Catalytic treatment of crude algal bio-oil in supercritical water: optimization studies
Abstract
We have investigated the catalytic treatment of a crude algal liquefaction bio-oil in supercritical water to discover how the properties of the treated oil depend on the experimental conditions. An L9 (34) orthogonal array design (OAD) with four factors at three levels was employed. The four factors were temperature (varied from 430–530 °C), time (varied from 2–6 h), catalyst type (Pt/C, Mo2C, HZSM-5), and catalyst loading (varied from 5–20 wt%). We used a direct analysis to determine the relationship between experimental conditions and properties of treated oils. The oil properties we examined were elemental composition, atomic ratios, chemical composition, and higher heating value. Of the four factors, the 100 °C variation in temperature was always the most influential for each of the oil properties examined. Of the remaining three factors, catalyst type had the greatest influence on the fatty acid content of the treated oil and the fraction of N- and O-containing compounds in the oil. Catalyst loading had the greatest effect on the higher heating value and O/C ratio in the treated oil. Reaction time had the greatest effect on the H/C and N/C ratios. The results demonstrated that treatment in supercritical water at 430 °C led to roughly a halving of the N and O content of the oil, a reduction in S to below detection limits, and about a 10% improvement in the higher heating value of the bio-oil. Within the parameter space investigated, the conditions leading to the highest content of saturated compounds in the treated oil are 430 °C, 6 h, with a 10 wt% loading of Mo2C as the catalyst. Around 76 wt% of the carbon in the feedstock was retained in the treated oil at these conditions.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Savage P. E. and Duan P. G. are strongly related due to other papers elaborated in co-authorship.
“Moreover, both authors are strongly related due to other papers elaborated in co-authorship [49–52] as shown in Fig. 5”
From Research Progress, Trends, and Future Prospects on Hydrothermal Liquefaction of Algae for Biocrude Production: A Bibliometric Analysis (2024) · cites this paper as [51]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 27 · Cited by 172
- Authors
- Duan, P., & Savage, P. E.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Corresponding author
- Savage, Phillip E.
- Venue
- Energy & Environmental Science
- Publisher
- Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
- Published
- 2011
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1447
- ISSN
- 1754-5692 (ISSN-L)
- 1754-5706
- OpenAlex
- W2081026966
- Cited by
- 172
- References
- 27
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 6.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Energy & Environmental Science (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Michigan
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Subcritical and Supercritical Water Processes
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Thermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Catalysis and Hydrodesulfurization Studies
- Keywords
- supercritical water treatment, catalytic upgrading, Mo2C catalyst, Pt/C catalyst, HZSM-5 zeolite, catalyst loading, reaction temperature, higher heating value, fatty acid content, elemental composition, process optimization
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review