4.7 Article

Mineral carbonation of a pulp and paper industry waste for CO2 sequestration

Journal

PROCESS SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Volume 148, Issue -, Pages 968-979

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.psep.2021.02.019

Keywords

Mineral carbonation; CO2 sequestration; Alkaline waste; Grits; Experimental design

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study focuses on mineral carbonation using grits to capture CO2. Acetic acid was found to be the optimal solvent for calcium extraction, resulting in a carbonation efficiency of 77% for the grits.
This study focuses on the mineral carbonation to capture CO2 using an alkaline industrial waste, the grits, formed during the kraft pulp production process. An indirect mineral carbonation route was adopted, composed by two steps: first the extraction of calcium from the grits and second the precipitation of calcium carbonate. Firstly, four solvents were analyzed (HNO3, CH3COOH, NaOH and NH4Cl). Only HNO3 and CH3COOH have shown significant extraction efficiencies of 79.4 and 73.2 %, respectively, after 2 h at 30 degrees C. Kinetic tests demonstrated that equilibrium conditions are reached after 60 min. Since the nitric acid is a corrosive acid and with high associated costs, the acetic acid was selected for the dissolution of grits and extraction of calcium. The optimal conditions determined were an acetic acid concentration of 2 M, solid/liquid ratio of 30 g/L and temperature of 45 degrees C with an efficiency approximately of 77 %. In the second step, carbonation experiments were performed contacting the Ca-rich liquor, obtained from the extraction step, with a flux of pure CO2 gaseous in a stainless inox reactor. The optimal conditions determined were 30 degrees C and 30 bar, reaching a carbonation efficiency of 74 %, corresponding a CO2 sequestration capacity of 460 kg CO2/ton of grits. (C) 2021 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. 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