4.8 Review

A review of the hydrothermal carbonization of biomass waste for hydrochar formation: Process conditions, fundamentals, and physicochemical properties

期刊

RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS
卷 90, 期 -, 页码 223-247

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.071

关键词

Biomass; Hydrothermal carbonization; Hydrochar; Characterization; Mechanism

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51679083]
  2. Interdisciplinary Research Funds for Hunan University [2015JCA03]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hydrothermal carbonization (HTC) is a thermochemical conversion technique which is attractive due to its ability to transform wet biomass into energy and chemicals without predrying. The solid product, known as hydrochar, has received attention because of its ability to prepare precursors of activated carbon in wastewater pollution remediation, soil remediation applications, solid fuels, and other carbonaceous materials. Besides the generally lignocellulose biomass used as sustainable feedstock, HTC has been applied to a wide range of derived waste, including sewage sludge, algae, and municipal solid waste to solve practical problems and generate desirable carbonaceous products. This review presented the critical hydrothermal parameters of HTC, including temperature, residence time, heating rate, reactant concentration, and aqueous quality. The chemical reaction mechanisms involved in the formation of hydrochar derived from single components and representative feedstock, lignocellulose, and sludge termed as N-free and N-rich biomass, were elucidated and summarized to better understand the hydrochar formation process. Specifically, hydrochar physicochemical characteristics such as surface chemistry and structure were investigated. Current knowledge gaps, and new perspectives with corresponding recommendations were provided to further exploit the great potential of the HTC technique and more practical applications for hydrochar in the future.

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

4.8
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