**Absorption of Carbon Dioxide in a Bubble-Column Scrubber**

Pao-Chi Chen

*Graduate School of Engineering Technology Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering Lunghwa University of Science and Technology Taiwan* 

#### **1. Introduction**

94 Greenhouse Gases – Capturing, Utilization and Reduction

EPA (2009). Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under

Hart, A. & Gnanendran, N. (2009). Cryogenic CO2 Capture in Natural Gas. *Greenhouse Gas* 

Houghton, J. T.; Jenkins, G. J. & Ephraums, J. J. (1990). *Climate Change*: (ed) The IPCC Scientific Assessment, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K. Hu, W. & Chakma, A. (1990). Modeling of Equilibrium Solubility of CO2 and H2S in

Judkins, R.; Fulkerson, W. & Sanghvi M.K. (1993). The Dilemma of Fossil Fuel Use and

Kohl, A. L. & Nielsen, R.B. (1997). *Gas Purification*. (5th edition). Gulf Professional

Masjedi, M.; Malek Afzali, H.; Saman Manesh, H.; Ahmadzadeh, Z. & Abdi A. (1998).

Merel, J.; Clausse, M. & Meunier, F. (2008). Experimental Investigation on CO2 Post-

Moradi, A. M.; Akhtarkavan, M.; Ghiasvand, J. & Akhtarkavan, H. (2008). Assessment of

NIOC (National Iranian Oil Company). (2011). CCS Technology, A Report from IOR

Pourjazaieri, S.; Zoveidavianpoor, M. & Shadizadeh, S. R. (2010). Simulation of an Amine-

Rinker, E.B.; Ashour, S. S. & Sandall, O.C. (2000). Absorption of Carbon Dioxide into

Veltman, K.; Singh, B. & Hertwich, E.G. (2010). Human and Environmental Impact

Webster, J.G. (1995). Chemical Impacts of Geothermal Development. In: Brown, K.L.

Zhang, P.; Shi, Y.; Wei, J. W.; Zhao, W. & Ye, Q. (2008). Regeneration of 2-Amino-2-Methyl-

Congress, IGA pre-congress course, Pisa, Italy; pp. (79-95)

Aqueous Diglycolamine (DGA) Solutions, *The Canadian journal of chemical* 

Global Climate Change. Energy and Fuels Vol.7, No.1, pp. (14 – 22), ISSN 0887-0624

Survey of Air Pollutants in Tehran, *Journal of Medical Council of Islamic Republic of* 

combustion Capture by Indirect Thermal Swing Adsorption Using 13x and 5a Zeolites. *Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research,* Vol. 47, No. 1, pp. (209–215),

Direct Adverse Impacts of Climate Change on Iran. *WSEAS International Conference on CULTURAL HERITAGE AND TOURISM (CUHT'08)*, Heraklion, Crete Island,

based CO2 Recovery Plant, Petroleum Science and Technology, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp.

Aqueous Blends of Diethanolamine and Methyldiethanolamine. *Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research*, Vol. 39, No. 11, pp. (4346-4356), ISSN 0888-5885 Roshan, Gh. R.; Khoshakh lagh, F.; Azizi, Gh. & Mohammadi H. (2011). Simulation of

Temperature Changes in Iran under the Atmosphere Carbon Dioxide Duplication Condition. *Iranian Journal of Environmental Health Science & Engineering* Vol. 8, No. 2,

Assessment of Postcombustion CO2 Capture Focusing on Emissions from Amine-Based Scrubbing Solvents to Air, *Environmental Science & Technology,* Vol. 44, No. 4,

(convenor), Environmental aspects of geothermal development. World Geothermal

1-Propanol used for carbon dioxide absorption. *Journal of Environmental Sciences.*

*Control Technol*., Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. (697–706), ISSN 1750-5836

*engineering*, Vol. 68, No.3, pp.(523-525), ISSN 0008-4034

Publishing, ISBN 0884152200, Houston, Texas.

*Iran*, Vol. 15, No. 4, pp. (155-62), ISSN 0254-4571

Greece, July 22-24, pp. (89-94) ISSN 1790-2769

ISSN 0888-5885

Research Institute.

(39-47), ISSN 1091-6466

pp. (139-152), ISSN 1735-1979

pp. (1496–1502), ISSN 0013-936X

Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. (39–44), ISSN 1001-0742

Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act, 210pp

In the current stage over 85% of world energy demand is supplied by fossil fuels. Coal-fired plants discharged roughly 40% of the total CO2 are the main contributors in CO2 emissions (Kim & Kim, 2004; Yang et al., 2008). Environmental issues caused by exhaust green house gases (GHG) and toxics have become global problems. Through the past studies of five decades, increased GHG levels in atmosphere is believed to cause global warming, in which CO2 is the largest contributors. International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts that the CO2 content in atmosphere may contain up to 570 ppmv CO2, causing an increase in mean global temperature around 1.9℃ and an increase mean sea level of 38m (Stewart & Hessami, 2005). Also accompanied is species extinction. Therefore, the importance of removing carbon dioxide from exhaust emissions has been recognized around the world. There are three options to reduce total emission into the atmosphere, i. e., to increase energy efficiency, to use renewable energy, and enhance the sequestration or removal of CO2. However, from the viewpoints of coal-fired plants discharged a lot amount of CO2-gas, CO2 gas needs to be removed from the flue gases of such point sources before direct sequestration. There are several processes for CO2 separation and capture processes, including post-combustion, pre-combustion, oxy-fuel processes, and chemical-looping combustion (Yang et al., 2008). In here, we focus on the treatment of post-combustion processes since they are typical coal-fired plants.

For the removal of exhaust CO2-gas, several methods have been proposed, such as chemical absorption, physical absorption, membrane separation, biochemical methods, and the catalytic conversion method. In addition to these methods, the absorption of carbon dioxide in an alkaline solution with crystallization has also been adopted to explore the removal of carbon dioxide from waste gas (Chen et al., 2008). This approach, with the production of carbonate by means of reactive crystallization, has been found to be effective. In order to remove of CO2 gas, several scrubbers were utilized, such as sieve tray column, packed bed column, rotating packed bed and bubble column. Therefore, how to choose an excellent scrubber becomes significant in the removal of CO2 gas from flue gas. The performances of the scrubbers were always estimated by using overall mass-transfer coefficient. Due to this, they found packed bed with structured packing (Aroonwilas & Tontiwachwuthiku, 1997)

Absorption of Carbon Dioxide in a Bubble-Column Scrubber 97

In this chapter, the materials include absorption models, determination of absorption rate, solution chemistry, determination of mass-transfer coefficients, and scrubbing factors of various scrubbers. Finally, how to estimate the size of bubble-column scrubber is also

When gas is blown through the liquid as a stream of bubbles, e. g., in a sparged vessel or on a bubble-plate; diffusion, convection, and reaction proceed simultaneously. A complicated system is formed during gas-liquid contact. Absorption accompanied with chemical reaction not only can enhance the absorption rate but also can reduce the height of scrubber (Levenspiel, 1998). Therefore, in absorption accompanied with chemical reaction system, chemical reaction kinetics play an important role on the overall rate of absorption process. There are eight special cases for the absorption with reaction processes; the absorption efficiency is dependent on fast reaction or slow reaction kinetics. In order to quantitatively evaluate the absorption rate, absorption model proposed is required. Four models are observed in the literature (Danckwerts, 1970; Sherwood et al., 1975); there are the film model, still surface model, surface-renewal model, and the penetration model. In here, a two-film model is introduced, since it is a more practical model for applications, as shown in Figure 1. The gas solute in bulk phase overcomes the resistance of gas film and moves to the gas-liquid interface; later, solute moves across the interface and overcomes the liquid film resistance and goes through the bulk liquid. At the interface the Henry's law is applied:

C KP i Hi (1)

where Ci is the concentration of solute at liquid side interface, Pi the partial pressure of solute at gas side interface, and *KH* the Henry's law constant. The two-film model is widely used in the literature. In here, the Henry's law constant is dependent on the ionic strength

Fig. 1. A schematic diagram for the two-film model.( Levenspiel, 1998)

discussed in this chapter.

**2. Absorption models** 

and temperature.

gives a higher overall mass-transfer coefficient as compared with other scrubbers. On the other hand, Chen et al. (2008) found that the performance of scrubber could be estimated by using scrubbing factor, a definition of removal of 1 mole CO2 gas per mole of absorbent and per liter of scrubber. In this manner, a bubble-column scrubber is the first choice.

In a bubble column, gas is often introduced near the bottom of the column. The liquid may flow through the column either with or against the gas flow. Investigations of bubblecolumns from the viewpoints of both environmental problems and industrial use can be found in the literature (Juvekar & Sharma, 1973; Sada et al*.*, 1985; Sauer & Hempel, 1987; Okawa et al*.*, 1999; Chen et al*.*, 2002; Hamid & Jones, 2002; Lapin et al., 2002). Bubble column reactors are widely used in the chemical, petrochemical, biochemical, and metallurgical industries (Degaleesan & Dudukovic, 1998). They were favored because of their simple construction, higher heat and mass transfer coefficients, higher removal efficiency, and effective control of the liquid residence time. In addition, bubble columns may be operated in either batch mode or continuous mode, depending on the requirements, as in processes such as liquid-phase methanol synthesis or continuous-mode Fisher-Tropsch synthesis with a liquid superficial velocity that is lower than the gas superficial velocity by at least an order of magnitude or more. In this manner, the gas flow controls the fluid dynamics of the individual phases of these systems. This in turn controls liquid mixing and inter-phase mass transfer, which subsequently influence conversion and selectivity.

In addition, some investigators (Sauer & Hempel, 1987; Hamid & Jones, 2002) have studied the dynamics, mass transfer, and control of the crystal size and shape of products for industrial purposes. However, these data cannot be utilized effectively. In gas-liquid reaction, the absorption mechanism is controlled by both the mass-transfer and chemical reaction steps, depending on the operating conditions. In order to describe the concentration distributions, several diffusion-with-chemical-reaction models have been proposed in the literature (Sherwood et al*.*, 1975; Shah, 1979; Fan, 1989; Cournil & Herri, 2003). In these reports, the chemical reaction kinetics in gas-liquid reactions was first order or second order, depending on the pH of the solution. However, in some systems the mass action equations were found to be very complicated, and in others, it was found that the pH had an effect on the species (Morel, 1983). Therefore, the absorption of gases was strongly affected by the pH of the solution. Thus, it is clear that controlling the pH of the solution is important for controlling the absorption rates of gases, since the ionic strength and, hence, Henry's constant are affected by the pH of the solution. Additionally, several gas-liquid absorption applications, such as desulfurization processes and the removal of carbon dioxide, involve small particles (Hudson and Rochelle, 1982; Saha and Bandyopadhyay, 1992; Chen et al*.*, 2002; Okawa et al*.*, 1999). However, some of the above papers reported that the size and concentration of solids affected the mass-transfer coefficient, while most studies found larger sizes at higher solid concentrations (Shah, 1979; Cournil & Herri, 2003). These masstransfer coefficient data cannot be used in absorption with reactive crystallization systems, such as gypsum and carbonates. Therefore, research on the effect of particles on the absorption processes is required. For design purposes, data for the hydrodynamics and mass-transfer coefficients in bubble columns is required (Bukur & Daly, 1987). In order to obtain the mass transfer coefficients in an alkaline solution with and without solids, a twofilm model was utilized to describe the absorption of carbon dioxide. The results are also compared here with those reported in the literature.

In this chapter, the materials include absorption models, determination of absorption rate, solution chemistry, determination of mass-transfer coefficients, and scrubbing factors of various scrubbers. Finally, how to estimate the size of bubble-column scrubber is also discussed in this chapter.

#### **2. Absorption models**

96 Greenhouse Gases – Capturing, Utilization and Reduction

gives a higher overall mass-transfer coefficient as compared with other scrubbers. On the other hand, Chen et al. (2008) found that the performance of scrubber could be estimated by using scrubbing factor, a definition of removal of 1 mole CO2 gas per mole of absorbent and

In a bubble column, gas is often introduced near the bottom of the column. The liquid may flow through the column either with or against the gas flow. Investigations of bubblecolumns from the viewpoints of both environmental problems and industrial use can be found in the literature (Juvekar & Sharma, 1973; Sada et al*.*, 1985; Sauer & Hempel, 1987; Okawa et al*.*, 1999; Chen et al*.*, 2002; Hamid & Jones, 2002; Lapin et al., 2002). Bubble column reactors are widely used in the chemical, petrochemical, biochemical, and metallurgical industries (Degaleesan & Dudukovic, 1998). They were favored because of their simple construction, higher heat and mass transfer coefficients, higher removal efficiency, and effective control of the liquid residence time. In addition, bubble columns may be operated in either batch mode or continuous mode, depending on the requirements, as in processes such as liquid-phase methanol synthesis or continuous-mode Fisher-Tropsch synthesis with a liquid superficial velocity that is lower than the gas superficial velocity by at least an order of magnitude or more. In this manner, the gas flow controls the fluid dynamics of the individual phases of these systems. This in turn controls liquid mixing and inter-phase mass

In addition, some investigators (Sauer & Hempel, 1987; Hamid & Jones, 2002) have studied the dynamics, mass transfer, and control of the crystal size and shape of products for industrial purposes. However, these data cannot be utilized effectively. In gas-liquid reaction, the absorption mechanism is controlled by both the mass-transfer and chemical reaction steps, depending on the operating conditions. In order to describe the concentration distributions, several diffusion-with-chemical-reaction models have been proposed in the literature (Sherwood et al*.*, 1975; Shah, 1979; Fan, 1989; Cournil & Herri, 2003). In these reports, the chemical reaction kinetics in gas-liquid reactions was first order or second order, depending on the pH of the solution. However, in some systems the mass action equations were found to be very complicated, and in others, it was found that the pH had an effect on the species (Morel, 1983). Therefore, the absorption of gases was strongly affected by the pH of the solution. Thus, it is clear that controlling the pH of the solution is important for controlling the absorption rates of gases, since the ionic strength and, hence, Henry's constant are affected by the pH of the solution. Additionally, several gas-liquid absorption applications, such as desulfurization processes and the removal of carbon dioxide, involve small particles (Hudson and Rochelle, 1982; Saha and Bandyopadhyay, 1992; Chen et al*.*, 2002; Okawa et al*.*, 1999). However, some of the above papers reported that the size and concentration of solids affected the mass-transfer coefficient, while most studies found larger sizes at higher solid concentrations (Shah, 1979; Cournil & Herri, 2003). These masstransfer coefficient data cannot be used in absorption with reactive crystallization systems, such as gypsum and carbonates. Therefore, research on the effect of particles on the absorption processes is required. For design purposes, data for the hydrodynamics and mass-transfer coefficients in bubble columns is required (Bukur & Daly, 1987). In order to obtain the mass transfer coefficients in an alkaline solution with and without solids, a twofilm model was utilized to describe the absorption of carbon dioxide. The results are also

per liter of scrubber. In this manner, a bubble-column scrubber is the first choice.

transfer, which subsequently influence conversion and selectivity.

compared here with those reported in the literature.

When gas is blown through the liquid as a stream of bubbles, e. g., in a sparged vessel or on a bubble-plate; diffusion, convection, and reaction proceed simultaneously. A complicated system is formed during gas-liquid contact. Absorption accompanied with chemical reaction not only can enhance the absorption rate but also can reduce the height of scrubber (Levenspiel, 1998). Therefore, in absorption accompanied with chemical reaction system, chemical reaction kinetics play an important role on the overall rate of absorption process. There are eight special cases for the absorption with reaction processes; the absorption efficiency is dependent on fast reaction or slow reaction kinetics. In order to quantitatively evaluate the absorption rate, absorption model proposed is required. Four models are observed in the literature (Danckwerts, 1970; Sherwood et al., 1975); there are the film model, still surface model, surface-renewal model, and the penetration model. In here, a two-film model is introduced, since it is a more practical model for applications, as shown in Figure 1. The gas solute in bulk phase overcomes the resistance of gas film and moves to the gas-liquid interface; later, solute moves across the interface and overcomes the liquid film resistance and goes through the bulk liquid. At the interface the Henry's law is applied:

$$\mathbf{C}\_{i} = \mathbf{K}\_{\text{H}} \mathbf{P}\_{i} \tag{1}$$

where Ci is the concentration of solute at liquid side interface, Pi the partial pressure of solute at gas side interface, and *KH* the Henry's law constant. The two-film model is widely used in the literature. In here, the Henry's law constant is dependent on the ionic strength and temperature.

Fig. 1. A schematic diagram for the two-film model.( Levenspiel, 1998)

Absorption of Carbon Dioxide in a Bubble-Column Scrubber 99

CO32-, respectively. It is found that α0 decreases with an increasing in pH on one hand and α2 increases with pH on the other hand, while α1 increases with an increasing in pH when the pH is less than 6 on one hand and it decreases with an increasing with pH when the pH is higher than 10 on the other hand. This indicates that the pH value could be adjusted to

the solution. This could be done with an addition of alkaline solution, such as NaOH solution, and acidic solution, such as HCl solution. In order to show the effect of alkaline

For the CO2-H2O-BaCl2 system with an addition of NaOH solution, there are a lot of

Na+, and ion pair BaCO30. Due to this, the mass action equations, total mass balance

(5)

(7)

(8)

(11)

(12)

TCl [Cl ] (13) TNa [Na ] (14)

From a given pH value and the total mass balance equations, mass action equations, and activity coefficient equations, the concentrations of chemical species can be obtained by using an ionic strength approximation method (Butler, 1964; Nancollas, 1966; Chen et al., 2004). Due to this, the ionic strength can be determined. The activity coefficients of electrolytes can be

> 2 2 2 <sup>1</sup> (0.06 0.6 ) log 0.511 1 (1 1.5 / )

*i i i*

 

(9)

(10)

]+4[CO32-] (15)

1 1

*I B I BI <sup>z</sup> I Iz z* (16)

\* CO (g) H O H CO 2 2 23 (6)

and CO3

, CO32-, H+, OH-

2-, presented in

and CO32-, an

, Ba2+, Cl-

,

desired value to control the chemical species, such as H2CO3\*, HCO3-

chemical species presented in the solution, such as H2CO3\*, HCO3-

example will be discussed later.

H O OH H <sup>2</sup>

\* H CO HCO H 23 3

<sup>2</sup> HCO CO H 3 3

o2 2 BaCO Ba CO 3 3

2 2 BaCO (s) Ba CO 3 3

2 o TBa [Ba ] [BaCO ] <sup>3</sup>

**Charge balance equation**  [H+]+4[Ba2+]+[Na+]=[OH-

**Total mass balance equations:** 

\* 20 TCO [H CO ] [HCO ] [CO ] [BaCO ] 23 3 3 3

]+[Cl-]+[HCO3-

Table 1. Mass action, total mass balance, and charge balance equations.

estimated from the Bromley correlation equation (Sohnel & Garside, 1992):

*i*

**Mass action equations:** ( Morel, 1983)

solution and chemical species on the concentrations of H2CO3\*, HCO3-

equations and charge balance equation are shown in Table 1, Eqs. (5)-(15).

#### **3. Solution chemistry in carbonate system**

When CO2 dissolves in water, it hydrates to form H2CO3. In basic solution, hydrated carbon dioxide ionizes to give hydrated protons [H+], bicarbonate ion [HCO3 -], and carbonate ion [CO2 2-]. The solution chemistry for CO2-H2O system is expressed in terms of Equations (2)- (4). In here, we will abbreviate [H2CO3]+[CO2] simply as [H2CO3 \*]. The total amount of dissolved carbonate increases with increasing pH because of the ionization equilibrium. In dilute solutions at 25℃, the ionization constants for Ka1 and Ka2 are approximately 10-6.3 and 10-16.3(Butler, 1982), respectively. The ionization constants depend on temperature and on the presence of other salts.

$$\text{CO}\_2(\text{g}) + \text{H}\_2\text{O} = \text{H}\_2\text{CO}\_3^\ast \tag{2}$$

$$\text{H}\_2\text{CO}\_3^\* = \text{H}^+ + \text{HCO}\_3^- \tag{3}$$

$$\rm{HCO}\_3^- = \rm{H}^+ + \rm{CO}\_3^{2-} \tag{4}$$

Figure 2 is a plot of degree of ionization (α)versus pH at 25℃. In here, the total amount of carbonate is the summation of all carbons including H2CO3 \*, HCO3 and CO32-.We express as CT. In addition, α0,α1, andα2 are the degree of ionization for species H2CO3\*, HCO3- and

Fig. 2. Ionization of carbon dioxide as a function of pH value \* 23 23 [H CO ] [H CO ] <sup>2</sup> [CO (aq)];α0+α1+α2=1α0=[H2CO3\*]/ CT; α1=[HCO3- ]/ CT; α2=[ CO32-]/ CT

When CO2 dissolves in water, it hydrates to form H2CO3. In basic solution, hydrated carbon

\* H CO H HCO 2 3 <sup>3</sup>

<sup>2</sup> HCO H CO 3 3

Figure 2 is a plot of degree of ionization (α)versus pH at 25℃. In here, the total amount of

CT. In addition, α0,α1, andα2 are the degree of ionization for species H2CO3\*, HCO3- and

2-]. The solution chemistry for CO2-H2O system is expressed in terms of Equations (2)- (4). In here, we will abbreviate [H2CO3]+[CO2] simply as [H2CO3\*]. The total amount of dissolved carbonate increases with increasing pH because of the ionization equilibrium. In dilute solutions at 25℃, the ionization constants for Ka1 and Ka2 are approximately 10-6.3 and 10-16.3(Butler, 1982), respectively. The ionization constants depend on temperature and on

\* CO ( 2 2 23 g) H O H CO (2)

\*, HCO3-

(3)

(4)

23 23 [H CO ] [H CO ]

]/ CT; α2=[ CO32-]/ CT


and CO32-.We express as

dioxide ionizes to give hydrated protons [H+], bicarbonate ion [HCO3

**3. Solution chemistry in carbonate system** 

carbonate is the summation of all carbons including H2CO3

Fig. 2. Ionization of carbon dioxide as a function of pH value \*

<sup>2</sup> [CO (aq)];α0+α1+α2=1α0=[H2CO3\*]/ CT; α1=[HCO3-

[CO2

the presence of other salts.

CO3 2-, respectively. It is found that α0 decreases with an increasing in pH on one hand and α2 increases with pH on the other hand, while α1 increases with an increasing in pH when the pH is less than 6 on one hand and it decreases with an increasing with pH when the pH is higher than 10 on the other hand. This indicates that the pH value could be adjusted to desired value to control the chemical species, such as H2CO3 \*, HCO3 and CO32-, presented in the solution. This could be done with an addition of alkaline solution, such as NaOH solution, and acidic solution, such as HCl solution. In order to show the effect of alkaline solution and chemical species on the concentrations of H2CO3 \*, HCO3 and CO32-, an example will be discussed later.

For the CO2-H2O-BaCl2 system with an addition of NaOH solution, there are a lot of chemical species presented in the solution, such as H2CO3\*, HCO3- , CO32-, H+, OH- , Ba2+, Cl- , Na+, and ion pair BaCO30. Due to this, the mass action equations, total mass balance equations and charge balance equation are shown in Table 1, Eqs. (5)-(15).


Table 1. Mass action, total mass balance, and charge balance equations.

From a given pH value and the total mass balance equations, mass action equations, and activity coefficient equations, the concentrations of chemical species can be obtained by using an ionic strength approximation method (Butler, 1964; Nancollas, 1966; Chen et al., 2004). Due to this, the ionic strength can be determined. The activity coefficients of electrolytes can be estimated from the Bromley correlation equation (Sohnel & Garside, 1992):

$$\frac{1}{z\_i^2} \log \gamma\_i = -0.511 \frac{\sqrt{I}}{1 + \sqrt{I}} + \frac{\left(0.06 + 0.6B\_1\right)I}{\left(1 + 1.5I \;/\ z\_i\right)^2} + \frac{B\_1 I}{z\_i^2} \tag{16}$$

Absorption of Carbon Dioxide in a Bubble-Column Scrubber 101

at the top. Two streams come into contact with in the column adversely. If we assume that nitrogen gas is essentially insoluble in the liquid phase and that liquid does not vaporize to the gas phase, the gas phase is a binary A-B. The absorption rate of carbon dioxide can be determined by using the material balance under steady state operation, as shown in Figure 3 for a multiple-tube plug-flow model. If we assume plug flow for the gas phase through the

> ( )0 *uC uC S r d z i Ai z i Ai z z i Ai i*

where *ui* is the linear velocity, *Si* the cross section of *i*th tube, *rAi* the absorption rate per unit area of the *i*th tube, and *di* the diameter of *i*th tube. For a total of *N* tubes the material

( )0

1 ( ) ( )0 

*Ai i*

*i*

*Ai i*

*r d*

( )0

() 0

*i i Ai z i Ai z z Ai i*

 *N*

1

where *FA* is the overall molar flow rate of the gas phase, which is equal to *uSC i i Ai* .

2

2 2 1 1

*Ai i Ai i*

*r dA r dA*

1 () 0 *N A A Ai i i*

 *N A*

*i dF r d*

2 2 1 1 1

1 2 <sup>1</sup>

where *Ai* is the lateral surface area of the *i*th tube. These equations can be rewritten as

2 1

*A*

*r*

*i*

 *N A Ai i i*

*dz* (25)

*dz* (26)

*dF r d dz* (27)

*F F r dA* (28)

1 2 ( )0 *F F rA AA A* . (29)

*dA <sup>A</sup>* (30)

*S uC uC r dz* (24)

(23)

tube, the material balance for carbon dioxide in the *i*th tube at steady state is

1 1

Equation (24) divided by Δ*z* and taken to the limit, *i.e*., Δ*z*→0, Equation (24) becomes

*i i Ai*

 

*i i*

*d uSC*

*N N*

balance becomes

Integrating Equation (26), we have

or

and

and

where *zi* is the charge number, *I* is the ionic strength and *B1* is composed of ionic contributions. This equation can be used to estimate activity coefficients in solutions of high ionic strength up to about 6 M. The ionic strength of a solution can be calculated with the following equation:

$$\begin{aligned} \text{I} &= \frac{1}{2} \sum \mathbf{z}\_i^2 \mathbf{C}\_i \\ &= \frac{1}{2} \Big( [\mathbf{H}^+] + 4[\mathbf{B}\mathbf{a}^{2+}] + [\mathbf{Na}^+] + [\mathbf{OH}^-] + [\mathbf{HCO}\_3^-] + 4[\mathbf{CO}\_3^{2-}] + [\mathbf{Cl}^-] \Big) \end{aligned} \tag{17}$$

For a bubble column, total chloride ion concentration (*TCl*) and total sodium ion concentration (*TNa*) can be determined from material balances, since chloride and sodium ions are both non-reacting components. At steady-state condition, the *TCl* and *TNa* can be evaluated as follows:

$$TCl = \frac{2Q\_1C\_1}{Q\_1 + Q\_2} \tag{18}$$

and

$$T\text{Na} = \frac{Q\_2 C\_2}{Q\_1 + Q\_2} \tag{19}$$

where Q1 and Q2 are volumetric flow rates for barium chloride solution and sodium hydroxide solution, respectively, C1 the feed concentration of chloride ion, and C2 the feed concentration of sodium ion.

Once the ionic strength is obtained, the Henry's law constant, defined in Equation (1), can be evaluated (Butler, 1982). For example, at a temperature of 30℃, Henry's law constant can be expressed as:

$$\mathbf{p} \mathbf{K}\_{\rm H} = \mathbf{1.53} + 0.1039 \mathbf{I} - 0.0148 \mathbf{I}^2 \tag{20}$$

Where *pKH* is defined as:

$$pK\_H = -\log K\_H \tag{21}$$

Sometime, Henry's law constant is defined as:

$$H = \frac{1}{K\_H RT} \tag{22}$$

The Henry's law constant, H, will be used in later.

#### **4. Determination of absorption rate at steady-state**

In a bubble column, for a simulated flue gas (CO2(N2)-H2O system), as shown in Figure 3, a gas mixture containing A (carbon dioxide) and B (nitrogen) flowing into a bubble column at the bottom comes into continuous contact with an alkaline solution flowing into the column at the top. Two streams come into contact with in the column adversely. If we assume that nitrogen gas is essentially insoluble in the liquid phase and that liquid does not vaporize to the gas phase, the gas phase is a binary A-B. The absorption rate of carbon dioxide can be determined by using the material balance under steady state operation, as shown in Figure 3 for a multiple-tube plug-flow model. If we assume plug flow for the gas phase through the tube, the material balance for carbon dioxide in the *i*th tube at steady state is

$$(\mu\_i \mathbb{C}\_{Ai} \left|\_z - \mu\_i \mathbb{C}\_{Ai} \left|\_{z+Az} \right. \right.) S\_i - r\_{Ai} \pi d\_i \Delta z = 0 \tag{23}$$

where *ui* is the linear velocity, *Si* the cross section of *i*th tube, *rAi* the absorption rate per unit area of the *i*th tube, and *di* the diameter of *i*th tube. For a total of *N* tubes the material balance becomes

$$\sum\_{i=1}^{N} \mathbf{S}\_i \{ \boldsymbol{u}\_i \mathbf{C}\_{Ai} \Big|\_{z} - \boldsymbol{u}\_i \mathbf{C}\_{Ai} \Big|\_{z + Az} \} - \sum\_{i=1}^{N} r\_{Ai} \pi d\_i Az = \mathbf{0} \tag{24}$$

Equation (24) divided by Δ*z* and taken to the limit, *i.e*., Δ*z*→0, Equation (24) becomes

$$-\frac{d(\sum \mu\_i S\_i \mathbb{C}\_{Ai})}{dz} - \sum\_{i=1}^{N} r\_{Ai}(\pi d\_i) = 0\tag{25}$$

or

100 Greenhouse Gases – Capturing, Utilization and Reduction

where *zi* is the charge number, *I* is the ionic strength and *B1* is composed of ionic contributions. This equation can be used to estimate activity coefficients in solutions of high ionic strength up to about 6 M. The ionic strength of a solution can be calculated with the

<sup>1</sup> [H ] 4[Ba ] [Na ] [OH ] [HCO ] 4[CO ] [Cl ] <sup>2</sup> 

For a bubble column, total chloride ion concentration (*TCl*) and total sodium ion concentration (*TNa*) can be determined from material balances, since chloride and sodium ions are both non-reacting components. At steady-state condition, the *TCl* and *TNa* can be

2 2

1 1 1 2 <sup>2</sup> *Q C TCl*

2 2 1 2 *Q C TNa*

where Q1 and Q2 are volumetric flow rates for barium chloride solution and sodium hydroxide solution, respectively, C1 the feed concentration of chloride ion, and C2 the feed

Once the ionic strength is obtained, the Henry's law constant, defined in Equation (1), can be evaluated (Butler, 1982). For example, at a temperature of 30℃, Henry's law constant can be

> <sup>1</sup> *H*

In a bubble column, for a simulated flue gas (CO2(N2)-H2O system), as shown in Figure 3, a gas mixture containing A (carbon dioxide) and B (nitrogen) flowing into a bubble column at the bottom comes into continuous contact with an alkaline solution flowing into the column

*H*

3 3

*Q Q* (18)

*Q Q* (19)

<sup>2</sup> pK 1.53 0.1039I 0.0148I <sup>H</sup> (20)

*pK K H H* log (21)

*K RT* (22)

(17)

following equation:

evaluated as follows:

concentration of sodium ion.

Where *pKH* is defined as:

Sometime, Henry's law constant is defined as:

The Henry's law constant, H, will be used in later.

**4. Determination of absorption rate at steady-state** 

expressed as:

and

2 i i

<sup>1</sup> I zC 2

$$-\frac{dF\_A}{dz} - \sum\_{i=1}^{N} r\_{Ai}(\pi d\_i) = 0\tag{26}$$

where *FA* is the overall molar flow rate of the gas phase, which is equal to *uSC i i Ai* . Integrating Equation (26), we have

$$-\int\_{1}^{2} dF\_A - \sum\_{i=1}^{N} \int\_{1}^{2} r\_{Ai}(\pi d\_i) dz = 0 \tag{27}$$

and

$$\left( \left( F\_{A1} - F\_{A2} \right) - \int\_{1}^{2} \sum\_{i=1}^{N} r\_{Ai} dA\_i = 0 \tag{28}$$

where *Ai* is the lateral surface area of the *i*th tube. These equations can be rewritten as

$$\left( (F\_{A1} - F\_{A2}) - \overline{r}\_A A = 0 \right) \tag{29}$$

and

$$\overline{r\_A} = \frac{\sum \int\_1^2 r\_{Ai} dA\_i}{\sum \int\_1^2 dA\_i} = \frac{\sum \int\_1^2 r\_{Ai} dA\_i}{A} \tag{30}$$

Absorption of Carbon Dioxide in a Bubble-Column Scrubber 103

increased with an increase in gas-flow rate as well as pH value. In addition, the absorption rate also increased obviously with an increase in gas concentration, y1, but was only slightly

> **pH=13.0 pH=12.5 pH=12.0**

**0 2 4 6 8 10**

**u(cm/s)**

According to a two-film model for CO2(N2)-H2O system, the relationship between local absorption rate, *rA*, and local individual mass-transfer coefficients based on both the gas-side

() *<sup>A</sup> <sup>G</sup> g g <sup>i</sup> r k aC C* (34)

at the interface *Cgi* =*HCLi*, where *H* is Henry's law constant defined in Equation (2). Combining Equation (34) and Equation (35) in terms of the overall mass-transfer coefficient,

where, CA and CLA are concentrations of CO2-gas in the gas-phase and liquid-phase, respectively. According to Equation (24), we assume plug flow for gas phase and wellmixed flow for liquid phase, the material balance equation between △z at steady state can be

*k aC C L Li L* ( ) (35)

*r K a C HC <sup>A</sup>* ( )( ) *G loc A LA* (36)

affected by liquid-flow rate.

**0E+0**

and liquid-side can be written as

the equation becomes

rewritten as:

Fig. 4. A plot of RA versus u at various pH values.

**5. Determination of mass-transfer coefficients** 

**2E-4**

**4E-4**

**6E-4**

**R (mol/s L)**

**A**

**8E-4**

**1E-3**

Fig. 3. A multiple-tube plug flow model.

where *Ar* is the mean absorption rate and *A* is the total surface area of the gas phase in the bubble column, which can not be obtained directly. Equation (29) shows that the absorption rate, *Ar A* , is equal to the consumption of carbon dioxide through the bubble column. This value can be determined by measuring the concentration of carbon dioxide and the gas-flow rate:

$$R\_A = \frac{F\_{A1} - F\_{A2}}{V\_L} = \frac{F\_{A1} - F\_{A2}}{\varepsilon\_L V\_b} \tag{31}$$

and

$$R\_A = \frac{\overline{r}\_A A}{V\_L} \tag{32}$$

where *VL* is the volume of the liquid phase, *Vb* the volume of the bubble column, and *ε<sup>L</sup>* is the hold-up of the liquid phase. Since the molar flow rate of inert gas is equal to *FA1*(1–*y1*)*/y1*, the molar flow rate of acidic gas at the outlet, *FA2*, is *FA1*[(1–*y1*)*/y1*][*y2*/(1–*y2*)]. Thus, Equation (31) can be rewritten as

$$R\_A = \frac{F\_{A1}}{V\_L} \left[ 1 - (\frac{1 - y\_1}{y\_1})(\frac{y\_2}{1 - y\_2}) \right] \tag{33}$$

Therefore, the overall absorption rate, *RA*, as defined by Cournil & Herri (2003), can be obtained with measurable quantities. Figure 4 exhibits the absorption rate versus gas-flow rate with precipitation at various pH values. The result shows that the absorption rate

where *Ar* is the mean absorption rate and *A* is the total surface area of the gas phase in the bubble column, which can not be obtained directly. Equation (29) shows that the absorption rate, *Ar A* , is equal to the consumption of carbon dioxide through the bubble column. This value can be determined by measuring the concentration of carbon dioxide and the gas-flow

> 12 12 *A A AA*

> > *<sup>A</sup> A*

where *VL* is the volume of the liquid phase, *Vb* the volume of the bubble column, and *ε<sup>L</sup>* is the hold-up of the liquid phase. Since the molar flow rate of inert gas is equal to *FA1*(1–*y1*)*/y1*, the molar flow rate of acidic gas at the outlet, *FA2*, is *FA1*[(1–*y1*)*/y1*][*y2*/(1–*y2*)]. Thus, Equation

1 1 2

Therefore, the overall absorption rate, *RA*, as defined by Cournil & Herri (2003), can be obtained with measurable quantities. Figure 4 exhibits the absorption rate versus gas-flow rate with precipitation at various pH values. The result shows that the absorption rate

*<sup>F</sup> y y <sup>R</sup>*

*A*

*L*

*A*

1 2 <sup>1</sup> 1 ( )( ) <sup>1</sup> 

*L r A <sup>R</sup>*

*FF FF <sup>R</sup>*

*L L b*

*V V* (31)

*V yy* (33)

*V* (32)

*A*

Fig. 3. A multiple-tube plug flow model.

rate:

and

(31) can be rewritten as

increased with an increase in gas-flow rate as well as pH value. In addition, the absorption rate also increased obviously with an increase in gas concentration, y1, but was only slightly affected by liquid-flow rate.

Fig. 4. A plot of RA versus u at various pH values.

#### **5. Determination of mass-transfer coefficients**

According to a two-film model for CO2(N2)-H2O system, the relationship between local absorption rate, *rA*, and local individual mass-transfer coefficients based on both the gas-side and liquid-side can be written as

$$r\_A = k\_G a (\mathbf{C}\_{\mathcal{g}} - \mathbf{C}\_{\mathcal{g}i}) \tag{34}$$

$$k = k\_L a (\mathbb{C}\_{Li} - \mathbb{C}\_L) \tag{35}$$

at the interface *Cgi* =*HCLi*, where *H* is Henry's law constant defined in Equation (2). Combining Equation (34) and Equation (35) in terms of the overall mass-transfer coefficient, the equation becomes

$$r\_A = (\mathbb{K}\_G a)\_{loc} (\mathbb{C}\_A - H \mathbb{C}\_{LA}) \tag{36}$$

where, CA and CLA are concentrations of CO2-gas in the gas-phase and liquid-phase, respectively. According to Equation (24), we assume plug flow for gas phase and wellmixed flow for liquid phase, the material balance equation between △z at steady state can be rewritten as:

Absorption of Carbon Dioxide in a Bubble-Column Scrubber 105

Here, 1/*KGa* was overall resistance, 1/*kGa* the gas-side resistance, and *H/kLa* the liquid-side resistance. For a second order reaction, by introducing the enhancement factor into Equation

*G G A B*

where *k2* is the second order reaction constant and *DA* is the diffusion coefficient for carbon dioxide. Since Henry's constant is a function of the ionic strength and temperature, which can be adjusted with pH values and temperature, a plot of Equation (46) to obtain *kGa* and

In here, we will compare absorption rate and overall mass transfer coefficient obtained in a bubble-column scrubber for five absorption systems, i.e., NaOH/BaCl2/H2O, NaOH/Zn(NO3)2/H2O, MEA/CO2/H2O, MEA/CaCl2/CO2, and NH3/CO2/H2O. The process variables are working temperature, gas-flow rate, pH value, and gas concentration. The absorption rates and overall mass transfer coefficients are listed in Table 2. The table shows that the absorption rates obtained for NaOH/Zn(NO3)2/H2O system were in the range of 1.34×10-4-2.88×10-3mol/L.s, which were higher than that the other systems. However, the absorption rates for NH3/CO2/H2O system were in the range of 2.17×10-4- 1.09×10-3 mol/L.s; the values were comparable with that NaOH/Zn(NO3)2/H2O system. On the other hand, the overall mass-transfer coefficients obtained for MEA/CO2/H2O system were higher than the others, while the values for NH3/CO2/H2O and NaOH/Zn(NO3)2/H2O systems were also comparable with the MEA/CO2/H2O system. By means of Taguchi's analysis for MEA/CO2/H2O system, the significance sequence influencing the absorption rate is A(CO2%)>C(temperature)>D(gas-flow rate)>B(pH),

(( ) )

11 1

**5.1 Comparisons of absorption rates overall mass-transfer coefficients** 

while the significance sequence for mass-transfer coefficient is B>A>C>D.

A plot of *1/KGa* vs. *H*/(*CB0*)*1/2* at different gas-superficial velocity was shown in Figure 5. A linear plot was obtained in this work. The reciprocal of the intercept at zero *H*/(*CB0*)*1/2* was the individual gas-side volumetric mass transfer coefficient. On the other hand, the slope, *1/((DAk2)1/2a)*, multiplied by *H/CB01/2* was *H/kLa*, where the liquid-side mass transfer *kLa* could

Figure 6 is a plot of the liquid-side mass transfer coefficient vs. the gas-superficial velocity at various pH values for both with and without precipitation. The liquid-side mass transfer coefficient increased with an increase in the superficial velocity at various pH values. Both procedures show that the data are close together, larger data points for precipitation and smaller data points for no precipitation. The values obtained in this study were higher than those reported by Fan (1989), as shown in the parallelogram, while the values were close to the values reported by Sada et al. (1985). On the other hand, the trend in our data, extrapolated into smaller gas-superficial velocity, was higher than that reported in Sanchez

]0.5 and u was found to be:

**5.2 Individual mass-transfer coefficients** 

et al. (2005). A linear regression for *kL*a /[OH-

be obtained.

1/2 1/2 2 0

*H Ka ka Dk aC* , (46)

(45), we have

*kLa* becomes possible.

$$(\mu \mathbb{C}\_A \Big|\_z - \mu \mathbb{C}\_A \Big|\_{z+Az})\mathcal{S} - r\_A \varepsilon\_L \mathcal{S} \Delta \mathcal{z} = 0\tag{37}$$

Where, u is the mean gas-superficial velocity based on the column cross-sectional area. Take limit for Equation (37),

$$
\mu \frac{d\mathbf{C}\_A}{dz} + r\_A \mathbf{c}\_L = \mathbf{0} \tag{38}
$$

Substitute Equation (36) into Equation (38),

$$
\mu \frac{d\mathbf{C}\_A}{dz} + (\mathbf{K}\_G a)\_{\text{loc}} (\mathbf{C}\_A - H\mathbf{C}\_{AL}) \mathbf{g}\_L = \mathbf{0} \tag{39}
$$

In Equation (39), CAL is almost less than 4x10-8M when the pH value is higher than 12. In addition, H value is around 1.5 and CA is higher than 1mM. Therefore, CA>>HCLA, Equation (39) could be written as

$$
\mu \ll \frac{d\mathbb{C}\_A}{dz} + (\mathbb{K}\_G a)\_{l\alpha} \mathbb{C}\_A \mathfrak{x}\_L = 0 \tag{40}
$$

We assume that <sup>L</sup> is kept constant through the column. Integrating Equation (40), we have

$$
\mu \int\_{C\_{A1}}^{C\_{A2}} \frac{d\mathbf{C}\_A}{\mathbf{C}\_A} + \varepsilon\_L \int\_0^L (K\_G a)\_{loc} \, dz = 0 \tag{41}
$$

and,

$$
u \ln \frac{\mathbf{C}\_{A2}}{\mathbf{C}\_{A1}} + K\_G a L \varepsilon\_L = 0\tag{42}$$

where,

$$K\_{\rm G}a = \frac{1}{L} \int\_{0}^{L} (K\_{\rm G}a)\_{\rm loc} \, dz \tag{43}$$

By multiplying S with Equation (42), the equation becomes

$$K\_{\rm G}a = \frac{\mathcal{Q}\_{\rm g}}{V\_L} \ln \frac{\mathcal{C}\_{A1}}{\mathcal{C}\_{A2}} \tag{44}$$

Using this equation, the average overall mass-transfer coefficient can be evaluated in terms of measurable quantities.

Furthermore, the overall mass-transfer coefficient is correlated with the individual masstransfer coefficients:

$$\frac{1}{K\_G a} = \frac{1}{k\_G a} + \frac{H}{k\_L a} \tag{45}$$

( )0 *uC uC S r S z Az Az z AL* 

Where, u is the mean gas-superficial velocity based on the column cross-sectional area. Take

*dC u r*

*dC u K a C HC*

*dC u Ka C*

<sup>1</sup> 0

2 1

*A <sup>C</sup> u K aL*

*G*

*C L A*

2

*A*

*A*

By multiplying S with Equation (42), the equation becomes

*C A dC*

 0 *<sup>A</sup> A L*

 ( )( ) 0 *<sup>A</sup> G loc A AL L*

> () 0 *<sup>A</sup> G loc A L*

We assume that <sup>L</sup> is kept constant through the column. Integrating Equation (40), we have

() 0

ln 0 *<sup>A</sup> G L*

> 0 <sup>1</sup> ( ) *L*

*<sup>Q</sup> <sup>C</sup> K a*

ln *<sup>g</sup> <sup>A</sup>*

Using this equation, the average overall mass-transfer coefficient can be evaluated in terms

Furthermore, the overall mass-transfer coefficient is correlated with the individual mass-

1 1 *GGL*

*L A*

1 2

*H*

*u K a dz*

*L G loc*

In Equation (39), CAL is almost less than 4x10-8M when the pH value is higher than 12. In addition, H value is around 1.5 and CA is higher than 1mM. Therefore, CA>>HCLA,

limit for Equation (37),

Substitute Equation (36) into Equation (38),

Equation (39) could be written as

and,

where,

of measurable quantities.

transfer coefficients:

 

*dz* (38)

*dz* (39)

*dz* (40)

*C* (41)

*C* (42)

*K a K a dz <sup>G</sup> G loc <sup>L</sup>* (43)

*V C* (44)

*K a ka ka* (45)

(37)

Here, 1/*KGa* was overall resistance, 1/*kGa* the gas-side resistance, and *H/kLa* the liquid-side resistance. For a second order reaction, by introducing the enhancement factor into Equation (45), we have

$$\frac{1}{K\_{\rm G}a} = \frac{1}{k\_{\rm G}a} + \frac{1}{\left( (D\_{\rm A}k\_{\rm 2})^{1/2}a \right) \mathcal{C}\_{\rm B0}^{1/2}} \, ^{\prime} \, ^{\prime} \, ^{\prime} \tag{46}$$

where *k2* is the second order reaction constant and *DA* is the diffusion coefficient for carbon dioxide. Since Henry's constant is a function of the ionic strength and temperature, which can be adjusted with pH values and temperature, a plot of Equation (46) to obtain *kGa* and *kLa* becomes possible.

#### **5.1 Comparisons of absorption rates overall mass-transfer coefficients**

In here, we will compare absorption rate and overall mass transfer coefficient obtained in a bubble-column scrubber for five absorption systems, i.e., NaOH/BaCl2/H2O, NaOH/Zn(NO3)2/H2O, MEA/CO2/H2O, MEA/CaCl2/CO2, and NH3/CO2/H2O. The process variables are working temperature, gas-flow rate, pH value, and gas concentration. The absorption rates and overall mass transfer coefficients are listed in Table 2. The table shows that the absorption rates obtained for NaOH/Zn(NO3)2/H2O system were in the range of 1.34×10-4-2.88×10-3mol/L.s, which were higher than that the other systems. However, the absorption rates for NH3/CO2/H2O system were in the range of 2.17×10-4- 1.09×10-3 mol/L.s; the values were comparable with that NaOH/Zn(NO3)2/H2O system. On the other hand, the overall mass-transfer coefficients obtained for MEA/CO2/H2O system were higher than the others, while the values for NH3/CO2/H2O and NaOH/Zn(NO3)2/H2O systems were also comparable with the MEA/CO2/H2O system. By means of Taguchi's analysis for MEA/CO2/H2O system, the significance sequence influencing the absorption rate is A(CO2%)>C(temperature)>D(gas-flow rate)>B(pH), while the significance sequence for mass-transfer coefficient is B>A>C>D.

#### **5.2 Individual mass-transfer coefficients**

A plot of *1/KGa* vs. *H*/(*CB0*)*1/2* at different gas-superficial velocity was shown in Figure 5. A linear plot was obtained in this work. The reciprocal of the intercept at zero *H*/(*CB0*)*1/2* was the individual gas-side volumetric mass transfer coefficient. On the other hand, the slope, *1/((DAk2)1/2a)*, multiplied by *H/CB01/2* was *H/kLa*, where the liquid-side mass transfer *kLa* could be obtained.

Figure 6 is a plot of the liquid-side mass transfer coefficient vs. the gas-superficial velocity at various pH values for both with and without precipitation. The liquid-side mass transfer coefficient increased with an increase in the superficial velocity at various pH values. Both procedures show that the data are close together, larger data points for precipitation and smaller data points for no precipitation. The values obtained in this study were higher than those reported by Fan (1989), as shown in the parallelogram, while the values were close to the values reported by Sada et al. (1985). On the other hand, the trend in our data, extrapolated into smaller gas-superficial velocity, was higher than that reported in Sanchez et al. (2005). A linear regression for *kL*a /[OH- ]0.5 and u was found to be:

Absorption of Carbon Dioxide in a Bubble-Column Scrubber 107

**u=1.70cm/s u=4.07cm/s u=6.30cm/s u=9.10cm/s**

**0 4 8 12 16 20**

**H/C (M ) B0 1/2 -1/2**

**1E-1 1E+0 1E+1 1E+2**

**u(cm/s)**

Fig. 6. Effects of process variables on the liquid side mass transfer coefficient.(Chen et al.,

Fig. 5. A plot of 1/KGa versus H/CB01/2 for obtaining individual mass transfer coefficients

**This work**

**Sanchez et al. (2005)**

**Sada et al.**

**pH=13.0 pH=12.5 pH=12.0**

 **(1985) Fan(1989)**

**0**

**1E-4**

**1E-3**

**1E-2**

**1E-1**

**k a(1/s)**

**L**

**1E+0**

**1E+1**

(Chen et al., 2008)

2008)

**10**

**20**

**1/K a(1/s)**

**G**

**30**

**40**


Table 2. Absorption rates and overall mass-transfer coefficients in a bubble-column scrubber for different systems.

Systems Operating conditions RA (mol/L.s) KGa(1/s)

1.35×10-6-6.22×10-4 0.027-1.120

6.26×10-6-3.69×10-4 0.018-0.249

2.17×10-4-1.09×10-3 0.0136-0.567

4.4×10-5-7.69×10-4 0.0277-0.196

1.03x10-4-1.13x10-3 0.0651-0.339

1.34×10-4-2.88×10-3 0.0145-0.590

T=25 - 45℃ y1=15%

T=25℃ y1=10 - 30% pH=9 - 11 CL=0.2 M CMEA=4 M Qg =2L/min-9.5L/min

T=25 - 60℃ y1=15 - 60% pH=9.5 - 11.5 C NH3=7.7 M Qg=2 - 5 L/min

T=25℃ y1=10 - 30% pH=12 - 13 CL=0.01-0.2 M CNaOH=1-2 M QL=50 - 320 ml/min Qg=2 – 10.7 L/min

T=25℃ y1=20% pH=12 - 13 CNaOH=1-2 M QL=50 ml/min Qg=2 – 10.7 L/min

T=25 - 45℃ y1=20% pH=10 -13 CL=0.2 M CNaOH=2 M QL=50 ml/min Qg=3 - 8 L/min

Table 2. Absorption rates and overall mass-transfer coefficients in a bubble-column scrubber

Qg=4 - 9.5 L/min CMEA=4 M

MEA/CO2/H2O

MEA/CaCl2/CO2 (with precipitation)

NH3/CO2/H2O (with precipitation)

NaOH/BaCl2/H2O (with precipitation)

NaOH/BaCl2/H2O (without precipitation)

NaOH/Zn(NO3)2/H2O (with precipitation)

for different systems.

Fig. 5. A plot of 1/KGa versus H/CB01/2 for obtaining individual mass transfer coefficients (Chen et al., 2008)

Fig. 6. Effects of process variables on the liquid side mass transfer coefficient.(Chen et al., 2008)

Absorption of Carbon Dioxide in a Bubble-Column Scrubber 109

0.07 -

0.14 -


0.3396 0.178-0.872

0.2115 0.0422-0.637

0.027-1.1204 0.118-0.494

<sup>69</sup>0.0251-0.664

<sup>0</sup>0.0275-0.401

[NaOH]=2.0M 0.41-0.53\*\* 0.0508-0.151\*\*\*

0.50-0.75 0.41-0.51

0.0651-

0.0227-

0.0136-0.56

0.0145-0.59

Qg=4.9-10.4L/min QL=46mL/min AMP=1.1M

Qg=4.4-13.1L/min QL=42ml/min y1=1-10%

Qg=4.4-13.1L/min QL=42mL/min AMP=1.0M

Qg=4.4-13.1L/min QL=42mL/min [MEA]=2.0M [MEA+AMP]=2M

Qg=4.7-14.5 L/min QL=50ml/min y1=20% [NaOH]= 2.0M

Qg=2.0-10.27 L/min QL=50-320ml/min CL=0.01-0.2M y1=10-30% [NaOH]= 2.0M

Qg=4.0-9.5 L/min

QL=31.35- 215.13ml/min y1=15-65% [MEA]= 4.0M T=25-45℃ pH=9.0-11.0

T=25 - 60℃ y1=15 - 60% pH=9.5 - 11.5 C NH3=7.7 M Qg=2 - 5 L/min

T=25 - 45℃ y1=20% pH=10 -13 CL=0.2 M CNaOH=2 M QL=50 ml/min Qg=3 - 8 L/min

Table 3. Scrubbing factors for different absorption systems

\*:'a' is based on volume of packing;\*\*: 'a' is based on dispersion phase; \*\*\*: E is assumed to be 0.8.

T=25℃ pH=9.0-12.0

RPB

(Lin et al, 2003)

precipitation

Bubble column without

NaOH/BaCO3/H2O (Chen et al., 2008)

Bubble column with precipitation NaOH/BaCl2/H2O ( Chen et al., 2008)

Bubble column without

precipitation MEA/H2O/CO2 (Chen et al., 2010)

Bubble column (with precipitation) NH3/CO2/H2O (Chen et al., 2010)

Bubble column (with precipitation) NaOH/Zn(NO3)2/H2O (Chen et al., 2010)

$$k\_L a = 0.2449 \mu^{1.09} \text{[OH}^-\text{]}^{0.5} \tag{47}$$

The coefficient of determination becomes 0.9670. The exponent of u in here was 1.09, which falls in the exponent range of 0.58 to1.52 reported in the literature. In the same absorption system, a correlation for gas-side mass transfer coefficient obtained by using regression for no precipitation system was shown below:

$$k\_{\odot}a = 0.29982\mu^{0.22} \tag{48}$$

The exponent of u in here was 0.22, which is lower than 0.75 reported in the literature (Sada et al., 1985; Botton et al., 1980). Due to this, the individual mass-transfer coefficients, *kLa* and *kGa*, could be determined when the operating conditions were given; and hence, the overall mass-transfer coefficient was estimated by Equation (45).

#### **6. Scrubbing factor**

The scrubbing factor (φ) was defined as φ=(*Fg E /FAVb*), which means moles of CO2-gas to be removed per mole of absorbent and per the volume of the scrubber, estimated values for various scrubbers were also calculated and listed in Table 3. In these systems, FA is defined as the molar flow rate of absorbent solution. The result showed that φ values in here, both for systems with precipitation and without precipitation, are much higher than those in packed bed systems, indicating that bubble-column scrubbers are indeed more effective than packed bed scrubbers. The scrubbing factors for bubble columns are approximation 5 fold to 20-fold as compared with packed beds. This indicates that the absorption capacity for bubble columns is higher than that for packed beds. Alternatively, comparison for various bubble columns, i.e., NaOH/BaCl2/H2O system (1), NaOH/Zn(NO3)2/H2O system(2), NH3/CO2/H2O system(3), and MEA/CO2/H2O system(4), is carried out in here, we find that the magnitude sequence in scrubbing factors are (1)>(3)>(4)>(2). In the current stage system (4) is a more popular system in the removal of carbon dioxide. However, system (3) is a more attractive process since aqueous ammonia absorbent has a lot of advantages, including higher absorption capacity, cheaper, lower energy required from the viewpoint of regeneration, no corrosion problem, and safety, as compared with MEA process (Yeh & Bai, 1999; Yeh et al., 2005). Ammonia scrubbing process is widely applied to produce ammonia bicarbonate (ABC) as a fertilizer in the Chinese chemical industry.


The coefficient of determination becomes 0.9670. The exponent of u in here was 1.09, which falls in the exponent range of 0.58 to1.52 reported in the literature. In the same absorption system, a correlation for gas-side mass transfer coefficient obtained by using regression for

The exponent of u in here was 0.22, which is lower than 0.75 reported in the literature (Sada et al., 1985; Botton et al., 1980). Due to this, the individual mass-transfer coefficients, *kLa* and *kGa*, could be determined when the operating conditions were given; and hence, the overall

The scrubbing factor (φ) was defined as φ=(*Fg E /FAVb*), which means moles of CO2-gas to be removed per mole of absorbent and per the volume of the scrubber, estimated values for various scrubbers were also calculated and listed in Table 3. In these systems, FA is defined as the molar flow rate of absorbent solution. The result showed that φ values in here, both for systems with precipitation and without precipitation, are much higher than those in packed bed systems, indicating that bubble-column scrubbers are indeed more effective than packed bed scrubbers. The scrubbing factors for bubble columns are approximation 5 fold to 20-fold as compared with packed beds. This indicates that the absorption capacity for bubble columns is higher than that for packed beds. Alternatively, comparison for various bubble columns, i.e., NaOH/BaCl2/H2O system (1), NaOH/Zn(NO3)2/H2O system(2), NH3/CO2/H2O system(3), and MEA/CO2/H2O system(4), is carried out in here, we find that the magnitude sequence in scrubbing factors are (1)>(3)>(4)>(2). In the current stage system (4) is a more popular system in the removal of carbon dioxide. However, system (3) is a more attractive process since aqueous ammonia absorbent has a lot of advantages, including higher absorption capacity, cheaper, lower energy required from the viewpoint of regeneration, no corrosion problem, and safety, as compared with MEA process (Yeh & Bai, 1999; Yeh et al., 2005). Ammonia scrubbing process is widely applied to produce ammonia

no precipitation system was shown below:

**6. Scrubbing factor** 

Packed bed

1992)

packing

(Aroonwilas and

(Tontiwachwuthiku et al.,

Packed bed (Aroonwilas and

Packed bed with structured

Tontiwachwuthiku,1997)

mass-transfer coefficient was estimated by Equation (45).

bicarbonate (ABC) as a fertilizer in the Chinese chemical industry.

Tontiwachwuthiku,1997) - 0.08-0.27\*

Scrubbers Operating conditions KGa(1/s) φ=(Fg E /FAVb)

Qg=0.87-1.47L/min QL=1230-1760ml/min y1=11.5-19.5% [NaOH]=1.2-2.0M

Qg=4.9-10.4L/min QL=23-70ml/min

[NaOH]=1.0-2.0M

y1=1-15%

1.09 0.5 0.2449 [ ] *k a u OH <sup>L</sup>* (47)

0.22 0.29982 *Gka u* (48)

(mol/mol-L)

0.0176-0.173



0.68-2.74\*


\*:'a' is based on volume of packing;\*\*: 'a' is based on dispersion phase; \*\*\*: E is assumed to be 0.8.

Table 3. Scrubbing factors for different absorption systems

Absorption of Carbon Dioxide in a Bubble-Column Scrubber 111

log-log coordinates, which can be represented well by the following Equation (Hikita et al.,

2 (0.35 / )[( /1)( /72)]

On the other hand, H can be calculated by using Equations (20) and (22) when the ionic strength and temperature are given. Sometime if overall mass-transfer coefficient correlation is obtained, such as MEA/CaCl2/CO2 with precipitation system, the overall mass-transfer

*u*

3/1 ) <sup>721</sup> ( 

In this chapter, absorption of CO2 in a continuous bubble-column scrubber was illustrated for four absorption systems. In order to obtain absorption rate and mass-transfer coefficients in an alkaline solution with and without precipitation, a two-film model with fast reaction case was utilized to study the absorption of carbon dioxide. A multiple-tube plug flow model was developed to determine the absorption rate and overall mass-transfer coefficient. At the gas-liquid interface, the Henry's law is applied to connect between the bulk phases. In order to determine Henry's law constant, the ionic strength can be determined by using an ionic strength approximation method, if the pH of solution, the total mass balance equations, mass action equations, and activity coefficient equations are available.

5 1.76 2.62 10 exp(0.41 ) *K a <sup>G</sup> <sup>u</sup> pH* (55)

Some useful correlations for gas hold-up can be found in the literature (Hikita et al., 1980).

<sup>1</sup> <sup>1</sup>

Fig. 7. Gas hold-up in bubble-columns (Danckwerts, 1970)

coefficient can be estimated when u and pH of the solution are available:

*L*

1/3

*u* (54)

1980):

**8. Conclusion** 

1-*ε<sup>L</sup>*

#### **7. Sizes of bubble-column scrubbers**

For a second order instantaneous chemical reaction system, Equation (39) can be applied for gas-side material balance:

$$
\mu \frac{d\mathbf{C}\_A}{dz} + (\mathbf{K}\_G a)\_{\text{loc}} (\mathbf{C}\_A - H\mathbf{C}\_{AL}) \mathbf{z}\_L = \mathbf{0} \tag{39}
$$

Integrating equation (39) from 0 to Z, we have

$$
\mu \int\_{C\_{A1}}^{C\_{A2}} \frac{d\mathbf{C}\_A}{\mathbf{C}\_A - \mathbf{H}\mathbf{C}\_{AL}} + \mathfrak{e}\_L K\_\mathbf{G} a\mathbf{Z} = \mathbf{0} \tag{49}
$$

where

$$K\_{\rm G}a = \frac{1}{Z} \int\_{0}^{Z} (K\_{\rm G}a)\_{\rm loc} \, dz \tag{50}$$

Combination of overall mass-transfer coefficient, Equation (49) becomes

$$\mathbf{Z} = \frac{u}{\mathbf{c}\_{L}\mathbf{K}\_{\rm Ca}a} \Big|\_{\mathbf{C}\_{A2}}^{\mathbf{C}\_{A1}} \frac{d\mathbf{C}\_{A}}{\mathbf{C}\_{A} - \mathbf{H}\mathbf{C}\_{AL}} = \frac{u}{\frac{\mathbf{c}\_{L}}{\mathbf{1}\_{A2}} + \mathbf{f}\_{A2}} \Big|\_{\mathbf{C}\_{A2}}^{\mathbf{C}\_{A1}} \frac{d\mathbf{C}\_{A}}{\mathbf{C}\_{A} - \mathbf{H}\mathbf{C}\_{AL}} \tag{51}$$

or

$$V\_b = \frac{F\_{A1}}{\mathcal{C}\_{A1}\varepsilon\_L K\_G a} \int\_{\mathcal{C}\_{A2}}^{\mathcal{C}\_{A1}} \frac{d\mathcal{C}\_A}{\mathcal{C}\_A - H\mathcal{C}\_{AL}} = \frac{F\_{A1}}{\mathcal{C}\_{A1}\varepsilon\_L} \frac{\mathcal{C}\_{A1}}{\mathcal{C}\_A - H\mathcal{C}\_{AL}} \int\_{\mathcal{C}\_{A2}}^{\mathcal{C}\_A} \frac{d\mathcal{C}\_A}{\mathcal{C}\_A - H\mathcal{C}\_{AL}} \tag{52}$$

where Vb(=SZ) is the volume of scrubber and FA1 is the molar flow rate of input gas. If CA>>HCLA, Equation (52) could be written as:

$$V\_b = \frac{F\_{A1}}{C\_{A1} \varepsilon\_L K\_G a} \ln \frac{C\_{A1}}{C\_{A2}} = \frac{F\_{A1}}{\frac{C\_{A1} \varepsilon\_L}{1} + \frac{H}{C\_{A2}}} \ln \frac{C\_{A1}}{C\_{A2}} \tag{53}$$

Equation (53) shows that the size of scrubber is dependent on gas-flow rate, H (ionic strength and temperature), the pH of the solution, liquid hold-up (εL), and desired CO2 output concentration (CA2). In here, kGa and kLa can be evaluated by using Equations (47) and (48) if pH and u are given. In addition, liquid hold-up (εL) can be estimated according to Figure 7, a plot of 1-εL(gas hold-up) versus 1 72 1/3 ( ) *u* , where ρ and σ are the density and surface tension of the liquid in cgs unit. The final correlation has been given as a curve on

For a second order instantaneous chemical reaction system, Equation (39) can be applied for

*dC u K a C HC*

*A*

*C A AL dC u K aZ*

2

*A*

*C*

1

Combination of overall mass-transfer coefficient, Equation (49) becomes

*A*

 ( )( ) 0 *<sup>A</sup> G loc A AL L*

<sup>0</sup>

0 <sup>1</sup> ( ) *Z*

1 1

 *A A*

*A A*

2 2 1

*L G A AL C C <sup>L</sup> A AL*

1 1

 *A A*

*C C A AA A*

*A A*

where Vb(=SZ) is the volume of scrubber and FA1 is the molar flow rate of input gas. If

2 2

*<sup>A</sup> L G A AL C C A L A AL*

1

1 11 1 12 2 1 ln ln 1

*A AA A*

*A LG A A L A*

surface tension of the liquid in cgs unit. The final correlation has been given as a curve on

Equation (53) shows that the size of scrubber is dependent on gas-flow rate, H (ionic strength and temperature), the pH of the solution, liquid hold-up (εL), and desired CO2 output concentration (CA2). In here, kGa and kLa can be evaluated by using Equations (47) and (48) if pH and u are given. In addition, liquid hold-up (εL) can be estimated according to

*H ka ka*

*G L*

*H ka ka*

*u* , where ρ and σ are the density and

*G L*

*K a C HC C HC*

*G L*

*A A*

*H ka ka*

*u dC u dC <sup>Z</sup>*

1 1 1 1

*FC FC <sup>V</sup> C Ka C C C*

*<sup>F</sup> dC F dC <sup>V</sup> C K a C HC C C HC*

*C C*

*L G*

*dz* (39)

*C HC* (49)

*K a K a dz <sup>G</sup> G loc <sup>Z</sup>* (50)

(51)

(52)

(53)

**7. Sizes of bubble-column scrubbers** 

Integrating equation (39) from 0 to Z, we have

*b*

CA>>HCLA, Equation (52) could be written as:

*b*

Figure 7, a plot of 1-εL(gas hold-up) versus 1 72 1/3 ( )

gas-side material balance:

where

or

log-log coordinates, which can be represented well by the following Equation (Hikita et al., 1980):

$$1 - \mathfrak{e}\_L = \frac{1}{2 + (0.35 \,/\, u) [(\rho \,/\, 1)(\sigma \,/\, 72)]^{1/3}} \tag{54}$$

Some useful correlations for gas hold-up can be found in the literature (Hikita et al., 1980).

Fig. 7. Gas hold-up in bubble-columns (Danckwerts, 1970)

On the other hand, H can be calculated by using Equations (20) and (22) when the ionic strength and temperature are given. Sometime if overall mass-transfer coefficient correlation is obtained, such as MEA/CaCl2/CO2 with precipitation system, the overall mass-transfer coefficient can be estimated when u and pH of the solution are available:

$$K\_{\odot}a = 2.62 \times 10^{-5} u^{1.76} \exp(0.41pH) \tag{55}$$

#### **8. Conclusion**

In this chapter, absorption of CO2 in a continuous bubble-column scrubber was illustrated for four absorption systems. In order to obtain absorption rate and mass-transfer coefficients in an alkaline solution with and without precipitation, a two-film model with fast reaction case was utilized to study the absorption of carbon dioxide. A multiple-tube plug flow model was developed to determine the absorption rate and overall mass-transfer coefficient. At the gas-liquid interface, the Henry's law is applied to connect between the bulk phases. In order to determine Henry's law constant, the ionic strength can be determined by using an ionic strength approximation method, if the pH of solution, the total mass balance equations, mass action equations, and activity coefficient equations are available.

Absorption of Carbon Dioxide in a Bubble-Column Scrubber 113

*CLA*= concentration of component A in liquid phase (mol/L)

*FA1*= molar flow rate of the CO2-gas at the inlet (mol/s) *FA2*=molar flow rate of the CO2-gas at the outlet (mol/s)

*CT=*total carbonate concentration (mol/L)

*DA*= diffusivity (cm2/s) *E*= removal efficiency

*Fg*= gas-molar-flow rate (mol/s) *FL*= liquid-molar-flow rate (mol/s)

*H*= Henry's law constant *I*= ionic strength (mol/L)

*FA*= absorbent A molar-flow rate (mol/s)

*k2*= second order reaction constant (L/mol s)

*KGa*= overall mass-transfer coefficient (s-1) *(KGa)loc*= local mass-transfer coefficient (s-1)

*KH*= Henry's constant defined in Eq.(1) *L*=height of the bubble column (cm)

*Pi*= partial pressure of component i (atm)

*Q1*=feed rate of BaCl2 solution (mL/min) *Q2*=feed rate of NaOH solution (mL/min)

*QL*= feed rate of liquid solution (mL/min) *R*= universal gas constant (atm-L/K mol)

*TBa*= total barium ion concentration (mol/L)

*Qg*= gas-flow rate (L/min)

*RA*=absorption rate (mol/s L)

S=cross section area (cm2) *T*= absolute temperature (K)

*rA*=mass-transfer rate (mol/s cm2)

*PAi*= partial pressure of component A at interface (atm)

*Ar* =average mass-transfer rate defined in Eq.(30)(mol/s cm2)

*kLa*= individual volumetric liquid-side mass-transfer coefficient (s-1) *kGa*= individual volumetric gas-side mass-transfer coefficient (s-1)

Combinations of mass-transfer rate, overall mass-transfer coefficient, Henry's law constant and individual mass-transfer coefficients, the overall mass-transfer coefficient can correlate with the individual mass-transfer coefficients. For a second order reaction, by introducing the enhancement factor into correlation equation, we can obtain both gas-side and liquidside individual mass-transfer coefficients by using measurable data. The effects of process variables on the individual mass-transfer coefficients were discussed and we obtained kinetic expressions for the both. Using Taguchi's analysis for MEA/H2O/CO2 system, it was found that the significance sequence influencing the absorption rate is A(CO2%)>C(temperature)>D(gas-flow rate)>B(pH), while the significance sequence for mass-transfer coefficient is B>A>C>D. According to scrubbing factor defined in here, it was found that the scrubbing factors for bubble columns are always higher than that packed beds. This illustrates a higher scrubbing capacity for bubble columns as compared with packed beds. Finally, according to the material balance model proposed in here, the size of bubble column scrubber could be evaluated when the individual mass-transfer coefficients are available.

#### **9. Acknowledgement**

The authors acknowledge the financial support of National Science Council of the Republic of China (NSC-99-2221-E-262-024).

#### **10. Nomenclature**

*A*= total surface area of bubbles in scrubber (cm2)

*a*= gas-liquid interfacial area based on the slurry volume (1/cm)

*B1*= a constant in Eq.(16)

*CA*= concentration of component A (mol/L)

CB= concentration of component B (mol/L)

*CA1*= concentration of A in gas phase at inlet (mol/L)

*CA2*= concentration of A in gas phase at outlet (mol/L)

CAi= concentration of A at gas side interface (mol/L)

CBi= concentration of B at liquid side interface (mol/L)

*C1*= concentration of chloride ion at the inlet (mol/L)

*C2*= concentration of NaOH at the inlet (mol/L)

*CB0*= concentration of hydroxide ion (mol/L)

Cg=concentration of solute in bulk gas phase (mol/L)

Cg1=concentration of CO2-gas at inlet (mol/L)

Cg2=concentration of CO2-gas at outlet (mol/L)

*CL*= concentration of solute in solution (mol/L)

*CLA*= concentration of component A in liquid phase (mol/L)

*CT=*total carbonate concentration (mol/L)

*DA*= diffusivity (cm2/s)

112 Greenhouse Gases – Capturing, Utilization and Reduction

Combinations of mass-transfer rate, overall mass-transfer coefficient, Henry's law constant and individual mass-transfer coefficients, the overall mass-transfer coefficient can correlate with the individual mass-transfer coefficients. For a second order reaction, by introducing the enhancement factor into correlation equation, we can obtain both gas-side and liquidside individual mass-transfer coefficients by using measurable data. The effects of process variables on the individual mass-transfer coefficients were discussed and we obtained kinetic expressions for the both. Using Taguchi's analysis for MEA/H2O/CO2 system, it was found that the significance sequence influencing the absorption rate is A(CO2%)>C(temperature)>D(gas-flow rate)>B(pH), while the significance sequence for mass-transfer coefficient is B>A>C>D. According to scrubbing factor defined in here, it was found that the scrubbing factors for bubble columns are always higher than that packed beds. This illustrates a higher scrubbing capacity for bubble columns as compared with packed beds. Finally, according to the material balance model proposed in here, the size of bubble column scrubber could be evaluated when the individual mass-transfer coefficients

The authors acknowledge the financial support of National Science Council of the Republic

are available.

**9. Acknowledgement** 

**10. Nomenclature** 

*B1*= a constant in Eq.(16)

of China (NSC-99-2221-E-262-024).

*A*= total surface area of bubbles in scrubber (cm2)

*CA1*= concentration of A in gas phase at inlet (mol/L) *CA2*= concentration of A in gas phase at outlet (mol/L) CAi= concentration of A at gas side interface (mol/L) CBi= concentration of B at liquid side interface (mol/L) *C1*= concentration of chloride ion at the inlet (mol/L)

*C2*= concentration of NaOH at the inlet (mol/L) *CB0*= concentration of hydroxide ion (mol/L)

Cg1=concentration of CO2-gas at inlet (mol/L) Cg2=concentration of CO2-gas at outlet (mol/L) *CL*= concentration of solute in solution (mol/L)

Cg=concentration of solute in bulk gas phase (mol/L)

*CA*= concentration of component A (mol/L) CB= concentration of component B (mol/L)

*a*= gas-liquid interfacial area based on the slurry volume (1/cm)

*E*= removal efficiency

*FA1*= molar flow rate of the CO2-gas at the inlet (mol/s)

*FA2*=molar flow rate of the CO2-gas at the outlet (mol/s)

*Fg*= gas-molar-flow rate (mol/s)

*FL*= liquid-molar-flow rate (mol/s)

*FA*= absorbent A molar-flow rate (mol/s)

*H*= Henry's law constant

*I*= ionic strength (mol/L)

*k2*= second order reaction constant (L/mol s)

*kLa*= individual volumetric liquid-side mass-transfer coefficient (s-1)

*kGa*= individual volumetric gas-side mass-transfer coefficient (s-1)

*KGa*= overall mass-transfer coefficient (s-1)

*(KGa)loc*= local mass-transfer coefficient (s-1)

*KH*= Henry's constant defined in Eq.(1)

*L*=height of the bubble column (cm)

*Pi*= partial pressure of component i (atm)

*PAi*= partial pressure of component A at interface (atm)

*Q1*=feed rate of BaCl2 solution (mL/min)

*Q2*=feed rate of NaOH solution (mL/min)

*Qg*= gas-flow rate (L/min)

*QL*= feed rate of liquid solution (mL/min)

*R*= universal gas constant (atm-L/K mol)

*RA*=absorption rate (mol/s L)

*rA*=mass-transfer rate (mol/s cm2)

*Ar* =average mass-transfer rate defined in Eq.(30)(mol/s cm2)

S=cross section area (cm2)

*T*= absolute temperature (K)

*TBa*= total barium ion concentration (mol/L)

Absorption of Carbon Dioxide in a Bubble-Column Scrubber 115

Cournil, M.; Herri, J. M. (2003). Asymptotic Models for Gas-Liquid Crystallization in Two-

Degaleesan, S.; Dudukovic, M. P. (1998). Liquid Backing in Bubble Columns and the Axial

Hikita, H.; Asai,S.; Tanigawa, K; Segawa, K; Kitao, M.(1980). Gas hold-up in bubble

Hudson, J. L.; Rochelle, G. T. (1982). *Flue Gas Desulfurization*, American Chemical Society,

Kim, S; Kim, H. T. (2004). Aspen simulation of CO2 absorption system with various amine solution, *Prepr. Pap.-Am. Chem. Soc., Div. Fuel Chem.*, 49(1), pp.251-252. Lapin, A.; Paaschen, T.; Junghans, K.; Lubbert, A. (2002). Bubble Column Fluid Dynamics,

Levenspiel, O. (1998). *Chemical Reaction Engineering*, 3rd ed., Chapters 23-24, John Wiley &

Lin, C. C.; Liu, W. T.; Tan, C. S.(2003). Removal of Carbon Dioxide by Absorption in a

Juvekar, V. A.; Sharma, M.M. Absorption of CO2 in a suspension of lime, *Chem. Eng. Sci*., 28,

Nancollas, G. H.(1966). *Interactions in Electrolyte Solutions*, Elsevier Publishing Company,

Okawa, T.; Tsuge, H.; Matsue, H. (1999). Reactive crystallization of CaCO3 in a gas-liquid

Sada, E.; Kumazawa, H.; Lee, C.; Fujiwara, N. (1985). Gas-Liquid Mass Transfer

Saha, A. K.; Bandyopadhyay, S.S. Absorption of carbon dioxide in alkanolamines in the presence of fine activated carbon particles, *Can. J. Chem. Eng.*, 70, pp.193-196.

Sauer, T.; Hempel, D. C. (1987). Fluid dynamics and mass transfer in a bubble column with

Sanchez, O.; Michaud, S.; Escudie, R.; Delgenes, J. P.; Bernet, N.(2005). Liquid Mixing and

Sherwood, T. K.; Pigford, R. L.; Wilke, C. R. (1975). *Mass Transfer*; McGraw-Hill Inc.; New

Stewart, C.; Hessami, M. A study of methods of carbon dioxide capture and sequestration---

Characteristics in a Bubble Column With Suspended Sparingly Soluble Fine

Gas-liquid Mass Transfer in a Three-phase Inverse Turbulent Bed Reactor. *Chemical* 

the sustainability of a photosynthetic bioreactor approach, *Energy Conversion and* 

Morel, F. M. M. (1983). *Principles of Aquatic Chemistry*; John Wiley & Sons: New York.

crystals in draft tube bubble columns, *15th Ind. Cry., Serrento, Italy*(2002)(CD-ROM)

Flow Structures in Slender Columns with Large-Diameter Ring-Spargers, *Chem.* 

Fan, L. S. (1989). *Gas-Liquid-Solid Fluidization Engineering*; Butterworths: New York, USA. Hamid, S. N. S.; Jones, A. G. (2002). Scale up of gas-liquid precipitation of calcium carbonate

Film Systems, *AIChE J*., 49(8), pp.2031-2038.

Danckwerts, P. V. (1970). *Gas-Liquid Reactions*, McGraw-Hill, NewYork, USA.

Dispersion Coefficient, *AIChE J*., 44(11), pp.2369-2378.

columns, *The Chemical Engineering Journal*, 20, pp.59-67.

ACS Symposium Series 188, Washington, D.C., U.S.A..

Rotating Packed Bed. *Ind. Eng. Chem. Res*., *42*, pp.2381-2386.

multistage column crystallizer, *14th Ind. Cry.* 1999(CD-ROM)

Particles, *Ind. Eng. Chem. Process Des. Dev.*, 24, pp.255-261.

Shah, Y. T. (1979). *Gas-Liquid-Solid Reactor Design*; McGraw-Hill; New York.

suspended particles,*Chem. Eng. Technol.* 10, pp.180-189.

Shah, Y. T.(1979). *Gas-Liquid-Solid Reactor Design*; McGraw-Hill; New York.

Sohnel, O.; Garside, J. (1992). *Precipitation*; Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd.: Oxford.

*Eng. Sci*., 57, pp.1419-1424.

Amsterdam, Netherlands.

*Engineering J*., *114*, pp.114-120.

*management*, 46, pp.403-420.

Sons.

York.

pp.825-837.

*TCO*= total carbonate ion concentration (mol/L)

*TCl*= total chloride ion concentration (mol/L)

*TNa*= total sodium ion concentration, mol/L

*u*= superficial velocity (cm/s)

*Vb*= volume of the bubble column (L)

*VL*= volume of liquid in bubble column (L)

*y1*=molar fraction of CO2-gas at the inlet (%)

*y2*=molar fraction of CO2-gas at the outlet (%)

*z*= position in the bubble column (cm)

#### **Greek symbols**

αi=degree of ionization, i=0,1,2

*γi*= activity coefficient

εL= hold-up of liquid

ρ=density of fluid (g/cm3)

σ=surface tension (dyn/cm)

φ= scrubbing factor (mol-CO2/mol‧L)

#### **11. References**


Aroonwilas, A.; Tontiwachwuthikul, P. (1997). High-efficiency Structured Packing for CO2

Botton, R., Cosserrat, D. and Charpentier, J. C. (1980). Mass Transfer in Bubble Columns

Bukur, D. B. and Daly, J. G. (1987). Gas hold-up in bubble columns for Fischer-Tropsch

Chen, P. C. ; Shi, W. ; Du, R. ; Chen, V. (2008). Scrubbing of CO2 greenhouse gas

Chen, P. C.; Chen, C. C.; Fun, M. H.; Liao, O. Y.; Jiang, J. J.; Wang, Y. S.; Chen, C. S. (2004).

Chen, P. C.; Kou, K. L. ; Tai, H. K.; Jin, S. L.; Lye, C. L.; Lin, C. Y. (2002). Removal of Carbon

accompanying with precipitation in a continuous bubble-column scrubber, *I&EC* ,

Mixing and Crystallization Kinetics in Gas-liquid Reactive Crystallization. *Chem.* 

Dioxide by Reactive Crystallization in a Scrubber---Kinetics of Barium Carbonate

Operating at High Gas Throughputs*, Chem. Eng. J.*, 20, pp.87-94. Butler, J. N. (1964). *Ionic Equilibrium*, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., USA. Butler, J. N. (1982). *Carbon Dioxide Equilibriua and Their Applications*, Addison-Wesley

Separation Using 2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol(AMP). *Separation and Purification* 

*TCO*= total carbonate ion concentration (mol/L) *TCl*= total chloride ion concentration (mol/L) *TNa*= total sodium ion concentration, mol/L

*u*= superficial velocity (cm/s)

*Vb*= volume of the bubble column (L)

*z*= position in the bubble column (cm)

φ= scrubbing factor (mol-CO2/mol‧L)

*Technology*, *12*, pp.67-79.

47, pp.6336-6343.

*Eng. Tech.*, *27*, pp.519-531.

Publishing Company, Inc., USA.

synthesis, *Chem. Eng. Sci.*, 42(12), pp.2967-2969.

Crystals. *J. Crystal Growth*, *237-239*, pp.2166-2171.

αi=degree of ionization, i=0,1,2

**Greek symbols** 

*γi*= activity coefficient εL= hold-up of liquid

**11. References** 

ρ=density of fluid (g/cm3) σ=surface tension (dyn/cm)

*VL*= volume of liquid in bubble column (L) *y1*=molar fraction of CO2-gas at the inlet (%) *y2*=molar fraction of CO2-gas at the outlet (%) Cournil, M.; Herri, J. M. (2003). Asymptotic Models for Gas-Liquid Crystallization in Two-Film Systems, *AIChE J*., 49(8), pp.2031-2038.


Danckwerts, P. V. (1970). *Gas-Liquid Reactions*, McGraw-Hill, NewYork, USA.

**6** 

*1Brazil 2Chile* 

*Universidade Federal da Bahia* 

**Ethylbenzene Dehydrogenation in the Presence** 

Maria do Carmo Rangel1, Ana Paula de Melo Monteiro1, Marcelo Oportus2,

Patricio Reyes2, Márcia de Souza Ramos1 and Sirlene Barbosa Lima1

*2Facultad de Ciencias Químicas, Universidad de Concepción, Casilla 3-C, Concepción,* 

Because of the harmful effects to the environment, there is an increasing concern worldwide for decreasing the amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide. The average temperature of the earth, caused by greenhouse gases, has been increased in such a value that can cause catastrophic events. Several solutions have been proposed to overcome this problem, but they basically involve two approaches: (i) the decrease of carbon monoxide emissions or (ii) the application in innovative technologies to capture and use it. Both alternatives have been

The global chemical industry uses about 115 million metric tons of carbon dioxide every year as feedstock in a variety of synthetic processes. This number is insignificant compared to 23.7 billion metric tons estimated annual global emissions of the gas caused by human activities, primarily the burning of fossil fuels. In addition, the total anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide, approximately 45%, remain in the atmosphere, as a result of a

It is believed that the amount of carbon dioxide used by chemical industry could easily be tripled using current technologies, but that still does not solve the problem, since only its use by the chemical industry is not enough to significantly reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Because of the scale of the problem, different strategies need to be used simultaneously, including increasing the efficiency of current processes, as well as the capture and use or storage of carbon dioxide generated by burning fossil fuels and using renewable fuels and energy sources. As a result of the development of the chemistry based on carbon dioxide, a reduction in the use of toxic products in chemical industry is expected with an improvement in health and safety (Ritter, 2005). Therefore, there is a significant effort of scientific and technological community to discuss the use of carbon dioxide in different applications which would provide its elimination from the air and its reuse as raw material for

studied and discussed and several applications have been proposed (Song, 2006).

**1.1 The use of carbon dioxide for chemicals manufacture** 

gradual accumulation of carbon dioxide (Ritter, 2005).

manufacturing other products.

**1. Introduction** 

*1GECCAT Grupo de Estudos em Cinética e Catálise, Instituto de Química,* 

**of Carbon Dioxide over Metal Oxides** 

