4.7 Article

Assessment of kinetic models for the production of & gamma;-valerolactone developed in isothermal, adiabatic and isoperibolic conditions

Journal

FUEL
Volume 350, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2023.128792

Keywords

Kinetic modeling; Gamma valerolactone; Levulinate; Calorimetry; Adiabatic

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The use of lignocellulosic biomass as raw materials for the production of biofuels is increasing. Reliable kinetic models are needed for the shift from lab-scale to industrial scale. We developed and assessed several kinetic models for the hydrogenation of butyl levulinate to γ-valerolactone over Ru/C in different thermal modes. The most reliable models were found to be the non-competitive Langmuir Hinshelwood with hydrogen non-dissociation and dissociation.
The use of lignocellulosic biomass as raw materials for the production of biofuels is increasing. There are several potential processes valorizing these raw materials, but the shift from lab-scale to industrial scale requires the development of reliable and robust kinetic models. Usually, these models are developed in isothermal mode, limiting their use for thermal risk assessment or pinch analysis. We developed and assessed several kinetic models for the hydrogenation of butyl levulinate to & gamma;-valerolactone over Ru/C in different thermal modes, i.e., isothermal, isoperibolic and adiabatic modes. The reaction calorimeter Mettler-Toledo RC1 was used to perform kinetic experiments. Bayesian inference was used during the regression stage to calculate the credible intervals. The validation stage was done by a holdout method. From the regression and validation stage, we found that the non-competitive Langmuir Hinshelwood with hydrogen non-dissociation and dissociation were the most reliable models. These models can predict the kinetics of this reaction system in different thermal modes.

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