SO2 Pollution and Acid Rain in China

(Air Pollution Control Technology)

October 2018

Presenter ： Hosein Ghaedi

School of Environment
Tsinghua University of China
 Presentation Outline

 The history of SO2 and acid rain

pollution in China

 Regulations/laws to control SO2 and

acid rain

 SO2 control technologies

 References

2
The History of SO2 and Acid
Rain Pollution in China
 Coal Combustion
• Coal combustion is a major source of air pollution in China; the most
common air pollutants being particulates and SO2.
• Energy consumption in China was increased more than 10-fold over
about 30 years (1953-1983).
• In 1982, the total energy consumption amounted to 620 million tons coal
equivalent; coal and oil accounted for 74%, and 19%, respectively of the
total.

Table 1. Energy consumption in China reported

by Zhao and Sun (1986).
Table 2. Levels of SO2 and pH in selected cities in
%Total
Year Total (106 ton Coal Oil Gas Hydro China (1982) reported by Zhao et al. (1988).
Coal Eq.) Area City Annual SO2 (µg m-3)
1953 54.110 94.33 3.810 0.02 1.84 pH
Residential Clean
1962 165.40 89.23 6.610 0.93 3.23 Northern Beijing I58 15 6.74
1970 292.91 80.89 14.67 0.92 3.52 Xian 124 24 6.12
1975 454.25 71.85 21.07 2.51 4.57 Southern Chongqing 260 20 4.14
1982 619.37 73.92 18.67 2.56 4.85 Guiyang 393 88 4.07
 Initial Acid Rain Investigations
 Two core areas for acid rain were identified in the beginning of the 1980s:
1-Chongqing-Guiyang
2- Nanchang zone

 According to Nationwide Acid Rain

Surveys in 1982, acid rain does occur in
some parts of China. More than half of all
rain events in large areas situated to the
south of the Yangtze River have a pH of
less than 5.6 such as Chongqing, Guiyang
and neighboring areas in the southwestern
part of China (Zhao and Sun 1986).
 Initial evidence of acid rain (Zhao et al.,
1988):
 A report in 1985 revealed the evidence of
forest damage in Chongqing City, Sichuan
Province because of the long-term exposure
to acid rain. Fig. 1. Map of the People’s Republic of China.
 Metal structures and concrete works have
suffered severe corrosion in regions
(Chongqing and Guiyang) in China with
severe air pollution and acid rain. 5
 SO2 Emission
Table 3. SO2 emissions in Chinese provinces from 1995
to 2000 (thousand metric tons) (Zhang 2004).

Fig. 2. SO2 emission in China from 1982 to 1996 (Larssen et al., 1999).

20
06
5

-2
00

01
-2

0
01
20
Fig. 3. Emissions of acidifying precursors in China.
(Duan et al., 2016) 6
 Precipitation pH

Fig. 4. Maps of Average Annual Precipitation pH (Source: Duan et al., 2016)

1992-1999: pH 2000-2005: pH 2006-20014: pH 7

Regulations/Laws to Control
SO2 and Acid Rain
 Initial Efforts to Control SO2 Emission
• The legislative foundation for environmental regulation in China in turn is the
Environmental Protection Law of the People’s Republic of China adopted as
provisional legislation in 1979 and enacted as final legislation in 1989 (Report: An

Assessment of Environmental Regulation of the Steel Industry in China, 2009).

• In 1981, the First National Symposium on Acid Rain was convened in Beijing.
• In 1982, the National Environmental Protection Office (NEPO) organized and
sponsored two projects: First Nationwide Survey on acid rain and research on the
formation and effects of acid rain in the southwestern region of china.
• Based on The findings of the first survey, the Second National Survey on Acid
Rain was initiated in 1985 and lasted for two years.

9
 Implementation of SO2 Control Policies
Five-Year Planning (FYP):
Target: To maintain national SO2 emissions at the
Ninth Five-Year Plan during 1996–2000 1995 level, reaching 24.00 million tons by 2000.
(Gao et al., 2009)
 The SO2 emission control was introduced in this plan.

 Main Policy Measures of the “Two Control Zones” (TCZ) Plan (Gao et al., 2009) (Hering and Poncet 2014)
1. Controlling the sulfur content of coals supplied:
Shutdown any new coal mine with a sulfur content greater than 3.0% and limit output of existing coal
mines with a sulfur content greater than 3.0%.
2. Controlling emissions from coal-fired power plants:
The construction of new thermal power plants will not be approved in cities or suburbs of large and
medium-size cities; for newly built or rebuilt thermal power plants, if the sulfur content in burning
coal exceeds 1.0%, desulfurization facilities must be installed.
3. Collecting SO2 emission fees:
Emission fees should be collected from major sulfur emitters, and no less than 90 percent of emission
fees should be used for specific SO2 pollution control investments at these polluting sources.

The goal was achieved by decreasing national SO2 emissions

from 23.67 million tons in 1995 to 19.95 million tons in 2000. 10
 Implementation of SO2 Control Policies
Five-Year Planning (FYP):
Target: Reduction of national SO2
Tenth Five-Year Plan during 2001–2005 emissions to 18.00 million tons by 2005,
which was 10% less than the 2000 level
(Kanada et al., 2013) and (Gao et al., 2009)
 To By
achieve
2005 thisemissions
goal, SEPArose (Chinese National
to 25.49 Ambient
million Air 42%
tons, Quality Standard),
above MST
the goal
(Ministry of2009),
(Gao et al., Science and et Technology),
(Schreifels al., 2012) and SETC (State Economic and Trade
Commission) jointly issued a document titled ‘‘Technology Policies on SO2 Emission
Control from Coal Combustion’’ in January 2002. This included the following policies:
The reasons for the failure (Gao et al., 2009):
1. 1.Construction
The primary of coal was
reason minethemouth
massive power plants
increase withconsumption,
in coal desulfurization facilities
resulting fromand the
transformation from coal
the strong economic transportation
growth and heavytoindustry.
electricity transportation.
2. 2.
Closing
Because the of
coal-fired generating
coal shortages, unitssmall
illegal with ahigh-sulfur
capacity ofcoalmines
<50 MW before the end of 2003.
again flourished,
3. which
Powerled plants burninginmedium-
to a decline or high-sulfur coal should be required to install flue gas
coal quality.
desulfurization
3. The pollutant (FGD)
levy facilities.
system failed to exert its intended influence.
4. 4.New,
Due expanded,
to deficienciesor rebuilt power measurement
in emission plants shouldcapabilities,
install FGDthefacilities
chargestowere
comply with the
levied
requirements of Emission
based on neither the exactStandard
amount ofof Air Pollutants
emissions nor for
the Thermal Power
requirements Plants (GB13223-
of regulations,
1996) andagreements,
but on Total Emissionwhich Control (TEC).the authority of the law.
undermined
5. 5.
The
Dueappropriate
to inadequateFGD financial
technologies fortodifferent
policy supportkinds of generating
the installation units were
of FGD, stipulated.
the power
sector did not carry out the FGD plan. 11
 Implementation of SO2 Control Policies
Five-Year Planning (FYP):
Target: To reduce national SO2 emission to
Eleventh Five-Year Plan during 2006–2010 22.94 million ton by 2010 (10% reduction)
(Gao et al., 2009) and (Kanada et al., 2013)
 This
Mandatory
plan wasrestrictions
successful andontotal
energy
SO 2 intensity
emissions weredeclined introduced
by more for
thanthe firstand
14% time
in this plan. This regulation created pressures to reduce the intensity of coal and
flue-gas desulphurization (FGD) technology was installed on 86 percent of thermal
other fossil
power fuels that
plant capacity byincrease
the end ofSO 2 pollution
2010 (Schreifels(Karplus . 2017).
et al.,
et al., 2012)

Six important factors to achieve the goal (Schreifels et al., 2012):

1. The instruments used to outline the goal
2. The political commitment to enforce the emission targets
3. Central government accountability for, both provincial/local officials and power company
executives
4. Verification of emission measurements by the central government
5. Greater government focus at all levels on the SO 2 goal
6. Revised policies and programs that placed an emphasis on performance and incentives
(financial incentives) 12
 Implementation of SO2 Control Policies
Five-Year Planning (FYP):

Twelfth Five-Year Plan during 2011–2015 Target: 8% reduction of SO2 emission

(Li et al., 2015)
 To achieve the target, the government emphasizes the use of market-based
instruments such as cap and trade as potential valuable policy tools (Li et al., 2015)
The reasons behind this achieving goal (van der A et al., 2017)
1. Stricter control on the implementation of the regulations
2. Additional filtering efforts
3. Switching to low-sulfur coal and petrol
4. Phasing out obsolete capacity in coal-using industry
5. Phasing out small-scale coal mining
6. Gradually using more oil, gas, and renewable energies instead of coal
from 2011 onward
13
 Implementation of SO2 Control Policies
Five-Year Planning (FYP):
Target: 15% reduction of SO2
Thirteenth Five-Year Plan during 2016–2020 emission by the end of 2020
(Hsu et al., 2017)

 Tang et al. (2017) predicted

that the SO2 emissions will
decrease by 23% by 2020
in China.

Fig. 5. SO2 emission reduction from different sectors (Tang et al., 2017)

14
SO2 Control Technologies

15
 SO2 Control Technologies
Common technology

1) Wet FGD
Regenerable technology
Conventional Flue gas 2) Semi-dry FGD
technologies desulfurization (FGD)
Once-through technology 3) Dry FGD
Electron beam flue
gas treatment (EBFGT)
SO2 emission technology
control Selective catalytic reduction
technologies (SCR) technology
Multi-pollutant control
(Hg/SO2/NOx) technology
Non-thermal plasma (NTP)
technology
Modern
technologies Pulse corona-induced plasma
chemical process (PPCP)

Novel integrated
desulfurization (NID) Modified sorbents
technology

Fig. 6. Categorizing existing technology for SO2 emission Control

● In once-through technologies, the spent sorbent is disposed of as a waste or utilized as a byproduct.
● In regenerable technologies, SO2 is released from the sorbent during the sorbent’s regeneration, and
the SO2 may be further processed to yield H2SO4, elemental sulfur, or liquid SO2. No waste is produced
in regenerable technology applications. 16
 SO2 Control Technologies
Examples of SO2 Control Technologies
 Examples
Limestone forced
of wet
oxidation
once-through
(LSFO) technologies (Srivastava and Jozewicz 2001):
, limestone inhibited oxidation (LSIO), lime process, magnesium enhanced
lime (MEL), jet bubbling reactor (JBR), dual alkali, and seawater process .
 Examples
Lime of semi-dry
spray drying (LSD) or dry once-through technologies (Srivastava and Jozewicz 2001):
, furnace sorbent injection (FSI), LIFAC process, economizer sorbent injection (ESI),
duct sorbent injection (DSI), duct spray drying (DSD), circulating fluidized bed (CFB), and Hybrid Pollution
Abatement System (HYPAS) Hypas sorbent injection (HSI).
 Examples of wet regenerable technologies :
Sodium sulfite process, magnesium oxide process, sodium carbonate process, and amine process.
 Example of dry regenerable technologies: Chengdu, China (1997)
Activated carbon.
Hangzhou, China (2002)
Beijing, China (2006)
 Example of Multi-pollutant control technology
Shandong, China (2007)
Electron beam flue gas treatment (EBFGT) for SO2/Nox removing (Chmielewski and Han 2017)

Honeycomb V2O5-WO3/TiO2-SiO2 SCR catalyst impregnated with V/Cu/Mn oxides for Hg/SO2/Nox removing.
 Example of modified sorbent:
Lime modified with sewage sludge.
17
 SO2 Control Technologies
Wet FGD process
 Japan (98%), USA (92%), and Germany (90%) are the main users (Cheng and Zhang 2018).
 Advantages: High removal efficiency, minimal safety hazards (explosion, fires), and ability to collect
both gas and particulate matters (Roy and Sardar 2015)
 Disadvantages: Wet waste production (contaminated scrubber
liquid), formation of highly corrosive acids, high power
requirements, high capital, operating and maintenance cost.
 Due to low cost of limestone and SO2 control efficiencies
from 90% up to 98%, it is the preferred process for coal-
fired electric burning coal.

Fig. 7. A schematic of limestone-based wet FGD process (Jafarinejad 2016).

18
 SO2 Control Technologies
Dry FGD process
 Advantages: Low operating costs, no water consumption (Cheng and Zhang 2018), easily installation,
less space requirement, and easier waste disposal.
 Disadvantages:
● High operating temperatures (75-85oC) compared with wet FGD process (55-65oC).
● Less SO2 recovery efficiency compared with wet FGD process (Roy and Sardar 2015).

● Lime spray drying is a technology for smaller and low-sulfur coal-fired boilers and for solid waste
incinerators and recommended in cases where SO 2 emission is low .
● Quicklime is more expensive than limestone because of the high energy requirement for calcination.

Fig. 8. A schematic of lime spray drying (LSD) process (Jafarinejad 2016). 19

 Reference
1. D. Zhao, J. Xiong, Y. Xu, and C. W. H, Acid rain in southwestern China, Atmospheric
Environment (1967) 22 (1988) 349-358.
2. D. Zhao and B. Sun, Air pollution and acid rain in China, Ambio 15 (1986) 2-4.
3. J. Zhang, "Using Emissions Trading to Achieve Sulfur Dioxide Reduction in China,"
Master Degree, Department of Environment, Technology, and Social Studies,
Roskilde Universitetscenter, 2004.
4. T. Larssen, H. M. Seip, A. Semb, J. Mulder, I. P. Muniz, R. D. Vogt, E. Lydersen, V.
Angell, T. Dagang, and O. Eilertsen, Acid deposition and its effects in China: an
overview, Environmental Science & Policy 2 (1999) 9-24.
5. L. Duan, Q. Yu, Q. Zhang, Z. Wang, Y. Pan, T. Larssen, J. Tang, and J. Mulder, Acid
deposition in Asia: Emissions, deposition, and ecosystem effects, Atmospheric
Environment 146 (2016) 55-69.
6. A. f. A. Manufacturing, "An assessment of environmental regulation of the steel
industry in China", Alliance for American Manufacturing, Washington, D.C., 2009.
7. C. Gao, H. Yin, N. Ai, and Z. Huang, Historical Analysis of SO 2 Pollution Control
Policies in China, Environmental Management 43 (2009) 447-457.

20
 Reference
8. L. Hering and S. Poncet, Environmental policy and exports: Evidence from Chinese
cities, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 68 (2014) 296-318.
9. M. Kanada, L. Dong, T. Fujita, M. Fujii, T. Inoue, Y. Hirano, T. Togawa, and Y. Geng,
Regional disparity and cost-effective SO 2 pollution control in China: A case study in 5
mega-cities, Energy Policy 61 (2013) 1322-1331.
10. J. J. Schreifels, Y. Fu, and E. J. Wilson, Sulfur dioxide control in China: policy
evolution during the 10th and 11th Five-year Plans and lessons for the future, Energy
Policy 48 (2012) 779-789.
11. V. Karplus, Y. Huang, and D. Zhang, State Control as a Substitute for Environmental
Regulation? Evidence from Chinese Cities, Journal of Environmental Economics and
Management (2017) 1-41
12. X. Li, X. Wu, and F. Zhang, A method for analyzing pollution control policies:
Application to SO2 emissions in China, Energy Economics 49 (2015) 451-459.
13. R. J. van der A, B. Mijling, J. Ding, M. E. Koukouli, F. Liu, Q. Li, H. Mao, and N.
Theys, Cleaning up the air: effectiveness of air quality policy for SO 2 and NOx
emissions in China, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 17 (2017) 1775-1789.
14. A. Hsu, C. Yan, and Y. Cheng, "Addressing gaps in China’s environmental data: the
existing landscape," Yale Data Driven, Singapore (2017) 1-37. 21
 Reference
15. Q. Tang, Y. Lei, X. Chen, and W. Xue, Air Quality Improvement Scenario for China
during the 13 th Five-Year Plan Period, Asian Journal of Atmospheric Environment
(AJAE) 11 (2017) 33-36.
16. R. K. Srivastava and W. Jozewicz, Flue Gas Desulfurization: The State of the Art,
Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association 51 (2001) 1676-1688.
17. A. G. Chmielewski and B. Han, "Electron Beam Technology for Environmental
Pollution Control," in Applications of Radiation Chemistry in the Fields of Industry,
Biotechnology and Environment, Editors: M. Venturi and M. D’Angelantonio, Cham:
Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp. 37-66.
18. G. Cheng and C. Zhang, Desulfurization and Denitrification Technologies of Coal-
fired Flue Gas, Polish Journal of Environmental Studies 27 (2018) 481-489.
19. P. Roy and A. Sardar, SO2 Emission Control and Finding a Way Out to Produce
Sulphuric Acid from Industrial SO2 Emission, Journal of Chemical Engineering &
Process Technology 6 (2015) 1-7.
20. S. Jafarinejad, Control and treatment of sulfur compounds specially sulfur oxides
(SOx) emissions from the petroleum industry: a review, Chemistry International 2
(2016) 242-253.
22
Thank You For Your Attention !