Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36499989›Full record

ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2022

The Discrepancy between Coal Ash from Muffle, Circulating Fluidized Bed (CFB), and Pulverized Coal (PC) Furnaces, with a Focus on the Recovery of Iron and Rare Earth Elements.

Jinhe Pan, Xin Long, Lei Zhang, Andrei Shoppert, Dmitry Valeev, Changchun Zhou, Xiao Liu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Jinhe PanKey Laboratory of Coal Processing & Efficient Utilization, Ministry of Education, School of Chemical Engineering and Technology, China University of Mining & Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China.ORCID 0000-0001-8352-6793
Xin LongKey Laboratory of Coal Processing & Efficient Utilization, Ministry of Education, School of Chemical Engineering and Technology, China University of Mining & Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China.
Lei ZhangKey Laboratory of Coal Processing & Efficient Utilization, Ministry of Education, School of Chemical Engineering and Technology, China University of Mining & Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China.ORCID 0000-0001-7677-4510
Andrei ShoppertLaboratory of Advanced Technologies in Non-Ferrous and Ferrous Metals Raw Materials Processing, Ural Federal University, 620002 Yekaterinburg, Russia.ORCID 0000-0002-9684-9628
Dmitry ValeevLaboratory of Sorption Methods, Vernadsky Institute of Geochemistry and Analytical Chemistry, The Russian Academy of Sciences, 119991 Moscow, Russia.ORCID 0000-0002-8820-7502
Changchun ZhouKey Laboratory of Coal Processing & Efficient Utilization, Ministry of Education, School of Chemical Engineering and Technology, China University of Mining & Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China.
Xiao LiuShenhua Zhungeer Energy and Resource Comprehensive Development Co., Ltd., Erdos 010300, China.
China University of Mining and Technology · CNChina Shenhua Energy (China) · CNRussian Academy of Sciences · RUUral Federal University · RU

Funding

National Key R&D Program of China 2021YFC2902601National Natural Science Foundation of China 92062109, 52204292, 51974309National Postdoctoral Program for Innovative Talents BX2021362
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Coal ash (CA) is not only one of the most solid wastes from combustion, easily resulting in a series of concerns, but it is also an artificial deposit with considerable metals, such as iron and rare earth. The variation in the coal ash characteristics due to the origins, combustion process, and even storage environment has been hindering the metal utilization from coal ash. In this study, three ash sample from lab muffle, circulating fluidized bed (CFB), and pulverized coal (PC) furnace was derived for the discrepancy study from the combustion furnace, including properties, iron, and rare earth recovery. The origins of the coal feed samples have more of an effect on their properties than combustion furnaces. Magnetic separation is suitable for coal ash from PC because of the magnetite product, and the iron content is 58% in the Mag-1 fraction, with a yield of 3%. The particles in CA from CFB appear irregular and fragmental, while those from PC appear spherical with a smooth surface. The results of sequential chemical extraction and observation both indicated that the aluminosilicate phase plays an essential role in rare earth occurrences. Rare earth in CA from muffling and CFB is facilely leached, with a recovery of approximately 50%, which is higher than that from PC ash. This paper aims to offer a reference to easily understand the difference in metal recovery from coal ash.

Indexed as

circulating fluidized bed furnacecoal ashmagnetic separationmode of occurrencepulverized coal furnacerare earth elementsrecovery

Identifiers

PMID36499989
PMCPMC9738165
OpenAlexW4310989187

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.