4.6 Article

Thermal decomposition of dolomite under CO2: insights from TGA and in situ XRD analysis

期刊

PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 17, 期 44, 页码 30162-30176

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c5cp05596b

关键词

-

资金

  1. Spanish Government Agency Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad [CTQ2014-52763-C2-1-R, CTQ2014-52763-C2-2-R]
  2. Andalusian Regional Government Junta de Andalucia [FQM-5735]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Thermal decomposition of dolomite in the presence of CO2 in a calcination environment is investigated by means of in situ X-ray diffraction (XRD) and thermogravimetric analysis (TGA). The in situ XRD results suggest that dolomite decomposes directly at a temperature around 700 degrees C into MgO and CaO. Immediate carbonation of nascent CaO crystals leads to the formation of calcite as an intermediate product of decomposition. Subsequently, decarbonation of this poorly crystalline calcite occurs when the reaction is thermodynamically favorable and sufficiently fast at a temperature depending on the CO2 partial pressure in the calcination atmosphere. Decarbonation of this dolomitic calcite occurs at a lower temperature than limestone decarbonation due to the relatively low crystallinity of the former. Full decomposition of dolomite leads also to a relatively low crystalline CaO, which exhibits a high reactivity as compared to limestone derived CaO. Under CO2 capture conditions in the Calcium-Looping (CaL) process, MgO grains remain inert yet favor the carbonation reactivity of dolomitic CaO especially in the solid-state diffusion controlled phase. The fundamental mechanism that drives the crystallographic transformation of dolomite in the presence of CO2 is thus responsible for its fast calcination kinetics and the high carbonation reactivity of dolomitic CaO, which makes natural dolomite a potentially advantageous alternative to limestone for CO2 capture in the CaL technology as well as SO2 in situ removal in oxy-combustion fluidized bed reactors.

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

4.6
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