Removal of sulfur compounds and siloxanes by physical and chemical sorption

Bak, Chul u.; Lim, Chan Jong; Lee, Jong Gyu; Kim, Young Deuk; Kim, Woo Seung

doi:10.1016/j.seppur.2018.07.080

Cited by 48 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study was carried out at low D4 concentration, similar to the values found in biogas streams at WWTP and landfills (Bak et al, 2019;Tran et al, 2019b). At low concentration, the adsorption isotherms of D4 exhibited a linear behavior, which was described by Henry´s Law model (Figure 5).…”

Section: Adsorption Equilibriummentioning

confidence: 60%

Siloxane removal for biogas purification by low cost mineral adsorbent

Pioquinto-García

Rodríguez

Martínez

et al. 2021

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The potential use of raw and expanded perlite as low-cost adsorbents for biogas purification has been investigated. The thermal expansion of perlite causes a reduction in the density of silanol groups from 2515.43 to 653.75 OH/nm 2 ; in contrast, the specific surface area of perlite increased two-fold due to the thermal expansion. To determine the equilibrium adsorption capacity and the adsorption kinetics batch experiments were conducted. The adsorption capacities are in the following order: activated carbon (6.8 mg/g) > silica gel (6.6 mg/g) > expanded perlite (5.81 mg/g) > raw perlite (5.6 mg/g) when compared at the same experimental conditions. The equilibrium adsorption data showed that perlite can be used to reduce the octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane concentration below 28 mg/m 3 , as recommended by leading manufacturers. The adsorption kinetics of octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane onto raw and expanded perlite followed the Linear-Driving Force model suggesting that the mass transfer is the ratecontrolling step. In addition to its low cost, expanded perlite has the advantage of requiring lower desorption temperature (200 ºC) for regeneration in comparison to the reported values for activated carbon (> 400 ºC) and fast desorption kinetics (20 min), which could contribute to a cleaner production of biogas.

show abstract

Section: Adsorption Equilibriummentioning

confidence: 60%

Siloxane removal for biogas purification by low cost mineral adsorbent

Pioquinto-García

Rodríguez

Martínez

et al. 2021

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Commercially available adsorbents (iron oxide, iron oxide hydroxides, activated carbon (AC), impregnated AC, silica gels, and molecular sieves) were extensively characterized for the first time using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray fluorescence, and BET surface area measurements (Bak, Lim, Lee, Kim, & Kim, 2019). The study reported that iron oxide hydroxides exhibited the best adsorption capacities for H 2 S and carbonyl sulfide; AC showed good removal efficiency for carbon disulfide; and silica gels exhibited high adsorption capacities for siloxanes.…”

Section: Physiochemical Odor/emissions Control Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gaseous emissions from wastewater facilities

Koh¹,

Shaw²

2020

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A review of the literature published in 2019 on topics relating to gaseous emissions from wastewater facilities is presented. This review is divided into the following sections: odorant emissions from Water Resource Recovery Facilities (WRRFs); greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions; gaseous emissions from wastewater collection systems; physiochemical odor/emissions control methods; biological odor/emissions control methods; odor/GHG characterization and monitoring; and odor impacts/risk assessments.

show abstract

“…14 Particularly, the activated carbon after impregnation with caustics or metallic oxide has better catalytic performance, which can convert hydrogen sulfide into elemental sulfur, sulfurous acid or sulfuric acid. 15,16 In this process, there is no secondary waste production, and there is no need to do additional treatment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Generally, raw carbon has bad performance for H 2 S adsorption, while activated carbon loaded with catalysts has better performance for H 2 S adsorption 14 . Particularly, the activated carbon after impregnation with caustics or metallic oxide has better catalytic performance, which can convert hydrogen sulfide into elemental sulfur, sulfurous acid or sulfuric acid 15,16 . In this process, there is no secondary waste production, and there is no need to do additional treatment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Catalytic performance improved by catalyst‐integration technology and boostingH₂Scatalytic adsorption

Liu

Zuo

2021

Environ Prog Sustainable Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Herein, impregnation is a traditional and normal method to load catalyst on the activated carbon. A new way is reported to add the catalyst by catalyst‐integration, which combines the carbon with catalyst to coexist in carbon surface. The catalyst content of the carbon prepared by catalyst‐integration is 5.51%, and the same catalyst content carbon is also prepared by impregnation method. The differences between the two carbons are investigated. The carbon produced by catalyst‐integration has both strongly physical and chemical adsorption property, and catalyst has no effect on the physical adsorption. The catalyst‐integration carbon in comparing with impregnation carbon has larger H2S adsorption capacity no matter at oxygen and oxygen‐free conditions. The H2S breakthrough capacity of catalyst‐integration carbon reaches 0.13 g/cm3. Raw carbon after impregnation causes the decrease of pore volume and surface area. The carbon prepared by catalyst‐integration technology has no effects on the pore volume and reduce surface area. The influence of organic on the H2S adsorption and carbon fired after saturation are also investigated. The results show that catalyst‐integration carbon has better adsorption performance, and lower risk of spent carbon fire. In addition, the ignition temperature of the catalyst‐integration carbon reaches 507°C. Meanwhile, the related samples are characterized by Brunauer–Emmett–Teller, scanning electron microscopy and X‐ray diffraction.

show abstract

Removal of sulfur compounds and siloxanes by physical and chemical sorption

Cited by 48 publications

References 46 publications

Siloxane removal for biogas purification by low cost mineral adsorbent

Siloxane removal for biogas purification by low cost mineral adsorbent

Gaseous emissions from wastewater facilities

Catalytic performance improved by catalyst‐integration technology and boostingH₂Scatalytic adsorption

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Removal of sulfur compounds and siloxanes by physical and chemical sorption

Cited by 48 publications

References 46 publications

Siloxane removal for biogas purification by low cost mineral adsorbent

Siloxane removal for biogas purification by low cost mineral adsorbent

Gaseous emissions from wastewater facilities

Catalytic performance improved by catalyst‐integration technology and boostingH2Scatalytic adsorption

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Catalytic performance improved by catalyst‐integration technology and boostingH₂Scatalytic adsorption