Advertisement

Solid support ionic liquid (SSIL) adsorbents for mercury removal from natural gas

  • K. Suresh Kumar ReddyEmail author
  • B. Rubahamya
  • A. Al Shoaibi
  • C. Srinivasakannan
Original Paper
  • 64 Downloads

Abstract

Mercury removal is an integral part of gas-processing and coal combustion plants due to its implication on health, environment and process equipment. Utilization of impregnated carbons and metal sulfide-based adsorbents for mercury removal are common, however with limitations in adsorption capacity and life time. Continued efforts to develop porous carbon sorbents with better mercury adsorption capacity and kinetics are evident from the open literature with the recent focus being on solid support ionic liquid (SSIL)-based adsorbents with ionic liquid and chelating agents. However, reports on application of SSILs-based adsorbents for gas-phase mercury removal are not available in the open literature. Toward this objective, the present work attempts to synthesize three different SSILs adsorbents identified as SSIL (porous carbon + IL), SSILM (porous carbon + IL + MPTS), SSILA (porous carbon + IL + APTS–MBT) utilizing ultrasound-induced wet impregnation method. The adsorbents were subjected to characterization utilizing BET, XRD, FT-IR and SEM and were tested for its mercury adsorption capacity. The SSIL sorbents were found to possess higher order of magnitude adsorption capacity as compared to high-surface-area porous carbons and metal sulfide-based porous carbons. The adsorption capacity of the SSILs increased orders of magnitude with increase in adsorption temperature from 30 to 50 °C attributed to the predominance of the chemisorption. Among the three SSIL adsorbents, SSILA was found to exhibit highest equilibrium adsorption capacity of 36.9 mg/g at 50 °C. ΔH°, ΔS° and ΔG° indicate that elemental mercury adsorption on SSILA is a spontaneous and endothermic process.

Keywords

Elemental mercury Ionic liquid Adsorption capacity Chelating agent Wet impregnation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The Authors wish to acknowledge Khalifa University of Science and Technology for providing financial support for this project.

References

  1. Abbas T, Chellappan LK, Abdul Mutalib MI, Cheun KY, Shah SN, Nazir S, Hassan A, Abai M, Khan E (2015a) Stability and performance of physically immobilized ionic liquids for mercury adsorption fom a gas stream. Ind Eng Chem Res 54:12114–12123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abbas T, Chellappan LK, Abdul Mutalib MI, Cheun KY, Shah SN, Nazir S, Hassan A, Abai M, Khan E (2015b) Stability and performance of physically immobilized ionic liquids for mercury adsorption from a gas stream. Ind Eng Chem Res 54:12114–12123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abi M, Atkins MP, Hassan A, Holbrey JD, Kuah Y, Nockemann P, Oliferenko AA, Plechkova NV, Rafeen S, Rahman AA, Ramil R, Shariff SM, Seddon KR, Srinivasan G, Zou Y (2015) An ionic liquid process for mercury removal from natural gas. Dalton Trans 44:8617–8624CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Abu-Daabes M, Pinto NG (2005) synthesis and characterization of nano-structured sorbent for the direct removal of mercury vapor form flue gases by chelation. Chem Eng Sci 60:1901–1910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ajibade PA, Mbese JZ (2014) Synthesis and characterization of metal sulfide nanoparticles/ploy (methyl methacrylate) nanocomposites, Int J Polym sci. Article ID. 752,394Google Scholar
  6. Bae KM, Kim JB, Park SJ (2011) A review of elemental mercury removal processing. Carbon Lett 12:121–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diamantopoulou I, Skodras G, Sakellaropoulos GP (2010) Sorption of mercury by activated carbon in the presence of flue gas components. Fuel Process Technol 91:158–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Inbaraj BS, Wang JS, Lu JF, Siao FY, Chen BH (2009) Adsorption of toxic mercury by an extracellular biopolymer poly(γ-glutamic acid). Bioresour Technol 100:200–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ji L, Thiel SW, Pinto NG (2008a) Room temperature ionic liquids for mercury capture from flue gas. Ind Eng Chem Res 47:8396–8400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ji L, Thiel SW, Pinto NG (2008b) Pyrrolidinium imides: promising ionic liquids for direct capture of elemental mercury from flue gas. Water Air Soil Pollut Focus 8:349–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ji L, Thiel SW, Pinto NG (2008c) Room temperature ionic liquids for mercury capture from flue gas. Ind Eng Chem Res 47:8396–8400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ji L, Abu-Daabes M, Pinto NG (2009) thermally robust chelating adsorbents for the capture of gaseous mercury: fixed-bed behavior. Chem Eng Sci 64:486–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Karatza D, Prisciandaro M, Lancia A, Musmarra D (2011) Silver impregnated carbon for adsorption and desorption of elemental mercury vapors. J Environ Sci 23:1578–1584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Langmuir I (1918) The adsorption of gases on plane surfaces of glass, mica and platinum. J Am Chem Soc 40:1361–1403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 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. Environ Sci Technol 50:9551–9557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Liu W, Vidic RD, Brown TD (2000a) Optimization of high temperature sulfur impregnation on activated carbon for permanent sequestration of elemental mercury vapors. Environ Sci Technol 34:483–488CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Liu W, Vidic RD, Brown TD (2000b) Impact of flue gas conditions on mercury uptake by sulfur-impregnated activated carbon. Environ Sci Technol 34:154–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Luga C, Solis C, Alvarez-Idaboy JR, Martinez MA, Mondragon MA, Vivier-Bunge A (2014) A theoretical and experimental evaluation of imidazolium-based ionic liquids for atmospheric mercury capture. J Mol Model 20:1–9Google Scholar
  19. Mei Z, Shen Z, Yuan T, Wang W, Han H (2007) Removal of vapor-phase elemental mercury by N-doped CuCoO4 loaded on activated carbon. Fuel Process Technol 88:623–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Palomar J, Lemus J, Gilarranz MA, Rodriguez JJ (2009) Adsorption of ionic liquids from aqueous effluents by activated carbon. Carbon 47:1846–1856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Shen Z, Ma J, Mei Z, Zhang J (2010) Metal chlorides loaded on activated carbon to capture elemental mercury. J Environ Sci 22:1814–1819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Suresh Kumar Reddy K, Shoaibi AA, Srinivasakannan C (2014a) Elemental mercury adsorption on sulfur-impregnated porous carbon: a review. Environ Technol 35:18–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Suresh Kumar Reddy K, Shoaibi AA, Srinivasakannan C (2014b) Gas-phase mercury removal through sulfur impregnated porous carbon. J Ind Eng Chem 20:2969–2974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Suresh Kumar Reddy K, Shoaibi AA, Srinivasakannan C (2015) Sulfur-leaching facts from sulfur-impregnated porous carbons in the mercury removal. Energy Fuels 29:4488–4491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tan Z, Qiu J, Zeng H, Liu H, Xiang J (2011) Removal of elemental mercury by bamboo charcoal impregnated with H2O2. Fuel 90:1471–1475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tan Z, Sun L, Xiang J, Zeng H, Liu Z, Hu S, Qiu J (2012) Gas-phase elemental mercury removal by novel carbon-based sorbents. Carbon 50:362–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Yan TY (1996) Mercury removal from oil by reactive adsorption. Ind Eng Chem Res 35:3697–3701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Yao Y, Velpari V, Economy J (2014) Design of sulfur treated activated carbon fibers for gas phase elemental mercury removal. Fuel 116:560–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Islamic Azad University (IAU) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chemical Engineering DepartmentKhalifa University of Science and TechnologyAbu DhabiUnited Arab Emirates

Personalised recommendations