4.7 Article

Effect of CO2 and H2O on lignite char structure and reactivity in a fluidized bed reactor

Journal

FUEL PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY
Volume 211, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2020.106564

Keywords

Fluidized bed; Pyrolysis; Char structure; Reactivity; Gasification

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51776039]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

By comparing chars produced under different atmospheres, it was found that the pore structure and specific surface area of chars are significantly affected by the gasification environment, while the presence of chemical groups has a minor impact on the chars. The best gasification reactivities were obtained on the chars produced under 50%CO2/50%N2 and 50%H2O/50%N2 atmospheres, largely influenced by the porosity of the chars.
Lignite chars were produced in a fluidized bed (FB) reactor under 100%N-2, 100%CO2 and 50%N-2/50%H2O atmospheres, respectively. The physicochemical characteristics of the three kinds of chars were subsequently characterized, and the gasification reactivity of these chars were studied. The results indicated that the char produced under H2O and CO2 atmospheres have a rougher surface and a more developed pore structure than that produced under N-2 atmosphere. The specific surface areas of different samples follow the trend: raw coal < N-2 char < CO2 char < H2O char. Interestingly, it is found that the gasification of CO2 - char is beneficial for the development of 2-4 nm pores, while the gasification of H2O - char is beneficial for the development of 4-30 nm pores. The chemical groups existing on the three chars are similar, indicating that the impact of the pyrolysis atmosphere on the chemical groups of char is insignificant. It is also showed that the best reactivities of gasification are obtained on the chars produced under 50%CO2/50%N-2 and 50%H2O/50%N-2 atmospheres, which is largely affected by porosity of the chars.

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