Ation didn’t mixing ratios within a (blue reactor (BR).The CE didn’t rise drasdeviations (n = 4). Ash to water for wood tically of(n = extra ash water mixing experiment. outcomes have been 1:ten plausible. with 4). Ash to used inside the ratios 1:20 (blue ations BR 1:20 was discarded because the analysis circles) and not (green squares). The fourth run runof BR 1:20 was discarded since the analysis outcomes were not plausible.The results with the flow experiments might be seen in Figure three. The Flow Reactor typical CE differed from 14.88 for mixing ratio 1:20 to 17.45 for the mixing ratio 1:15. The maximum CE can be observed for test run 2 (FR 1:ten), 27.86 ; plus the lowest CE for run 4 (FR 1:10), 10.46 . For the ash to water mixing ratio FR 1:ten, the highest variability was observed. Usually speaking, Figure 3 shows an general average CE of around 15 . It may be noticed that a decrease volume of ash did not lead to a remarkably reduced CE. The CE didn’t rise drastically with extra ash made use of within the experiment.Flow ReactorFigure three. Carbonation efficiency for wood ash a flow reactor (FR) (n = 4), circle (blue) for 1:20, rhombus (red) for 1:15 Figure 3. Carbonation efficiency for wood ash inin a flow reactor(FR) (n = four), circle (blue) for 1:20, rhombus (red) for 1:15 and square (green) for 1:ten ash to water ratio. and square (green) for 1:ten ash to water ratio.Table 3 shows the detected elements and concentrations relevant for passing the procedure water into the sewage. Cd and Pb had been below the detection levels in all samples. three.3. pH-Value Table four shows the pH values inside the reactor for the many test runs. All BR runs showed only little declines in pH value. This can be explained by the little level of CO2 made use of inside the BR experiment. The ash nonetheless contained non-carbonated hydroxides. In Figure 3. Carbonation efficiency for wood ash in a flow reactor (FR) (n = four), circle (blue) for 1:20, rhombus (red) for 1:15 Azomethine-H (monosodium) Data Sheet contrast to that, the pH value was halved in the FR experiment due to the fact there have been noand square (green) for 1:10 ash to water ratio.Energies 2021, 14,7 ofhydroxides left that might be carbonated. FR runs used much more CO2 then necessary to assure the highest doable CE was reached.Table 1. Concentrations common deviations of distinct minor and trace components in the carbonated wood ash in mg/kg dry matter (DM): C1 (concentration prior to carbonation) and C2 (concentration after carbonation). Limit worth according to the Thiacetazone Protocol German Fertilizer Ordinance. Element Cu Zn B Mg Ni Pb Cr Ca C1 (mg/kgDM) 16.03 0.010 370.1 0.002 106.4 4.19 13,690 1513 31.36 two.04 three.04 two.65 65.15 0.001 118,000 7599 C2 (mg/kgDM) 78.61 33.43 465.8 47.68 93.64 14.52 12,250 635.four 32.07 two.04 22.97 7.63 63.32 15.93 111,600 9911 Limit Worth (mg/kgDM) 2000 80 150 -Table two. Concentrations standard deviations of distinct minor and trace components within the noncarbonated wood ash in mg/kg dry matter (DM): C1 (concentration prior carbonation). Element Na Al K Mn Li Ba Ga Sr Fe C1 (mg/kgDM) 2910 195.7 29,980 2014 34,020 1786 913.1 72.07 46.26 five.681 933.0 213.0 50.50 4.764 222.2 9.301 22,560 Table three. Concentrations common deviations of detected minor and trace elements in mg/L in approach water: C1 (concentration prior carbonation) and C2 (concentration just after carbonation). Limit value as outlined by the German Sewage Water Law. Element Cr Ni Cu Zn C1 (mg/L) 0.002 0.001 0.033 0.001 0.105 0.001 0.317 0.005 C2 (mg/L) 0.095 0.032 0.029 0.01 0.014 0.005 0.112 0.042 Limit Value (mg/L) 0.five 0.five 0.five 1.Table four. p.

By mPEGS 1