Numerical Simulation of Atmospheric Loadings of Mercury from a Coal Fired Power Plant to Lake Erie
Download
1 / 18

Numerical Simulation of Atmospheric Loadings of Mercury from a Coal Fired Power Plant to Lake Erie - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 96 Views
  • Uploaded on

Numerical Simulation of Atmospheric Loadings of Mercury from a Coal Fired Power Plant to Lake Erie. S. M. Daggupaty, C. M. Banic and P. Blanchard. Air Quality Research Division, Science and Technology Branch Environment Canada. Presented at 11th Conference on Atmospheric Chemistry

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Numerical Simulation of Atmospheric Loadings of Mercury from a Coal Fired Power Plant to Lake Erie' - sol


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Numerical Simulation of Atmospheric Loadings of Mercury from a Coal Fired Power Plant to Lake Erie

S. M. Daggupaty, C. M. Banic and P. Blanchard

Air Quality Research Division, Science and Technology Branch

Environment Canada.

Presented at 11th Conference on Atmospheric Chemistry

11-15 January 2009. Phoenix, AZ.


  • Deposition Fluxes: - Dry and Wet processes are formulated following Ma and Daggupaty (2000), Daggupaty et al (2006) and Zhang et al (2001, 2003).

  • Dry deposition flux (g m-2 s-1), is given by F(x, y)d = c(x,y,z1.5)  vdeff (x, y)

Ra bulk aerodynamic resistance is function of u*, z0 ,L. Rd quasi-laminar or surface resistance, Rc overall canopy resistance and Vg gravitational settling velocity.


  • Wet pollution Prediction system. (Daggupaty. et al 2006) was used for simulations.deposition flux (g s -1/ m2) :

 is the normalised scavenging coefficient (s-1 /mm hr-1)

I is precipitation intensity (water equivalent in mm/hr).

  • For P-Hg the wet deposition flux is followed as in Daggupaty (2006).

  • For RGM (as of HNO3)  =6* 10-4

  • For GEM with its low solubility  =3.0*10-6

  • These are in agreement with Berg(2001), Petersen et al (1998) and Ryaboshapko et al (2004).

  • Adsorption at air – water interface was also estimated.


2. Particulate Hg mass is assumed to be in large, medium and small particle size bins with respective fraction of 80%, 5% and 15%.

3. The chemical transformation of the plume Hg. species over the travel period (~ 10 hr) of study domain is hard to anticipate and is not modeled in this study.

Thus the plume could be undergoing different combinations of species strength over the travel period. The different scenarios considered here could be mimicking the plume evolution in time.


Table 1. Proportionate Hg species emission rates power plant varies between 4 to 8 mg/s (i.e., 130 to 240 kg/y) from NPRI data (National pollutant release inventory, .


15.Urban power plant varies between 4 to 8 mg/s (i.e., 130 to 240 kg/y) from NPRI data (National pollutant release inventory,

14.

13.Inland Water

12.

11.Wet land with plants

10.

9.

8.

7.Crops,mixed farming

6.Grass

5.Mixed leaf trees

4.Decds brdleaf trees

3.Decds Ndle Lf trees

2.Evergrn BrdLf trees

1.


GEM emission rate of 4.5mg/s (Scenario C) power plant varies between 4 to 8 mg/s (i.e., 130 to 240 kg/y) from NPRI data (National pollutant release inventory,


RGM emission rate of 0.25mg/s (Scenario C) power plant varies between 4 to 8 mg/s (i.e., 130 to 240 kg/y) from NPRI data (National pollutant release inventory,


GEM with emission rate of 1 g/s. power plant varies between 4 to 8 mg/s (i.e., 130 to 240 kg/y) from NPRI data (National pollutant release inventory,


RGM with emission rate of 1 g/s. power plant varies between 4 to 8 mg/s (i.e., 130 to 240 kg/y) from NPRI data (National pollutant release inventory,


Fig. 4a power plant varies between 4 to 8 mg/s (i.e., 130 to 240 kg/y) from NPRI data (National pollutant release inventory, .

Fig. 4b.

Fig. 4c.


. power plant varies between 4 to 8 mg/s (i.e., 130 to 240 kg/y) from NPRI data (National pollutant release inventory,

Figure 5a

.

Figure 5b

.

Figure 5c


Model vs MDN value: power plant varies between 4 to 8 mg/s (i.e., 130 to 240 kg/y) from NPRI data (National pollutant release inventory,


  • CONCLUSIONS power plant varies between 4 to 8 mg/s (i.e., 130 to 240 kg/y) from NPRI data (National pollutant release inventory,

  • RGM is found to be the dominant contributor of the three species of Hg to the Lake Erie loading.

  • The scenario B (with 90% as RGM) emissions gives highest loading and it was about 15% of observed MDN value to the Lake Erie.

  • 98% of GEM emissions and 93% fine particulate Hg emissions were transported out of the circular area with 100km radius from the power plant.

  • 4. Our experiments also suggest that a case with a larger GEM portion of emission (about 90% of total Hg emission) will have the least amount of total Hg loading to the Lake Erie.

  • 5. It is prudent to mention that out of the four scenarios the aircraft measured Hg species configuration in the plume is that of scenario C and it has least impact with 3% of the observed total Hg wet deposition to Lake Erie.


Thank you. power plant varies between 4 to 8 mg/s (i.e., 130 to 240 kg/y) from NPRI data (National pollutant release inventory,

Any comments or ?


ad