Skip to main content
NCBI home page
ACS Omega logoLink to ACS Omega
. 2023 Nov 3;8(45):43000–43007. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.3c06226

Effect of Reaction Parameters on CO2 Absorption from Biogas Using CaO Sorbent Prepared from Waste Chicken Eggshell

Taslima Akter †, Rahim Abdur †, Mohammad Shahinuzzaman †, Mohammad Shah Jamal †, Mohammad Abdul Gafur ‡, Swapan Kumer Roy §, Shahin Aziz §, Md Aftab Ali Shaikh ∥,⊥, Mosharof Hossain †,*
PMCID: PMC10652361  PMID: 38024727

Abstract

graphic file with name ao3c06226_0011.jpg

This study provides an efficient and straightforward approach to eliminate carbon dioxide (CO2) by absorption using a calcium oxide (CaO) sorbent derived from chicken eggshells. The sorbent concentration, stirring speed, and contact time were varied. The optimal condition for CO2 removal was a 10% calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)2) suspension at 600 rpm with 20 min interaction. This optimum condition conferred the ever-highest absorption (98.71%) of CO2 through Ca(OH)2 suspensions from eggshell-derived CaO. X-ray diffraction was used to identify crystallographic phases and optimum conditions revealed calcium carbonate (CaCO3) formation with the highest intensity, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy revealed peaks for the carbonate (CO32–) group, field emission scanning electron microscopy was used to investigate the morphological and structural properties of the sorbent before and after CO2 absorption, and thermogravimetric analysis was performed to understand the reaction mechanism. According to the kinetic analysis, the sorbent can be fully decomposed with a minimum activation energy (Ea) of 89.09 kJ/mol.

1. Introduction

In recent years, global warming caused by the release of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide (CO2), has become a major global concern. The massive volume of CO2 emissions adds more than 60% to global warming.1−3 Moreover, as the global population continues to expand, it is anticipated that energy demand will skyrocket.4 Burning fossil fuels to meet this demand has released large amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, escalating global warming. Continual efforts are being made to control the magnitude of forthcoming climatic changes caused by rising greenhouse gas emissions, but there are no fruitful results.5,6 In addition, the Copenhagen Agreement stipulates that by 2100, the global temperature increase should not exceed 2 °C above preindustrial levels. The International Energy Agency (IEA) has emphasized the need to meet the 2 °C target. If left unchecked, rising temperatures will inevitably cause sea levels to rise, thereby increasing the likelihood of storms and floods. Therefore, measures must be taken to remove CO2 and protect against global warming.

Today, scientists worldwide consider carbon capture, storage, and utilization (CCSU) an attractive method for reducing CO2 emissions.7−9 It involves the capture, compression, transport, geological storage, and use of CO2 in various ways. Therefore, achievable and cost-effective carbon capture methods are urgently required. Pre- and postcombustion modes offer a variety of technical choices including adsorption, absorption, membrane separation, chemical looping combustion with and without oxygen decoupling, and cryogenic separations.10−12 The literature has shown that water scrubbing uses a large amount of water, making it unworkable in places with a lack of water, and the membrane cost is higher with the membrane separation method, which operates at a higher working pressure (25–40 bar). The operating conditions of cryogenic separation are −100 °C and 40 bar, which are exceptionally challenging to meet.13 Among contemporary carbon capture technologies, absorption is the most technologically developed and has been widely used on a commercial scale for years.14,15

Absorption is the process of bringing a substance into contact with a solvent for separation, either physically or chemically. Physical absorption is the process of absorbing gas into a liquid without a chemical reaction.3,16 In contrast, a chemical reaction occurs when gas is absorbed into a solvent via chemical absorption.17,18 An efficient absorption requires a large surface area for mass transfer in the absorbent.19,20 A sorbent is also considered economically desirable if it has low energy requirements, is easily regenerated, has no adverse environmental effects, and is cost-effective.21

In recent years, numerous researchers have investigated the use of solid waste as sorbents.22,23 Interest in clean technology has also attracted the use of solid waste (eggshells) as a focus of research.24−26 Eggshells are a virtuous source of calcium oxide (CaO), which has a very good ability to capture CO2.27,28 The eggshells contain approximately 90% calcium carbonate (CaCO3) that is converted to CaO by calcination. Furthermore, eggshells are a biodegradable organic waste material that is safe for the environment, of low cost, and can be easily regenerated. Yolanda et al. showed that calcium hydroxide (Ca(OH)2) is suitable for a flexible CO2 capture system for backup power plants.29 This author also reported that Ca(OH)2 is sufficient for CO2 capturing from the ambient at room temperature.30 Han et al. revealed that Ca(OH)2 aqueous solution was appropriate for CO2 capture from a highly concentrated CO2 gas mixture.31 Considering all of these factors, the absorption process and eggshell-derived CaO are the best for CO2 reduction.

In this study, a chemical absorption approach using CaO derived from chicken eggshells was used as a sorbent to remove CO2. The sorbent concentration, absorption time, and stirring speed were measured at room temperature. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first approach to use CaO derived from eggshells to absorb the CO2 from Biogas.

2. Experimental Section

2.1. Materials

For the experiments, a CaO sorbent was prepared in the laboratory from discarded chicken eggshells collected from a local restaurant in Dhanmondi, Dhaka, Bangladesh. Biogas supplied from the biogas plant at the Institute of Fuel Research and Development, Bangladesh Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, Dhaka, Bangladesh was used as the source of CO2. Deionized (DI) water was used to prepare all of the solutions.

2.2. Methods

The experiments were conducted at the laboratory scale. The setup is divided into three sections: sorbent preparation, absorption, and analysis.

2.2.1. Calcium Oxide (CaO) Sorbent Preparation

Waste chicken eggshells were first washed with normal tap water and then with DI water to remove any dirt and impurities. The eggshell was dried in an electric oven (Memmert, UN 55) at 105 °C for 8 h. Then, the eggshell was ground into a fine powder using a blender and passed through a sieve. The sieved powder was then placed in a muffle furnace (Carbolite Gero, 30–3000 °C) and heated to 900 °C at a rate of 20 °C min–1 before being calcined for 5 h.32

2.2.2. Carbon Dioxide Absorption

The experiment was performed batchwise with respect to the absorption phase. Figure 1 represents the schematic diagram of the experimental setup. A 200 mL aliquot of simulated biogas (source of CO2) was pumped into the gas balloon, and the analysis was performed using a portable gas analyzer (Geotech Biogas 5000), Geotechnical Instruments Ltd. (UK). It was then introduced into the absorption flask for further observation. 200 mL of the biogas was used for each cycle of the experiment. The raw gas collection balloon and CO2 absorption flask were connected by a 5 mm diameter and a 300 mm long hose pipe. To achieve the desired results, the chemical absorption method employed an aqueous chemical solution or suspension in which CaO was converted into Ca(OH)2 using DI water.33 The chemical reaction between CaO, water, and CO2 is exothermic and increases moisture content.34 When CaO was mixed with water, it produced a Ca(OH)2 suspension according to the following reaction:

2.2.2. 1
Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Schematic diagram of the experimental setup for CO2 capture.

When exposed to a CO2 source, the Ca(OH)2 suspension reacts with CO2, resulting in the formation of CaCO3, as shown in the following reaction:

2.2.2. 2

To inspect the effects of each parameter (contact time, concentration, and stirring speed), 27 experiments were carried out. The temperature was set at 24 °C (room temperature). The contact times were set to 10, 20, and 30 min. The stirring speeds were chosen to be 400, 600, and 800 rpm for the different experiments. Every experiment was performed in triplicate.

2.3. Sorbent Characterization

At the end of the experimental run of the absorption process, the sorbent from each run was filtered. The sorbent sample was then oven-dried at 105 °C for 8 h and stored in a glass vial. Each sample was characterized by using various techniques. Crystallographic information was obtained using powder X-ray diffraction (XRD; Bruker D8 Advance, Germany) (Cu Kα radiation, λ = 0.15406 nm, 40 kV and 60 mA, scanning range of 10°–60° at the rate of 10°/min) to determine crystalline phases. A Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR; Frontier, PerkinElmer, UK) study was performed to characterize various surface functionalities in the samples with wavenumbers ranging from 400 to 4000 cm–1. The surface morphology of CaO was observed using field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM; JSM-7610F, JEOL, Japan) with an accelerating voltage of 15 kV, and elemental composition was observed by energy-dispersive X-ray analysis (EDX). Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA; TG/DTA6300, Japan) was used to determine the thermal stability of the sample and the reaction kinetics for the formation of CaCO3 using the Arrhenius equation by monitoring the weight change that occurred as the sample was heated at a constant rate.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Effect of Contact Time and Concentration of Sorbent on CO2 Removal

The interaction time between the sorbent and CO2 was found to play an important role in the removal of CO2. From Figure 2, it can be seen that CO2 reference (CO2 in raw biogas) contained 38.61 ± 0.24% CO2, and after 20 min absorption at 600 rpm, the remaining CO2 was 0.73 ± 0.06, 0.53 ± 0.06, and 2.60 ± 0.17% for 5, 10, and 15% sorbent concentrations, respectively. Analysis data show that the concentration of CO2 was drastically reduced with the 5, 10, and 15% sorbent suspensions by increasing the contact time with constant stirring. The maximum absorption percentage was 98.71%.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Effect of contact time (10, 20, and 30 min) and sorbent concentration (5, 10, and 15%) on the removal of CO2 from biogas using CaO sorbent at 600 rotational speed including raw biogas CO2 data.

However, the analyzer data in Figure 2 show that increasing the absorbent concentration from 5 to 10% improves the removal efficiency by increasing the driving force of the reaction. Here, raw biogas contained 38.61 ± 0.24% CO2, and after using 10% suspension at different contact times, the remaining CO2 was 4.20 ± 0.20, 0.53 ± 0.06, and 1.30 ± 0.26%, respectively. At a 10% concentration, the absorption of CO2 reached its highest point of 98.71%. However, after further increasing the absorbent concentration (15%), the absorption capacity decreased. This may be because of the presence of excess absorbent particles, which tend to flocculate and hinder the absorption process. When the excess solute particle stands in the way of gas molecules, the tortuosity of the diffusion path is increased and reduces the self-diffusion coefficient, resulting in the reduction of the absorption of the gas phase.35,36

3.2. Effect of the Stirring Speed on CO2 Removal

The influence of the stirring rate on the removal of CO2 was investigated (Figure 3). It can be seen that the rate of CO2 absorption appeared to be quite high, up to 600 rpm, and then decreased to 800 rpm. In the case of 600 rpm with 5, 10, and 15% sorbent concentration, the remaining CO2 was 0.33 ± 0.06, 0.10 ± 0.01, and 0.17 ± 0.06%, respectively whereas the raw biogas contained 38.61 ± 0.24% CO2. The experiment demonstrated that the stirring rate had a significant effect on the CO2 removal. The rate of gas absorption in a gas–liquid absorption reaction is determined by the reactor dimensions, geometry, number of impellers, and stirring speed.37,38 The diffusional domain, which requires a large interfacial area, has a direct effect on the absorption rate. Swirling in a stirred reactor facilitates gas diffusion into the liquid phase. To prevent disruption of the planar surface, the agitation speeds were kept relatively low. It was discovered that increasing the stirring speed boosted the CO2 absorption to a certain level before decreasing it. This was due to a decrease in the thickness of the liquid layer, which was responsible for the resistance to the mass transfer of CO2 gas molecules.36

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

Effect of the rotational speed (400, 600, and 800 rpm) on CO2 removal from biogas using different concentrations (5, 10, and 15%) of CaO sorbent at 20 min contact time.

3.3. Characterization of the Sorbent

3.3.1. XRD Analysis

The XRD patterns of the calcined eggshell, raw chicken eggshell powder, and treated samples are presented in Figure 4, and there is a noticeable contrast between them, with sharp peaks at 2θ values of 32.15°, 37.29°, and 53.82° indexed to the (111), (200), and (220) planes, respectively, for cubic CaO (JCPDS card number: 37-1497) (indicated with a black diamond shape in Figure 4). Raw eggshell powder exhibited sharp peaks at 2θ values of 22.50°, 29.33°, 35.96°, 39.42°, 43.40°, 47.15°, 49.17°, and 57.40° which could be indexed to the (012), (104), (110), (113), (202), (024), (116), and (122) planes of rhombohedral CaCO3 (indicated with a black dot shape in Figure 4) (JCPDS card number 72-1652).39 The treated samples (c), (d), and (e) showed peaks at 2θ values of 18.03°, 28.62°, 34.02°, 47.02°, 50.67°, 54.21°, 56.26°, and 59.50°, which can be indexed to hexagonal Ca(OH)2 planes (001), (100), (011), (012), (110), (111), (003), and (200) (JCPDS card number: 84-1264), respectively (indicated with a black heart shape in Figure 4). After observing all these peaks, it is clear that although every treated sample provided absorption evidence, the (d) sample showed a sharp peak at 29.33° for the (104) plane of CaCO3 and the best absorption of CO2.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

XRD pattern of the calcined eggshell (a), raw chicken eggshell (b), and CaO sorbent with 10% suspension and 20 min absorption time at three different rotational speeds: 400 (c), 600 (d), and 800 rpm (e).

3.3.2. FTIR Spectroscopy

The FTIR spectra of CaO (a), raw chicken eggshell powder (b), and treated samples 400 rpm (c), 600 rpm (d), and 800 rpm (e) were obtained by preparing pellets using KBr at room temperature, and the spectra were recorded at 400–4000 cm–1. The FTIR spectra, considering the optimum contact time, concentration variation, and rotation speed, are presented in Figure 5. The broad bands at 3652 and 3148 cm–1 can be attributed to the O–H stretching of Ca(OH)2. The tiny peak at 2518 cm–1 may be due to the CO2 stretching vibration. CaCO3, on the other hand, showed peaks at 1794 and 1460 cm–1 which were attributed to the CO32– group, indicating CaO carbonation. The spectra showed bands at 1073 and 862 cm–1, matching the mono- and bidentate carbonate vibration modes, respectively. The strong bands at 524 and 416 cm–1 can be identified as the vibrations of the Ca–O.40,41 The intensity of the CO32– peak increased at a 600 rpm rotational speed and then decreased at 800 rpm.

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

FTIR spectrum of CaO (a), raw chicken eggshell (b), and CaO sorbent with 10% suspension and 20 min absorption time at three different rotational speeds: 400 (c), 600 (d), and 800 rpm (e).

3.3.3. FESEM Analysis

The surface morphologies of the calcined eggshell and treated sorbents were investigated by FESEM and are presented in Figure 6. The surface of the calcined eggshell (Figure 6a) had a nonporous and irregular grain structure with an average grain size of 600–900 nm. However, the sorbents after treatment with the optimum concentration and contact time (10% concentration and 20 min contact time) exhibited a variety of grain sizes and shapes at different stirring rates, covering almost the entire surface of the prepared sorbents. The sorbents at 400 rpm (Figure 6b) also showed almost the same grain size with a few small particles. This may have been due to the formation of CaCO3. At a stirring rate of 600 rpm, the FESEM image (Figure 6c) shows the agglomeration of small particles with an 80–120 nm average grain size. This may have been due to the maximum conversion of CaO to CaCO3. A further increase in the stirring speed (800 rpm) decreased the absorption of CO2 onto the CaO sorbents. The increased stirring speed may influence the accumulation of CO2 on the surface of the absorbent.

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Open in a new tab

FESEM image for CaO (a) and CaO sorbent with 10% suspension and 20 min absorption time at three different rotational speeds: 400 (b), 600 (c), and 800 rpm (d).

3.3.4. EDX Analysis

The EDX analysis revealed the elemental composition of the treated sorbents (Figure 7). The weight percentage of carbon (C), oxygen (O), and calcium (Ca) was investigated, which was varied for each sample. The maximum C weight percentage was observed at the 600 rpm stirring speed (Figure 7d), indicating the maximum formation of CaCO3. Which indicated the maximum absorption capacity of CaO at that condition. Therefore, stirring speed is an important regulator that maximizes the absorption of CO2.

Figure 7.

Figure 7

Open in a new tab

EDX analysis of CaO sorbent with 10% suspension and 20 min absorption time at three different rotational speeds: 400 (a), 600 (b), and 800 rpm (c) and atomic weight percent of elements of these samples (d).

3.3.5. TG Analysis

TGA is an analytical method that measures the mass loss of a sample over time as the temperature varies. It can be used to analyze the thermal durability and composition of a material. The TGA curve of the sorbent after the absorption of CO2 with a molecular weight of 100 amu (atomic mass units) is shown in Figures 8 and 9. Figure 8a represents the raw eggshell TGA curve. A 2.5% mass loss was observed from 32 to 380 °C temperature, which is due to the moisture removal from the waste eggshell powder. Moreover, 1.6% mass loss was also observed from 380 to 606 °C temperature, which may be due to the hydroxide removal from the eggshell, and then up to 864 °C breakdown of CaCO3 occurred, and it gives exactly 41.6% mass loss. On the other hand, Figure 8b illustrates the raw CaO TGA peak. A 1.2% weight loss was found from 37 to 376 °C temperature, which may be due to the removal of moisture content from the ambient environment. However, 22.2% mass loss was observed from 376 to 475 °C temperature, which caused the breakdown of hydroxide in the sample. Moreover, a 3.3% mass loss was found for the breakdown of CaCO3 from 475 to 755 °C.

Figure 8.

Figure 8

Open in a new tab

TGA of CaO (a) and raw eggshell powder (b).

Figure 9.

Figure 9

Open in a new tab

TGA of CaO sorbent after absorption with 10% suspension and 20 min absorption time at three different rotational speeds: 400 (a), 600 (b), and 800 rpm (c).

The sorbent underwent thermal breakdown at temperatures above 400 °C, resulting in the formation of CaO and CO2 (Figure 9).42,43 Once the entire sample underwent the breakdown reaction, the solid-phase CaO remained on the weighing balance, providing a final reading of approximately 73 amu (i.e., once the temperature reached 800 °C). In this study, the TGA of CaCO3 samples after absorption reactions under optimal absorbent concentration and reaction time (10% concentration and 20 min time) with stirring rates of 400, 600, and 800 rpm were evaluated. In all cases, the sorbent started to decompose at approximately 430 °C and was converted to CaO and CO2 at temperatures above 700 °C. In sample (a), there was an initial mass loss of water molecules at 250–390 °C. Ca(OH)2 decomposed to CaO and CO2 at temperatures ranging from 429.1 to 475.5 °C. CaCO3 then decomposes until the temperature reaches 708.8 °C.44 The sorbent obtained from the reaction at a stirring rate of 600 rpm started to decompose at 429 °C. At 429–753 °C, decomposing Ca(OH)2 resulted in 17.0% weight loss and 8.2% weight loss for CaCO3. On the other hand, sample (c) initially absorbs moisture and gains some weight and then again starts to lose weight at 433.3 °C. Ca(OH)2 decomposes to CaO at 433.3–475.5 °C; however, CaCO3 does not decompose completely until the temperature reaches 800 °C. The decomposition rates in accordance with the temperature change are shown in Table 1. TGA data revealed that the maximum amount of CaCO3 was decomposed from the sample in the reaction at 600 rpm, indicating the formation of maximum CaCO3 which means maximum CO2 absorption.

Table 1. Percentage Mass Loss for Thermal Decomposition of Calcium Carbonate Obtained from Three Different Stirring Rates with 10% Suspension and 20 min Absorption Time.
  400 rpm 600 rpm 800 rpm
temperature range (°C) 429.1–475.5 475.1–708.8 429–475 475–753 433.3–475.5 475.5–800
weight loss (%) 23.0 3.1 17.0 8.2 20.8 4
total weight loss (%) 26.1 25.2 24.8
Open in a new tab

3.3.6. Reaction Kinetics for the Formation of CaCO3

To establish kinetic parameters, the study considers a first-order reaction, which includes the two-stage decomposition rate of the materials. The following kinetic equation (eq 3) was examined for heat deterioration, which is a simple differentiation of the first-order reaction. The carbonation rates of Ca(OH)2 were higher than those of CaO, particularly at temperatures above 400 °C. In addition, as described by eq 3, it is believed that the reaction proceeds through the formation of an interface of water molecules or OH̅ ions at the solid surface and is controlled by an inherent chemical reaction that occurs only on the surface that is not covered by CaCO3.45,46

3.3.6. 3

where k1 and k2 represent proportionality constants and n represents the reaction order. Assuming that the carbonation reaction is of zero order for the CO2 partial pressure,46,47 the temperature dependence of k1 was calculated by applying the Arrhenius law described in eq 4. Figure 10 shows the Arrhenius diagram for k1.

3.3.6. 4

where k represents rate constants, Ea is the activation energy, R is the molar gas constant, and T is the temperature in Kelvin.

Figure 10.

Figure 10

Open in a new tab

Arrhenius plot, Log k (Cel/min) against 1/Temp (1000/K), to calculate the activation energy (Ea) for the carbonation of Ca(OH)2 at different regression factors: 10 (a), 20 (b), 30 (c), 40 (d), 50 (e), 60 (f), 70 (g), 80 (h), and 90% (i).

The apparent activation energy and frequency factors obtained by linear regression are given in Table 2.

Table 2. Calculated Activation Energy (Ea) Using Arrhenius Plot at Different Regression Factors (R. F.).
no. R. F. (%) Ea (kJ/mol) TG (%)
1 10 199.07 97.67
2 20 167.71 95.27
3 30 149.63 92.88
4 40 138.15 90.49
5 50 129.69 88.09
6 60 122.15 85.70
7 70 111.44 83.30
8 80 89.10 80.91
9 90 153.49 78.52
Open in a new tab

The data indicate that deterioration at a 10% regression factor (R. F.) occurred at an activation energy of 199.07 kJ/mol, resulting in a weight loss of 2.34%. With an activation energy of 153.48 kJ/mol at the maximum regression factor, 21.49% of the weight was lost. At an R. F. of 80%, the lowest activation energy of 89.09 kJ/mol was required to degrade 19.09% of the sample.

4. Conclusions

Eggshell-derived CaO has been successfully used as an environmentally friendly alternative and an effective CO2 sorbent. Additional characterization was conducted to determine the morphological suitability of the material for the CO2 absorption applications. The XRD diffractogram revealed rhombohedral-phase CaCO3 for raw chicken eggshell powder and cubic-phase CaO for calcined chicken eggshell powder. On the other hand, the treated samples showed a combination of hexagonal-phased Ca(OH)2 and rhombohedral-phased CaCO3, indicating the carbonation of the sorbents. The FTIR spectrum revealed the O–H group and the CO32– group. The intensity of the CO32– peak increased at 600 rpm and then decreased at 800 rpm. A nonporous and irregular grain structure with an average grain size of 600–900 nm was observed for the calcined eggshell using FESEM. In the case of a stirring rate of 600 rpm, the FESEM image showed the agglomeration of small particles with 80–120 nm. Finally, TGA data revealed that the maximum amount of CaCO3 was decomposed from the sample in the reaction at 600 rpm. The experimental results illustrated that the sorbent concentration, reaction time, and stirring speed played significant roles in the CO2 removal efficiency. The highest performance of the CaO sorbent as an absorber is achieved when the concentration of the solvent used is 10% with a stirring speed of 600 rpm and a contact time of 20 min. The kinetic study confirmed that a minimum of 89.09 kJ/mol was required to decompose 19.09% of the absorbent sample. As a result, the developed technology may be a good approach for managing the massive amount of eggshells as kitchen waste as well as a good absorbent for global CO2 mitigation.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful for their assistance with Md. Ashraful Islam, Scientific Officer, and Md. Farid Ahmed, Scientific Officer, Institute of Glass and Ceramic Research and Testing, BCSIR, Dhaka-1205, Bangladesh. The authors declare that this manuscript was prepared under the R&D project of “Reduction of CO2 Gas Emissions Using Solid Waste Derived Catalytic Sorbent” and a Special Allocation Project under the Ministry of Science and Technology of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh (SRG-223443).

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: M.H.; methodology: M.H., T.A.; experimental work: T.A., M.S., A.G., S.K.R.; data curation: T.A., R.A., M.S.; formal analysis: T.A., R.A., M.S.; writing the main manuscript: T.A., M.H.; reviewing the manuscript: S.A., M.A.A.S., M.S.J.; all authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

References

  1. Albo J.; Luis P.; Irabien A. Carbon Dioxide Capture from Flue Gases Using a Cross-Flow Membrane Contactor and the Ionic Liquid 1-Ethyl-3-Methylimidazolium Ethylsulfate. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2010, 49 (21), 11045–11051. 10.1021/ie1014266. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Yu C.-H.; Huang C.-H.; Tan C.-S. A Review of CO2 Capture by Absorption and Adsorption. Aerosol Air Qual. Res. 2012, 12 (5), 745–769. 10.4209/aaqr.2012.05.0132. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  3. Krótki A.; Więcław Solny L.; Stec M.; Spietz T.; Wilk A.; Chwoła T.; Jastrząb K. Experimental Results of Advanced Technological Modifications for a CO2 Capture Process Using Amine Scrubbing. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 2020, 96, 103014 10.1016/j.ijggc.2020.103014. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  4. Oh T. H. Carbon Capture and Storage Potential in Coal-Fired Plant in Malaysia—A Review. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 2010, 14 (9), 2697–2709. 10.1016/j.rser.2010.06.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  5. Sreedhar I.; Nahar T.; Venugopal A.; Srinivas B. Carbon Capture by Absorption – Path Covered and Ahead. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 2017, 76, 1080–1107. 10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.109. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Svendsen H. F.; Hessen E. T.; Mejdell T. Carbon Dioxide Capture by Absorption, Challenges and Possibilities. Chem. Eng. J. 2011, 171 (3), 718–724. 10.1016/j.cej.2011.01.014. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Maile O. I.; Muzenda E.; Tesfagiorgis H. Chemical Absorption of Carbon Dioxide in Biogas Purification. Procedia Manuf. 2017, 7, 639–646. 10.1016/j.promfg.2016.12.095. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. Iovane P.; Nanna F.; Ding Y.; Bikson B.; Molino A. Experimental Test with Polymeric Membrane for the Biogas Purification from CO2 and H2S. Fuel 2014, 135, 352–358. 10.1016/j.fuel.2014.06.060. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Muntaha N.; Rain M. I.; Goni L. K. M. O.; Shaikh M. A. A.; Jamal M. S.; Hossain M. A Review on Carbon Dioxide Minimization in Biogas Upgradation Technology by Chemical Absorption Processes. ACS Omega 2022, 7 (38), 33680–33698. 10.1021/acsomega.2c03514. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Rubin E. S.; Mantripragada H.; Marks A.; Versteeg P.; Kitchin J. The Outlook for Improved Carbon Capture Technology. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 2012, 38 (5), 630–671. 10.1016/j.pecs.2012.03.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Markewitz P.; Kuckshinrichs W.; Leitner W.; Linssen J.; Zapp P.; Bongartz R.; Schreiber A.; Müller T. E. Worldwide Innovations in the Development of Carbon Capture Technologies and the Utilization of CO2. Energy Environ. Sci. 2012, 5 (6), 7281. 10.1039/c2ee03403d. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  12. Yang H.; Xu Z.; Fan M.; Gupta R.; Slimane R. B.; Bland A. E.; Wright I. Progress in Carbon Dioxide Separation and Capture: A Review. J. Environ. Sci. 2008, 20 (1), 14–27. 10.1016/S1001-0742(08)60002-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Granite E. J.; O’Brien T. Review of Novel Methods for Carbon Dioxide Separation from Flue and Fuel Gases. Fuel Process. Technol. 2005, 86 (14–15), 1423–1434. 10.1016/j.fuproc.2005.01.001. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Yan S.; He Q.; Zhao S.; Zhai H.; Cao M.; Ai P. CO2 Removal from Biogas by Using Green Amino Acid Salts: Performance Evaluation. Fuel Process. Technol. 2015, 129, 203–212. 10.1016/j.fuproc.2014.09.019. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Srichat A.; Suntivarakorn R.; Kamwilaisak K. A Development of Biogas Purification System Using Calcium Hydroxide and Amine Solution. Energy Procedia 2017, 138, 441–445. 10.1016/j.egypro.2017.10.196. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Stolaroff J. K.; Keith D. W.; Lowry G. V. Carbon Dioxide Capture from Atmospheric Air Using Sodium Hydroxide Spray. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42 (8), 2728–2735. 10.1021/es702607w. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Ozturk F.; Keles M.; Evrendilek F. Quantifying Rates and Drivers of Change in Long-Term Sector- and Country-Specific Trends of Carbon Dioxide-Equivalent Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 2016, 65, 823–831. 10.1016/j.rser.2016.07.035. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  18. Ravanchi M. T.; Sahebdelfar S.; Zangeneh F. T. Carbon Dioxide Sequestration in Petrochemical Industries with the Aim of Reduction in Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Front. Chem. Sci. Eng. 2011, 5 (2), 173–178. 10.1007/s11705-010-0562-1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Andriani D.; Wresta A.; Atmaja T. D.; Saepudin A. A Review on Optimization Production and Upgrading Biogas Through CO2 Removal Using Various Techniques. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2014, 172 (4), 1909–1928. 10.1007/s12010-013-0652-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Hornbostel M. D.; Bao J.; Krishnan G.; Nagar A.; Jayaweera I.; Kobayashi T.; Sanjurjo A.; Sweeney J.; Carruthers D.; Petruska M. A.; Dubois L. Characteristics of an Advanced Carbon Sorbent for CO2 Capture. Carbon 2013, 56, 77–85. 10.1016/j.carbon.2012.12.082. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Liu J.; Baeyens J.; Deng Y.; Tan T.; Zhang H. The Chemical CO2 Capture by Carbonation-Decarbonation Cycles. J. Environ. Manage. 2020, 260, 110054 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.110054. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Yan S.; Fang M.; Zhang W.; Zhong W.; Luo Z.; Cen K. Comparative Analysis of CO2 Separation from Flue Gas by Membrane Gas Absorption Technology and Chemical Absorption Technology in China. Energy Convers. Manage. 2008, 49 (11), 3188–3197. 10.1016/j.enconman.2008.05.027. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Wang J.; Yang Y.; Jia Q.; Shi Y.; Guan Q.; Yang N.; Ning P.; Wang Q. Solid-Waste-Derived Carbon Dioxide-Capturing Materials. ChemSusChem 2019, 12 (10), 2055–2082. 10.1002/cssc.201802655. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Goeppert A.; Czaun M.; Surya Prakash G. K.; Olah G. A. Air as the Renewable Carbon Source of the Future: An Overview of CO2 Capture from the Atmosphere. Energy Environ. Sci. 2012, 5 (7), 7833. 10.1039/c2ee21586a. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  25. Ramanathan V.; Feng Y. Air Pollution, Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change: Global and Regional Perspectives. Atmos. Environ. 2009, 43 (1), 37–50. 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2008.09.063. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  26. Sjostrom S.; Krutka H. Evaluation of Solid Sorbents as a Retrofit Technology for CO2 Capture. Fuel 2010, 89 (6), 1298–1306. 10.1016/j.fuel.2009.11.019. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  27. Shan S.; Ma A.; Hu Y.; Jia Q.; Wang Y.; Peng J. Development of Sintering-Resistant CaO-Based Sorbent Derived from Eggshells and Bauxite Tailings for Cyclic CO2 Capture. Environ. Pollut. 2016, 208, 546–552. 10.1016/j.envpol.2015.10.028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Ruiz C.; Rincón L.; Contreras R. R.; Sidney C.; Almarza J. Sustainable and Negative Carbon Footprint Solid-Based NaOH Technology for CO2 Capture. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2020, 8 (51), 19003–19012. 10.1021/acssuschemeng.0c07093. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  29. Criado Y. A.; Arias B.; Abanades J. C. A Flexible CO2 Capture System for Backup Power Plants Using Ca(OH)2/CaCO3 Solid Storage. Sustainable Energy Fuels 2022, 7 (1), 122–130. 10.1039/D2SE01195F. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  30. Criado Y. A.; Abanades J. C. Carbonation Rates of Dry Ca(OH)2 Mortars for CO2 Capture Applications at Ambient Temperatures. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2022, 61 (40), 14804–14812. 10.1021/acs.iecr.2c01675. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Han S.-J.; Yoo M.; Kim D.-W.; Wee J.-H. Carbon Dioxide Capture Using Calcium Hydroxide Aqueous Solution as the Absorbent. Energy Fuels 2011, 25 (8), 3825–3834. 10.1021/ef200415p. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  32. Hossain M.; Muntaha N.; Osman Goni L. K. M.; Jamal M. S.; Gafur M. A.; Islam D.; Fakhruddin A. N. M. Triglyceride Conversion of Waste Frying Oil up to 98.46% Using Low Concentration K+/CaO Catalysts Derived from Eggshells. ACS Omega 2021, 6 (51), 35679–35691. 10.1021/acsomega.1c05582. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Vega F.; Baena-Moreno F. M.; Gallego Fernández L. M.; Portillo E.; Navarrete B.; Zhang Z. Current Status of CO2 Chemical Absorption Research Applied to CCS: Towards Full Deployment at Industrial Scale. Appl. Energy 2020, 260, 114313 10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114313. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  34. Gao N.; Śliz M.; Quan C.; Bieniek A.; Magdziarz A. Biomass CO2 Gasification with CaO Looping for Syngas Production in a Fixed-Bed Reactor. Renewable Energy 2021, 167, 652–661. 10.1016/j.renene.2020.11.134. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Torres Pineda I.; Lee J. W.; Jung I.; Kang Y. T. CO2 Absorption Enhancement by Methanol-Based Al2O3 and SiO2 Nanofluids in a Tray Column Absorber. Int. J. Refrig. 2012, 35 (5), 1402–1409. 10.1016/j.ijrefrig.2012.03.017. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  36. Lu S.; Song J.; Li Y.; Xing M.; He Q. Improvement of CO2 Absorption Using AL2O3 Nanofluids in a Stirred Thermostatic Reactor. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 2015, 93 (5), 935–941. 10.1002/cjce.22175. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  37. Inkeri E.; Tynjälä T.; Laari A.; Hyppänen T. Dynamic One-Dimensional Model for Biological Methanation in a Stirred Tank Reactor. Appl. Energy 2018, 209, 95–107. 10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.10.073. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  38. Chaudhary A.; Bhaskarwar A. N. Effect of Physical Properties of Synthesized Protic Ionic Liquid on Carbon Dioxide Absorption Rate. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023, 30 (4), 8429–8447. 10.1007/s11356-021-17154-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Habte L.; Shiferaw N.; Mulatu D.; Thenepalli T.; Chilakala R.; Ahn J. Synthesis of Nano-Calcium Oxide from Waste Eggshell by Sol-Gel Method. Sustainability 2019, 11 (11), 3196. 10.3390/su11113196. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  40. Mohadi R.; Sueb A.; Anggraini K.; Lesbani A. Calcium Oxide Catalyst Based on Quail Eggshell for Biodiesel Synthesis from Waste Palm Oil. J. Pure Appl. Chem. Res. 2018, 7 (2), 129–138. 10.21776/ub.jpacr.2018.007.02.390. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  41. Lesbani A.; Tamba P.; Mohadi R.; Fahmariyanti Preparation of Calcium Oxide from Achatina Fulica as Catalyst for Production of Biodiesel from Waste Cooking Oil. Indones. J. Chem. 2013, 13 (2), 176–180. 10.22146/ijc.21302. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  42. Mohamed M.; Yousuf S.; Maitra S. Decomposition Study of Calcium Carbonate in Cockle Shell. J. Eng. Sci. Technol. 2012, 7 (1), 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  43. Dollimore D.; Tong P.; Alexander K. S. The Kinetic Interpretation of the Decomposition of Calcium Carbonate by Use of Relationships Other than the Arrhenius Equation. Thermochim. Acta 1996, 282–283, 13–27. 10.1016/0040-6031(95)02810-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  44. Mirghiasi Z.; Bakhtiari F.; Darezereshki E.; Esmaeilzadeh E. Preparation and Characterization of CaO Nanoparticles from Ca(OH)2 by Direct Thermal Decomposition Method. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2014, 20 (1), 113–117. 10.1016/j.jiec.2013.04.018. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  45. Shi H.; Zhou Y.; Zuo Y.; Cui L.; Idem R.; Tontiwachwuthikul P. Heterogeneous Catalysis of CO2-Diethanolamine Absorption with MgCO3 and CaCO3 and Comparing to Non-Catalytic CO2-Monoethanolamine Interactions. React. Kinet. Mech. Catal. 2017, 122 (1), 539–555. 10.1007/s11144-017-1219-6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  46. Shih S.-M.; Ho C.-S.; Song Y.-S.; Lin J.-P. Kinetics of the Reaction of Ca(OH)2 with CO2 at Low Temperature. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 1999, 38 (4), 1316–1322. 10.1021/ie980508z. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Van Balen K. Carbonation Reaction of Lime, Kinetics at Ambient Temperature. Cem. Concr. Res. 2005, 35 (4), 647–657. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2004.06.020. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Articles from ACS Omega are provided here courtesy of American Chemical Society

RESOURCES