| Literature DB >> 33138276 |
Kalu Samuel Ukanwa1, Kumar Patchigolla1, Ruben Sakrabani2, Edward Anthony1.
Abstract
This study explores the use of a novel activating agent and demonstrates the production and characterisation of activated carbon (AC) from a combine palm waste (CPW) in 3:2:1 proportion by weight of empty fruit bunch, mesocarp fibre and palm kernel shell. The resulting biomass was processed by a microwave-assisted method using trona and compared with material produced by conventional routes. These results demonstrate the potential of trona ore as an activating agent and the effectiveness of using a combined palm waste for a single stream activation process. It also assesses the effectiveness of trona ore in the elimination of alcohol, acids and aldehydes; with a focus on increasing the hydrophilicity of the resultant AC. The optimum results for the conventional production technique at 800 °C yielded a material with SBET 920 m2/g, Vtotal 0.840 cm3/g, a mean pore diameter of 2.2 nm and an AC yield 40%. The optimum outcome of the microwave assisted technique for CPW was achieved at 600 W, SBET is 980 m2/g; Vtotal 0.865 cm3/g; a mean pore diameter 2.2 nm and an AC yield of 42%. Fourier transform infrared spectrometry analyses showed that palm waste can be combined to produce AC and that trona ore has the capacity to significantly enhance biomass activation.Entities:
Keywords: activated carbon; activating agent; agricultural residues; microwave activation; oil palm waste; trona ore
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33138276 PMCID: PMC7663104 DOI: 10.3390/molecules25215028
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1DTA/TGA of OPW and variation of the samples impregnated with trona ore.
Figure 2(a) Microwave heating time relative to moisture content and temperature variation. (b) Mass flow relationship relative to the influence of temperature change on the composition of syngas.
Elemental analysis of combine palm waste activated carbon based on different production processes.
| Sample/Process Parameters | Proximate Analysis | Ultimate Analysis | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moisture | Volatile | FC | Ash | C | H | N | O | S | |
| Raw CPW | 4.05 | 74.50 | 16.25 | 5.20 | 44.60 | 6.35 | 0.80 | 48.10 | 0.15 |
| CPW | 5.25 | 12.95 | 73.56 | 8.24 | 74.20 | 2.88 | 1.10 | 21.70 | 0.12 |
| CPW | 2.46 | 10.38 | 76.60 | 10.56 | 76.95 | 2.22 | 1.38 | 19.33 | 0.12 |
| CPW | 6.44 | 14.69 | 71.22 | 7.65 | 73.87 | 3.10 | 1.30 | 21.63 | 0.10 |
| CPW | 4.05 | 11.20 | 75.90 | 8.85 | 74.63 | 2.42 | 1.18 | 21.67 | 0.10 |
CPW: combine palm waste, ℗: Process.
Figure 3SEM analysis of the AC produced from trona.
Yield and pore structural parameters.
| Sample | Process Parameter | SBET (m2/g) | Vtotal (cm3/g) | Vmeso (cm3/g) | Vmicro (cm3/g) | Dp (nm) | Yield (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PKS | ℗ A: 800 °C-1 h | 923 | 0.750 | 0.122 | 0.285 | 3.2 | 35 |
| MF | 1105 | 0.882 | 0.230 | 0.302 | 3.4 | 42 | |
| EFB | 845 | 0.645 | 0.234 | 0.285 | 2.3 | 30 | |
| CPW | 920 | 0.840 | 0.356 | 0.354 | 2.2 | 40 | |
| PKS | ℗ B: 500 °C-1 h + 800 °C-1 h | 650 | 0.745 | 0.108 | 0.230 | 2.8 | 30 |
| MF | 736 | 0.646 | 0.280 | 0.262 | 2.4 | 30 | |
| EFB | 820 | 0.568 | 0.250 | 0.145 | 2.5 | 24 | |
| CPW | 870 | 0.622 | 0.286 | 0.162 | 2.0 | 34 | |
| PKS | ℗ C: 600W-20 min | 1030 | 0.825 | 0.105 | 0.245 | 3.3 | 42 |
| MF | 1220 | 0.887 | 0.274 | 0.465 | 3.8 | 45 | |
| EFB | 735 | 0.640 | 0.222 | 0.346 | 3.1 | 37 | |
| CPW | 980 | 0.865 | 0.256 | 0.380 | 3.3 | 42 | |
| PKS | ℗ D: 500 °C-1 h + 600W-10 min | 670 | 0.542 | 0.089 | 0.200 | 3.1 | 37 |
| MF | 864 | 0.650 | 0.182 | 0.230 | 2.8 | 28 | |
| EFB | 810 | 0.712 | 0.234 | 0.242 | 3.0 | 28 | |
| CPW | 900 | 0.660 | 0.310 | 0.380 | 3.0 | 38 |
PKS: palm kernel shell, MF: Mesocarp fibre, EFB: Empty fruit bunch, CPW: combine palm waste, V: Volume, Dp: Pore diameter, ℗: Process.
Figure 4FTIR of OPW from different processing methods and activation conditions (a) raw feedstock (b) trona ore activated AC.
Figure 5Mechanism of trona during activation process.
Biochemical analysis of individual palm waste biomass.
| PKS | MF | EFB | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Proximate analysis (% | Moisture | 12 | 12.1 | 14.4 |
| Ash | 1.5 | 4.8 | 4.4 | |
| Volatiles | 70.6 | 72.9 | 73.7 | |
| Fixed carbon | 15.9 | 10.5 | 7.5 | |
| Ultimate analysis (% | C | 46 | 45.8 | 37.5 |
| H | 5.1 | 6.3 | 5.0 | |
| N | 0.4 | 0.9 | 0.4 | |
| S | 0.02 | 0.2 | 0.1 | |
| O * | 35 | 29.5 | 38 | |
| Lignocellulosic composition ** | Cellulose | 20.8 | 33.9 | 38.3 |
| Hemicellulose | 22.7 | 26.1 | 35.3 | |
| Lignin | 50.7 | 27.7 | 22.1 | |
| Thermal and energy properties | Organic content | 94.2 | 92 | 95.7 |
| Inorganic content | 5.8 | 8 | 4.3 | |
| Combustion rate, CR (X × 10−8 kg/s) ** | 4 | 4.2 | 3.8 | |
| Specific Heat, c, (J/kgK) ** | 3113 | 3231 | 2832 | |
* Oxygen by difference include moisture and ash, ** [58], PKS: palm kernel shell, MF: Mesocarp fibre, EFB: Empty fruit bunch.
Figure 6Microwave experimental setup for AC production.