4.5 Article

Pawpaw (Carica papaya) Peel Waste as a Novel Green Heterogeneous Catalyst for Moringa Oil Methyl Esters Synthesis: Process Optimization and Kinetic Study

期刊

ENERGIES
卷 13, 期 21, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/en13215834

关键词

plant oil; agricultural waste; catalyst; Taguchi method; biodiesel; kinetics

资金

  1. Cape Peninsula University of Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated pawpaw (Carica papaya) peel ash as a green solid base catalyst for Moringa oleifera oil methyl esters (MOOME) production. Taguchi orthogonal array approach was used to examine the impact of vital process input variables (calcined pawpaw peel (CPP) loading, reaction temperature, methanol-to-M. oleifera oil (MeOH:MOO) molar ratio and reaction time) on the MOOME yield. Catalytic potency potential of the CPP was evaluated by Fourier transform infrared (FTIR), Barrett-Joyner-Halenda (BJH), Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET), scanning electron microscope (SEM), energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) and X-ray diffraction (XRD) methods. The results obtained indicate that the CPP consists of nanoparticles and alkaline elements K (23.89 wt.%), Ca (2.86 wt.%) and Mg (1.00 wt.%). The high values of coefficient of determination, R-2 (0.9992) and adjusted R-2 (0.9968) as well as the low value of the coefficient of variation (0.31%) for the model developed indicate it can be used to sufficiently describe the transesterification process. MOOME yield of 96.43 +/- 0.10 wt.% was achieved at the optimum values of 3.5 wt.% CPP loading, 9:1 MeOH:MOO molar ratio, 35 degrees C reaction temperature and 40 min reaction time. The kinetic modeling of the transesterification process determined the reaction rate constant and overall reaction order as 0.20465 L center dot mol(-1)center dot s(-1) and 2, respectively. The results of this study demonstrate both CPP and MOO are feasible renewable resources for MOOME production. The kinetic data generated may be useful in reactor design for the transesterification 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

4.5
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