Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of different co-pyrolysis ways on sulfur transformation of coals under different atmospheres

  • Published:
Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, the effects of different co-pyrolysis ways (direct mixed co-pyrolysis and indirect layer-separated co-pyrolysis) on sulfur transformation behavior of Yangquan raw, deashed and depyrited coals were investigated during their co-pyrolysis with biomass (corn-cob) in Ar and CO2 atmospheres. Under the same pyrolysis way, the desulfurization ratios of these coals under CO2 atmosphere are all higher than those under Ar atmosphere, while their char yields lower than those under Ar atmosphere. During the same atmosphere, the char yields of the same kind of coal are almost similar during single pyrolysis and indirect layer-separated co-pyrolysis. However, the char yields (Ymix) during the direct mixed pyrolysis are higher than those (Y3) during the indirect layer-separated co-pyrolysis. Under CO2 atmosphere, the main sulfur-containing gases are composed by H2S and COS, while only H2S in Ar atmosphere, no obvious SO2 emission was detected. During the same co-pyrolysis way, the calorific values of YQ chars under Ar atmosphere are higher than those under CO2 atmosphere. The trend of total release amount of sulfur-containing gases is: indirect layer-separated co-pyrolysis > direct mixed co-pyrolysis > single-pyrolysis. This indicates that H2, CO, CH4 or a small amount of hydrocarbons resulting from biomass decomposition can promote more sulfurs to decompose. But, biomass oil or black carbon from biomass pyrolysis can prohibit the release of sulfur-containing gases. Thus, this study can provide the detailed information about the effects of different co-pyrolysis ways on sulfur transformation of coals under different atmospheres.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bai X, Ding H, Lian J, Ma D, Yang X, Sun N, Xue W, Chang Y. Coal production in China: past, present, and future projections. Int Geol Rev. 2017;60:535–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Squalli J. Renewable energy, coal as a baseload power source, and greenhouse gas emissions: evidence from U.S. state-level data. Energy. 2017;127:479–88.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Jia Z, Lin B. How to achieve the first step of the carbon-neutrality 2060 target in China: the coal substitution perspective. Energy. 2021;233:0360–5442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Guo H, Fu Q, Zhang L, Liu F, Hu Y, Zhang H, Hu R. Sulfur K-edge XAS study of sulfur transformation behavior during pyrolysis and co-pyrolysis of biomass and coals under difffferent atmospheres. Fuel. 2018;234:1322–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Liu Q, Hu H, Zhou Q, Zhu S, Chen G. Understanding energy efficiency and its drivers: an empirical analysis of China’s 14 coal intensive industries. Energy. 2019;190:0360–5442.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Liu L, Fei J, Cui M, Hu Y, Wang J. XANES spectroscopic study of sulfur transformations during co-pyrolysis of a calcium-rich lignite and a high-sulfur bituminous coal. Fuel Process Technol. 2014;121:56–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Melikoglu M. Clean coal technologies: a global to local review for Turkey. Energ Strat Rev. 2018;22:313–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Wang C, Liu H, Zhang Y, Zou C, Edward J, Anthony. Review of arsenic behavior during coal combustion: volatilization, transformation, emission and removal technologies. Prog Energy Combust Sci. 2018;68:1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhao Y, Xing W, Lu W, Zhang X, Thomas H, Christensen. Environmental impact assessment of the incineration of municipal solid waste with auxiliary coal in China. Waste Manag. 2012;32:1989–98.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sebastian C, Peter. Reduction of CO2 to chemicals and fuels: a solution to global warming and energy crisis. ACS Energy Lett. 2018;3:1557–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Spörl R, Maier J, Scheffffknecht G. Sulphur oxide emissions from dust-fifired oxy-fuel combustion of coal. Energy Procedia. 2013;37:1435–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Antar M, Lyu D, Nazari M, Shah A, Zhou X, Smith DL. Biomass for a sustainable bioeconomy: an overview of world biomass production and utilization. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2021;139:1364–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Toklu E. Biomass energy potential and utilization in Turkey. Renew Energy. 2017;107:235–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Haykiri-Acma H, Yaman S. Interaction between biomass and different rank coals during co-pyrolysis. Renew Energy. 2010;35:288–92.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Wu Z, Yang W, Li Y, Yang B. Co-pyrolysis behavior of microalgae biomass and low-quality coal: products distributions, char-surface morphology, and synergistic effects. Biores Technol. 2018;255:238–45.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Wang X, Guo H, Liu F, Hu R, Wang M. Effects of CO2 on sulfur removal and its release behavior during coal pyrolysis. Fuel. 2016;165:484–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Yang N, Guo H, Liu F, Zhang H, Hu Y, Hu R. Effects of atmospheres on sulfur release and its transformation behavior during coal thermolysis. Fuel. 2018;215:446–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Wang B, Zhao S, Huang Y, Zhang J. Effect of some natural minerals on transformation behavior of sulfur during pyrolysis of coal and biomass. J Anal Appl Pyrol. 2014;105:284–94.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Masnadi M, Habibi R, Kopyscinski J, Hill J, Bi X, Jim Lim C, Ellis N, Grace J. Fuel characterization and co-pyrolysis kinetics of biomass and fossil fuels. Fuel. 2014;117:1204–14.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Salema AA, Ting RMW, Shang YK. Pyrolysis of blend (oil palm biomass and sawdust) biomass using TG-MS. Bioresour Technol. 2019;274:439–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Qin Y, Han Q, Zhao Z, Du Z, Feng J, Li W, Vassilev S, Vassileva C. Impact of biomass addition on organic structure and mineral matter of char during coal-biomass co-gasifification under CO2 atmosphere. Fuel. 2017;202:556–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Idris S, Rahman N, Ismail K, Alias A, Rashid Z, Aris M. Investigation on thermochemical behaviour of low rank Malaysian coal, oil palm biomass and their blends during pyrolysis via thermogravimetric analysis (TGA). Biores Technol. 2010;101:4584–92.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Moghtaderi B, Meesri C, Wall T. Pyrolytic characteristics of blended coal and woody biomass. Fuel. 2004;83:745–50.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Corderoa T, Rodrı´guez-Mirasola J, Pastranaa J, Rodrı´guezb J. Improved solid fuels from co-pyrolysis of a high-sulphur content coal and different lignocellulosic wastes. Fuel. 2004;83:1585–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Liu L, Liu H, Cui M, Hu Y, Wang J. Calcium-promoted catalytic activity of potassium carbonate for steam gasification of coal char: transformation of sulfur. Fuel. 2013;112:687–94.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Zhang J, Wang M, Chen W, et al. Effects of step acid treatment process on the structure and pyrolysis characteristics of Ximeng brown coal: formation of gaseous products. J Fuel Chem Technol. 2013;41(10):1160–5.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Accolla FV, Orr WL. Pyrite removal from Kerogen without altering organic matter: the chromous chloride method. Energy Fuel. 1993;7(3):406–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Shirazi AR, Börtin O, Eklund L, Lindqvist O. The impact of mineral matter in coal on its combustion, and a new approach to the determination of the calorific value of coal. Fuel. 1995;74:247–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Mason DM, Gandhi KN. Formulas for calculating the calorific value of coal and coal chars: development, tests, and uses. Fuel. 1983;7:11–2.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was financially supported by the Project of Natural Science Foundation of China (No.21865018) and the Project of Natural Science Foundation of Inner Mongolia (No. 2019MS02001).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Xuelei He and Huiqing Guo contributed equally to this work and should be considered co-first authors.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Key Lab of Coal Chemistry in Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Inner Mongolia University, Hohhot, 010021, China

    Xuelei He, Hao Liu, Yanqiu Lei & Fenrong Liu

  2. School of Pharmaceutical Science, Inner Mongolia Medical University, Hohhot, 010110, China

    Huiqing Guo

Authors
  1. Xuelei He
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Huiqing Guo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hao Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yanqiu Lei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Fenrong Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

XH performed the experimental results, data curation, writing—original draft. YL contributed to data curation and formal analysis. HG was involved in formal analysis, editing, and funding acquisition. HL contributed to formal analysis. FL was involved in formal analysis, funding acquisition, resources, supervision, writing—original draft, and editing.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Yanqiu Lei or Fenrong Liu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

He, X., Guo, H., Liu, H. et al. Effects of different co-pyrolysis ways on sulfur transformation of coals under different atmospheres. J Therm Anal Calorim 148, 4345–4358 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-023-11958-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-023-11958-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation