4.7 Article

Bio-carbon production by oxidation and hydrothermal carbonization of paper recycling black liquor

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION
Volume 213, Issue -, Pages 332-341

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.12.175

Keywords

Black liquor; Hydrogen peroxide; Hydrothermal carbonization; Oxidation; Recycled paper

Funding

  1. Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, Baghdad, Iraq

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Black liquor, an industrial waste, also generally called spent liquor is a promising feedstock for production of bio-carbon due to its high lignin and energy contents. Mild processing conditions and sustainable resource utilization can drive commercial utilization of this industrial waste. A novel oxidative procedure using hydrogen peroxide as a green liquid oxidant at room temperature for processing of paper recycling neutral sulphite semi-chemical spent liquor was established and evaluations were carried out for its efficiency. Standard hydrothermal carbonization was carried out for comparing bio-carbon production qualitatively and quantitatively using the same spent liquor. The oxidation procedure was performed at room temperature using 5% of H2O2 followed by washing in diluted sulfuric acid (0.15 N) while hydrothermal carbonization was performed at 250 degrees C. The bio-carbon produced were similar in terms of ash percentage and ranged from 1.25 +/- 0.05 to 1.48 +/- 0.05% for oxidation method and from 1.11 +/- 0.03 to 1.45 +/- 0.04% for hydrothermal carbonization. The carbon contents for the oxidation method ranged from 60.54 to 61.50% and 66.81-67.31% for hydrothermal carbonization while higher heating values ranged from 25.32 to 26.11 MJ/kg and from 28.68 to 29.34 MJ/kg respectively. The mass yield ranged from 29.98 to 31.88% by the oxidation, while it was 15.02-16.08% by hydrothermal carbonization. (C) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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