4.7 Article

Effect of the temperature on the spent coffee grounds torrefaction process in a continuous pilot-scale reactor

Journal

FUEL
Volume 262, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2019.116493

Keywords

Torrefaction; Spent coffee grounds; Mass yield; Energy yield; Product properties

Funding

  1. European Union [731101]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Several studies in Literature have analyzed the torrefaction treatment process of biomass in batch reactors. Nevertheless, in order to check the industrial applicability of a process, it is more interesting to carry out torrefaction tests in continuous pilot plant reactors. Thus, the present study reports the results of continuous semi-industrial scale (500 kg/h) torrefaction experiments employing spent coffee grounds (SCG) as a feedstock in a horizontal rotary reactor. Torrefaction tests were carried out at three different temperatures (210 degrees C, 235 degrees C, and 260 degrees C) for 90 min, in order to evaluate the yields of solid, liquid (water and tar) and gaseous products and their composition. In particular, the effectiveness of the decarbonization and deoxygenation processes was investigated, analyzing the carbon and oxygen distribution. Within the temperature range, torrefaction yielded solid of 55.2-85.8 wt% with an increase of the higher heating value (HHV) of 5.1-15.4% compared to the raw material. Liquid fraction yield was in the range of 11.3-34.3 wt%, with a moisture content of 73.7-91.9% and HHV between 18.8 and 23.4 MJ/kg on dry basis. Gas fraction represented 2.9-10.5 wt% of the raw biomass with HHV between 1.95 and 3.55 MJ/Nm(3). Acids (mainly acetic acid) were the major compounds in the tar fraction, accounted up to 68 wt%, while CO2 was the main product of the deoxygenation reactions in the gaseous fraction (76.6-86.9 vol%). From the perspective of mass yield and energy density enhancement, 260 degrees C was considered to be the optimal temperature for torrefaction of SCG.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available