Pilot-Scale Study of CO<sub>2</sub> Capture by CaO-Based Sorbents in the Presence of Steam and SO<sub>2</sub>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Calcium looping cycles require an oxy-fired calciner burning coal for sorbent regeneration. Thus, in addition to O 2 and CO 2, the flue gases will include both steam and SO 2, and similarly, carbonation of real flue gases will occur in the presence of steam. However, to date, most research has been done without either of these two gaseous components present. Here, batch combustion experiments were performed in a pilot-scale fluidized-bed reactor to study the effects of steam and SO 2 addition on CO 2 capture by limestone-based sorbents calcined under oxygen-enriched air and oxy-fuel conditions. The initial fast kinetically controlled CO 2 capture stage was dramatically reduced when the sorbent was calcined at realistic temperatures in the presence of SO 2 . This is attributed to both greater sintering due to higher local calcination temperatures required by high CO 2 concentrations and CaSO 4 formation. By contrast, steam in the synthetic flue gas during carbonation extended the initial, high-efficiency CO 2 capture period compared with that observed during carbonation with dry synthetic flue gases. A comparison between pilot-scale fluidized-bed combustion (FBC) and thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) results showed that sorbent reactivity was considerably lower during pilot-scale FBC testing, as anticipated given the higher calcination temperatures employed in the FBC reactor and the presence of the other feed gases. The enhanced CO 2 capture efficiency in FBC reactors with steam present was also confirmed by TGA tests. These results are important because they demonstrate how sorbent deactivation effects seen in realistic FBC calcium-looping operation can be successfully reduced by the presence of steam in the carbonator.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".