Liquid-phase sulfur recovery within a eutectic solvent coupled with low temperature carbon disulfide hydrolysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Liquid phase sulfur recovery was explored in a eutectic solvent to demonstrate proof-of-concept for an alternative Claus tail gas cleanup process. A simulated tail gas feed containing 3% H 2 S and 1.5% SO 2 was converted to elemental sulfur within a biphenyl and diphenyl ether eutectic solvent. The formed sulfur accumulates at the bottom of the reactor upon solvent saturation, allowing for liquid–liquid separation if the temperature is maintained above 120 °C. Alternatively, crystallization of elemental sulfur could be performed with lower sulfur solubility in the solvent at room temperature. In the temperature range of 120 – 150 °C, a Claus equilibrium conversion of > 99% was achieved when care was taken to maintain the H 2 S/SO 2 ratio at 2:1. While lower temperature favours Claus equilibrium, destruction of other sulfur containing species such as CS 2 often suffers at these lower temperatures. Therefore, CS 2 destruction was explored within the eutectic solvent over both alumina and titania catalysts, which are commonly used in commercial applications. Good conversions were observed for both alumina and titania when maintaining the H 2 S/SO 2 ratio at 2:1. Better CS 2 conversions of 95% (over alumina) and 98% (over titania) were observed at 150 °C when operating at an H 2 S/SO 2 ratio at 2.3:1. The total sulfur conversions, when assuming theoretical equilibrium conversion in the sulfur recovery unit, combined with the liquid-phase tail gas cleanup process ranged from 99.3 to 99.9%. Addition of water to the feed negatively affected the CS 2 destruction on titania but had little effect on alumina. At sulfur saturation conditions, CS 2 destruction was not affected on titania, but was negatively affected on alumina at 150 °C.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".