4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Isothermal torrefaction kinetics for sewage sludge pretreatment

期刊

FUEL
卷 277, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2020.118103

关键词

Torrefaction kinetics; Sewage sludge; Non-lignocellulosic biomass; Woody biomass; Thermogravimetric analysis; Activation energy

资金

  1. National Research Foundation (NRF) of Korea [NRF-2017R1D1A1B03035442]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51906264]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province, China [2018A030313228]
  4. Guangzhou Municipal Science and Technology Project [201904010342]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Torrefaction of sewage sludge, a by-product from waste water treatment plants, has been receiving increased attentions in terms of sustainable sludge treatment, energy recovery and possibility to mitigate the environmental impacts. Torrefied sewage sludge is recognized as a better solid fuel than the dry sewage sludge, and it is also beneficial for subsequent thermochemical processes. In this study, sewage sludge was subjected to different torrefaction conditions in a thermogravimetric analyzer. The thermogravimetric data were then simulated using a two-consecutive reaction model to reproduce the mass losses during torrefaction. The obtained results from the torrefaction of the non-lignocellulosic biomass are also compared with other lignocellulosic biomass including a softwood and a hardwood. The findings from this study reveal that the non-lignocellulosic biomass is less thermally resistant and degrades much faster than the lignocellulosic biomass during the first stage of torrefaction. Moreover, the solid yield from the sewage sludge torrefaction at temperatures less than 280 degrees C is lower than that from the woody biomass torrefaction. However, this trend is inverted when the torrefaction temperature attains 280 degrees C and higher. The results obtained are useful for new design or retrofit of the sewage sludge torrefaction processes.

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