Adsorption and desorption on coals for CO2 sequestration

Zuo-tang, Wang; Fu, Zhenkun; Zhang, Bang-an; Wang, Guoxiong; Rudolph, Victor; Huo, Li-wen

doi:10.1016/s1674-5264(09)60002-8

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…8). This trend is well-known and reported by numerous authors in the literature ( [Borowski, 1975] , [Ettinger et al, 1967] , [Li et al, 2010] and [Wang et al, 2009] ). Ratios between the q mc sorption capacities for pure CO 2 and CH 4 among the panel of studied coal samples vary between 1.4 for high rank coals (AL02-MVB, CO03-A and JER01-MA) and 2.2 for low rank coals (CO01-SB and AL01-MVB) (Table 4) with an average of 1.7 ± 0.3.…”

Section: Comparison Of Co2 and Ch4 Sorptionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Selection of coals of different maturities for CO2 Storage by modelling of CH4 and CO2 adsorption isotherms

Garnier¹,

Finqueneisel²,

Zimny³

et al. 2011

International Journal of Coal Geology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International audienceCO2 injection in unmineable coal seams could be one interesting option for both storage and methane recovery processes. The objective of this study is to compare and model pure gas sorption isotherms (CO2 and CH4) for well-characterised coals of different maturities to determine the most suitable coal for CO2 storage. Carbon dioxide and methane adsorption on several coals have been investigated using a gravimetric adsorption method. The experiments were carried out using both CO2 and CH4 pure gases at 25 °C from 0.1 to 5 MPa (1 to 50 bar). The experimental results were fitted using Temkin's approach but also with the corrected Langmuir's and the corrected Tóth's equations. The two last approaches are more accurate from a thermodynamical point of view, and have the advantage of taking into account the fact that experimental data (isotherms) correspond to excess adsorption capacities. These approaches allow better quantification of the adsorbed gas. Determined CO2 adsorption capacities are from 0.5 to 2 mmol/g of dry coal. Modelling provides also the affinity parameters of the two gases for the different coals. We have shown these parameters determined with adsorption models could be used for classification and first selection of coals for CO2 storage. The affinity ratio ranges from a value close to 1 for immature coals to 41 for high rank coals like anthracites. This ratio allows selecting coals having high CO2 adsorption capacities. In our case, the modelling study of a significant number of coals from various ranks shows that anthracites seem to have the highest CO2 storage capacities. Our study provides high quality affinity parameters and values of CO2 and CH4 adsorption capacities on various coals for the future modelling of CO2 injection in coal seams

show abstract

Section: Comparison Of Co2 and Ch4 Sorptionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Selection of coals of different maturities for CO2 Storage by modelling of CH4 and CO2 adsorption isotherms

Garnier¹,

Finqueneisel²,

Zimny³

et al. 2011

International Journal of Coal Geology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Much attention has been paid to sequestration of CO 2 in saline aquifers, coal beds, and abandoned petroleum reservoirs as a way to curb atmospheric greenhouse effects [1][2][3][4][5]. Specifically, there is OPEN ACCESS interest in storing CO 2 in gas hydrates on the ocean floor [6] as hydrates can provide a secondary storage method for CO 2 in the ocean, thereby minimizing a chance for stored CO 2 leakage [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two factors contribute to this hypothesis: (1) structurally, CH 4 and CO 2 gases are similar-both are classified as structure I (sI) hydrate, which consist of two pentagonal dodecahedra (5 12 ) cages and six tetrakaidecahedra (5 12 6 2 ) cages [8] and (2) hydrates of CO 2 are more thermodynamically stable than CH 4 at temperatures below 10ºC [10]. The phase diagram of CO 2 and CH 4 hydrates in Figure 1 shows the stability zones of both hydrates. As seen in Equations (1) and (2), no additional energy is needed to dissociate CH 4 hydrates, since CO 2 hydrate formation is exothermic and the heat of formation of CO 2 hydrates is enough to dissociate CH 4 hydrates, the latter releases free CH 4 [6]: CO 2 (g) + nH 2 cages.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The phase diagram of CO 2 and CH 4 hydrates in Figure 1 shows the stability zones of both hydrates. As seen in Equations (1) and (2), no additional energy is needed to dissociate CH 4 hydrates, since CO 2 hydrate formation is exothermic and the heat of formation of CO 2 hydrates is enough to dissociate CH 4 hydrates, the latter releases free CH 4 [6]: CO 2 (g) + nH 2 cages. This way, when CO 2 is introduced into the CH 4 hydrate zone, not all of the CH 4 dissociates from its parent hydrate.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Kinetics of the Formation and Dissociation of Gas Hydrates from CO2-CH4 Mixtures

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sequestration of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) in the form of its hydrates in natural methane (CH 4 ) hydrate reservoirs, via CO 2 /CH 4 exchange, is an attractive pathway that also yields valuable CH 4 gas as product. In this paper, we describe a macroscale experiment to form CO 2 and CH 4 -CO 2 hydrates, under seafloor-mimic conditions, in a vessel fitted with glass windows that provides visualization of hydrates throughout formation and dissociation processes. Time resolved pressure and temperature data as well as images of hydrates are presented. Quantitative gas conversions with pure CO 2 , calculated from gas chromatographic measurements yielded values that range from 23 -59% that correspond to the extent of formed hydrates. In CH 4 -rich CH 4 -CO 2 mixed gas systems, CH 4 hydrates were found to form preferentially.

show abstract

“…Work continued to develop a standard for determining the gas content of a particular sample [12]. The standard included the determination of lost Gas (Q 1 ), released Gas (Q 2 ) and residual Gas (Q 3 ) released by crushing.…”

Section: Gas Contentmentioning

confidence: 99%