Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2017
DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.7b00877
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Kinetics and Mechanisms for Copyrolysis of Palm Empty Fruit Bunch Fiber (EFBF) with Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) Sludge

Abstract: Copyrolysis of biomass is one of the potential options to improve the quality of bio-oil. In this study, different types of feedstock, palm empty fruit bunches fiber (EFBF) and palm oil mill effluent (POME) sludge, were conducted via thermogravimetric analysis. The thermogravimetric behavior of EFBF and POME sludge blends (EFBF:POME sludge mass ratio of 100, 90, 75, 50, 25, and 0%) were subjected to different heating rates of (5, 10, 20, 30, 40 °C/min) with a nitrogen (N2) purge of 20 mL/min to simulate pyroly… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
16
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
(107 reference statements)
1
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Model-fitting methods are commonly applied because of their ability to determine the kinetic parameters directly and to offer information about possible reaction mechanisms. Different reaction models have been proposed (Aboulkas and El Bouadili, 2010; Chong et al, 2017; Khawam and Flanagan, 2006; Ma et al, 2018) and kinetic parameters can be determined based on these models. The expressions of g (α) for the different reaction mechanisms used in this work are listed in Table 1.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Model-fitting methods are commonly applied because of their ability to determine the kinetic parameters directly and to offer information about possible reaction mechanisms. Different reaction models have been proposed (Aboulkas and El Bouadili, 2010; Chong et al, 2017; Khawam and Flanagan, 2006; Ma et al, 2018) and kinetic parameters can be determined based on these models. The expressions of g (α) for the different reaction mechanisms used in this work are listed in Table 1.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Model-fitting method is commonly applied, attributing to its availability of determining the kinetic parameters directly. Different reaction models have been proposed (Aboulkas and El Bouadili, 2010; Chong et al, 2017; Khawam and Flanagan, 2006; Ma et al, 2018b) and kinetic parameters can be determined based on these models. For the model-free method, there are no previous assumptions about the reaction model and allows the kinetic parameters to be calculated as a function of α (degree of conversion).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Obvious differences in the pyrolysis of the original OPEFB/SWP from blend were noticed in the central pyrolysis region. The blends showed two peaks, with the DTG peak height and positions depicting the reactivity of the materials [40]. For instance, with the increase in biomass weight percentage in the blend, the reactivity and the mass loss rate of blends decreased significantly, depicting some degree of interaction between the two samples.…”
Section: Thermal Characteristicsmentioning
confidence: 99%