4.6 Article

Characteristics of a CaSO4 composite oxygen carrier supported with an active material for in situ gasification chemical looping combustion of coal

Journal

RSC ADVANCES
Volume 8, Issue 41, Pages 23372-23381

Publisher

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c8ra03425g

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51506105]
  2. Key Research and Development Plan of Shandong Province [2017GSF16101]
  3. Foundation of State Key Laboratory of High-efficiency Utilization of Coal and Green Chemical Engineering [201603]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

CaSO4 is considered to be a potential oxygen carrier for chemical-looping combustion (CLC) due to its cheapness and high oxygen transport capacity. To improve the physicochemical stability of the CaSO4 oxygen carrier, CaSO4 composite oxygen carriers supported with clay, cement, and ash separately were prepared. It was found that the attrition resistance of the CaSO4 oxygen carrier composed of clay and cement improved due to the bond action of clay and cement. The reactivity of the composite oxygen carrier with coal was investigated in a thermogravimetric analyser (TGA) and fluidised bed. Sulphurous gas products were analysed by mass spectrometry (TG-MS) and gas chromatography (GC). Based on the catalysis of the active components in clay, cement and ash, the reaction rate of CaSO4 with coal was improved by the active materials. However, the side reaction generating the sulphurous gas was severe in both the reduction and oxidation stages, especially when using steam as the gasifying agent. To enhance the regeneration, the CaSO4/clay composite oxygen carrier was upgraded by adding CaO. It was demonstrated that SO2 release can be restrained in both the reduction and oxidation stages when the mass ratio of CaO to the CaSO4/clay composite oxygen carrier was higher than 1. At this point, the corresponding oxygen transport capacity was about 14.1 wt%.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available