4.8 Article

Studies on Selective Adsorption of Biogas Components on Pillared Clays: Approach for Biogas Improvement

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 42, Issue 23, Pages 8727-8732

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/es8014666

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Fundaao para a Ciencia e Technologia (FCT
  2. Portugal) [SFRH/BPD/34872/2007, BPD/26559/2006]
  3. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BPD/34872/2007] Funding Source: FCT

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Comparative adsorptions of four gases (natural gas and landfill gas components), viz., CO2, CH4, C2H6, and N-2, were studied on four different pillared clays (PILCs) to develop a selective material. Such material could be useful for the separation/purification process of waste gases. These materials (PILCs) were prepared from two different natural montmorillonite clays, by pillaring with Al2O3 and ZrO2, separately and were characterized by means of nitrogen adsorption and XRD. The adsorption isotherms for pure component gases were determined for each PILC, up to 10(3) kPa. The isotherms data were explored to calculate the selectivity of PILCs for either gas in any binary mixture. It was observed that the surface area of the clays pillared with Al2O3 was higher than that of the clays pillared with ZrO2. At the highest studied equilibrium pressure, the order of maximum adsorption was found to be CO2 > C2H6 > CH4 > N-2 for each material. With the help of adsorption modeling, the selective adsorption from binary mixtures was predicted at different equilibrium pressures and compositions. Among the four PILCs, a ZrO2 PILC was found to be the most suitable material, in terms of separation possibility. To further assess the efficiency of these materials in commercial processes, the adsorption capacity in terms of working capacity was also calculated at two different regeneration pressures, i.e., at 1.0 atm and 1.0 Torr.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available