Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Emissions from
transfer
Hot metal
Charging
emissions
Emissions from
oxygen blow
Emissions from
slag removal
Emissions from
skimming
Torpedo car
transfer
Baghouse
Electrostatic
precipitator
Baghouse
No control
Hot metal
desulfurization
Baghouse
Additives
Slag
skimming
Hot meta
l
Slag
Basic oxygen furnace
Deslagging
Baghouse
Scrap
Flux
Desulfurization
emissions
Molten
steel
Additives
Oxygen
Slag transfer,
disposal
Transfer to
continuous
caster
Ladle
treatment
Tapping
Alloys and
other additives
Cast steel
None or
water spray
Baghouse
None
Baghouse
Caster emissions
Emissions from ladle
metallurgy
Emissions from tapping
Emissions from slag
transfer,disposal
Fig. 3.12 Sources of nanoparticles in a steel plant in Michigan (USA) [
51
]
Ca-P-Si tertiary system, which demonstrated that the ions resulted mostly from the
coal flying ash. This proved the optimisation/minimisation of the solid aerosol
content of the coal flying ash added to the alternative dust fuel in fluidised bed
coal-fired thermal power plants [
48
-
50
].
3.3.1.2 Ferrous and Non-ferrous Metallurgy
A recent thorough study on several steel plants with coke oven batteries in the Great
Lakes area reveals both direct sources of PM
2.5
(Fig.
3.12
) and sources that generate
nanoparticles through
de novo
synthesis between PAH and the heavy metals
released in the atmosphere (Fig.
3.13
)[
51
].
The total amounts of PM
2.5
released from the steel plants are given in
Table
3.8
[
51
].
The above-mentioned experimental data indicate that these amounts must not be
ignored, especially because they include heavy metals under the form of both
organic and organometallic compounds that are very dangerous for health and the
environment.
As far as the orientative distribution of iron-containing nanoparticle concentra-
tion in large steel plant areas is concerned, the concentrations measured in various
