Pyrolysis of Palm Waste for Power Generation via

Direct Carbon Fuel Cell

By Dr. Estee Yong Siek Ting

1. Introduction• What is a DCFC ?

Cathode half-cell reaction:

Anode half-cell reaction: Overall oxidation reaction:

1. Introduction• Why use DCFC ?

Low emission in CO2 cycle

No reformingHigh

theoretical efficiency

Simple system

Wide range of fuel choices

Carbon, high energy density

1. Introduction• Biomass in DCFC, a greener technology.

• Successful employed in DCFC

Second largest palm oil exporter

Using palm waste in DCFC benefits economy, social, and environment.

2. Objective

• To study the suitability of Palm shell as the possible carbon fuel source in Direct Carbon Fuel Cell

3. Experimental Work• Methodology

Phase 1: Preparation of palm shell for pretreatment.

Phase 2: Preparation of palm shell biochar by pyrolysis.

Phase 3: Characterizations of biochar samples.

Phase 4: Activity testing in DCFC

Fuel Cell reactor

Button Fuel Cell

4. Results & Discussions• Percentage Yield

Upon increasing pyrolysis temperature from 400 to 600oC, percentage weight yield drops significantly.

Percentage weight yield remains almost constant despite increasing pyrolysis temperature beyond 600oC. 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pyrolysis Temperature (oC)

Perc

enta

ge W

eigh

t Yie

ld (%

)

𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑔𝑒n weight 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑=𝑚𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡

𝑚𝑏𝑖𝑜𝑚𝑎𝑠𝑠

𝑥100 %

4. Results & Discussions• Proximate analysis

Upon increasing pyrolysis temperature from 400 to 600oC, percentage weight of Carbon increases while Volatiles reduces drastically.

Ash and moisture contents stay almost constant throughout entire range of pyrolysis temperature.

0 200 400 600 800 1000 12000

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

MoistureVolatile MatterFixed CarbonAsh Content

Pyrolysis Temperature (oC)

Perc

enta

ge W

eigh

t (%

)

4. Results & Discussions• Ultimate Analysis

%C trend is consistent with proximate analysis

Lower %O for high pyrolysis temperature

Fuel %C %H %N %S %O O/C

S400 76.87 1.98 1.40 0.03 19.72 0.26

S600 80.26 1.62 1.28 0.28 16.56 0.21

S800 81.32 1.87 1.89 0.15 14.77 0.18

S1000 80.89 2.89 0.01 0.29 15.92 0.20

4. Results & Discussions• CO2 adsorption analysis

Micropore surface area and volume increase from 400-800oC

Micropore surface area and volume reduce from 800-1000oC, with increasing pore size.

Fuel Smicro

(m2/g)

VMicro

(cm3/g)

Average pore size

(Å)

S400 394.16 0.12 11.85

S600 582.68 0.16 11.06

S800 734.34 0.20 11.06

S1000 642.92 0.19 11.32

4. Results & Discussions• XRD analysis

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 900

10

20

30

40

50

24.8o

24.9o

25.4o

CB

S1000

S800

S600

Inte

nsity

(CPS

)

2 Theta (o)

S400

Presence of graphitic structure is associated with a distinct peak at ~ 25o

S400 and S600 are amorphous

4. Results & Discussions• DCFC Reactivity analysis

Steep linear decline of V-I curve due to fuel starvation

Consistent trends in OCV and Peak Power density for all samples:

S600S400S800S1000

4. Results & Discussions• DCFC Reactivity analysis

Optimum pyrolysis temperature is 600oC 

Below this temp, carbon content is too low

Above this temp, microporous surface area too big

Above this temp, surface defect is limiting

5. Conclusion Optimum pyrolysis temperature is 600oC 

Determining factor: Minimum carbon content Optimum microporous surface area Adequate surface defect

6. Acknowledgement

I would like to express my greatest gratitude to:

• Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI) for eScience Fund 03-02-10-SF0186.

• Mr. Lim Shu Hong PhD student for performing experiment and analyzing data.