Везде

RAS Chemistry & Material ScienceХимическая физика Advances in Chemical Physics

  • ISSN (Print) 0207-401X
  • ISSN (Online) 3034-6126

Neutralization of sulfur-containing gases during coal filtration combustion

You can
PII
10.31857/S0207401X24070097-1
DOI
10.31857/S0207401X24070097
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Yu. Yu. Tsvetkova
  • Affiliation: Federal Research Center of Problems of Chemical Physics and Medicinal Chemistry, Russian Academy of Sciences
Volume/ Edition
Volume 43 / Issue number 7
Pages
91-101
Abstract
A study on the neutralization of sulfur compounds during the filtration combustion of model mixture compositions containing iron sulfide or copper sulfate by adding marble (CaCO3) was carried out. It has been experimentally shown that during burning model charge compositions with additions of both iron sulfide and copper sulfate, replacing chemically inert sapphire with marble leads to a decrease in combustion temperature by approximately 150–200 °C. At the same time, the content of CO2 in gaseous products increases, and the concentrations of CO and H2 decrease. The greatest effect on the absorption of sulfur-containing substances when adding marble was shown in experiments where sulfur was present in the fuel in sulfide form: the addition of 50% marble made it possible to capture 72% of the initial sulfur content, and for compositions with 90% marble in the charge, 85%. The absorption of sulfur compounds formed during the combustion of model mixture compositions with copper sulfate is much worse. When the charge contains 50% and 85% marble, sulfur-containing compounds were absorbed by only 19% and 24%, respectively.
Keywords
газификация угля серосодержащие газы нейтрализация мрамор фильтрационное горение
Date of publication
14.09.2025
Year of publication
2025
Number of purchasers
0
Views
3

References

  1. 1. Huang H., Shi C. // Energies. 2023. V. 16. № 2. P. 857. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16020857
  2. 2. Rashid M.I., Isah U.A., Athar M., Benhelal E. // ChemBioEng Rev. 2023. V. 10. № 5. P. 841. https://doi.org/10.1002/cben.202200023
  3. 3. Gómez J., Neumann T., Guerrero F., Toledo M. // Fuel. 2022. V. 307. № 121739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2021.121739
  4. 4. Xu G., Ou J., Wei H. et al. // J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2022. V. 10. № 108475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2022.108475
  5. 5. Tereza A.M., Kozlov P.V., Gerasimov G.Y. et al. // Acta Astronaut. 2023. V. 204. P. 705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2022.11.001
  6. 6. Roslyakov P.V., Kondratieva O.E. // IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. 2022. V. 1061. № 012035. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1061/1/012035
  7. 7. Xiong X., Yu S., Qin D., Tan H., Lu X. // J. Energy Inst. 2022. V. 105. P. 133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joei.2022.08.009
  8. 8. Vassilev S.V., Vassileva C.G. // J. Hazard. Mater. 2023. V. 457. № 131850. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.131850
  9. 9. Gopinathan P., Jha M., Singh A.K. et al. // Fuel. 2022. V. 316. № 123376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.123376
  10. 10. Xi Z., Xi K., Lu L., Zhang M. // Fuel. 2023. V. 331. № 125756. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.125756
  11. 11. Li L., Cheng L., Wang B., Ma Z., Zhang W. // J. Energy Inst. 2023. V. 111. № 101403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.125756
  12. 12. de Oliveira D.C., Lora E.E., Venturini O.J., Maya D.M., Garcia-Pérez M. // Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2023. V. 172. № 113047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.113047
  13. 13. Кислов В.М., Цветкова Ю.Ю., Цветков М.В., Пилипенко Е.Н., Салганская М.В. // Хим. физика. 2021. Т. 40. № 8. С. 19. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0207401X21080057
  14. 14. Kumar L., Jana S.K. // Rev. Chem. Eng. 2022. V. 38. № 7. С. 843. https://doi.org/10.1515/revce-2020-0029
  15. 15. Wang X., Zhang R., Li Q., Mi J., Wu M. // Fuel. 2023. V. 332. № 126052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.126052
  16. 16. Üresin E., Ateş M., Akgün F. // Intern. J. Oil, Gas Coal Technol. 2022. V. 31. № 2. P. 166. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJOGCT.2022.125370
  17. 17. Кислов В.М., Цветкова Ю.Ю., Цветков М.В. и др. // Физика горения и взрыва. 2023. Т. 59. № 2. С. 83. https://doi.org/10.15372/FGV20230210
  18. 18. Кислов В.М., Цветкова Ю.Ю., Глазов С.В. и др. // Хим. физика. 2020. Т. 39. № 8. С. 64. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0207401X20080038
  19. 19. Xing G., Wang W., Zhao S., Qi L. // Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023. V. 30. P. 76471. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-27872-8
  20. 20. Chang J.Y., Liu M., Wan J., Shi G.W., Li T. // Energy Rep. 2023. V. 9. P. 85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2023.04.032
  21. 21. Toledo M., Arriagada A., Ripoll N., Salgansky E.A., Mujeebu M.A. // Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2023. V. 177. № 113213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2023.113213
  22. 22. Боровик К.Г., Луценко Н.А. // Физика горения и взрыва. 2022. Т. 58. № 3. С. 40. https://doi.org/10.15372/FGV20220304
  23. 23. Кислов В.М., Цветков М.В., Зайченко А.Ю. и др. // Хим. физика. 2023. Т. 42. № 8. С. 39. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0207401X2308006X
  24. 24. Беляев А.А., Ермолаев Б.С. // Хим. физика. 2023. Т. 42. № 8. С. 3. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0207401X23080034
  25. 25. Liu L., Liu H., Cui M., Hu Y., Wang J. // Fuel. 2013. V. 112. P. 687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2012.06.048
  26. 26. Wang J., Tomita A. // Energy fuels. 2003. V. 17. № 4. P. 954. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef020251o
  27. 27. El-Houte S., Ali M.E.S., Sørensen O.T. // Thermochim. acta. 1989. V. 138. № 1. P. 107. https://doi.org/10.1016/0040-6031 (89)87245-4
  28. 28. Gadalla A.M. // Int. J. Chem. Kinet. 1984. V. 16. № 6. P. 655. https://doi.org/10.1002/kin.550160604
  29. 29. Kanari N., Menad N.E., Ostrosi E. et al. // Metals. 2018. V. 8. № 12. P. 1084. https://doi.org/10.3390/met8121084
  30. 30. Pérez Bernal J.L., Bello M.A. // Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2003. V. 42. № 5. P. 1028. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie020426h
  31. 31. Han Y.Q., Yang R.M., Dong Y., Tong H.L. // J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2022. V. 147. № 22. P. 12431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-022-11477-3
  32. 32. Recelj T., Golob J. // Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2004. V. 82. № 5. P. 371. https://doi.org/10.1205/psep.82.5.371.44188
  33. 33. Xia X., Zhang L., Li Z. et al. // J. Environ. Manage. 2022. V. 301. № 113855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113855
  34. 34. Jia X., Wang Q., Cen K., Chen L. // Fuel. 2016. V. 163. P. 157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.09.054
  35. 35. Lyngfelt A., Leckner B. // Chem. Eng. Sci. 1989. V. 44. № 2. P. 207. https://doi.org/10.1016/0009-2509 (89)85058-4
  36. 36. Yan Z.Q., Wang Z.A., Wang X.F. et al. // Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China. 2015. V. 25. № 10. P. 3490. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1003-6326 (15)63986-3
  37. 37. Salgansky E.A., Kislov V.M., Glazov S.V., Salgan skaya M.V. // J. Combust. 2016. V. 2016. № 9637082. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/9637082
  38. 38. Salgansky E.A., Zaichenko A.Y., Podlesniy D.N., Salganskaya M.V., Toledo M. // Intern. J. Hydrog. Energy. 2017. V. 42. № 16. P. 11017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.03.056
QR
Translate

Индексирование

Scopus

Scopus

Scopus

Crossref

Scopus

Higher Attestation Commission

At the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Scopus

Scientific Electronic Library