4.3 Review

Activated carbon from agricultural residues: a review

期刊

DESALINATION AND WATER TREATMENT
卷 278, 期 -, 页码 283-292

出版社

DESALINATION PUBL
DOI: 10.5004/dwt.2022.29053

关键词

Activated carbon; Chemical reactor; Carbonization; Physical activation; Chemical activation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study discusses the production of activated carbon using agricultural leftovers and investigates the relationship between the pyrolysis stage and process variables. The effects of physical and chemical activation circumstances on the properties of activated carbon are also discussed. The study shows the preparation of activated carbon from various agricultural residues and compares different activated carbon prepared from these residues.
Because of its high adsorption capacity, activated carbon is frequently employed as an effective adsorbent. Activated carbon is a main element for treatment of wastewater, groundwater and water purification. The activating agents greatly affects the porosity and surface area of the pro-duced activated carbon. In this study, the use of agricultural leftovers for the production of acti-vated carbon is discussed in detail. The pyrolysis stage is investigated in relation to a number of process variables. The effects of physical and chemical activation circumstances on the properties of activated carbon are discussed. Under controlled process conditions, many active carbons with Brunauer-Emmett-Teller surface areas ranging from 250 to 2,410 m2/g and pore volumes ranging from 0.022 to 91.4 cm3/g were produced. A review of reaction kinetic modelling applied to pyrolysis of agricultural wastes is also carried out. In this study, effort has been given to show the preparation of activated carbon from various agricultural residues. Also the comparisons of different activated carbon prepared from various agricultural residues have been shown. In the present review, the preparation of activated carbon by treating with different chemicals has also been incorporated.

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

4.3
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