4.7 Article

pH Neutralization of Aqueous Bio-Oil from Switchgrass Intermediate Pyrolysis Using Process Intensification Devices

期刊

ENERGY & FUELS
卷 31, 期 9, 页码 9455-9464

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.7b00854

关键词

-

资金

  1. Carbon, Hydrogen and Separation Efficiencies (CHASE) from BioEnergy Technologies Office in the United States Department of Energy (US DOE) [DE-AC05-00OR22725]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the potential carbon-neutrality of switchgrass bio-oil, its high acidity and diverse chemical composition limit its utilization. The objectives of this research are to investigate pH neutralization of bio-oil by adding various alkali solutions in a batch system and then perform neutralization using process intensification devices, including a static mixer and a centrifugal contactor. The results indicate that sodium hydroxide and potassium hydroxide are more appropriate bases for pH neutralization of bio-oil than calcium hydroxide due to the limited solubility of calcium hydroxide in aqueous bio-oil. Mass and total acid number (TAN) balances were performed for both batch and continuous-flow systems. Upon pH neutralization of bio-oil, the TAN values of the system increased after accounting the addition of alkali solution. A bio-oil heating experiment showed that the heat generated during pH neutralization did not cause a significant increase in the acidity of bio-oil. The formation of phenolic compounds during neutralization was initially suspected of increasing the system's overall TAN value because some of these compounds (e.g., vanillic acid) act as polyprotic acids and have a stronger influence on the TAN value than monoprotic acids (e.g., acetic acid). The amount of phenolics in separated bio-oil phases, however, did not change significantly after pH neutralization. Process intensification devices provided sufficient mixing and separation of the organic and aqueous phases, suggesting a scale-up route for the bio-oil pH neutralization process.

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