Journals / International Journal of Environment and Geoinformatics / 2020 / Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 3

Impacts and Mitigation Approach of Flue Gas (SO2) in Coal Fired Power Plant of Bangladesh

Pages
319–324
Publication Date
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to the suitability andefficiency of these processes, the best methods are explained to capture the flue gas (SO2) for saving our environment.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Energy demand of Bangladesh is rising continuously.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In Barapukuria, a coal-based power plant has already been activated to produce 250 MWelectricity.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the suitability andefficiency of these processes, the best methods are explained to capture the flue gas (SO2) for saving our environment.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Energy demand of Bangladesh is rising continuously. Therefore, several power plants have been establishing, where the main fuel isa coal to satisfy this requirement. In Barapukuria, a coal-based power plant has already been activated to produce 250 MWelectricity. The coal-fired power plant in Matarbari (1200 MW), Payra Thermal Power Plant (1320 MW), Rampal Power Plant(1320MW) are under construction in addition to add 3840 MW. While boasting our power grid, it raises the concern ofenvironmental adversity that may occur by the emission of flue gases (SO2, NOx, CO2) and particulate material from the chimney.This exhaust emission causes a discrepancy in human health and the environment. Among these flue gases SO2 is prime concernhere. Hence, this study is done to identify the adversity of this pollutant. For this reason, the amount of flue gas (SO2) is calculatedwhich will help to understand the deviation from standard values. If any deviation is identified, mitigation steps should be taken toprevent the adversity. There are various methods to mitigate the flue gas (SO2), for example, wet scrubber, limestone/gypsumsystem, ammonia scrubbing, lime/limestone scrubbing for mitigation of sulfur dioxide (SO2). According to the suitability andefficiency of these processes, the best methods are explained to capture the flue gas (SO2) for saving our environment.

🔖

Cite This Article

RIFAT, H. M. R., SULTAN, Z. B. (2022). Impacts and Mitigation Approach of Flue Gas (SO2) in Coal Fired Power Plant of Bangladesh. International Journal of Environment and Geoinformatics, Cilt: 7 - Sayı: 3, 319–324. https://ajindex.com/articles/541007

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Arslan, O., Akyürek, Ö. (2018). Spatial Modelling of Air Pollution from PM10 and SO2 concentrations during Winter Season in Marmara Region (2013-2014). International Journal of Environment and Geoinformatics, 5(1), 1-16, doi. 10.30897/ijegeo.412391. Bayırhan, İ., Mersı̇n, K., Tokuşlu, A., Gazı̇oğlu, C. (2019). Modelling of Ship Originated Exhaust Gas Emissions in the Strait of Istanbul (Bosphorus). International Journal of Environment and Geoinformatics, 6(3), 238-243. doi. 10.30897/ijegeo.641397. Craig, L., Brook, J. R., Chiotti, Q., Croes, B., Gower, S., Hedley, A., Pennell, W. (2008). Air pollution and public health: a guidance document for risk managers. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part A, 71(9-10), 588-698.
  2. Alam, F. (2013).
  3. Energy, Exergy and Environmental Impact Analyses of Barapukuria Coal Based Thermal Power Plant. Prinn, R. G., Fegley Jr, B. (1987). Bolide impacts, acid rain, and biospheric traumas at the CretaceousTertiary boundary. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 83(1-4), 1-15.
  4. Roy, P., and Sardar, A. (2015). SO2 emission control and finding a way out to produce sulphuric acid from industrial SO2 emission. J Chem Eng Process Technol, 6, 230. Initiative, P.P.I. (2003). Volume 1 Clean Coal Technology Programs: Program Update 2003.
  5. Flytzani-Stephanopoulos, M., Zhu, T., Li, Y. (2000). Ceria-based catalysts for the recovery of elemental sulfur from SO2-laden gas streams. Catalysis Today,62 (2-3), 145-158. Dhakatribune, (2019). dhakatribune.com/ (02/08/2019).
  6. Fioletov, V. E., McLinden, C. A., Krotkov, N., Yang, K., Loyola, D. G., Valks, P., Liu, X. (2013).
  7. Application of OMI, SCIAMACHY, and GOME‐2 satellite SO2 retrievals for detection of large emission sources. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 118(19), 11-399.
  8. Islam, K., Jasimuddin, M, Nath, B., Nath, T. (2016). Quantitative Assessment of Land Cover Change Using Landsat Time Series Data: Case of Chunati Wildlife Sanctuary (CWS), Bangladesh. International Journal of Environment and Geoinformatics, 3(2), 45-55, doi: 10.30897/ijegeo.306471. Lin, C. K., Lin, R. T., Chen, P.C., Wang, P., De Marcellis-Warin, N., Zigler, C., Christiani, D. C. (2018). A global perspective on sulfur oxide controls in coal-fired power plants and cardiovascular disease. Scientific reports, 8(1), 2611. Mersin, K., Bayırhan, İ., Gazioğlu, C. (2019). Review of CO2 Emission and Reducing Methods in Maritime Transportation, Thermal Sciences, 1-8.
  9. Rahman, M., Tamin, M., Rahman, L. (2012). Analysis