4.7 Article

Biosolids and microalgae as alternative binders for biomass fuel briquetting

期刊

FUEL
卷 194, 期 -, 页码 339-347

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2017.01.019

关键词

Biosolids; Microalgae; Starch; Biomass; Briquettes

资金

  1. Nigerian Government through the Petroleum Technology Development Fund (PTDF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Binders can be employed to improve the particle adhesion, compressive strength, abrasion resistance and energy content of densified biomass, such as briquettes. They may also reduce the energy cost of producing such briquettes, by reducing the compaction pressure, conditioning temperature and the wear on production equipment. This study explored and compared the effects of three different binders, including starch, enhanced treated biosolids and microalgae, on density, durability, energy content and combustion characteristics of fuel briquettes produced from blends of rice husks, corn cobs and bagasse, in a multilevel factorial design experiment. Briquettes had relaxed unit densities of 1.9-3.3 times the loose biomass bulk density, and were stronger than briquettes from the individual materials, with an average unconfined compressive strength of 125 kPa. An unconfined compressive strength of 175 kPa was achieved for a 2:4:1 blend of rice husks, corn cobs and bagasse with the microalgae binder at a compaction pressure of 31 MPa. Statistical analysis of the results showed that the addition of biosolids and microalgae binders significantly improved briquette density, while the addition of starch reduced briquette density, and biosolids reduced briquette strength. Of all the briquettes produced with the three binders, those containing the microalgae binder were found to be most durable, with a higher energy value, slower mass loss during briquette combustion, and a higher afterglow time. Since microalgae may be grown using CO2 from biomass combustion, discovery of their advantages as a binder in briquetting is particularly welcome. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. 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