environmental

BioteQ Environmental Technologies Inc is to begin the second of six potential water treatment projects identified in its November 2006 joint venture agreement with Jiangxi Copper Company (JCC), China's largest copper producer.

The first project by the the joint venture company, JCC-BioteQ Environmental Technologies Co Ltd, was the plant at JCC's Dexing site, and this is now operational. The joint venture has since initiated work on the second project, located at JCC's Yinshan mine site in Jiangxi Province. The first stage of this second project has been approved and a design report is to be conducted jointly by BioteQ and JCC to define the scope of the Yinshan project, including plant capacity and cost estimates.

The growth in China’s CO2 emissions is far outpacing previous estimates, making the goal of stabilizing atmospheric greenhouse gases even more difficult, according to a new analysis by economists at the University of California, Berkeley and UC San Diego. The study is scheduled for print publication in the May issue of the Journal of Environmental Economics and Management.

As the beginning of the second trading period for the EU Emissions Trading Scheme approaches, the European Commission has completed the assessment and approved the proposed national plans for allocating carbon dioxide (CO2) emission allowances of the original 25 member states, as well as those of Bulgaria and Romania.

Power plants and other industrial facilities
are covered by the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU
ETS) designed to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2)emissions.

Prior to 1990, little reliable data was available on mercury concentrations in coal plants' stack gas or anywhere within the plant gas stream. The ERA attempted to change that by developing an emissions inventory known as the 1999 Information Collection Request (ICR). The ICR collected basic information on all 1,140 coal-fired utility boilers in the U.S., and more detailed information as well. The detailed data included analyses of coal's calorific value and its mercury, chlorine, sulfur, moisture, and ash content. Also included were analyses of total and speciated (elemental and oxidized) mercury in the inlet and outlet flue gases of 81 units representing a cross-section of the various types of boilers and fuels used in the U.S.

No single technology will work for every coal-fired power plant. The mercury control options under investigation can be classified into six broad categories:

• Sorbent injection involves injecting a material, usually in powdered form, that adsorbs mercury upstream of a particulate collector such as a baghouse or electrostatic precipitator (ESP). Activated carbon injection currently represents one of the most promising controls on the horizon. It is the only technology that is close to being commercialized.

Burning coal in the U.S. is a tough job that continues to get tougher. Every few years, the federal government decides that coal-fired power plants must reduce their emissions of yet another pollutant. First came limits on NOX, SO2, and particulates, which required plants to install cleaner burners, scrubbers, and baghouses or electrostatic precipitators. The latest air-quality nemesis to show up on the radar screen is mercury. But the difference this time is that regulations for removing it are coming not just from Washington but from states as well.

By Dr. Robert Peltier, PE, Editor-in-Chief of POWER