Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry

, Volume 116, Issue 1, pp 511–517 | Cite as

TG–DSC analysis of pyrolysis process of two Chinese oil shales

  • Q. Q. Liu
  • X. X. Han
  • Q. Y. Li
  • Y. R. Huang
  • X. M. Jiang
Article
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

According to the recommendations developed by the Kinetics Committee of the International Confederation for Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry (ICTAC), non-isothermal pyrolysis experiments were carried out to analyze and compare two types of oil shale from the northeast of China using simultaneous differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) and thermogravimetric (TG) analysis at temperatures ranging from 40 to 850 °C. The pyrolysis process of oil shale begins with the evaporation of small molecular substances, then continues by the pyrolysis of kerogen, and finally ends mainly with the complete decomposition of carbonates. In this whole process, almost 36 % of overall pyrolytic heat was used for the pyrolysis of kerogen. When retorting air-dried basis oil shale below 520 °C, a considerable proportion of the heat required will have to be used mainly for the evaporation of small molecular substances below 185 °C. Specific heat capacities of two oil shale semicokes were measured below 500 °C by DSC method, showing that specific heat capacity of semicoke will increase with the increase of the temperature, and carbonization of kerogen can bring about a further positive effect on it. Coats–Redfern method was used to calculate kinetic parameters in three pyrolysis stages.

Keywords

Oil shale Pyrolysis Pyrolytic heat Specific heat capacity Kinetics 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Shanghai Natural Science Foundation (Grant No. 13ZR1420300).

References

  1. 1.
    Qian JL, Wang JQ, Li SY. World’s oil shale available retorting technologies and the forecast of shale oil production. In: Chung JS, editors. Proceedings of the eighteenth international offshore and polar engineering conference. Vancouver: 2008. p. 19–20.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Liu ZJ, Dong QS, Ye SQ, Zhu JW, Guo W, Li DC. The situation of oil shale resources in China. J Jilin University. 2006;36:869–76 (in Chinese, with English abstract).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Qian JL, Wang JQ. World oil shale retorting technologies. In: International conference on oil shale: recent trends in oil shale. Amman: 2006. p. 7–9.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Golubev N. Solid oil shale heat carrier technology for oil shale retorting. Oil Shale. 2003;20:324–32.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Uustalu J. Utilization of semi-coke for energy production. In: Rofer CK, Kaasik T, editors. Turning a problem into a resource: remediation and waste management at the Sillamae Site, Estonia. Tallinn: 2000. p. 223–8.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nicolini J, Pereira BF, Pillon CN, Machad VG, Lopes WA, Andrade JB, et al. Characterization of Brazilian oil shale byproducts planned for use as soil conditioners for food and agro-energy production. J Anal Appl Pyrol. 2011;90:112–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jiang XM, Han XX, Cui ZG. New technology for the comprehensive utilization of Chinese oil shale resources. Energy. 2007;32:772–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ots A, Poobus A, Lausmaa T. Technical and ecological aspects of shale oil and power cogeneration. Oil Shale. 2011;28:101–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jaber JO, Probert SD, Williams PT. Modelling oil-shale integrated tri-generator behaviour: predicted performance and financial assessment. Appl Energy. 1998;59:73–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kök MV. Heating rate effect on the DSC kinetics of oil shales. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2007;90:817–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Aboulkas A, El-Harfi K, El-Bouadili A, Nadifiyine M, Benchanaa M. Study on the pyrolysis of Moroccan oil shale with poly (ethylene terephthalate). J Therm Anal Calorim. 2009;96:883–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Arenillas A, Rubiera F, Arias B, Pis JJ, Faundez JM, Gordon AL, Garcia XA. A TG/DTA study on the effect of coal blending on ignition behavior. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2004;76:603–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Torrente MC, Galan MA. Kinetics of the thermal decomposition of oil shale from Puertollano (Spain). Fuel. 2001;80:327–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yagmur S, Durusoy T. Kinetics of combustion of oil shale with polystyrene. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2009;96:189–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kaljuvee T, Keelmann M, Trikkel A, Kuusik R. Thermooxidative decomposition of oil shales. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2011;105:395–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Goldfarb JL, D’Amico A, Culin C, Suuberg EM, Külaots I. Oxidation kinetics of oil shale semicokes: reactivity as a function of pyrolysis temperature and shale origin. Energy Fuels. 2013;27:666–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang Q, Li QF, Zhang LX, Fang YT, Wang ZQ. Experimental and kinetic investigation of the pyrolysis, combustion, and gasification of deoiled asphalt. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2013. doi: 10.1007/s10973-013-3370-2.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liu HM, Yuan P, Liu D, Tan DY, He HP, Zhu JX. Effects of solid acidity of clay minerals on the thermal decomposition of 12-aminolauric acid. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2013. doi: 10.1007/s10973-012-2887-0.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vyazovkin S, Burnham AK, Criado JM, Perez-Maqueda LA, Popescu C, Sbirrazzuoli N. ICTAC Kinetics Committee recommendations for performing kinetic computations on thermal analysis data. Thermochim Acta. 2011;520:1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Trikkel A, Kuusik R, Martins A, Pihu T, Stencel JM. Utilization of Estonian oil shale semicoke. Fuel Process Technol. 2008;89:756–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Han XX, Jiang XM, et al. Study of the combustion mechanism of oil shale semicoke in a thermogravimetric analyzer. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2008;92:595–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kok MV. Evaluation of Turkish oil shales—thermal analysis approach. Oil Shale. 2001;18:131–8.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kok MV, Pamir MR. Non-isothermal pyrolysis and kinetics of oil shales. J Therm Anal Calorim. 1999;56:953–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kok MV, Iscan AG. Oil shale kinetics by differential methods. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2007;88:657–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Williams PT, Ahmad N. Investigation of oil-shale pyrolysis processing conditions using thermogravimetric analysis. Appl Energy. 2000;66:113–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Thakur DS, Nuttall HE. Kinetics of pyrolysis of Moroccan oil shale by thermogravimetry. Ind Eng Chem Res. 1987;26:1351–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Diricco L, Barrick PL. Pyrolysis of Oil Shale. Ind Eng Chem. 1956;48:1316–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Williams PFV. Thermogravimetry and decomposition kinetics of British Kimmeridge clay oil-shales. Fuel. 1985;64:540–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jaber JO, Probert SD. Non-isothermal thermogravimetry and decomposition kinetics of two Jordanian oil shales under different processing conditions. Fuel Process Technol. 2000;63:57–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yan JW, Jiang XM, Han XX, Liu JG. A TG–FTIR investigation to the catalytic effect of mineral matrix in oil shale on the pyrolysis and combustion of kerogen. Fuel. 2013;104:307–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Natalja S, Vahur O. Heat capacity of Kukersite oil shale: literature overview. Oil shale. 2013;30:184–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kok MV, Pamir R. Pyrolysis kinetics of oil shales determined by DSC and TG/DTG. Oil Shale. 2003;20:57–68.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jaber J, Probert S. Pyrolysis and gasification kinetics of Jordanian oil-shales. Appl Energy. 1999;63:269–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kok MV, Senguler I, Hufnagel H, Sonel N. Thermal and geochemical investigation of Seyitomer oil shale. Thermochim Acta. 2001;371:111–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kok MV, Pokol G, Keskin C, Madarasz J, Bagci S. Combustion characteristics of lignite and oil shale samples by thermal analysis techniques. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2004;76:247–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Nazzal JM. Influence of heating rate on the pyrolysis of Jordan oil shale. J Therm Anal Calorim. 2002;62:225–38.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Levent D, Tulay D. Effect of heating rate and particle size on the pyrolysis of Göynük oil shale. Energy Sour. 2005;27:787–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Q. Q. Liu
    • 1
  • X. X. Han
    • 1
  • Q. Y. Li
    • 1
  • Y. R. Huang
    • 1
  • X. M. Jiang
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Thermal Energy EngineeringShanghai Jiao Tong UniversityShanghaiPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations