Advertisement

Adsorption

pp 1–10 | Cite as

Investigation of computational upscaling of adsorption of SO2 and CO2 in fixed bed columns

  • Kathleen R. DupreEmail author
  • Ami Vyas
  • Jillian L. Goldfarb
  • Emily M. Ryan
Article
  • 27 Downloads

Abstract

Fixed bed adsorption is an economical method of removing harmful gases, such as SO2 and CO2, from industrial flue gas. It is possible to reduce the cost and environmental impact of fixed bed adsorption by repurposing waste materials to be used as adsorbents, such as semi-coke derived from oil shale, a possible alternative to fossil fuels. Fixed bed adsorption systems are difficult and time consuming to characterize experimentally, especially on large scales. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) can expand researchers understaning of how these systems are affected by material selection and operating conditions. This study uses CFD to characterize fixed bed adsorption of SO2 and CO2. The research primarily focuses on SO2 adsorption on semi-coke, with an extension to CO2 adsorption on commercial carbon. The CFD modeling was able to describe the amount of the pollutants each material was able to adsorb over time based on a variety of inputs on a larger scale than experimental research. The model was further able to give more detailed comparisons of materials and operating conditions than the experiments, particularly the SO2 and semi-coke system.

Keywords

Flue gas treatment Computational upscaling Fixed bed Waste conversion 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Partial funding for this research was provided by a Clare Booth Luce Foundation Graduate Fellowship.

References

  1. An, B., Wang, W., Ji, G., Gan, S., Gao, G., Xu, J., Li, G.: Preparation of nano-sized α-Al2O3 from oil shale ash. Energy 35, 45–49 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dantas, T.L.P., Luna, F.M.T., Silva Jr., I.J., de Azevedo, D.C.S., Grande, C.A., Rodrigues, A.E., Moreira, R.F.P.M., Frias, R.: Carbon dioxide-nitrogen separation through adsorption on activated carbon in a fixed bed. Chem. Eng. J. 169, 11–19 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ding, J., Gidaspow, D.: A bubbling fluidization model using kinetic theory of granular flow. AIChE J. 36, 523 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dupre, K.R., Ryan, E.M., Suleimenov, A., Goldfarb, J.L.: Experimental and computational demonstration of a low-temperature waste to by-product conversion of U.S. oil shale semi-coke to a flue gas sorbent. Energies 11, 3195 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dyni, J.R.: Geology and Resources of Some World Oil-Shale Deposits. Reston, Virginia (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ergun, S.: Fluid flow through packed columns. Chem. Eng. Prog. 48, 89–94 (1952)Google Scholar
  7. Goldfarb, J.L., Buessing, L., Gunn, E., Lever, M., Billias, A., Casoliba, E., Schievano, A., Adani, F.: Novel integrated biorefinery for olive mill waste management: utilization of secondary waste for water treatment. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 5(1), 876–884 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Goldfarb, J.L., D’Amico, A., Culin, C., Suuberg, E.M., Külaots, I.: Oxidation kinetics of oil shale semicokes: reactivity as a function of pyrolysis temperature and shale origin. Energy Fuels 27, 666–672 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gregg, S.J., Sing, K.S.W.: Adsorption, Surface Area, and Porosity. Academic Press, London (1982)Google Scholar
  10. Herzog, N., Schreiber, M., Egbers, C., Krautz, H.J.: A comparative study of different CFD-codes for numerical simulation of gas-solid fluidized bed hydrodynamics. Comput. Chem. Eng. 39, 41–46 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hoomans, B.P.B., Kuipers, J.A.M., Briels, W.J., Van Swaaij, W.P.M.: Discrete particle simulation of bubble and slug formation in a two-dimensional gas-fluidised bed: a hard-sphere approach. Chem. Eng. Sci. 51(1), 99–118 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Isitan, S., Ceylan, S., Topcu, Y., Hintz, C., Tefft, J., Chellappa, T., Guo, J., Goldfarb, J.L.: Product quality optimization in an integrated biorefinery: conversion of pistachio nutshell biomass to biofuels and activated biochars via pyrolysis. Energy Conserv. Manag. 127, 576–588 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Karau, A., Benken, C., Thommes, J., Kula, M.-R.: The influence of particle size distribution and operating conditions on the adsorption performance in fluidized beds 1991. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 55, 54–64 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Külaots, I., Goldfarb, J.L., Suuberg, E.M.: Characterization of Chinese, American and Estonian oil shale semicokes and their sorptive potential. Fuel 89, 3300–3306 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lane, W.A., Ryan, E.M.: Verification, validation, and uncertainty quantification of a sub-grid model for heat transfer in gas-particle flows with immersed horizontal cylinders. Chem. Eng. Sci. 176, 409–420 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lane, W.A., Sarkar, A., Sundaresan, S., Ryan, E.M.: Sub-grid models for heat transfer in gas-particle flows with immersed horizontal cylinders. Chem. Eng. Sci. 151, 7–15 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lane, W.A., Storlie, C.B., Montgomery, C.J., Ryan, E.M.: Numerical modeling and uncertainty quantification of a bubbling fluidized bed with immersed horizontal tubes. Powder Technol. 253, 733–743 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Leci, C.L.: Financial implications on power generation costs resulting from the parasitic effect of CO2 capture using liquid scrubbing technology from power station flue gases. Energy Conserv. Manage. 37, 210 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Li, Z., Liu, Y., Wang, H., Tsai, C.-J., Yang, X., Xing, Y., Zhang, C., Xiao, P., Webley, P.A.: A numerical modelling study of SO2 adsorption on activated carbons with new rate equations. Chem. Eng. J. 353, 858–866 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lizzio, A.A., DeBarr, J.A.: Effect of surface area and chemisorbed oxygen on the SO2 adsorption capacity of activated char. Fuel 75, 1515–1522 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lua, A.C., Yang, T.: Theoretical and experimental SO2 adsorption onto pistachio-nut-shell activated carbon for a fixed-bed column. Chem. Eng. J. 155, 175–183 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Luan, J., Li, A., Su, T., Cui, X.: Synthesis of nucleated glass-ceramics using oil shale fly ash. J. Hazard. Mater. 173, 427–432 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Miller, D.C., Syamlal, M., Mebane, D.S., Storlie, C., Bhattacharyya, D., Sahinidis, N.V., Agarwal, D., Tong, C., Zitney, S.E., Sarkar, A., Sun, X., Sundaresan, S., Ryan, E.M., Engel, D., Dale, C.: Carbon capture simulation initiative: a case study in multiscale modeling and new challenges. Annu. Rev. Chem. Biomol. Eng. 5, 301–323 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mulgundmath, V.P., Jones, R.A., Tezel, F.H., Thibault, J.: Fixed bed adsorption for the removal of carbon dioxide from nitrogen: breakthrough behaviour and modelling for heat and mass transfer. Sep. Purif. Technol. 85, 17–27 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Qiang, T., Zhigang, Z., Wenpei, Z., Zidong, C.: SO2 and NO selective adsorption properties of coal-based activated carbons. Fuel 84, 461–465 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Raukas, A., Punning, J.-M.: Environmental problems in the Estonian oil shale industry. Energy Environ. Sci. 2, 723–728 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rios, R.B., Correia, L.S., Bastos-Neto, M., Torres, A.E.B., Hatimondi, S.A., Ribeiro, A.M., Rodrigues, A.E., Cavalcante Jr., C.L., de Azevedo, D.C.S.: Evaluation of carbon dioxide-nitrogen separation through fixed bed measurements and simulations. Adsorption 20, 945–957 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ruthven, D.M.: Principles of Adsorption and Adsorption Processes. Wiley, New York (1984)Google Scholar
  29. Sage, P.W., Ford, N.W.J.: Review of sorbent injection processes for low-cost sulphur dioxide control. Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part A J. Power Energy. 210, 183–190 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Shafeeyan, M.S., Daud, W.M.A.W., Shamiri, A.: A review of mathematical modeling of fixed-bed columns for carbon dioxide adsorption. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 92, 961–988 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sumathi, S., Bhatia, S., Lee, K.T., Mohamed, A.R.: Optimization of microporous palm shell activated carbon production for flue gas desulphurization: experimental and statistical studies. Biosour. Technol. 100, 1614–1621 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Taghipour, F., Ellis, N., Wong, C.: Experimental and computational study of gas-solid fluidized bed hydrodynamics. Chem. Eng. Sci. 60, 6857–6867 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Taulbee, D.N., Graham, U.M., Carter, S.D., Robl, T.L., Derbyshire, F.: Examination of eastern US oil shale by-products and their markets. Fuel 74, 1118–1124 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ueyama, K.: A study of two-fluid model equations. J. Fluid Mech. 690, 474–498 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Weller, H., Greenshields, C., de Rouvray, C.: OpenFOAM, https://openfoam.org/
  36. Williams, P.T., Ahmad, N.: Influence of process conditions on the pyrolysis of Pakistani oil shales. Fuel 78, 653–662 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yaghoobi-Khankhajeh, S., Alizadeh, R., Zarghami, R.: Adsorption modeling of CO2 in fluidized bed reactor. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 129, 111–121 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yang, H., Xu, Z., Fan, M., Gupta, R., Slimane, R.B., Bland, A.E., Wright, I.: Progress in carbon dioxide separation and capture: a review. J. Environ. Sci. 20, 14–27 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringBoston UniversityBostonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Biological and Environmental EngineeringCornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations