Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 25, Issue 26, pp 25702–25714 | Cite as

Optimization of palm oil mill sludge biochar preparation for sulfur dioxide removal

  • Nursashabila Iberahim
  • Sumathi SethupathiEmail author
  • Mohammed J. K. Bashir
Environmental functions of biochar

Abstract

In this study, palm oil mill sludge was used as a precursor to prepare biochar using conventional pyrolysis. Palm oil mill sludge biochar (POSB) was prepared at different preparation variables, i.e., heating temperature (300–800 °C), heating rate (10–20 °C/min) and holding time (60–120 min). The prepared biochars were tested for sulfur dioxide (SO2) adsorption in a fixed bed reactor using 300 ppm of SO2 gas at 300 ml/min (with N2 gas as balance). Response surface central composite experimental design was used to optimize the production of biochar versus SO2 removal. A quadratic model was developed in order to correlate the effect of variable parameters on the optimum adsorption capacity of SO2 gas. The experimental values and the predicted results of the model were found to show satisfactory agreement. The optimum conditions for biochar preparation to yield the best SO2 removal was found to be at 405 °C of heating temperature, 20 °C/min of heating rate and 88 min of holding time. At these conditions, the average yield of biochar and adsorption capacity for SO2 gas was reported as 54.25 g and 9.75 mg/g, respectively. The structure of biochar and their roles in SO2 adsorption were investigated by surface area, morphology images, infrared spectra, and proximate analysis, respectively. The characterization findings suggested that POSB adsorbs SO2 mainly by the functional groups.

Keywords

Palm oil mill sludge Biochar Pyrolysis Sulfur dioxide Adsorbent Adsorption 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR) for the research grant provided for this project (UTARRF/C2-10/S6) and Kementerian Pendidikan Tinggi (KPT) on MyBrain15 program for the student’s financial support.

References

  1. Agrafioti E, Bouras G, Kalderis D, Diamadopoulos E (2013) Biochar production by sewage sludge pyrolysis. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 101:72–78Google Scholar
  2. Akbar RS, Christopher MKC, Nurhazwani I, Padmesh TVN (2013) Adsorption of gaseous pollutants (SO2 & CO) onto palm shell activated carbon. EURECA 2013:123–124Google Scholar
  3. Anis M, Astimar AA, Loh SK, Nasrin AB, Lim WS & Choo YM. (2010). Oil palm biomass products and commercialization (2015). Retrieved from http://biomass-sp.net/downloads/sdhfsd65sda23fsdf234/D4 Malaysian Palm Oil Board.pdf
  4. Azmi NB, Bashir MJK, Sumathi S, Wei LJ (2015) Stabilized landfill leachate treatment by sugarcane bagasse derived activated carbon for removal of color, COD and NH3-N—optimization of preparation conditions by RSM. JECE 3:1287–1294Google Scholar
  5. Cha JS, Park SH, Jung S-C, Ryu C, Jeon J-K (2016) Production and utilization of biochar: a review. J Ind Eng Chem 40:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen T, Zhang Y, Wang H, Lu W, Zhou Z, Zhang Y, Ren L (2014) Influence of pyrolysis temperature on characteristics and heavy metal adsorptive performance of biochar derived from municipal sewage sludge. Bioresour Technol 164:47–54Google Scholar
  7. Department of Environment, Malaysia (2000) A guide to air pollutant index in Malaysia. Retrieved from Portal Rasmi Jabatan Alam Sekitar: https://www.doe.gov.my/portalv1/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/API-Guideline.pdf
  8. Department of Statistics, Malaysia. (2016). Compendium of Environment Statistic 2016. Retrieved from Department of Statistic Malaysia. https://newss.statistics.gov.my/newss-portalx/ep/epFreeDownloadContentSearch.seam?cid=7611https://newss.statistics.gov.my/newss-portalx/ep/epFreeDownloadContentSearch.seam?cid=7611
  9. Devi P, Saroha AK (2013) Effect of temperature on biochar properties during paper mill sludge pyrolysis. Int J ChemTech Res 5(2):682-687Google Scholar
  10. Fu P, Yi W, Bai X, Li Z, Hu S, Xiang J (2011) Effect of temperature on gas composition and char structural features of pyrolyzed agricultural residues. Bioresour Technol 102(17):8211-8219Google Scholar
  11. Gai X, Wang H, Liu J, Zhai L, Liu S, Ren T (2014) Effects of feedstock and pyrolysis temperature on Biochar adsorption of ammonium and nitrate. PLoS One 9(12):e113888. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113888 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gwenzi W, Muzava M, Mapanda F, Tauro TP (2016) Comparative short-term effects of sewage sludge and its Biochar on soil properties, maize growth and uptake of nutrients on a tropical clay soil in Zimbabwe. J Integr Agr 2016 15(6):1395–1406Google Scholar
  13. Hossain MK, Strezov V, Chan KY, Ziolkowski A, Nelson PF (2011) Influence of pyrolysis temperature on production and nutrient properties of wastewater sludge biochar. J Environ Manag 92:223–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. IBI (2012) “Standardized product definition and product testing guidelines for biochar that is used in soil”. Retrieved from International Biochar Initiative: http://www.biochar-international.org/characterizationstandard
  15. Jiang X, Liu Y, Gu M (2011) Absorption of sulphur dioxide with sodium citrate buffer solution in a rotating packed bed. Chin J Chem Eng 19(4):687–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Karatepe N, Orbak I, Yavuz R, Özyug˘Uran A (2008) Sulfur dioxide adsorption by activated carbons having different textural and chemical properties. Fuel 87:3207–3215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lau LC, Nor NM, Lee KT, Mohamed AR (2015) Selection of better synthesis route of CeO2/NaOH/PSAC for hydrogen Sulphide removal from biogas. JECE 3:1522–1529Google Scholar
  18. Lehmann J, Pereira da Silva J, Steiner C, Nehls T, Zech W, Glaser B (2003) Nutrient availability and leaching in an archaeological Anthrosol and a Ferralsol of the Central Amazon basin: fertilizer manure charcoal amendments. Plant Soil 249:343–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liu Z-S (2008) Adsorption of SO2 and NO from incineration flue gas onto activated carbon. Waste Manag 28:2329–2335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lua AC, Yang T (2009) Theoretical and experimental SO2 adsorption onto pistachio-nut-shell activated carbon for a fixed-bed column. Chem Eng J 155:175–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Maˇsek O, Budarinb V, Gronnowb M, Crombiea K, Brownsorta P (2013) Microwave and slow pyrolysis biochar—comparison of physical and functional properties. J Anal Appl Pyrol 100:41–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Macias-Perez MC, Lillo-Rodenas MA, Bueno-Lopez A, de Lecea CSM, Linares-Solano A (2008) SO2 retention on CaO/Activated carbon sorbents. Part II: effect of the activated carbon support. Fuel 87:2544–2550.Google Scholar
  23. Mehrara H, Shishesaz MR, Rouzbehani B (2013) A novel selective flue gas SO2 removal with an amine absorbent. Int J Sci Emerging Tech 6(1):216–221Google Scholar
  24. Melo LCA, Coscione AR, Abreu CA, Puga AP, Camargo OA (2013) Influence of pyrolysis temperature on cadmium and zinc sorption capacity of sugar cane straw-derived biochar. Bioresources 8(4):4992–5004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Novak JM, Busscher WJ, Laird DL, Ahmedna M, Watts DW, Niandou MAS (2009) Impact of biochar amendment on fertility of a southeastern coastal plain. Soil Sci 174:105–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Özçimen D (2013) An approach to the characterization of biochar and bio-oil. In Renewable energy for sustainable future. ISBN:978–1–477554-890. (pp. 41–58). iConcept PressGoogle Scholar
  27. Özçimen D, Ersoy-Meriçboyu A (2010) Characterization of biochar and bio-oil samples obtained from carbonization of various biomass materials. Renew Energ 35:1319–1324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Panahi PN, Salari D, Niaei A, Mousavi SM (2013) NO reduction over nanostructure M-Cu/ZSM-5 (M: Cr, Mn, Co and Fe) bimetallic catalysts and optimization of catalyst preparation by RSM. J Ind Eng Chem 19:1793–1799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Park HJ, Park Y-K, Kim JS (2008) Influence of reaction conditions and the char separation system on the production of bio-oil from radiata pine sawdust by fast pyrolysis. Fuel Process Technol 89:797–802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Parveen FR, Rajeev PS, Ibrahim MH, Norizan E (2010) Review of current palm oil mill effluent (POME) treatment methods: vermicomposting as a sustainable practice. World Appl Sci J 11(1):70–81Google Scholar
  31. Peterson SC, Jackson MA (2014) Simplifying pyrolysis: using gasification to produce corn stover and wheat straw biochar for sorptive and horticultural media. Ind Crop Prod 53:228–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Srinivasan P, Sarmah AK, Smernik R, Das O, Mohammed F, Gao W (2015) A feasibility study of agricultural and sewage biomass as biochar, bioenergy and biocomposite feedstock: production, characterization and potential applications. Sci Total Eviron 512-513:495–505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Srivastave RK, Jozewicz W (2001) Flue gas desulfurization: the state of the art. J Air Waste Manage Assoc 51:1676–1688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sumathi S, Bhatia S, Lee KT, Mohamed AR (2009a) Performance of an activated carbon made from waste palm shell in simultaneous adsorption of SOx and NOx of flue gas at low temperature. Sci China Technol Sc 52:198–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sumathi S, Bhatia S, Lee KT, Mohamed AR (2009b) Optimization of microporous palm Shell activated carbon production for flue gas desulphurization: experimental and statistical studies. Bioresour Technol 100:1614–1621CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thangalazhy-Gopakumar S, Adhikari S, Ravindran H, Gupta RB, Fasina O, Tu M, Fernando SD (2010) Physiochemical properties of bio-oil produced at various temperatures from pine wood using an auger reactor. Bioresour Technol 101(21):8389-8395Google Scholar
  37. Thangalazhy-Gopakumar S, Al-Nadheri WMA, Jegarajan D, Sahu JN, Mubarak NM, Nizamuddin S (2015) Utilization of palm oil sludge through pyrolysis for bio-oil and bio-char production. Bioresour Technol 178:65–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yahaya SM, Lau S (2013) Palm oil effluent (POME) from Malaysia palm oil Mills: waste or resource. IJEST 2(6):1138–1155Google Scholar
  39. Yanli W, Zhanggen H, Zhenyu L, Qingya L (2004) A novel activated carbon honeycomb catalyst for simultaneous SO2 and NO removal at low temperatures. Letters to the Editor, Carbon 42:423–460Google Scholar
  40. Yuan H, Lua T, Wanga Y, Huanga H, Chena Y (2014) Influence of pyrolysis temperature and holding time on properties of biochar derived from medicinal herb (Radix Isatidis) residue and its effect on soil CO2 emission. J Anal and Appl Pyrol 110:277–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zell H, Quarcoo D, Scutaru C, Vitzthum K, Uibel S, Schöffel N (2010) Air pollution research: visualization of research activity using density-equalizing mapping and Scientometric benchmarking procedures. J Occup Med Toxicol 5(5):1–9Google Scholar
  42. Zhang J, Liu L, Liu R (2015) Effects of pyrolysis temperature and heating time on Biochar obtained from the pyrolysis of Straw and lignosulfonate. Bioresour Technol 176:288–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering and Green TechnologyUniversiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Jalan Universiti, Bandar BaratKamparMalaysia

Personalised recommendations