4.6 Article

Performance of Activated Carbons Derived from Date Seeds in CO2 Swing Adsorption Determined by Combining Experimental and Molecular Simulation Data

期刊

INDUSTRIAL & ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY RESEARCH
卷 59, 期 15, 页码 7161-7173

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.iecr.9b05542

关键词

-

资金

  1. Khalifa University of Science and Technology [CIRA2018-103]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The ability to experimentally control the structural features of activated carbons (ACs), combined with current advances in modeling carbon-based materials at the atomic level, allows one to build predictive models for the process design of novel applications. This contribution is devoted to molecular simulations of CO2 in ACs, starting from building the atomistic adsorbent model, validated with experimental results, and simulating its application for CO2 capture and separation by adsorption. Single components and competitive adsorption data of binary mixtures from different industrial streams (e.g., CO2/N-2 and CO2/CH4) were obtained by Grand Canonical Monte Carlo (GCMC) simulations, performed under typical operating conditions for the separation of streams associated with post-combustion and natural gas sweetening. We employed a previously published modeling technique to represent ACs, based on packing noninterconnected functionalized fragments of carbon sheets with surface heterogeneities. GCMC simulations were first used to calculate adsorption isotherms and isosteric heats to analyze the performance of the ACs for CO2 capture. Predicted process parameters such as working capacities and purities were evaluated and complemented with energetic performance for swing adsorption processes, with and without preadsorbed traces of water. Results show that the presence of preadsorbed water does not significantly affect the adsorption performance, but it influences the energy consumption of the process. Furthermore, a small amount of water can improve the CO2 capture performance in some specific cycles at low pressures.

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