4.7 Article

Emissions from the premixed combustion of gasified polyethylene

Journal

ENERGY & FUELS
Volume 22, Issue 1, Pages 372-381

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ef700379c

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An investigation was conducted on pollutants emitted from steady-state, steady-flow gasification and combustion of polyethylene (PE) in a two-stage furnace. The polymer, in pulverized form, was first pyrolyzed at 1000 degrees C, and subsequently, its gaseous pyrolyzates were burned, upon mixing with air at high temperatures (900-1100 degrees C). The motivation for this indirect type of burning PE was to attain nominally premixed combustion of the pyrolyzate gases with air, thereby achieving lower pollutant emissions than those emanating from the direct burning of the solid PE polymer. This work assessed the effluents of the two-stage furnace and examined the effects of the combustion temperature, as well as the polymer feed rate and the associated fuel/air equivalence ratio (0.3 < phi < 1.4). It was found that, whereas the yield of pyrolysis gas decreased with an increasing polymer feed rate, its composition was nearly independent of the feed rate. CO2 emissions peaked at an equivalence ratio near unity, while the CO emissions increased with an increasing equivalence ratio. The total light volatile hydrocarbon and semivolatile polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) emissions of combustion increased with an increasing equivalence ratio. The generated particulates were mostly submicrometer in size. Overall, PAH and soot emissions from this indirect burning of PE were an order of magnitude lower than corresponding emissions from the direct burning of the solid polymer, obtained previously in this laboratory using identical sampling and analytical techniques. Because pyrolysis of this polymer requires a nominal heat input that amounts to only a diminutive fraction of the heat released during its combustion, implementation of this technique is deemed advantageous.

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