| Literature DB >> 35919611 |
Wei Zhang1,2, Hao-Yang Li1,3, Chun-Gang Xu1,4,5, Zhuo-Yi Huang1,2, Xiao-Sen Li1,4,5.
Abstract
Gas hydrate has great application potential in gas separation, energy storage, seawater desalination, etc. However, the intensity of mass and heat transfer is not enough to meet the needs of efficient hydrate synthesis. Nanoparticles, different from other liquid chemical additives, are considered as effective additives to promote hydrate formation due to their rich specific surface area and excellent thermal conductivity. This work summarizes the effect of the nanoparticles on the thermodynamics and kinetics of hydrate formation. And also, this work probes into the mechanism of the effect of the nanoparticles on the formation of hydrate as well as provides some suggestions for future research. It is found that it's difficult for nanoparticles to effectively promote the formation of the gas hydrate without the use of surfactants, because the adhesion characteristics of the nanoparticles make them easily agglomerate or even agglomerate in solution. In addition, at present, the research on the influence of nanoparticles on the formation and decomposition of natural gas hydrate is still very fragmented, and the micro mechanism of the influence is not clear, which requires more systematic and specific research in the future. At the same time, the development of nanoparticles that can promote the formation of natural gas hydrate should also become the focus of future research. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35919611 PMCID: PMC9277519 DOI: 10.1039/d2ra03376c
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
List of recent studies on the effects of nanoparticles or nanofluids on gas hydrate formation
| Ref. | NM | Gas | Size (nm) | Concentration | Modification |
|
| Dispersant | Remark |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Fe3O4 | CH4 | 20 | 0.2–1.6 g L−1 | SDS-coated | 275.15 | 6 | Compared with only SDS, the induction time was shorter and the gas consumption was higher | |
|
| Fe3O4 | CO2 | 50 | 0.01–0.15 wt% | Magnetic field | 274.15–276.15 | 3.01–4.06 | CTAB | Under the optimum conditions, the gas consumption increased by 443.9% and the induction time decreased by 96.6% |
|
| Fe3O4 | CH4 | 0.1 wt% | SDS & SO-coated, magnetic field | 276.15 | 6 | Shortening induction time and increasing gas storage capacity | ||
|
| Fe3O4 | CO2 | 50 | 0.05–0.25 wt% | 274.15, 276.15 | 2.5 | SDS or CTAB | 0.15 wt% Fe3O4 nanoparticle and 400 ppm SDS in the based fluid is the best aqueous solution for CO2 hydrate formation, with a 70.6% decrement in induction time and a 160% increment in gas consumption | |
|
| CuO | CH4 | 0.01–1 wt% | 275.65 | 5.5 | SDS | The induction time decreased by 92.7% and the gas storage capacity increased by 34% | ||
|
| CuO | CH4 | 40 | 0.05–1 wt% | 274.65, 276.65 | 5, 6 | SDS | There is no significant effect on the final gas storage capacity | |
|
| Cu | CH4 | 25, 75 | 0.0157 M, 0.157 M | 275.15–275.76 | 5.24–5.55 | CTAB | Cu nanoparticles and CTAB can shorten the induction time, increase the reaction rate and increase gas consumption | |
|
| Cu | HFC134a | 20 | 0.1 wt%, 1 wt% | 274.15 | 5.7 | SDBS | The rate of gas hydrate formation is increased and the dissociation pressure is changed | |
|
| ZnO | CH4 | 10–30 | 0.05 wt%, 0.1 wt% | 274.65 | 4.9–6 | SDS | Positive effect on induction time, reaction rate, solubility of methane and gas consumption. But no significant effect on gas capacity | |
|
| ZnO | CO2 | 11.5 | 0.1 wt% | 274 | 2.2, 2.6, 3.2 | Increase the gas consumption by up to 16% | ||
|
| Ag | CH4 | 50–75 | 275.15 | 4.7, 5.7 | The induction time was shortened by 85% and 73.9%, and the gas consumption was increased by 33.7% and 7.4%, respectively | |||
|
| Ag | CH4 | 6–30 | 4.5, 9, 18, 27, 36 μM | Triangular silver nanoparticles | 275.15, 276.15 | 4.5,4.8,5,5.3,5.5 | Induction time reduced by 97% | |
|
| Ag | C2H6 | 6–30 | 4.5, 9, 18, 27, 36 μM | 276.15, 277.65 | 1.5,1.9,2.2 | Induction time reduced by 97.5% | ||
|
| Ag | CO2 | 45, 90 μM | 273.65, 275.65 | 2, 3 | SDS | Ag nanoparticles + SDS can increase gas consumption and apparent rate constant | ||
|
| Al2O3 | CO2 | 0.1–0.6 wt% | 273.15 | 0.1 | THF, SDS | Under the optimum ratio of THF, SDS and Al2O3, the formation rate can be increased by 3.74 times | ||
|
| Al2O3 | CO2 | 30 | 0.005–0.5 wt% | Non-modified, hydrophilic and hydrophobic | 275.15 | 4.5 | Three kinds of particles have little effect on the phase equilibrium. The non-modified particles can shorten the induction time, but reduce the gas consumption. 0.01 wt% hydrophilic modification has better promoting effect, shortening induction time and increasing gas consumption | |
|
| C | CH4 | 10–15 | 0.003 wt%, 0.004 wt% | Carbon nanotubes | 274.15 | Carbon nanotubes can increase gas consumption by 300% and reaction rate, and oxidized carbon nanotubes are more effective at increasing rate. Both have a slightly positive effect on thermodynamic equilibrium | ||
|
| C | CO2 | 50 | 0.4 wt% | Graphite nanoparticles | 277.15 | 3.5 | Induction time was shortened by 80.8%, and the maximum air consumption was increased by 12.8% | |
|
| C | CO2 | 50 | 0.4 wt%, 0.8 wt%, 1.2 wt% | Graphite nanoparticles | 275.7–280.9 | 1.6–3.3 | Graphite nanoparticles have an adverse effect on the phase equilibrium of CO2 hydrate formation, but it is independent of particle concentration | |
|
| C | CH4 | 31.4 | 0.1–10 ppm | Hydrophilic, hydrophobic carbon nanotubes | 275.15 | 4.6 | The formation rate of hydrophobic carbon nanotubes was increased by 6% at high concentration and by 16.34% at low concentration | |
|
| GO | CO2 | 20–300 ppm | 279 | 3–5 | The induction time was shortened by 53–74.3%, the gas consumption increased by 5.1–15.9%, and the optimal concentration was 50 ppm | |||
|
| SiO2 | CH4 | 20–30 | 0.1–0.4 wt% | Porous medium | 274.15 | 6 | The concentration of 0.1–0.3 wt% has positive effect on the rate of hydrate formation, while the concentration of 0.4 wt% significantly inhibits hydrate formation | |
|
| Al2O3, SiO2, Cu, Ag | 75% CH4 + 25% CO2 | <50, 10–20, 40–60, <150 | 0.1–0.3 wt% | 274.15 | 4 | SiO2 can increase the gas consumption by the most, up to 45%, Cu and Al2O3 by 1–15%, and Ag has no significant effect | ||
|
| Al2O3 + GO | CH4 | Al2O3: 10–20 | 0.2–0.6 wt% + 100–400 ppm | 281.15 | 3 | THF | The induction time was shortened and the reaction rate was increased, but the final gas consumption and gas reserves were not affected |
Fig. 1Phase equilibrium of methane hydrate with or without MWCNTs (■: distilled water, □: 0.004 wt% MWCNTs).[21]
Fig. 2Phase equilibrium of tetrabutyl ammonium bromide (TBAB) + graphite nanoparticle (GN) varying with different GN concentrations.[24]
Fig. 3Comparison of the split fraction for the CO2/H2 hydrate formation with the synergic additives and other additives.[29]