4.7 Article

Release of chlorine during oat straw pyrolysis doped with char and ammonium chloride

期刊

RENEWABLE ENERGY
卷 215, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2023.118923

关键词

Chlorine release; Biomass; Pyrolysis; Biochar

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chlorine is a problematic element in agricultural biomass during thermal conversion, even in low-temperature pyrolysis. The addition of ammonium chloride into oat straw increased the yield of char and promoted biochar carbonization. Increasing the pyrolysis temperature inhibited chlorine release and decreased its distribution into the gas phase. Doping oat straw with NH4Cl positively affected the share of furfural in the non-condensed gases.
Chlorine is one of the most undesirable elements in agricultural biomass which can cause operating problems during its thermal conversion. Even in low-temperature pyrolysis, chlorine is released in the gaseous phase. Therefore, in order to study the chlorine release during pyrolysis, the following samples were analyzed: oat straw, oat straw doped with char, oat straw doped with NH4Cl, and char doped with NH4Cl. The pyrolysis process of these feedstocks was conducted at 400, 500 and 600 & DEG;C under an inert atmosphere, with a short residence time (2 min) for a sample in the reactor. It transpired that the doping of ammonium chloride into oat straw increased the char yield. Doping oat straw with char as well as NH4Cl promoted biochar carbonization. Chlorine release was significantly inhibited when increasing the pyrolysis temperature from 400 to 600 & DEG;C for samples of oat straw, oat straw doped with char, and oat straw doped with NH4Cl. In addition, despite the increase in pyrolysis temperature, the percentage of chlorine distributed into the gas phase decreased. Doping oat straw with NH4Cl had a positive effect on increasing the share of furfural (up to 12.9% at 400 & DEG;C) in non-condensed gases identified by pyrolysis gas chromatography-mass spectrometry.

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