Qualitative and kinetic analysis of torrefaction of lignocellulosic biomass using DSC-TGA-FTIR
Open accessAbstract
Torrefaction is a thermochemical conversion technique to improve the fuel properties of lignocellulosic biomass by treating at temperature 200 ℃-300 ℃ in the minimum oxygen environment for a reasonable residence time. In this study, thermal decomposition and thermal activities of miscanthus and wheat straw during the torrefaction at 200 ℃, 275 ℃, and 300 ℃ in a nitrogen environment for 45 minutes of residence time are analyzed in a simultaneous thermogravimetric analyzer (micro TGA) with a differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), and a macro-TGA. The output of the micro TGA is fed into the Fourier transform infrared spectrometry (FTIR) and qualitative analysis of the gaseous product is carried out. The composition of different gas products during the torrefaction of biomass are compared critically and kinetics were analyzed. It is found that the weight loss due to degradation of initial biomass in second stage (torrefaction process) is a much faster conversion process than the weight loss process in the first stage (drying process). The weight loss of biomass increases with increase in the residence time and torrefaction treatment temperatures. The yield after torrefaction is a solid bio-coal product. The torrefied product were less reactive and has nearly 25% better heating value than the raw biomass. Between the two feedstocks studied, torrefied miscanthus proved to be a more stable fuel than the torrefied wheat straw. The major gaseous components observed during torrefaction are water, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, 1,2-Dibromethylene.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
Torrefied biomass is more reactive than raw biomass.
“Torrefied biomass is more reactive than raw biomass [54].”
From Thermal Analysis Technologies for Biomass Feedstocks: A State-of-the-Art Review (2021) · cites this paper as [54]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 17 · Cited by 19
- Authors
- Acharya, B., School of Engineering, U. O. G., R. Pradhan, R., & Dutta, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Guelph (CA)
- ORCID
- Dutta, Animesh
- Venue
- AIMS energy
- Published
- 2015
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 760-773
- ISSN
- 2333-8326 (ISSN-L)
- 2333-8334
- OpenAlex
- W2209508297
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 0.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- AIMS energy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Thermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
- Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Thermal and Kinetic Analysis
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Biofuel production and bioconversion
- Keywords
- torrefaction, lignocellulosic biomass, Miscanthus, wheat straw, thermal decomposition, gaseous products, calorific value, bio-coal, fuel stability
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