4.7 Article

Multi-stage hydrothermal liquefaction modeling of sludge and microalgae biomass to increase bio-oil yield

期刊

FUEL
卷 328, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2022.125253

关键词

Hydrothermal liquefaction; Sludge; Microalgae; Chlorella sorokiniana; Co-HTL

资金

  1. RUDN University Strategic Academic Leadership Program
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) [2019H1D3A1A01102657]
  3. Korea Environment Industry & Technology Institute (KEITI) [2022003480001]
  4. Development of demonstration tech-nology for energy conversion using unused complex biomass [2022003480001]
  5. Post-plastic Graduate Program - Korea Ministry of Environment (MOE)
  6. National Research Foundation of Korea [2019H1D3A1A01102657] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the effect of Multi-Stage HTL on different feedstocks and finds that kitchen wastewater sludge is the most suitable for producing high-energy bio-oil. The study also analyzes the compound variations in bio-oils and bio-chars derived from different biomasses using various testing methods.
This study aims to elucidate the effect of Multi-Stage HTL with a constant resident time of 30 min for three different feedstocks including kitchen wastewater sludge (KwWs), freshwater microalgae Chlorella sorokiniana (UUIND6), Co-HTL (KwWs + UUIND6) to obtain the maximum bio-oil yield. According to the results obtained, KwWs appears to be the most suitable for conversion into energy-dense bio-oil under a sustainable biorefinery approach for increased bio-oil yields i.e., 72.75 +/- 0.37 wt%, with HHV of 40.52 MJ/kg and energy recovery of 53.64 wt%. Further, the bio-oils and bio-chars derived from different types of biomasses obtained at different temperature conditions were analyzed by GC-MS, NMR, FTIR, and Raman spectroscopy to identify variations in the bio-crude compounds.

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