Appeal No. 97-2914
Application No. 08/448,060
SO3 before it reaches the wet scrubber, which was known to be not
effective in removing SO3 .@
The examiner cites Cyran and Steag as suggesting the dry cleaning of flue gas after the
particulate collection step.
The examiner relies on Cyran as teaching a means for injecting dry sorbent into a flue
gas for removing sulfur oxides (Figure; col. 2, line 55, through col. 3, line 21).
However, the reference also discloses a baghouse filter downstream from the
dry sorbent injection (col. 3, lines 46-56).
The reference does not describe a particulate collection means upstream from
the dry sorbent injection means. Instead, the particulates are captured
in the baghouse filter, along with the spent dry sorbent (col. 3, lines 39-
45).
The reference does not teach the removal of SO3 in particular from the flue gas.
Rather, it specifically refers to SO2 removal throughout, with only the
mention of Asulfur oxides@ at col. 6, lines 26 and 27.
The examiner further relies upon Steag as setting forth a means for removing SO2/SO3
out of a flue gas by initially passing the contaminated gas through a dust
collector followed by a dry cleaning of the gas to remove SO2/SO3 (p. 2, lines
4-13).
After the dry cleaning, however, Steag captures the particles in a cloth filter (p.
2, lines 75-83).
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007