# Flue Gas Composition and Treatment Potential of a Waste Incineration Plant
## 3 Results
### Adopted Flue Gas Cleaning System for the Proposed Plant
For the 2 and 2.5 excess air ratio, CO\({}_{2}\) emissions reduced from 209,294 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\) to 4728 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\) and from 175,855 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\) to 3892 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\), respectively. The same outcome was observed for all emitted gases. The SO\({}_{2}\) with 1.5 excess air was 890.2 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\) before treatment and 44.5 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\) after treatment. With 2 excess air, SO\({}_{2}\) emissions dropped to 720.5 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\) before treatment. After exposure to lime particles, it was 35.8 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\), and finally, with 2.5 excess air, it was 604.7 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\) before lime injection and 30.3 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\) after interaction with lime particles. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & & & & & & & & & & \\
**MSW Mass Flow [kg/s]** & **Air Mass Flow [kg/s]** & **Air** & **Excess Air Ratio** & **Flow Rate of Flue Gas** & **Fine Gas** & **CO2** & **NO2** & **SO2** & **HCL** & **Point** \\  & & & **“C** & **Air Ratio** & **[m/s]** & **”C** & **C** & & & & \\ \hline
25 & 51.5 & 120 & 1.5 & 310.5 & 1146 & 258,514.40 & 749.90 & 890.20 & 717.00 & 1 \\
25 & 51.5 & 120 & 1.5 & 310.5 & 1146 & 258,514.40 & 180.00 & 890.20 & 717.00 & 2 \\
25 & 51.5 & 120 & 1.5 & 137.4 & 325 & 258,514.40 & 180.00 & 890.20 & 717.00 & 3 \\
25 & 51.5 & 120 & 1.5 & 137.4 & 325 & 258,514.40 & 180.00 & 44.50 & 7.16 & 4 \\
25 & 51.5 & 120 & 1.5 & 85 & 129 & 6023.90 & 180.00 & 44.50 & 7.16 & 5 \\
25 & 68.6 & 180 & 2 & 337 & 998 & 209,294.70 & 606.80 & 720.50 & 580.00 & 1 \\
25 & 68.6 & 180 & 2 & 337 & 998 & 209,294.70 & 145.40 & 720.50 & 580.00 & 2 \\
25 & 68.6 & 180 & 2 & 166 & 325 & 209,294.70 & 145.40 & 720.50 & 580.00 & 3 \\
25 & 68.6 & 180 & 2 & 166 & 325 & 209,294.70 & 145.40 & 35.80 & 5.60 & 4 \\
25 & 68.6 & 180 & 2 & 104 & 129 & 4728.20 & 145.40 & 35.80 & 5.60 & 5 \\
25 & 85.8 & 190 & 2.5 & 375 & 931 & 175,855.40 & 590.40 & 604.70 & 486.00 & 1 \\
25 & 85.8 & 190 & 2.5 & 375 & 931 & 175,855.40 & 122.30 & 604.70 & 486.00 & 2 \\
25 & 85.8 & 190 & 2.5 & 195 & 325 & 175,855.40 & 122.30 & 604.70 & 486.00 & 3 \\
25 & 85.8 & 190 & 2.5 & 195 & 325 & 175,855.40 & 122.30 & 30.30 & 4.80 & 4 \\
25 & 85.8 & 190 & 2.5 & 124 & 129 & 3892.30 & 122.30 & 30.30 & 4.80 & 5 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 14: Results of the simulated flue gas cleaning emissions system for 25 kg/s of MSW. Figure 8: Flue gas cleaning system for the proposed incineration facility (simulated in Epsilon). Figure 9: _Cont._  
Regarding the NO\({}_{2}\) emissions, for the 1.5 excess air ratio, it could be reduced from 749 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\) to 180 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\), and from 606 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\) to 145 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\) for 2 excess air ratio. With 2.5 excess air ratio, the reduction was from 509 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\) to 122 mg/Nm\({}^{3}\). Table 15 summarizes the emission values of the blue cleaning system after the furnace at point 1 and before the stack at point 5. As previously mentioned, gases emitted from waste incineration facilities must adhere to the laws and regulations in each country. For example, in Europe, they follow the EC BAT 2010 techniques which can be adapted for MENA region countries since there are no incineration plants. Flue gas emission requirements affect capital investment and plant operation costs which is why the economic analysis of waste incineration is so varied and changeable. The analysis of flue gas emissions in this study highlights the need for future research into the detailed costs of the chemical compounds required, such as lime and spherical carbon, to achieve reductions in emissions.