School for Engineering of Matter, Transport and Energy, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, 85287, United States.
School for Engineering of Matter, Transport and Energy, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, 85287, United States.
J Colloid Interface Sci. 2020 Apr 1;565:131-141. doi: 10.1016/j.jcis.2020.01.008. Epub 2020 Jan 8.
Many adsorbents with outstanding methane (CH)/nitrogen (N) separation performance are reported recently. Some may have the potential for coalbed methane (CBM) recovery to resolve the current energy crisis. However, no systematic assessment method for evaluating these adsorbents is available. This study was performed for efficient comparison and assessment of 47 novel adsorbents that are suitable for CBM recovery and to guide further adsorbent development with a three-step simulation-based method. First, the adsorbents of interest were prescreened based on the CH/N adsorption selectivity predicted from the ideal adsorption solution theory and a composite parameter S that incorporates both adsorption selectivity and working capacity. Then, the top 10 adsorbents from the prescreening step were tested in a simulated vacuum pressure swing adsorption process. The process performance of the adsorbents was evaluated by comparing their product purity, recovery and productivity at two base conditions. It was observed that Cu-MOF and NAPC-3-6 exhibited the highest product purity and OAC-1 showed the highest product recovery and productivity at the two base cases. The process performance indicators of various adsorbents were also correlated with their adsorption selectivities and capacities to investigate how these adsorption characteristics would affect the process performance. We find that the working capacities of the adsorbents are highly related with the product recovery while the adsorption selectivities are more related with the product purity. Finally, a process optimization study was performed employing the three adsorbents that exhibited the best performance in the previous evaluation. The objective of the optimization is to minimize the energy consumption of the process while meeting specified product purity (95% or 98%) and recovery rate (90%). The decision variables include the evacuation pressure, feed flow rate and adsorption pressure. The sensitivity of each variable was also examined through a parametric study. The optimization results indicate that the adsorbent selection will depend on the production scale and purity requirement. OAC-1 is the best candidate for a large scale CH production with a regular purity grade while NAPC-3-6 is a better choice for a small scale CH production with high purity requirement.
最近报道了许多具有出色甲烷(CH)/氮(N)分离性能的吸附剂。其中一些可能具有从煤层气(CBM)回收中解决当前能源危机的潜力。然而,目前还没有用于评估这些吸附剂的系统评估方法。本研究采用基于三步模拟的方法,对 47 种适合 CBM 回收的新型吸附剂进行了有效的比较和评估,以指导进一步的吸附剂开发。首先,根据理想吸附溶液理论和包含吸附选择性和工作容量的综合参数 S 预测的 CH/N 吸附选择性,对感兴趣的吸附剂进行预筛选。然后,在模拟真空变压吸附过程中对预筛选步骤中的前 10 种吸附剂进行测试。通过比较两种基础条件下的产品纯度、回收率和生产率来评估吸附剂的工艺性能。结果表明,在两种基础条件下,Cu-MOF 和 NAPC-3-6 表现出最高的产品纯度,OAC-1 表现出最高的产品回收率和生产率。还将各种吸附剂的工艺性能指标与其吸附选择性和容量相关联,以研究这些吸附特性如何影响工艺性能。我们发现,吸附剂的工作容量与产品回收率高度相关,而吸附选择性与产品纯度更相关。最后,对在前一次评估中表现出最佳性能的三种吸附剂进行了工艺优化研究。优化的目标是在满足指定产品纯度(95%或 98%)和回收率(90%)的情况下,最小化工艺的能耗。决策变量包括抽空压力、进料流量和吸附压力。还通过参数研究检查了每个变量的敏感性。优化结果表明,吸附剂的选择将取决于生产规模和纯度要求。对于常规纯度等级的大规模 CH 生产,OAC-1 是最佳选择,而对于高纯度要求的小规模 CH 生产,NAPC-3-6 是更好的选择。