4.7 Article

Considerations on factors affecting biochar densification behavior based on a multiparameter model

期刊

ENERGY
卷 221, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2021.119893

关键词

Densification; Pelletization; Modeling; Pyrolysis; Pyrolysis oil; Biochar

资金

  1. Research Council of Norway [294679/E20]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research findings suggest that producing biochar at high temperatures and adding water as a binder can reduce the exiting pressure, while the use of pyrolysis oil as a binder also lowers the pressure. Pelletization temperature has minimal impact on the exiting pressure. Biochar has higher exiting pressure values than untreated wood, but lower than torrefied wood. The trend of exiting pressure is a good indicator of the mechanical quality of the pellets.
The optimization of upscaled biochar pelleting is limited by lack of knowledge regarding the effects of process parameters. A multiparameter model, coupled to a single pellet press unit, was for the first time applied to biochar production to predict the upscaled biochar pelleting process behavior. The model permits to estimate in a time and cost-effective way how the die friction forces, quantified through the pellet exiting pressure, are affected by the key process parameters. It was observed that to achieve acceptably low exiting pressures (in the order of 100 MPa), it was critical to produce biochar at high temperatures (e.g. 600 degrees C). Addition of water as a binder is also beneficial, while pelletization temperature does not significantly affect the exiting pressure. Furthermore, when pyrolysis oil was used as a binder, lower exiting pressures were measured. Biochar returned higher exiting pressure values compared with untreated wood, but lower compared with torrefied wood. Moreover, the correlation between density and compressive strength was also examined. It was found that the exiting pressure trend is a good indicator to estimate the mechanical quality of the pellets. (C) 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier 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

4.7
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