4.7 Article

Solubility, absorption heat and mass transfer studies of CO2 absorption into aqueous solution of 1-dimethylamino-2-propanol

期刊

FUEL
卷 144, 期 -, 页码 121-129

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2014.11.098

关键词

Carbon dioxide; Equilibrium solubility; Ion speciation; Mass transfer; 1-Dimethylamino-2-propanol

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21476064, 21376067, U1362112]
  2. National Key Technology RD Program [2012BAC26801, 2014BAC18804]
  3. Innovative Research Team Development Plan-Ministry of Education of China [IRT1238]
  4. Shanxi Yanchang Petroleum (Group) Co., LTD
  5. Specialized Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education [20130161110025]
  6. China's State Project 985 in Hunan University-Novel Technology Research
  7. Development for CO2 Capture as well as Hunan University to the Joint International Center for CO2 Capture

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this work, the CO2 absorption performance of aqueous 1-dimethylamino-2-propanol (1DMA2P) was comprehensively investigated in terms of CO2 equilibrium solubility, CO2 absorption rate, CO2 absorption heat, and mass transfer efficiency. The CO2 equilibrium solubility in 2 M 1DMA2P was measured over the temperature range of 298-333 K and CO2 partial pressure range of 8-101 kPa. The results showed that the CO2 equilibrium solubility of 1DAM2P was higher than those of conventional amines, MEA and MDEA. The CO2 absorption heat of 1DMA2P based on the Gibbs-Helmholtz equation was found to be -30.5 kJ/mol, which suggests that 1DMA2P needs a lower regeneration energy as compared with MEA and MDEA. Ion speciation (including 1DMA2P, 1DMA2PH(+), HCO3, CO32-) plots obtained from the pH method were also generated at the temperatures of 298 K and 313 K. In addition, the overall mass transfer coefficient (K(G)a(v)) of 1DMA2P in a packed column was also experimentally obtained and compared with those of MEA and MDEA. The ranking was: MEA > 1DMA2P > MDEA. (c) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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