204 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17593698)
1. Mercury control costs drop.
Cooney CM
Environ Sci Technol; 2007 Feb; 41(4):1061-2. PubMed ID: 17593698
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. DOE/NETL's phase II mercury control technology field testing program: preliminary economic analysis of activated carbon injection.
Jones AP; Hoffmann JW; Smith DN; Feeley TJ; Murphy JT
Environ Sci Technol; 2007 Feb; 41(4):1365-71. PubMed ID: 17593743
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. The thief process for mercury removal from flue gas.
Granite EJ; Freeman MC; Hargis RA; O'Dowd WJ; Pennline HW
J Environ Manage; 2007 Sep; 84(4):628-34. PubMed ID: 16959396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Adsorbents for capturing mercury in coal-fired boiler flue gas.
Yang H; Xu Z; Fan M; Bland AE; Judkins RR
J Hazard Mater; 2007 Jul; 146(1-2):1-11. PubMed ID: 17544578
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Economic analysis of atmospheric mercury emission control for coal-fired power plants in China.
Ancora MP; Zhang L; Wang S; Schreifels J; Hao J
J Environ Sci (China); 2015 Jul; 33():125-34. PubMed ID: 26141885
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Preliminary estimates of performance and cost of mercury control technology applications on electric utility boilers.
Srivastava RK; Sedman CB; Kilgroe JD; Smith D; Renninger S
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2001 Oct; 51(10):1460-70. PubMed ID: 11686251
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Vapor-phase elemental mercury adsorption by residual carbon separated from fly ash.
Wang LG; Chen CH; Kolker KH
J Environ Sci (China); 2005; 17(3):518-20. PubMed ID: 16083138
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. The cost of carbon capture and storage for natural gas combined cycle power plants.
Rubin ES; Zhai H
Environ Sci Technol; 2012 Mar; 46(6):3076-84. PubMed ID: 22332665
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Characterization of mercury binding onto a novel brominated biomass ash sorbent by X-ray absorption spectroscopy.
Bisson TM; MacLean LC; Hu Y; Xu Z
Environ Sci Technol; 2012 Nov; 46(21):12186-93. PubMed ID: 23020596
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Unknown mechainism for airborne mercury.
Lubick N
Environ Sci Technol; 2006 Jun; 40(12):3664-5. PubMed ID: 16830522
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Implications of the recent reductions in natural gas prices for emissions of CO2 from the US power sector.
Lu X; Salovaara J; McElroy MB
Environ Sci Technol; 2012 Mar; 46(5):3014-21. PubMed ID: 22321206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Novel regenerable sorbent based on Zr-Mn binary metal oxides for flue gas mercury retention and recovery.
Xie J; Qu Z; Yan N; Yang S; Chen W; Hu L; Huang W; Liu P
J Hazard Mater; 2013 Oct; 261():206-13. PubMed ID: 23933289
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The role of pressure drop and flow redistribution on modeling mercury control using sorbent injection in baghouse filters.
Flora JR; Hargis RA; O'Dowd WJ; Karash A; Pennline HW; Vidic RD
J Air Waste Manag Assoc; 2006 Mar; 56(3):343-9. PubMed ID: 16573197
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Carbon-enriched coal fly ash as a precursor of activated carbons for SO2 removal.
Izquierdo MT; Rubio B
J Hazard Mater; 2008 Jun; 155(1-2):199-205. PubMed ID: 18155355
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Regenerable sorbents for mercury capture in simulated coal combustion flue gas.
Rodríguez-Pérez J; López-Antón MA; Díaz-Somoano M; García R; Martínez-Tarazona MR
J Hazard Mater; 2013 Sep; 260():869-77. PubMed ID: 23876255
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Costs for integrating wind into the future ERCOT system with related costs for savings in CO2 emissions.
Lu X; McElroy MB; Sluzas NA
Environ Sci Technol; 2011 Apr; 45(7):3160-6. PubMed ID: 21375280
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The control of mercury vapor using biotrickling filters.
Philip L; Deshusses MA
Chemosphere; 2008 Jan; 70(3):411-7. PubMed ID: 17692357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Control of electrothermal heating during regeneration of activated carbon fiber cloth.
Johnsen DL; Mallouk KE; Rood MJ
Environ Sci Technol; 2011 Jan; 45(2):738-43. PubMed ID: 21158385
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Health benefits and control costs of tightening particulate matter emissions standards for coal power plants - The case of Northeast Brazil.
Howard DB; Thé J; Soria R; Fann N; Schaeffer R; Saphores JM
Environ Int; 2019 Mar; 124():420-430. PubMed ID: 30682597
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. The role of ammonia on mercury leaching from coal fly ash.
Wang J; Wang T; Mallhi H; Liu Y; Ban H; Ladwig K
Chemosphere; 2007 Nov; 69(10):1586-92. PubMed ID: 17604819
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
