4.5 Article

Catalytic Hydrotreatment of Microalgae Biocrude from Continuous Hydrothermal Liquefaction: Heteroatom Removal and Their Distribution in Distillation Cuts

期刊

ENERGIES
卷 11, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en11123360

关键词

hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL); Spirulina; hydroprocessing; hydrotreating; upgrading; hydrodeoxygenation (HDO); hydrodenitrogenation (HDN); fractional distillation; drop-in biofuels; nitrogen distribution

资金

  1. European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme [764734]
  2. H2020 Societal Challenges Programme [764734] Funding Source: H2020 Societal Challenges Programme

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To obtain drop-in fuel properties from 3rd generation biomass, we herein report the catalytic hydrotreatment of microalgae biocrude, produced from hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) of Spirulina. Our contribution focuses on the effect of temperature, initial H-2 pressure, and residence time on the removal of heteroatoms (O and N) in a batch hydrotreating setup. In contrast to common experimental protocols for hydrotreating at batch scale, we devised a set of two-level factorial experiments and studied the most influential parameters affecting the removal of heteroatoms. It was found that up to 350 degrees C, the degree of deoxygenation (de-O) is mainly driven by temperature, whereas the degree of denitrogenation (de-N) also relies on initial H-2 pressure and temperature-pressure interaction. Based on this, complete deoxygenation was obtained at mild operating conditions (350 degrees C), reaching a concurrent 47% denitrogenation. Moreover, three optimized experiments are reported with 100% removal of oxygen. In addition, the analysis by GC-MS and Sim-Dis gives insight to the fuel quality. The distribution of heteroatom N in lower (<340 degrees C) and higher (>340 degrees C) fractional cuts is studied by a fractional distillation unit following ASTM D-1160. Final results show that 63-68% of nitrogen is concentrated in higher fractional cuts.

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

4.5
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