Influence of Carbon Dioxide on the Thermal Degradation Process of


Jul 12, 2017 - ABSTRACT: The thermal mass loss, gaseous-phase reactions, and reaction kinetics of five representative components of combustible solid ...
0 downloads 0 Views 2MB Size


Subscriber access provided by UNIV OF TEXAS ARLINGTON

Article

Influence of carbon dioxide on the thermal degradation process of representative components of combustible solid wastes using TG-MS Jing Gu, Yazhuo Wang, Haoran Yuan, Taoli Huhe, and Yong Chen Energy Fuels, Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.7b01226 • Publication Date (Web): 12 Jul 2017 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on July 13, 2017

Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

Energy & Fuels is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.

Page 1 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

1

Influence of carbon dioxide on the thermal degradation process of representative

2

components of combustible solid wastes using TG-MS

3

J. Gu,a,b, Y. Z. Wang,a,b H. R. Yuan,a,b * T. L. Huhe,a,b and Y. Chena,b,c

4

a

5

Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou 510640, China

6

b

7

Guangzhou 510640, China

8

c

Guangzhou Institute of Energy Conversion, Key Laboratory of Renewable Energy, Chinese

Guangdong Key Laboratory of New and Renewable Energy Research and Development,

Guangzhou division Academy, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou 510070, China

9

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +86-20-87013240; fax: +86-20-87013240. E-mail address: [email protected] 1

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

10

Abstract

11

The thermal mass loss, gaseous-phase reactions, and the reaction kinetics of five representative

12

components of combustible solid wastes (CSWs), i.e., rice straw (RS), eucalyptus wood (EW),

13

blank printing paper (BPP), high-density polyethylene (HDPE) and polyvinyl chloride (PVC),

14

under argon (Ar) and carbon dioxide (CO2) atmospheres were studied by thermogravimetric–mass

15

spectrometry (TG-MS) to observe the effect of CO2 on the thermal degradation process. The CO2

16

atmosphere had bigger influence than the Ar atmosphere on the thermal mass loss of CSW; CO2

17

affected the main gaseous product distribution, which was attributed to the complex gas reforming

18

reaction that occurred in the gaseous phase, and the abundant CO2 promoted the formation of CO

19

and CH4. When the temperature was over 650 °C, the CO2 reduction reaction occurred in the solid

20

phase and the residue of RS and BPP was mainly silicon, calcium and potassium oxidizers. The

21

best-fitting mechanism of the first main mass loss stage of CSW in Ar atmosphere was mainly the

22

nucleation and growth model. The best-fitting mechanism of the second main mass loss of

23

biomass-based CSWs (BCSWs) under CO2 atmosphere was the diffusion model, and that of

24

plastic CSWs (PCSWs) was the reaction order model. Furthermore, dehydrochlorination of PVC

25

occurred at 200-384 °C, wherein chlorine atoms were released in different compound forms under

26

Ar and CO2 atmospheres. Therefore, the emissions from the heat treatment of CSW under a CO2

27

atmosphere presented an improved environmental profile compared to those released from

28

pyrolysis under an Ar atmosphere.

29

Keywords: carbon dioxide; thermal degradation; combustible solid wastes; TG-MS; kinetics

30

analysis

31

2

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 2 of 30

Page 3 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

32

1 Introduction

33

With the development of the economy and the consequent improvement in living standards in

34

the cities of China, the production of MSW is increasing precipitously. In 2015, the amount of

35

MSW was as high as 191 million tons in China [1], and by 2025, this amount is predicted to reach

36

510 million tons

37

accounting for approximately 30 % of the total

38

components of CSW are biomass and plastic, including vegetation (21 %), paper (15 %),

39

polyethylene (PE) (39 %) and polyvinyl chloride (12 %) [4]. Due to the composition of CSW, it can

40

be utilized in various waste-to-energy processes, thus, the development of processes that generate

41

energy from CSW offers great potential.

42

[2]

. Combustible solid waste (CSW) is an important component of MSW, [3]

. In Guangzhou, China, the representative

Several studies have examined the waste-to-energy processes of CSW using thermochemical [5]

, inert gases, i.e.,

43

processes in various gaseous reaction media, such as air, i.e., combustion

44

pyrolysis

45

been suggested as feasible alternatives to combustion to inhibit emissions of dioxin precursors due

46

to the reducing conditions, strong reduction of volume and mass, and the improvement of resource

47

recovery

48

greenhouse gases, has gained significant attention for waste management and energy recovery

49

[10-12]

50

oxygen, steam and CO2 in different compositions using a bubbling fluidized bed gasifier. Their

51

results showed that using CO2 as a gasification agent may be a good option, either by recirculating

52

part of the gasification gas or using gas captured from combustion processes. However, research

53

on the effects of CO2 on the thermal mass loss, reaction kinetics and real-time analysis of the

54

evolved gases of CSW have rarely been reported.

[6]

, and oxygen-enriched air, i.e., gasification

[7]

. Both pyrolysis and gasification have

[8-9]

. The utilization of carbon dioxide (CO2), which is the major component of

. Pinto et al. [13] studied the co-gasification of rice biomass wastes and PE with mixtures of air,

55

Thermogravimetric analysis (TG) has been widely used to study the thermal mass loss

56

characteristics and reaction kinetics of various solids (coal, biomass, plastic, etc.), which are

57

influenced by the heating rate [14], atmosphere [15], pretreatment [16] etc. Lee et al. [17] analyzed the

58

thermal degradation of biomass (i.e., red pepper stalk) in N2 and CO2 by TG and found that CO2

59

promoted tar destruction due to CO2 reforming reactions and led to different extents of

60

carbonization, which modified the physico-chemical properties of the biochar. Moreover, the

61

combination of mass spectrometry (MS) and TG (i.e., TG-MS) is one of the best methods to 3

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

62

analyze the evolved gases in real time to study the mechanisms of thermochemical processes [18-19].

63

Zhang et al.

64

components of MSW under N2 and steam atmospheres and found that the presence of steam

65

caused the steam partial oxidation of solid residue, leading to an increasing amount of H2, CO and

66

CO2 production in the high temperature range.

[20]

used TG-MS to investigate the thermal decomposition of six representative

67

In this work, the thermal mass-loss characteristics and gas evolution data of five

68

representative components of CSW under argon (Ar) and CO2 atmospheres were obtained using

69

TG-MS, and the surface elemental analysis of the residue were characterized by the scanning

70

electron microscopy and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (SEM/EDS). This study attempted

71

to compare their different behaviors with the thermal characteristics to determine the influence of

72

CO2 on the thermal mass loss of CSW, the main gaseous product distribution and the residue

73

composition, in order to demonstrate that the use of CO2 in the thermal degradation process is

74

conducive to decreasing emissions.

75 76

2 Materials and Methods

77

2.1 Raw materials

78

Rice straw (RS), eucalyptus wood (EW) and blank printing paper (BPP) were selected as

79

representative biomass-based CSWs (BCSWs), and high-density polyethylene (HDPE) and

80

polyvinyl chloride (PVC) were chosen as the representative plastic CSWs (PCSWs). The results of

81

the proximate and ultimate analyses are shown in Table 1.

82

Table 1 shows that RS has the highest ash content (~15 %) and the lowest volatile content,

83

while EW has the highest fixed carbon, approximately 10 %. EW and BPP contain small amounts

84

of sulfur. The oxygen content of the BCSWs is approximately 41-47 % higher than that of the

85

PCSWs. HDPE is a thermoplastic resin with the highest volatile content, approximately 99 %.

86

PVC is a type of polyethylene-based plastic polymer with a chlorine content of approximately

87

56 %, which results in a large difference between its thermal degradation process and that of

88

HDPE. These PCSWs contain no ash and a small amount of fixed carbon.

89 90 91

2.2 Experimental methods All experiments were performed using a STA449 F3 TG analyzer (Erich Netzsch GmbH & 4

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 4 of 30

Page 5 of 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

92

Co., KG., Selb, Germany) coupled with an OMNISTAR GSD301 mass spectrometer (Pfeiffer

93

Vacuum Technology AG, Asslar, Germany). A 15 mg sample with 150-200 µm average particle

94

size was heated from 40 °C to 1000 °C at a constant heating rate of 30 °C/min with an Ar flow or a

95

CO2 flow (100 mL/min). Before heating, the temperature was held at 40 °C for 1 h to remove the

96

air and stabilize the baseline of MS. TG and MS data were recorded at the same time during the

97

heating process, and a multiple ion detection (MID) model was adopted in the MS. This work

98

examined the important ions [21] at 2, 16, 18, 28 and 44 (m/z), designated H2, CH4, H2O, CO and

99

CO2, respectively. Moreover, the selected ion at 36.5 (m/z), which mainly accounted for HCl, was

100

studied in the thermal process of PVC.

101

The residue of BCSWs after the thermal treatment were collected and the scanning electron

102

microscopy and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (SEM/EDS) analyses of residue were

103

recorded on a Hitachi S-4800 FESEM/EDAX HORIBA EX-250 instrument.

104 105

2.3 Kinetics model To compare the thermal degradation processes of the representative components of CSW

106

[22-24]

107

during the thermal processing, the Coats-Redfern method

was used to obtain the apparent

108

activation energy, pre-exponential factor, and the best-fitting kinetics model. TG curves recorded automatically by the TG analyzer and Eq. (1) were used to calculate the

109 110

conversion rate of sample ‘x’:

111

x (t ) =

112

where ‘t’ is the reaction time (in min); ‘x’ is the conversion of samples based on time; ‘m0’ is the

113

mass in the thermobalance at time 0 (in mg); ‘m(t)’ is the mass in the thermobalance at a particular

114

time in the reaction (in mg); and ‘mf’ is the mass in the thermobalance at the end of the reaction (in

115

mg).

(1)

Under non-isothermal conditions, the heat treatment reaction rate of CSW can be written as:

116 117

m0 − m (t) m0 − m f

dx = kf ( x ) dt

118

(2)

119

where ‘k’ is the Arrhenius speed constant, which can be represented as k =k 0 exp  -

 Ea   . Here,  RT 

5

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 6 of 30

120

‘k0’ is the pre-exponential factor (in min-1); ‘Ea’ is the apparent activation energy (in kJ/mol); ‘R’

121

is the universal gas constant; and ‘T’ is the temperature (in K). The mathematical model f(x)

122

depends on the reaction type or the reaction mechanism and is related only to the extent of the

123

reaction (x). Therefore, Eq. (2) can be expressed as:

124

dx Ea = k 0 exp( − ) f( x ) dt RT

(3)

125

dT = dt Φ

(4)

126

dx k0 Ea = exp( − ) f( x ) dT Φ RT

(5)

127

where ‘Φ’ is the heating rate (in °C/min). The integrals on both sides of Eq. (5) can be converted

128

as follows:

129

2 RT  Ea  k R  F(x)  )− ln  2  = ln  0 (1 − Ea  RT  T   Φ Ea

130 131 132 133

(6)

Because 2RT/Ea1000

18.78

Ar

216.21-548.25

363.77

73.89

548.25-757.44

733.47

7.27

CO2

218.10-550.95

363.60

73.60

550.95-910.60

883.12

17.78

Ar

406.41-616.33

491.14

97.94

-

CO2

406.80-559.81

496.81

99.63

-

Ar

203.33-388.28

299.24

64.40

388.28-572.18

478.09

27.45

CO2

200.74-383.73

295.54

64.44

383.73-588.65

483.72

27.86

sphere

-

RS 650.0-992.25

922.83

21.68

-

EW

BPP

HDPE

PVC

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 30 of 30

Table 3 Different reaction mechanism Mechanism N1 N3/2

Mechanism description

f(x) (1-x)

Nucleation and growth model (n=1) Nucleation and growth model (n=3/2)

F(x) -ln(1-x)

3/2(1-x) [-ln(1-x)]

1/3

[-ln(1-x)]2/3

N2

Nucleation and growth model (n=2)

2(1-x) [-ln(1-x)]1/2

[-ln(1-x)]1/2

N3

Nucleation and growth model (n=3)

3(1-x) [-ln(1-x)]2/3

[-ln(1-x)]1/3

N4

Nucleation and growth model (n=4)

4(1-x) [-ln(1-x)]3/4

[-ln(1-x)]1/4

-1/4

[-ln(1-x)]5/4

N4/5

Nucleation and growth model (n=4/5)

4/5(1-x) [-ln(1-x)]

N6/5

Nucleation and growth model (n=6/5)

5/6(1-x) [-ln(1-x)]-1/5

[-ln(1-x)]6/5

R3/2

Reaction order model (n=3/2)

(1-x)3/2

2[(1-x)-1/2-1]

R2

Reaction order model (n=2)

(1-x)2

(1-x)-1-1

D1

One-dimension diffusion

1/(2x)

x2

D2

Two-dimension diffusion

[-ln(1-x)]-1 3/2[(1-x)

-1/3

-1]

x+(1-x)ln(1-x) -1

(1-2/3x)-(1-x)2/3

D3

Three-dimension diffusion (G-B)

D4

Three-dimension diffusion (Jander)

3/2(1-x)2/3[1-(1-x)1/3]-1

[1-(1-x)1/3]2

D5

Three-dimension diffusion (Z-L-T)

3/2(1-x)4/3[(1-x)-1/3-1]-1

[(1-x)-1/3-1]2

Table 4 Kinetic parameters of CSW in Ar and CO2 atmospheres

Sample

Atmosphere

First main mass loss stage Ea

k0 -1

R2

Second main mass loss stage Mecha

Ea

k0

R2

-1

(KJ/mol)

(min )

Ar

105.14

1.74E+09

0.9925

N4/5

CO2

104.46

1.55E+09

0.9928

N4/5

Ar

130.73

1.31E+11

0.9778

N4/5

CO2

127.86

7.10E+10

0.9856

N4/5

313.27

Ar

164.34

6.57E+13

0.9946

N4/5

CO2

170.16

2.23E+14

0.9942

N4/5

Ar

262.66

1.26E+18

0.9936

N3/2

-

CO2

273.58

4.79E+18

0.9933

N3/2

-

Ar

173.13

3.64E+15

0.9891

R3/2

184.06

CO2

173.23

4.58E+15

0.9867

R3/2

186.25

-nism

(KJ/mol)

(min )

Mechanism

-

RS 322.94

1.01E+13

0.9777

D4

1.64E+13

0.9603

D5

317.57

8.30E+16

0.9700

N4/5

317.49

7.14E+13

0.9809

D2

1.02E+13

0.9810

R3/2

1.51E+13

0.9763

R3/2

-

EW

BPP

HDPE

PVC

ACS Paragon Plus Environment