4.7 Article

Performance of CaO catalyst prepared from magnetic-derived CaCO3 for biodiesel production

期刊

FUEL
卷 304, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2021.121419

关键词

Magnetic fields; Aragonite; calcite ratio; Quantitative analysis; Calcium oxide; Solid catalyst; Biodiesel production

资金

  1. Chulalongkorn University [CU_GR_63_03_21_01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the impact of different CaCO3 crystal forms on the properties of CaO catalysts and the yield of biodiesel under magnetic field exposure. It was found that CaO catalysts prepared from various polymorphs of CaCO3 yielded over 85% biodiesel production under optimal conditions, showing potential environmental and social benefits.
This paper studied the different CaCO3 crystal forms between calcite and aragonite under magnetic fields using calcocarbonic solution prepared from dissolving ground natural shell. The experiments were conducted by exposing the solution to magnetic fields. The characteristics of reprecipitated CaCO3 were investigated. The aragonite/calcite ratios were proportional to magnetic flux densities. The physicochemical properties of CaO catalysts from thermal decomposition of CaCO3 depended on polymorphic ratios. The performances of the catalysts for biodiesel reaction were studied. The transesterifications of palm oil and methanol were comparatively performed using CaO catalysts prepared from different CaCO3 polymorphs. The transesterification reacted by CaO prepared from all polymorphic ratios yielded more than 85% of biodiesel under optimal conditions. Some amount of calcium was leached into the reaction medium depending on different polymorphic ratios of precursors. However, the leached calcium did not enhance the biodiesel yield. In addition, CaO-600 mT catalyst is the most promising considering that it is a residual catalyst from shell waste. This green innovation shows major potential of producing biodiesel from plants with environmental and social benefits.

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