfided by using a nitrogen gas stream containing 8 mol% of H2S at the temperature of 285oC. Then, their mercury removal capacities are measured at the temperature of 60 oC, pressure of 1 atm, and gas flow rate of 220 cm3/min versus time. Results showed that Cat-A and MRU-4 sorbents reached their static adsorption capacities of 12.1 and 19.3 wt%, respectively. Moreover, mercury adsorption variations of sorbents against time indicate that MRU-4 had faster dynamic adsorption than Cat-A sorbent. Ultimately, the characterization results also confirmed that the structures of MRU-4 and Cat-A adsorbents were mesoporous and microporous, respectively.
Keywords
Mercury Removal
Synthetic Gas
Activated Alumina
Copper Sulfide
Sorbent
  1. Li, Y., Yu, J., Liu, Y., Huang, R., Wang, Z., & Zhao, Y. (2022). A review on removal of mercury from flue gas utilizing existing air pollutant control devices (APCDs), Journal of Hazardous Materials, 427, 128132, doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.128132.##
  2. Chalkidisa, A., Jampaiah, D., Hartley, P.G., Sabri, Y.M., & Bhargava S.K. (2020). Mercury in natural gas streams: A review of materials and processes for abatement and remediation, Journal of Hazardous Materials, 382, 1-30., doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2019.121036. ##
  3. Sun, H., Zhao, S., Ma Y., Wu, J., Liang, P., Yang, D., & Zhang, H. (2018). Effective and regenerable Ag/4A zeolite nanocomposite for Hg0 removal from natural gas, Journal of Alloys and Compounds, 762, 520-527, doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2018.05.222. ##
  4. Zhang, H., Sun, H., Zhang, D., Zhang, W., Chen, S., Li, M., & Liang, P. (2019). Nanoconfinement of Ag nanoparticles inside mesoporous channels of MCM-41 molecule sieve as a regenerable and H2O resistance sorbent for Hg0 removal in natural gas, Chemical Engineering Journal, 361, 139-147, doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2018.12.059·##
  5. Zhang, Z., Wu, J., Li, B., Xu, H., & Liu, D. (2019). Removal of elemental mercury from simulated flue gas by ZSM-5 modified with Mn-Fe mixed oxides, Chemical Engineering Journal, 375, 121946, doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2019.121946. ##
  6. Rastelli, H., Gorawara, J.K., & Simonetti, D.A. (2017). Process for the removal of mercury from hydrocarbon streams containing oxygen, U.S. Patent No. 9670422. ##
  7. Eckersely, N. (2010). Advanced Mercury Removal Technologies, Hydrocarb. Process, 89(1), 29-35. ##
  8. Ralston, N. (2008). Nano-selenium captures mercury, Nature Nanotechnology, 3, 527–528, doi:10.1038/nnano,.2008.251. ##
  9. Hamzehlouyan, T., Sampara, C., Li, J., Kumar, A., & Epling, W. (2014). Experimental and kinetic study of SO2 oxidation on a Pt/γ-Al2O3 catalyst, Applied Catalysis B: Environmental., 152–153, 108–116, doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2014.01.005. ##
  10. Zhou, Q., Duan, Y-F., Hong, Y-G., Zhu, C., She, M., & Zhang. J. (2015). Experimental and kinetic studies of gas-phase mercury adsorption by raw and bromine modified activated carbon, Fuel Processing Technology, 134, 325–332, org/ 10.1016/j.fuproc.2014.12.052. ##
  11. Yang, S., Liu, C., Liu, Z., Yang, B., Xiang, K., & Zhang, C. (2018). High catalytic activity and SO2-poisoning resistance of Pd/CuCl2/γ-Al2O3 catalyst for elemental mercury oxidation, Catalysis Communications, 105, 1–5, doi.org/10.1016/j.catcom.2017.11.001. ##
  12. Zou, S., Liao, Y., Xiong, S., Huang, N., Geng, Y., & Yang, S. (2017). H2S-modified Fe-Ti spinel: a recyclable magnetic sorbent for recovering gaseous elemental mercury from flue gas as a co-benefit of wet electrostatic precipitators, Environmental Science and Technology, 51(6), 3426–3434, doi.org/ 10.1021/acs.est.6b05765. ##
  13. Liu, W., Vidic, R.D., & Brown, T.D. (2000). Impact of flue gas conditions on mercury uptake by sulfur-impregnated activated carbon, Environmental Science & Technology, 34, 154–159, doi.org/10.1021/es990315i. ##
  14. Li, H., Zhu, L., Wang, J., Li, L., & Shih, K. (2016). Development of nano-sulfide sorbent for efficient removal of elemental mercury from coal combustion fuel gas, Environmental Science & Technology, 50(17), 9551–9557, doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b02115. ##
  15. Li, H., Zhu, L., Wang, J., Li, L., Lee, P.H., Feng, Y., & Shih, K. (2017). Effect of nitrogen oxides on elemental mercury removal by nanosized mineral sulfide, Environmental Science & Technology, 51, 8530–8536, doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b00224. ##
  16. Liao, Y., Chen, D., Zou, S., Xiong, S., Xiao, X., & Dang, H. (2016). Recyclable naturally derived magnetic pyrrhotite for elemental mercury recovery from flue gas, Environmental Science & Technology, 50(19), 10562–10569, doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b03288. ##
  17. Xiang, W., Liu, J., Chang, M., & Zheng, C. (2012) The adsorption mechanism of elemental mercury on CuO (110) surface, Chemical Engineering Journal, 200–202, 91–96, doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cej.2012.06.025. ##
  18. Li, F., Wu, J., Qin, Q., Li, Z., & Huang, X. (2010). Controllable synthesis, optical and photocatalytic properties of CuS nanomaterials with hierarchical structures, Powder Technology, 198, 267–274, doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2009.11.018. ##
  19. Liu, W., Xua, H., Liao, Y., Quan, Z., Li, S., Zhao, S., Qu, Z., & Yan, N. (2019). Recyclable CuS sorbent with large mercury adsorption capacity in the presence of SO2 from non-ferrous metal smelting flue gas, Fuel, 235, 847–854, doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.08.062. ##
  20. Musmarra, D., Karatza, D., Lancia, A., Prisciandaro, M., & Mazziotti di Celso, G. (2015). A Comparison among Different Sorbents for Mercury Adsorption from Flue Gas, Chemical Engineering Transactions, 43, 2461-2466. ##
  21. Karatza, D., Lancia, A., Musmarra, D., & Zucchini, C. (2000). Study of mercury absorption and desorption on sulfur impregnated carbon, Experimental Thermal and Fluid Science, 21, 150-155 , doi.org/10.1016/S0894-1777(99)00065-5. ##
  22. Leyva-Ramos, R., Medellin-Castillo, N.A., Jacobo-Azuara, A., Mendoza-Barron, J., Landin-Rodriguez, L.E., Martinez-Rosales, J.M., & Aragon-Piña, A. (2008). Fluorine Removal from Water Solution by Adsorption on Activated Adsorption on Activated Alumina Prepared from Pesudo-Boehmite, J. Environ. Eng. Manage., 18, 301-309. ##
  23. Sotomayor, F., Cychosz, K.A., & Thommes, M. (2018). Characterization of Micro/Mesoporous Materials by Physisorption: Concepts and Case Studies, Account of Materials & Surface Research, 3, 34-50. ##
  24. Prins, R. (2020). On the structure of γ-Al2O3, Journal of Catalysis, 392, 336-346, doi.org/10.1016/j.jcat.2020.10.010. ##
  25. Soltanali, S., Mashayekhi, M., Seif Mohaddecy S.R. (2020). Comprehensive investigation of the effect of adding phosphorus and/or boron to NiMo/ -Al2O3 catalyst in diesel fuel hydrotreating, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 137, 273–281, doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2020.02.033. ##