A comparative study of aromatic content in pyrolysis oils from waste plastics and tires: Assessing common refinery methods
Identifikátory výsledku
Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI
<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F60461373%3A22320%2F24%3A43928963" target="_blank" >RIV/60461373:22320/24:43928963 - isvavai.cz</a>
Výsledek na webu
<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016236124008627" target="_blank" >https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016236124008627</a>
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2024.131714" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.fuel.2024.131714</a>
Alternativní jazyky
Jazyk výsledku
angličtina
Název v původním jazyce
A comparative study of aromatic content in pyrolysis oils from waste plastics and tires: Assessing common refinery methods
Popis výsledku v původním jazyce
The conversion of waste plastics and tires via pyrolysis to pyrolysis oil represents one of the most promising ways of chemical recycling. Determining aromatics in pyrolysis oils from these feedstocks is crucial for their utilization as both petrochemicals and fuels. In this study, we compared three standard methods commonly available in refinery laboratories (ASTM D1319 − FIA, EN12916 − HPLC-RI, ASTM D8396 − GC × GC-FID) for analyzing aromatic content across a wide range of waste plastic pyrolysis oils, their middle distillate fractions, and hydrotreated products. Using model compounds, we explained most of the observed differences in aromatic content determined by these methods. HPLC-RI and FIA resulted in significant errors. For instance, the FIA reports some dienes and heterocompounds as aromatics. The results from HPLC-RI showed that monoaromatics are overestimated, while polyaromatics are underestimated. Among the tested methods, GC × GC-FID provided the most reliable results. © 2024 The Author(s)
Název v anglickém jazyce
A comparative study of aromatic content in pyrolysis oils from waste plastics and tires: Assessing common refinery methods
Popis výsledku anglicky
The conversion of waste plastics and tires via pyrolysis to pyrolysis oil represents one of the most promising ways of chemical recycling. Determining aromatics in pyrolysis oils from these feedstocks is crucial for their utilization as both petrochemicals and fuels. In this study, we compared three standard methods commonly available in refinery laboratories (ASTM D1319 − FIA, EN12916 − HPLC-RI, ASTM D8396 − GC × GC-FID) for analyzing aromatic content across a wide range of waste plastic pyrolysis oils, their middle distillate fractions, and hydrotreated products. Using model compounds, we explained most of the observed differences in aromatic content determined by these methods. HPLC-RI and FIA resulted in significant errors. For instance, the FIA reports some dienes and heterocompounds as aromatics. The results from HPLC-RI showed that monoaromatics are overestimated, while polyaromatics are underestimated. Among the tested methods, GC × GC-FID provided the most reliable results. © 2024 The Author(s)
Klasifikace
Druh
J<sub>imp</sub> - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science
CEP obor
—
OECD FORD obor
20704 - Energy and fuels
Návaznosti výsledku
Projekt
—
Návaznosti
S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach<br>I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace
Ostatní
Rok uplatnění
2024
Kód důvěrnosti údajů
S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů
Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku
Název periodika
Fuel
ISSN
0016-2361
e-ISSN
—
Svazek periodika
369
Číslo periodika v rámci svazku
1st August
Stát vydavatele periodika
US - Spojené státy americké
Počet stran výsledku
10
Strana od-do
131714
Kód UT WoS článku
001232389500001
EID výsledku v databázi Scopus
2-s2.0-85190752603