4.7 Article

Understanding pyrolysis mechanisms of corn and cotton stalks via kinetics and thermodynamics

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaap.2022.105521

关键词

Isoconversional kinetic analysis; Thermodynamic analysis; Biomass pyrolysis; Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA); Effective activation energy

资金

  1. Guangdong Basic and Applied Basic Research Foundation, China [2019B1515120002]
  2. Key Project of Dongguan Social Science and Technology Development, China [2019507140180]
  3. Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Distributed Energy Systems, China [2020B1212060075]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study analyzed the physicochemical characteristics, kinetics, and thermodynamics of corn and cotton stalks pyrolysis. The results showed that their pyrolysis processes are nonspontaneous, requiring external energy, and their endothermicity and reactivity increase as the pyrolysis progresses.
The kinetics and thermodynamics of biomass pyrolysis are crucial in its design, optimization and industrial application. The physicochemical characterization, kinetic and thermodynamic analyses of corn and cotton stalks pyrolysis are performed. Nonisothermal thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) with four heating rates (4, 8, 16 and 32 K min(-1)) is employed to experimentally investigate their pyrolysis kinetic behaviors. The effective activation energy values obtained by isoconversional kinetic analysis vary significantly with the reacted fraction and the average values are 206.2 and 207.4 kJ mol(-1) for the pyrolysis of corn and cotton stalks, respectively. The changes in Gibbs free energy, enthalpy and entropy for them are evaluated and the results indicate that corn and cotton stalks pyrolysis is nonspontaneous processes and requires external energy to be thermally decomposed and that their endothermicity and reactivity increase as their pyrolysis processes proceed. The results can be helpful in better understanding the reaction mechanisms and extending the application of corn and cotton stalk pyrolysis.

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