4.7 Article

Spent fluid catalytic cracking catalyst derived MCM-41 supported polyethylenimine for post-combustion CO2 capture

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.seppur.2023.124992

关键词

Spent fluid catalytic cracking catalyst; Adsorption kinetics; Amine modified MCM-41; Flue gas; CO 2 capture

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The buildup of solid waste and global warming pose major challenges, but synthesizing solid amine materials can address CO2 emissions and utilize solid waste effectively.
The buildup of solid waste as well as the global warming has become one of the major challenges. CO2 capture with solid amine synthesized from solid waste can not only address the issue of large CO2 emissions, but also achieve efficient utilization of solid waste. In this work, spent fluid catalytic cracking catalysts (sFCCc), a type of major wastes in petrochemical industries, are first utilized to synthesize polyethyleneimine (PEI) functionalized ordered mesoporous materials. The as-obtained MCM-41-PEI from sFCCc exhibits an acceptable equilibrium CO2 capacity (qe) of 2.7 mmol/g in simulated flue gases (10 % CO2/N2) at 65 degrees C, which is higher than one prepared with commercial silicon source. Moreover, the adsorbent displays excellent cyclic stability during 50 TSA cycles in the dry simulated flue gases, where the capacity decreases only by 4.9 %. Additionally, the breakthrough capacity (qb) is significantly improved from 0.6 mmol/g to 1.6 mmol/g under humid conditions (35 degrees C, 10 % CO2/N2). Interestingly, we discover that the optimal adsorption temperature of MCM-41-PEI with different PEI loadings shifted due to the distinct PEI distribution behavior within the pores. The Avrami model provides a reliable interpretation for the CO2 adsorption behavior of MCM-41-PEI at various test conditions. The synthetic strategy here provides a new route in the treatment of excessive sFCCc resources to achieve valuable adsorbents, which can be applied to dilute source CO2 capture processes.

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