4.4 Article

Explaining steam-enhanced carbonation of CaO based on first principles

期刊

GREENHOUSE GASES-SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 8, 期 6, 页码 1110-1123

出版社

WILEY PERIODICALS, INC
DOI: 10.1002/ghg.1822

关键词

CO2 capture; calcium looping; steam-enhanced carbonation; DFT-D; binary adsorption

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFE0102500-06-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Calcium-based sorbents have been regarded as effective agents for capturing CO2 from industrial flue gas. Recent studies have shown that steam can enhance the carbonation performance of calcium-based sorbents. In this paper, a CaO (001) surface was made to investigate the micro-level mechanism of steam-enhanced carbonation based on first principles calculations. Charge transfer and bond population were calculated to evaluate an interaction effect between adsorbates and the CaO (001) surface. Individual adsorption of CO2 and H2O was compared with binary adsorption and co-adsorption of the two molecules on the CaO (001) surface, based on dispersion-corrected density functional theory (DFT-D) calculations. First, the predicted adsorption energies suggest the O-top site is the best site. It forms carbonate-like structure and hydroxyl-like structure for the individual adsorption of CO2 and H2O. Binary adsorption calculations indicate that H2O is more easily adsorbed by the CaO (001) surface than CO2. The adsorption of H2O and CO2 adsorption are promoted in comparison with their individual adsorption on the CaO (001) surface. Moreover, the analysis of adsorption energies and partial density of states (PDOS) suggests that a H2O-CaO (001) surface (CaO (001) surface that has already adsorbed H2O) is more reactive than the clean CaO (001) surface for CO2 adsorption, which further supports the idea that the steam-enhanced mechanism is an Eley-Rideal (E-R) mechanism, which means H2O is adsorbed on the CaO surface, and then CO2 is adsorbed. (c) 2018 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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

4.4
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