Pyrolysis technologies for pomegranate (Punica granatum L.) peel wastes. Prospects in the bioenergy sector
An unpublished low-cost industrial biomass waste, pomegranate peel, as alternative and sustainable fuel source was studied. A horizontal tubular furnace of original design for conventional and flash pyrolysis was carried out. The bio-char yields from both processes were similar, but the bio-oil and...
| Autores: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión aceptada para publicación |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2019 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC) |
| Repositorio: | DIGITAL.CSIC. Repositorio Institucional del CSIC |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:digital.csic.es:10261/175173 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10261/175173 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Bio-char Bio-fuels Conventional pyrolysis Flash pyrolysis Industrial biomass waste Pomegranate peels |
| Sumario: | An unpublished low-cost industrial biomass waste, pomegranate peel, as alternative and sustainable fuel source was studied. A horizontal tubular furnace of original design for conventional and flash pyrolysis was carried out. The bio-char yields from both processes were similar, but the bio-oil and bio-gas yields were higher in flash pyrolysis, depending on the temperature. The bio-char obtained show that it could be used as a fuel (higher heating values ≥ 28.0 MJ/kg) and as a potential precursor of activated carbon. It was also found that the lower temperature of the flash pyrolysis was, the greater the bio-oil yield (∼53%) and that the higher was, the greater the biogas yield (∼50%). The bio-oil from conventional pyrolysis has a predominantly furanic nature and contained significant amounts of the phenols and benzenes. In contrast, the bio-oil from flash pyrolysis is similar to that of “anthracene oil”, both of them being composed mainly of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. The bio-gas obtained by flash pyrolysis is of a higher quality than that obtained by conventional pyrolysis because it has a lower CO2 content (32.4% vs 66.6%) and higher syngas content (CO + H2) (50.8% vs 26.8%). Flash pyrolysis is better in CH4 production (11.6% vs 4.6%). |
|---|