4.7 Article

Co-pyrolysis of microalgae and waste rubber tire in supercritical ethanol

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING JOURNAL
卷 269, 期 -, 页码 262-271

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2015.01.108

关键词

Co-pyrolysis; Microalgae; Waste rubber tire; Synergistic effect; Bio-oil

资金

  1. National Science Foundation of China [21106034]
  2. Henan Polytechnic University [B2011-008]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Co-pyrolysis of microalgae and waste rubber tire (WRT) in supercritical ethanol was examined to investigate the effects of reaction temperature (290-370 degrees C), time (10-120 min), WRT/microalgae mass ratio (RIM, 5/0-0:5), and ethanol/feedstock ratio (EtOH/(R + M), 5:5-30:5). Temperature and mass ratio are two factors that significantly affect the yield and quality of bio-oil. Under optimal reaction conditions, the highest bio-oil yield achieved was 65.4 wt%. The presence of microalgae allows the conversion of WRT to occur under milder conditions than WRT alone. The temperature needed for adequate conversion of WRT and microalgae in supercritical ethanol (330 degrees C) is much lower than the co-pyrolysis temperature without a solvent. ZnO and carbon black in the WRT played catalytic roles in the conversion of the WRT and microalgae as well as the in situ denitrogenation and deoxygenation of the bio-oil. A positive synergistic effect between the WRT and the microalgae was observed. The highest value for the synergistic effect (37.8%) was observed at an R/M mass ratio of 1:1. The interaction of microalgae and WRT during co-pyrolysis also favored denitrogenation and deoxygenation, thus improving the quality of the bio-oil. The heating values of the bio-oils produced from the co-pyrolysis of WRT and microalgae were found to be in the range of 35.80-42.03 MJ/kg. The main components in the gas phase are typically CO2, H-2, and CH4. However, methods for improving the quality of bio-oil via co-pyrolysis will require further study. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据