RA-915+/RP-M324 Sorbent Trap Mercury Analyzer
Sorbent Trap Mercury Analyzer
RA-915+/RP-M324 Sorbent Trap Mercury Analyzer RA-915+/RP-M324 Sorbent Trap Mercury Analyzer
Description
RA-915+/RP-M324 Sorbent Trap Mercury Analyzer

Using a sample probe that will be inserted into the emission stack and a sampling console that can accurately measure the volume of gas sampled, the emission gases will be pulled onto a pair of Sorbent Traps. Here, the mercury will be trapped in order to be measured on the Sorbent Trap Mercury Analyzer.

Features
  • Ability to quantify 1 ng to 100,000 ng per analysis
  • easy calibration
  • can analyze an entire trap section including glass wool in one run
  • most RATA analyses take about 90 seconds; high level analyses - up to 8-10 minutes
  • exhaust is scrubbed, no clean room or hood is needed
  • perfect for field use
  • works great in the lab
  • real-time peak viewing allows run-time adjustment for abberant samples
  • contains no catalyst, gold amalgam, or drying tube that require frequent expensive replacement
  • requires no compressed gases (other analyzers require compressed oxygen)
  • no autosampler, but samples can be analyzed in the time required to load an autosampler, and there is no potential for contamination of samples traveling together in the sample tray
  • industry standard for Method 30B and Appendix K with about 100 units in use
  • unique application of Zeeman AA Technology prevents interference and allows a simpler furnace design
  • operation is easy to learn, training and certification take one day
Advantages for EPA Method 7473 Thermal Analysis
  • Analyze samples from 0.2ng/g (0.2ppb) to 30,000,000ng/g (30,000ppm)
  • most analyses take 90 seconds. Very high level samples take only 8-11 minutes
  • sample Sizes up to 5g
  • versatile: analyze aqueous samples thermally down to 5ug/L with no digestion
  • analyzer module is the finest Hg vapor monitor available, able to detect < 2 ng/m3
  • no catalyst, gold amalgam, or drying tube, hence the analyzer is not prone to damage from high-level or halogen contaminated samples
Advantages of Sorbent Trap System over Continuous Emissions Mercury Monitor (CEMM) as the primary system for compliance monitoring
  • Capital and operating costs a fraction of CEMMs costs
  • mature proven technology, reliability proven by many systems in use
  • simple, dependable, easy and inexpensive to maintain
  • the only system capable of reliably measuring low levels (<0.5 micrograms per cubic meter.) This will be critical where Mercury Reduction is mandated
Advantages of Sorbent Trap System as an additional tool for facilities equipped with CEMM
  • Can be used as a low cost back-up system during CEMMs maintenance and repair where a loss of data can mean tens of thousands of dollars
  • check the accuracy of your calibrators
  • perform your own RATA and pre-Rata tests
  • excellent CEMMs trouble-shooting tool
  • perform Speciation Studies using our Ohio Lumex Speciation Traps
  • flexible for testing at different points and assessing Mercury Reduction Schemes
  • can be used to determine mercury levels in coal, ash, and other materials
  • perfect to reveal best optimization of Sorbent Injection Systems
Advantages of the Sorbent Trap System for Stack Testers
  • Much simpler to perform than Method-29 or “Ontario Hydro” method
  • results in minutes
  • quickly categorize source levels on site
  • only collect the number of samples needed (9 versus 12 runs) - no need to collect extra runs to assure 9 good results
  • finish RATA using method compliant results before leaving the site
  • saves money compared to other methods or off-site analysis
  • “One-Shot” argument: both Digestion and Thermal Methods are destructive if sample is lost on Trap Disassembly. The penalty for on-site Thermal Analysis is merely another run
Comparison with other methods
Ohio Lumex analyzer on site:
  • typical RATA in 1.5 - 2 days
  • minumal runs required (as few as 9) since data integrity can be determined on site
  • testing team has to complete control over analysis
Ontario Hydro method:
  • 3 - 5 days required to get 12 runs
  • results analyzed off-site
  • testing must be repeated if 4 or more runs fail
  • equipment is expensive and fragile
Sorbent traps analyzed off-site:
  • must do extra runs to ensure 9 good runs (12 vs. 9)
  • retesting required if 4 or more runs prove to be bad
  • impossibe to predict spike value for Field Recovery Test
Using CEMM as an instrumental reference method:
  • expensive
  • dynamic spiking is complicated to perform
  • no portable NIST Traceable Calibrator for "total" Hg is commercially available
  • wet stacks and high particulates can cause problems
Testing sites where RATA criteria was met using Appendix K Ohio Lumex analyzer
  • Allegheny Armstrong Power Plant July 2006, WKU Tester
  • Trimble County RATA July 7- 12, 2005, Arcadis Tester
  • Reliant Energy Power March 24, 2006, EERC Tester
  • EPRI Round Robin Test, multiple locations, 2006
  • NIPSCO power plant Indiana, APEX ETV EPA verification 2006, Battelle Tester