4.7 Article

Acceleration effect of BDO tar on coal water slurry during co-gasification

期刊

ENERGY
卷 262, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2022.125432

关键词

BDO tar; Waste-coal-water-shirty; Co-gasification; Alkali metal Na; Coal char

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the disposal of 1,4-butanediol (BDO) tar using waste-coal-water-slurry (WCWS) technology and examines the acceleration mechanism during co-gasification. The results show that the weight loss of BDO tar is most evident in the 200-300 degrees C range, and the co-gasification performance is significantly enhanced at high temperatures. The presence of alkali metal Na in BDO tar creates distinct areas on the surface of coal char, impeding the formation of defective carbon structures.
1,4-butanediol (BDO) is a general-purpose chemical feedstock. BDO tar is produced from the plant and is difficult to dispose of. This study has used the waste-coal-water-slurry (WCWS) technology to dispose of BDO tar and investigated the acceleration mechanism during co-gasification. The results show that the weight loss of BDO-tarcoal-water-slurry (BCWS) is more evident in the range of 200-300 degrees C because most of the organic constituents in BDO tar are lost. In the high-temperature field (>600 degrees C), the BCWS thermogravimetric (TG) curves migrate to the low-temperature zone, indicating that the co-gasification performance of the BCWS is significantly enhanced. The most distinct areas (spotted area, rough area, and subsidence area) exist on the surface of coal char by the alkali metal Na in BDO tar, which impedes the formation of defective carbon structures and amorphous carbon structures. Moreover, many defective and amorphous carbon emerged due to the tightly bound complexes with O and Na generated by the reaction between the unstable intermediate and the carbon matrix. BDO tar for BCWS co-gasification process is catalytic, suggesting that activation energy is lower than that of CWS.

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