Gasification reactivity of co-pyrolysis char from coal blended with corn stalks

Chen, Xiye; Liu, Li; Zhang, Linyao; Zhao, Yan; Qiu, Penghua

doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2019.01.108

Cited by 48 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their S and N contents close to zero indicated that their thermal treatment would not produce nitrides and sulfides. The higher heating value of SY and MB (33.06 and 45.51 MJ/kg, respectively) were higher than that of coal (28.87 MJ/kg) ( Chen et al, 2019 ), bamboo residues (17.67–18.23 MJ/kg) ( Hu et al, 2019 ), spent potlining (22.21 MJ/kg), textile dyeing sludge (6.95 MJ/kg) ( Sun et al, 2019 ), and coffee grounds (23.64 MJ/kg) ( Chen et al, 2020 ). Their calorific values were higher than those of the other plastics such as polyvinyl chloride (19.02 MJ/kg) ( Lee et al, 2018 ), polystyrene (42.3 MJ/kg) ( Muneer et al, 2019 ), and polyethylene terephthalate (23.97 MJ/kg) ( Singh et al, 2019 ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…In other words, their pyrolysis generated only a small amount of ash residues, thus achieving a good volume reduction ( Table 2 ). The volatiles content was significantly lower for SY (75.43 %) than MB (98.27 %), but their volatiles were higher than those of bamboo residues (64.55∼72.95 %) ( Hu et al, 2019 ), coal (32.37 %) ( Chen et al, 2019 ), spent potlining (1.56 %), textile dyeing sludge (27.83 %) ( Sun et al, 2019 ). The higher the volatiles matter is, the greater the gas production and the calorific value are, the more favorable the pyrolysis reaction is.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pyrolysis dynamics of two medical plastic wastes: Drivers, behaviors, evolved gases, reaction mechanisms, and pathways

Ding

Huashan²,

Liu

et al. 2021

Journal of Hazardous Materials

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Pyrolysis dynamics of two medical plastic wastes: Drivers, behaviors, evolved gases, reaction mechanisms, and pathways

Ding

Huashan²,

Liu

et al. 2021

Journal of Hazardous Materials

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Gasification also shows high flexibility in feedstock variation (Saidi et al 2020). The common feedstock for gasification includes biomass (Putro et al 2020;Sittisun et al 2019), coal (Grabowski et al 2020), carbonized products (Chen et al 2019;He et al 2019), plastics (Nanda and Berruti 2020b), and municipal solid waste (Martínez et al 2020).…”

Section: Refuse-derived Fuel Production In Several Countriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gasification of refuse-derived fuel from municipal solid waste for energy production: a review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dwindling fossil fuels and improper waste management are major challenges in the context of increasing population and industrialization, calling for new waste-to-energy sources. For instance, refuse-derived fuels can be produced from transformation of municipal solid waste, which is forecasted to reach 2.6 billion metric tonnes in 2030. Gasification is a thermalinduced chemical reaction that produces gaseous fuel such as hydrogen and syngas. Here, we review refuse-derived fuel gasification with focus on practices in various countries, recent progress in gasification, gasification modelling and economic analysis. We found that some countries that replace coal by refuse-derived fuel reduce CO 2 emission by 40%, and decrease the amount municipal solid waste being sent to landfill by more than 50%. The production cost of energy via refuse-derived fuel gasification is estimated at 0.05 USD/kWh. Co-gasification by using two feedstocks appears more beneficial over conventional gasification in terms of minimum tar formation and improved process efficiency.

show abstract

“…However, a signi cant amount of alkali metals is volatilised to the gas phase during the gasi cation process at high temperatures. In addition, the strong interactions between alkali metals and minerals in coal can lead to catalyst deactivation as well as di cult recovery and regeneration [9][10][11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Structural and Gasification Kinetic Studies on Co-pyrolysis Chars of Coal and Biomass

Zeng

Jiao

Ren

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present study, the CO2 gasification behaviours of the co-pyrolysis chars with coal and biomass as feedstock were investigated using isothermal thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) at 950–1150 °C. The TGA results demonstrated that the char gasification reactivity was improved at higher biomass composition. In addition, the char characteristics results evaluation revealed that biomass promoted the development of a porous structure and inhibited the formation of graphite-like carbon during the co-pyrolysis of coal and biomass. Moreover, an extended random pore model (eRPM) was proposed to define the char gasification kinetics of coal and biomass. It was found that the activation energies of chars decreased with increasing biomass composition. Lastly, the relationship between the gasification reactivity and char characteristics was evaluated.

show abstract

Gasification reactivity of co-pyrolysis char from coal blended with corn stalks

Cited by 48 publications

References 25 publications

Pyrolysis dynamics of two medical plastic wastes: Drivers, behaviors, evolved gases, reaction mechanisms, and pathways

Pyrolysis dynamics of two medical plastic wastes: Drivers, behaviors, evolved gases, reaction mechanisms, and pathways

Gasification of refuse-derived fuel from municipal solid waste for energy production: a review

Structural and Gasification Kinetic Studies on Co-pyrolysis Chars of Coal and Biomass

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About