4.7 Article

Modelling the reactions of cellulose, hemicellulose and lignin submitted to hydrothermal treatment

期刊

INDUSTRIAL CROPS AND PRODUCTS
卷 124, 期 -, 页码 919-930

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2018.08.045

关键词

Cellulose; Hemicellulose; Lignin; Hydrothermal treatment; Biorefinery

资金

  1. French National Research Agency (ANR) as part of the Investissements d'Avenir program [ANR-11-LABX-0002-01]
  2. CPER 2007-2013 Structuration du Pole de Competitivite Fibres Grand'Est (Competitiveness Fibre Cluster, France), through local (Conseil General des Vosges) fund
  3. CPER 2007-2013 Structuration du Pole de Competitivite Fibres Grand'Est (Competitiveness Fibre Cluster, France), through regional (Region Lorraine) fund
  4. CPER 2007-2013 Structuration du Pole de Competitivite Fibres Grand'Est (Competitiveness Fibre Cluster, France), through national (DRRT) fund
  5. CPER 2007-2013 Structuration du Pole de Competitivite Fibres Grand'Est (Competitiveness Fibre Cluster, France), through national (FNADT) fund
  6. CPER 2007-2013 Structuration du Pole de Competitivite Fibres Grand'Est (Competitiveness Fibre Cluster, France), through European (FEDER, France) fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The main compounds of plant biomass, i.e., cellulose, lignin and hemicellulose, were submitted to hydrothermal carbonisation (HTC) in ranges of temperature and time of 140-240 degrees C and 0.5-24 h, respectively. Those parameters were combined into a single one, the severity factor, and its effect on hydrochar yield on the one hand, and on pH, yield and composition of the liquid fraction on the other hand, was investigated in depth. The production of furanic and phenolic compounds was correlated with both severity and pH. The kinetics of furfural (RI) and 5-hydroxymethylfurfural (5-HMF) production and consumption were also investigated and modelled, and the results were compared to those reported in the literature. The production of nine phenolic compounds from lignin HTC was also considered.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据