Characteristics of as‐prepared biochar derived from catalytic pyrolysis within moderate‐temperature ionic liquid for <scp>CO<sub>2</sub></scp> uptake
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A promising biochar as solid adsorbent for CO2 uptake was prepared by the catalytic pyrolysis of coconut shell in moderate‐temperature ionic liquid (IL). Then, it was characterized by means of SEM, EDS, BPEA, BET, NLDFT, FTIR, and TG‐DSC, and a mechanism interpretation of the porous biochar formation was conducted. In addition, the adsorption characteristics of CO2 on the as‐prepared biochar, such as adsorption capacity, adsorption potential, isosteric heat, and static selectivity at different adsorption temperatures and pressures, were systematically evaluated. The results indicated that the as‐prepared biochar exhibited an adequate CO2 adsorption with a capacity of 4.5 mmol/g at 273 K and 100 kPa. Then, a significant number of slit‐like pores were revealed to exist on the as‐prepared biochar with a peak pore size between a range of 0.6 nm‐2 nm. The porous structure formation was ascribed to the release of carbon‐, hydrogen‐, oxygen‐, sulphur‐, and nitrogen‐containing compounds during biochar preparation. Meanwhile, both the adsorption potential and isosteric heat of the CO2 uptake under the tested conditions decreased with an increase in the adsorption capacity, which ranged from 33 kJ/mol‐21 kJ/mol and 23 kJ/mol‐7 kJ/mol, respectively. Therefore, the isosteric heat could be considered as a piecewise function of adsorption capacity. In addition, the molar ratios of CO2 over N2 adsorbed under the tested conditions were above 11 and were accompanied by molar ratio peaks of 26 at 273 K and 19 at 298 K, respectively. Moreover, an interesting phenomenon occurred: the static adsorptive selectivity of CO2 over N2 first increased and then decreased and there was an increase in the adsorption pressure at the tested adsorption temperatures.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".