Synergistic Effects of Catalyst Mixtures on Biomass Catalytic Pyrolysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper studied the synergistic effects of catalyst mixtures on biomass catalytic pyrolysis in comparison with the single catalyst in a microwave reactor and a TGA. In general, positive synergistic effects were identified based on increased mass loss rate, reduced activation energy, and improved bio-oil quality compared to the case with a single catalyst at higher catalyst loads. 10KP/10Bento (a mixture of 10% K3PO4 and 10% bentonite) increased the mass loss rate by 85 and 45% at heating rates of 100 and 25°C/min, respectively, compared to switchgrass without catalyst. The activation energy for 10KP/10Bento and 10KP/10Clino (a mixture of 10% K3PO4 and 10% clinoptilolite) was slightly lower or similar to other catalysts at 30 wt.% load. The reduction in the activation energy by the catalyst mixture was higher at 100°C/min than 25°C/min due to the improved catalytic activity at higher heating rates. Synergistic effects are also reflected in the improved properties of bio-oil, as acids, aldehydes, and anhydrosugars were significantly decreased, whereas phenol and aromatic compounds were substantially increased. 30KP (30% K3PO4) and 10KP/10Bento increased the content of alkylated phenols by 341 and 207%, respectively, in comparison with switchgrass without catalyst. Finally, the use of catalyst mixtures improved the catalytic performance markedly, which shows the potential to reduce the production cost of bio-oil and biochar from microwave catalytic pyrolysis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".