4.5 Article

Upgrading pyrolytic residue from waste tires to commercial carbon black

期刊

WASTE MANAGEMENT & RESEARCH
卷 36, 期 5, 页码 436-444

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0734242X18764292

关键词

Waste tires; pyrolytic residue; commercial carbon black; upgrading; recycling; ultrasonic treatment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The managing and recycling of waste tires has become a worldwide environmental challenge. Among the different disposal methods for waste tires, pyrolysis is regarded as a promising route. How to effectively enhance the added value of pyrolytic residue (PR) from waste tires is a matter of great concern. In this study, the PRs were treated with hydrochloric and hydrofluoric acids in turn under ultrasonic waves. The removal efficiency for the ash and sulfur was investigated. The pyrolytic carbon black (PCB) obtained after treating PR with acids was analyzed by X-ray fluorescence spectrophotometry, Fourier transform infrared spectrometry, X-ray diffractometry, laser Raman spectrometry, scanning electron microscopy, thermogravimetric (TG) analysis, and physisorption apparatus. The properties of PCB were compared with those of commercial carbon black (CCB) N326 and N339. Results showed PRs from waste tires were mainly composed of carbon, sulfur, and ash. The carbon in PCB was mainly from the CCB added during tire manufacture rather than from the pyrolysis of pure rubbers. The removal percentages for the ash and sulfur of PR are 98.33% (from 13.98 wt % down to 0.24 wt %) and 70.16% (from 1.81 wt % down to 0.54 wt %), respectively, in the entire process. The ash was mainly composed of metal oxides, sulfides, and silica. The surface properties, porosity, and morphology of the PCB were all close to those of N326. Therefore, PCB will be a potential alternative of N326 and reused in tire manufacture. This route successfully upgrades PR from waste tires to the high value-added CCB and greatly increases the overall efficiency of the waste tire pyrolysis industry.

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