Pyrolysis behavior and kinetic study of phenol as tar model compound in micro fluidized bed reactor

Gai, Chao; Dong, Yong; Lv, Zhaochuan; Zhang, Zhaoling; Liang, Jingcui; Liu, Yantao

doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.04.098

Cited by 35 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This integral term is represented by the model equations shown in Table 1 and by conducting experiments at a range of isothermal temperatures a plot of lnk versus 1/T was obtained to derive the activation energy from the slope of the plot according to Eq. (5) with the most suitable method determined by the best linearity fit [17].…”

Section: Kinetic Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, the pyrolytic reactions of oil-palm shell at low and high temperature regimes were found to be based on two mechanisms according to Guo and Lua [41]. In comparison to thermogravimetric pyrolysis methods other researchers have also reported different mechanisms and sequences involved in the formation of gas species, for example three dimensional diffusion was found responsible for the production of hydrogen and methane during the pyrolysis process [12,17].…”

Section: Kinetic Analysis Of Pyrolysis Of Olive Kernelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comparison of the Pyrolysis of Olive Kernel Biomass in Fluidised and Fixed Bed Conditions

Al-Farraji

Marsh

Steer

2016

Waste Biomass Valor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of thermogravimetric analysis to describe biomass kinetics often uses bench top thermogravimetric analyser (TGA) analysers which are only capable of low heating rates. The aim of this research was to compare experimental fast pyrolysis of Olive kernels in a bespoke laboratory thermogravimetric fluidised bed reactor (TGFBR) characterised by rapid heating rates at high flow rates, compared to a smaller bench scale fixed bed TGA system. The pyrolysis in the TGFBR was analysed by using the isothermal kinetic approach and it was theorised that the pyrolysis decomposition reactions occurred by two mechanisms depending on the temperature, resulting in an activation energy of 67.4 kJ/mol at temperatures below \500°C and 60.8 kJ/mol at temperatures [500°C. For comparison, a bench scale TGA was used to look at the thermal behaviour in different fixed bed thermal conditions giving a higher activation energy of 74.4 kJ/mol due to the effect of external particle gas diffusion. The effect of biomass particle size (0.3-4.0 mm) on the conversion of biomass at different temperatures, was investigated between 300 and 660°C in the TGFBR. The results suggested inhibition of internal gas diffusion was more important at lower temperatures, but in comparison had no significant effect when measured in the fixed bed TGA at lower heating rates. Bench top TGA analysis of pyrolysis is a rapid and valuable method, but is limited by smaller sample sizes and lower heating rates. In comparison, the conditions encountered with the laboratory scale TGFBR are more likely to be relevant to larger scale systems where heat distribution, heat transfer and mass diffusion effects play major roles in the reactivity of biomass.

show abstract

Section: Kinetic Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Kinetic Analysis Of Pyrolysis Of Olive Kernelmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of the Pyrolysis of Olive Kernel Biomass in Fluidised and Fixed Bed Conditions

Al-Farraji

Marsh

Steer

2016

Waste Biomass Valor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The samples are fed to the heated bubbling bed through a pulsed (0.1–1 s) electromagnetic valve. The volatile products are collected in gas sampling bags for offline GC analysis or via capillary column for online MS analysis (Choi et al, ; Gai et al, ; Guo et al, ; Yu et al, , , ).…”

Section: Experimental Setups To Measure Pyrolysis Kineticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Besides, these studies can also help in designing a suitable catalyst to improve the selectivity towards desired products (Butler et al, ; Li et al, ). Numerous studies have been performed over the years to decode the kinetic mechanisms of biomass fast pyrolysis (Agarwal, Dauenhauer, Huber, & Auerbach, ; Bai et al, ; Bai & Brown, ; Banyasz, Li, Lyons‐Hart, & Shafer, ; Bradbury, Sakai, & Shafizadeh, ; Branca, Di Blasi, Mango, & Hrablay, ; Broido & Nelson, ; Choi et al, ; Chu, Subrahmanyam, & Huber, ; Custodis, Hemberger, Ma, & van Bokhoven, ; Debiagi et al, ; Faravelli, Frassoldati, Migliavacca, & Ranzi, ; Gai et al, ; Huang, Liu, Tong, Li, & Wu, ; Huang, Liu, Wei, Huang, & Li, ; Kawamoto, Murayama, & Saka, ; Kawamoto & Saka, ; Khachatryan, Xu, Wu, Pechagin, & Asatryan, ; Kim, Bai, & Brown, ; Lou, Wu, & Lyu, ; Mayes & Broadbelt, ; Mayes, Nolte, Beckham, Shanks, & Broadbelt, ; Mettler, Mushrif, et al, 2012; Miller & Bellan, ; Norinaga, Shoji, Kudo, & Hayashi, ; Nowakowska, Herbinet, Dufour, & Glaude, ; Patwardhan, Dalluge, Shanks, & Brown, ; Patwardhan, Satrio, Brown, & Shanks, ; Piskorz, Majerski, Radlein, Vladars‐Usas, & Scott, ; Piskorz, Radlein, & Scott, ; Ranzi et al, , ; Ranzi, Debiagi, & Frassoldati, , ; Ronsse, Dalluge, Prins, & Brown, ; Scheer et al, ; Scheer, Mukarakate, Robichaud, Nimlos, & Ellison, ; Shafizadeh & Fu, ; Shen & Gu, ; Shen, Gu, & Bridgwater, ; Shen, Xiao, Gu, & Luo, ; Varhegyi, Jakab, & Antal, ; Vasiliou et al, ; Vinu & Broadbelt, ; Wang, Ru, Lin, & Luo, ; Werner, Pommer, & Broström, ; Zhang, Li, Yang, & Blasiak, ; Zhang, Nolte, & Shanks, ; Zhou, Li, Mabon, & Broadbelt, ; Zhou, Nolte, Mayes, Shanks, & Broadbelt,…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring biomass fast pyrolysis kinetics: State of the art

SriBala

Carstensen

Marin

2018

WIREs Energy & Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fast pyrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass is considered to be a promising thermochemical route for the production of drop‐in fuels and valuable chemicals. During the past decades, a comprehensive understanding of feedstock structure, fast pyrolysis kinetics, product distribution, and transport effects that govern the process has allowed to design better pyrolysis reactors and/or catalysts. A variety of lignocellulosic biomass feedstocks, like corn stover, pinewood, poplar, and model compounds like glucose, xylan, monolignols have been utilized to study the thermal decomposition at or close to fast pyrolysis conditions. Significant progress has been made in understanding the kinetics by developing unique setups such as drop‐tube, PHASR, and micropyrolyzer reactors in combination with the use of advanced analytical techniques such as comprehensive gas and liquid chromatography (GC, LC) with time‐of‐flight mass spectrometer (TOF‐MS). This has led to initial intrinsic kinetic models for biomass and its main components, namely cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin, validated using experimental setups where the effects of heat and mass transfer on the performance of the process, expressed using Biot and pyrolysis numbers, are adequately negligible. Yet, not all aspects of fast pyrolysis kinetics of biomass components are equally well understood. The use of time‐resolved or multiplexed experimental techniques can further improve our understanding of reaction intermediates and their corresponding kinetic mechanisms. The novel experimental data combined with first principles based multiscale models can reshape biomass pyrolysis models and transform biomass fast pyrolysis to a more selective and energy efficient process. This article is categorized under: Energy and Climate > Climate and Environment Energy Research & Innovation > Science and Materials Bioenergy > Science and Materials

show abstract

“…It is an intermediate stage between combustion and pyrolysis, occurring at temperatures ranging between 600 and 1500 °C [1]. Gasification is considered a viable route by which solid biofuel can be converted partially into gases [2]. Product gas quality is influenced by composition and energy content, which depends mainly upon factors including gasifier configuration, feedstock origin and operating conditions such as equivalence ratio (ER) and temperature [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Kinetics and Performance of Raw and Torrefied Biomass in a Continuous Bubbling Fluidized Bed Gasifier

Al-Farraji

Marsh

Steer

et al. 2017

Waste Biomass Valor

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper is an experimental study of the kinetics of gasification of olive kernel by using a thermogravimetric fluidized bed reactor technique. Gasification of 'as received' and torrefied olive kernels were investigated in a lab-scale bubbling fluidized bed gasifier, operating at up to 3.2 kg/h. The effect of bed temperature between 550 and 750 °C in 50 °C increments on the gasification product gas at mass-based equivalence ratios of 0.15 and 0.2 was studied. To explore the potential of torrefied biomass, the gasification results were compared to that of the 'as received' biomass. The product gas from torrefied biomass produced higher H 2 , CO and CH 4 concentrations at identical oxidant flow rates in addition to higher cold gas efficiency and higher product gas heating value. The influence of equivalence ratio in gasification was also investigated at reactor temperatures of 750 °C and five equivalence ratios (0.15, 0.2, 0.25, 0.3, and 0.35). The results revealed that the torrefied biomass has the highest HHV at an equivalence ratio of 0.2 with a value of 6.09 MJ/Nm 3 , while 'as received' biomass 4.72 MJ/Nm 3 . Kinetic experiments under isothermal conditions were performed for the gasification of the materials in continuous mode. A mass balance model was successfully used to provide the capability of separately determining the rate constant of the reactions taking place. The kinetic parameters were calculated by a first order reaction model giving activation energies for 'as received' olive kernels of 84 kJ/mol and for torrefied olive kernels of 106 kJ/mol.

show abstract

Pyrolysis behavior and kinetic study of phenol as tar model compound in micro fluidized bed reactor

Cited by 35 publications

References 52 publications

A Comparison of the Pyrolysis of Olive Kernel Biomass in Fluidised and Fixed Bed Conditions

A Comparison of the Pyrolysis of Olive Kernel Biomass in Fluidised and Fixed Bed Conditions

Measuring biomass fast pyrolysis kinetics: State of the art

Kinetics and Performance of Raw and Torrefied Biomass in a Continuous Bubbling Fluidized Bed Gasifier

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About