4.7 Article

PCDD/Fs in wet sewage sludge pyrolysis using conventional and microwave heating

期刊

JOURNAL OF ANALYTICAL AND APPLIED PYROLYSIS
卷 104, 期 -, 页码 280-286

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaap.2013.07.005

关键词

Sewage sludge; FTIR; PCDD/Fs; Conventional pyrolysis (CP); Microwave pyrolysis (MWP)

资金

  1. National Basic Research Program (973 Program) of China [2011CB201500]
  2. National High Technology Research and Development Programme of China (863 Programme) [2012AA063505]
  3. Research Project of environmental protection commonweal industry [201209023-4]
  4. National Key Technology Research and Development Program of China [2012BABO9B01]
  5. Important Project on Science and Technology of Zhejiang Province of China [2008C13024-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

TG-FTIR was carried out to investigate gas evolution during pyrolysis of wet sewage sludge from Shanghai, China. Weight lost 85% in the temperature range 25-600 degrees C while the main volatile matters were released before 600 degrees C. To get emission characteristics of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans (PCDD/Fs) during pyrolysis processes, conventional pyrolysis (CP) by electric heating and microwave pyrolysis (MWP) by microwave heating were separately conducted on two set of batch reactors. Both CP and MWP evolved no more than 5% of concentration of 17 toxic PCDD/Fs in untreated sewage sludge while corresponding ratios of International Toxicity Equivalents (I-TEQ) were around 30%. The ratios of difference congeners can be well explained by distillation effect. Homologue profiles of the total PCDD/Fs indicated presence of dechlorination and distillation effects during the two processes while the effects in CP were more prominent than in MWP though the latter got higher temperature. Other to that, MWP produced equivalent quantity of PCDD/Fs compared with CP indicating the absence of nonthermal effect in MWP on PCDD/Fs evolution. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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