4.5 Article

The Relationship between Thermal Characteristics and Microstructure/Composition of Carbon Dioxide Hydrate in the Presence of Cyclopentane

期刊

ENERGIES
卷 14, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en14040870

关键词

carbon emission reduction; hydrate; microscopic mechanism; binary hydrate; DSC

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51736009, 51879254]
  2. Natural Science Fund of Guangdong Province, China [2019A1515011490]
  3. Special project for marine economy development of Guangdong Province [GDME-2018D002]
  4. Key Research Program of Frontier Sciences, CAS [ZDBS-LY-SLH041]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research demonstrates that CO2-CP binary hydrate and CO2 hydrate are formed successively and coexist in the final hydrate in the CP-CO2 system. The formation of these two hydrates causes two pressure drops.
Hydrate-based carbon dioxide (CO2) separation and capture is a new technology for achieving CO2 emission reduction. However, it is still not commercially applied for the ambiguity of microscopic hydrate formation mechanism. In a constant volume experiment of hydrate formation, there are two or more pressure platforms, indicating that there might be two or more different hydrates formation in succession. In order to reveal the relationship between the microscopic process and the gas consumption in the process of hydrate formation, hydrate composition and formation mechanism of cyclopentane-CO2 (CP-CO2) system was investigated using a differential scanning calorimeter (DSC) and Raman spectroscopy. The results indicated CO2-CP binary hydrate and CO2 hydrate are formed successively, and they coexist in the final hydrate. CP-CO2 binary hydrates forms preferentially, and as crystal seeds, inducing the formation of CO2 hydrates. The two hydrates formation processes cause the two pressure-drops. The results provide a scientific basis for increasing the gas consumption in different stages of gas hydrate formation in the presence of hydrate formation promoter.

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