Cargando…
Comparison of CO(2) Separation Efficiency from Flue Gases Based on Commonly Used Methods and Materials
The comparison study of CO(2) removal efficiency from flue gases at low pressures and temperatures is presented, based on commonly used methods and materials. Our own experimental results were compared and analyzed for different methods of CO(2) removal from flue gases: absorption in a packed column...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8780194/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35057178 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15020460 |
_version_ | 1784637777343676416 |
---|---|
author | Ziobrowski, Zenon Rotkegel, Adam |
author_facet | Ziobrowski, Zenon Rotkegel, Adam |
author_sort | Ziobrowski, Zenon |
collection | PubMed |
description | The comparison study of CO(2) removal efficiency from flue gases at low pressures and temperatures is presented, based on commonly used methods and materials. Our own experimental results were compared and analyzed for different methods of CO(2) removal from flue gases: absorption in a packed column, adsorption in a packed column and membrane separation on polymeric and ceramic membranes, as well as on the developed supported ionic liquid membranes (SILMs). The efficiency and competitiveness comparison of the investigated methods showed that SILMs obtained by coating of the polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) membrane with 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium acetate ([Emim][Ac]) exhibit a high ideal CO(2)/N(2) selectivity of 152, permeability of 2400 barrer and long term stability. Inexpensive and selective SILMs were prepared applying commercial membranes. Under similar experimental conditions, the absorption in aqueous Monoethanolamine (MEA) solutions is much faster than in ionic liquids (ILs), but gas and liquid flow rates in packed column sprayed with IL are limited due to the much higher viscosity and lower diffusion coefficient of IL. For CO(2) adsorption on activated carbons impregnated with amine or IL, only a small improvement in the adsorption properties was achieved. The experimental research was compared with the literature data to find a feasible solution based on commercially available methods and materials. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8780194 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87801942022-01-22 Comparison of CO(2) Separation Efficiency from Flue Gases Based on Commonly Used Methods and Materials Ziobrowski, Zenon Rotkegel, Adam Materials (Basel) Article The comparison study of CO(2) removal efficiency from flue gases at low pressures and temperatures is presented, based on commonly used methods and materials. Our own experimental results were compared and analyzed for different methods of CO(2) removal from flue gases: absorption in a packed column, adsorption in a packed column and membrane separation on polymeric and ceramic membranes, as well as on the developed supported ionic liquid membranes (SILMs). The efficiency and competitiveness comparison of the investigated methods showed that SILMs obtained by coating of the polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) membrane with 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium acetate ([Emim][Ac]) exhibit a high ideal CO(2)/N(2) selectivity of 152, permeability of 2400 barrer and long term stability. Inexpensive and selective SILMs were prepared applying commercial membranes. Under similar experimental conditions, the absorption in aqueous Monoethanolamine (MEA) solutions is much faster than in ionic liquids (ILs), but gas and liquid flow rates in packed column sprayed with IL are limited due to the much higher viscosity and lower diffusion coefficient of IL. For CO(2) adsorption on activated carbons impregnated with amine or IL, only a small improvement in the adsorption properties was achieved. The experimental research was compared with the literature data to find a feasible solution based on commercially available methods and materials. MDPI 2022-01-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8780194/ /pubmed/35057178 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15020460 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Ziobrowski, Zenon Rotkegel, Adam Comparison of CO(2) Separation Efficiency from Flue Gases Based on Commonly Used Methods and Materials |
title | Comparison of CO(2) Separation Efficiency from Flue Gases Based on Commonly Used Methods and Materials |
title_full | Comparison of CO(2) Separation Efficiency from Flue Gases Based on Commonly Used Methods and Materials |
title_fullStr | Comparison of CO(2) Separation Efficiency from Flue Gases Based on Commonly Used Methods and Materials |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of CO(2) Separation Efficiency from Flue Gases Based on Commonly Used Methods and Materials |
title_short | Comparison of CO(2) Separation Efficiency from Flue Gases Based on Commonly Used Methods and Materials |
title_sort | comparison of co(2) separation efficiency from flue gases based on commonly used methods and materials |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8780194/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35057178 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15020460 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ziobrowskizenon comparisonofco2separationefficiencyfromfluegasesbasedoncommonlyusedmethodsandmaterials AT rotkegeladam comparisonofco2separationefficiencyfromfluegasesbasedoncommonlyusedmethodsandmaterials |