A Review of CO2 Adsorbents Performance For Different Carbon Capture Technology Processes Conditions

Review
A review of CO2 adsorbents

performance for different carbon
capture technology processes
conditions
Jia Yen Lai, Lock Hei Ngu and Siti Salwa Hashim, Swinburne University of Technology, Sarawak,
Malaysia
Abstract: The utilization of various conventional and emerging solid adsorbents is an attractive carbon
capture method for post-combustion and direct air capture (DAC). This review aims to identify
adsorbents with the highest CO2 adsorption performance at various CO2 capture conditions inclusive
of pre-combustion, post-combustion, and DAC to aid the selection of adsorbents. It presents the
various adsorbents’ physical and chemical properties, their synthesis methods, CO2 adsorption
performance, and their advantages as CO2 adsorbents. Findings of the review show that NaX@NaA
core-shell microspheres possess the highest CO2 adsorption capacity at 5.60 mmol g−1 for adsorption
at DAC conditions. MOF-177-TEPA exhibited the highest post-combustion condition CO2 adsorption
capacity at 4.60 mmol g−1 given tetraethylenepentamine properties leading to low diffusion resistance
for CO2 and easy access to active sites. Approximation of these adsorbents’ adsorption capacity within
pre-combustion capture temperature at 1 bar for oxy-combustion process was 0.0000026–48.71 mmol
g−1 . It is crucial to understand and evaluate these adsorbents’ characteristics for application in the
appropriate adsorption conditions. This considers their usage limitations on pilot-scale CO2 capture
because of low productivity, poor durability, and stability for prolonged cyclic adsorption–desorption,
expensive adsorption system, high gas flow rate, high adsorbate accommodation requirement, longer
flow switching time, and low tolerance towards water and impurities present in flue gas. This paper
hence presents future enhancements in overcoming their limitations to accommodate pilot scale
carbon capture. These are beneficial in providing insights for capturing CO2 from flue gases emitted in
industries. © 2021 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Additional supporting information may be found online in the Supporting Information section at the end
of the article.
Keywords: adsorbent limitation; adsorption capacity; CO2 adsorbents; CO2 emission; future
enhancement
Correspondence to: Lock Hei Ngu, Faculty of Engineering, Computing and Science, Swinburne University of Technology, Jalan Simpang Tiga,
93350 Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia.
E-mail: lngu@swinburne.edu.my
Received March 19, 2021; revised June 29, 2021; accepted July 27, 2021
Published online at Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/ghg.2112
© 2021 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Greenhouse Gas Sci Technol. 0:1–41 (2021); DOI: 10.1002/ghg.2112 1
JY Lai et al. Review: A review of CO2 adsorbents performance for different carbon capture technology processes conditions
Introduction MOFs were found to be capable of capturing CO2

using PSA.12 However, zeolites’ hydrophilic
Adsorption of carbon dioxide (CO2 ) in a gas mixture characteristic renders them incapable of adsorbing
using solid adsorbents by pressure swing approach CO2 from flue gas while the hydrophobic microporous
(PSA), thermal swing approach (TSA), or temperature materials, activated carbon and MOFs are more
vacuum swing approach (TVSA) has been studied in tolerant towards water vapor.12
the industry as an attractive approach and a promising A related overview of different types of adsorbents
alternative to the amine scrubbing process.1–6 The and their CO2 adsorption performance in
adsorption process is generally carried out by filling post-combustion conditions11,13,14 is presented as
dry adsorbents into a packed column in the presence of follows: Ben-Mansour et al.11 provide a review of
a CO2 stream, and the CO2 is captured onto the different carbon capture materials that have the
adsorbent surface at atmospheric pressure and potential for CO2 adsorption, the experimental studies
temperature of 25–65 °C.5 It is cost-effective when CO2 on the adsorption by the adsorbents, and challenges of
adsorption and desorption are conducted using PSA, the adsorbents for post-combustion adsorption. Zhao
TSA, or a combination of both to obtain pure CO2 .5 et al.14 briefly gave an overview of zeolites,
The reversible reaction and improved efficiency on immobilized organic amine adsorbents, MOFs,
adsorption through chemical functionalization on the covalent organic frameworks (COFs), and potassium-
surface of adsorbents highlighted to the prominence of and metal oxide-based adsorbents on post-combustion
adsorption for CO2 capture.5 Global warming and capture process. Moreover, the preparation of porous
climate change arise from the alarming increase of carbons, the relationship between the carbon structure
atmospheric CO2 level, from 290.70 ppm in the and CO2 capture performance, and recent progress on
preindustrial time around 18807,8 to 409.80 ppm in using them for post-combustion CO2 capture were also
20199 associated with the increase of anthropogenic discussed.
activities (i.e., fossil fuels combustion in power plant, Samanta et al.13 studied the CO2 adsorption from flue
agriculture, forestry and other land use, industrial gas stream by various adsorbents (i.e., activated
processes, transportation, etc.),10 leads to the carbonaceous materials, microporous and mesoporous
implementation of adsorption for reduction of CO2 silica, zeolites, carbonates, and polymeric resins
emission. functionalized with or without nitrogen functional
Zeolite, silica materials, metal organic framework groups) and their characteristics (i.e., equilibrium
(MOF), and activated carbon are conventional adsorption capacity, selectivity, regeneration, durability
adsorbents that are extensively studied for CO2 over multiple adsorption–desorption cycles, and
adsorption. The utilization of these solid adsorbents for adsorption–desorption kinetics) on adsorption
CO2 adsorption requires minimum energy in both performance. Besides, Hedin et al.12 focused on a
adsorption and regeneration without involving the variety of adsorbents as a potential candidate for CO2
formation of a chemical bond resulting from the capture from flue gases using PSA or TSA processes,
interaction between the adsorbate and adsorbent.11 For the development of adsorbents, modeling, and
effective CO2 adsorption, it is crucial to develop solid simulations of gas molecules in adsorbents.
adsorbents with high CO2 adsorption capacity and From the numerous studies on different adsorbents,
selectivity.11 this study aims to consolidate and give a
Despite their advantages as potential CO2 adsorbents, comprehensive review on the basic features, synthesis
there is no preferred adsorbent reported presently for method, advantages and disadvantages as CO2
the various carbon capture conditions. Furthermore, adsorbent, and CO2 adsorption performance of at the
no preferred adsorbent was reported for the various carbon capture conditions of different types of
post-combustion condition from large combustion gas adsorbents, which are zeolites, silica materials, MOFs,
volume at real pressure conditions due to low CO2 activated carbon, COFs, alkali-metal/metal oxide based
adsorption capacity, low CO2 selectivity, high capture adsorbents, ordered porous carbon, activated carbon
cost, slow kinetic rate, and intolerant towards fiber (ACF), graphene, carbon molecular sieves (CMS),
moisture.5 Developments in utilizing CO2 adsorbents layered anionic clays (i.e., layered double hydroxide
in post-combustion capture are forthcoming. Several (LDH) and layered double oxide (LDO)), and their
solid adsorbents such as activated carbon, zeolites, and composites in the typical post-combustion conditions.
2 © 2021 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Greenhouse Gas Sci Technol. 0:1–41 (2021); DOI: 10.1002/ghg.2112
Review: A review of CO2 adsorbents performance for different carbon capture technology processes conditions JY Lai et al.
Figure 1. Process flow diagram of post-combustion CO2 capture of a coal-fired plant

(ESP = electrostatic precipitator) (Reproduced from 5).
Aspects such as physical and chemical properties of the volume with nitrogen (N2 ) and other minor
adsorbents, CO2 adsorption capacity, CO2 adsorption components (i.e., water vapor (H2 O), carbon
conditions, and selectivity of adsorbents were monoxide (CO), oxide of nitrogen (NOx ), and sulfur
summarized. The adsorption performance of these oxides (SOx )) and are emitted at atmospheric pressure
various adsorbents is investigated at various CO2 (1 bar) and temperature of 40–150 °C.15–18 The
capture conditions inclusive of pre-combustion, post-combustion process is generally using wet or dry
post-combustion, and direct air capture (DAC) to adsorbents and the fundamentals of adsorption and
identify the adsorbent that offers the highest CO2 desorption to adsorb CO2 .5
adsorption capacity. The outcome aims to aid the Figure 2 presents a schematic diagram of pre- and
selection of adsorbents for carbon capture in industrial oxy-combustion capture technologies. The
applications. This review also discussed the limitations oxy-combustion process combusts a hydrocarbon or
of these adsorbents on large scale CO2 adsorption and carbonaceous fuel using either pure oxygen or pure
their future enhancements. This present study is vital oxygen/CO2 -rich recycled flue gas mixture to remove
in providing new insights into the CO2 adsorption with nitrogen at 1300–1400 °C in a typical gas turbine cycle
these adsorbents for the pilot-scale process. and 1900 °C in an oxy-fuel coal-fired boiler. Contrary
to post-combustion capture technology, the
oxy-combustion CO2 capture process, under the same
CO2 capture with adsorption pressure condition (1 bar) separates the CO2 , a
The process of capturing CO2 emission from fossil fuel concentration of 17–70% in flue gas via cooling to low
power plants and cement manufacturing industries is temperature (−55 °C) after the removal of impurities
essential for industrial carbon management in reducing (SOx and NOx ) and gases (excess oxygen (O2 ),
the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.15 nitrogen (N2 ), and argon).19
Post-combustion capture technology is a viable Pre-combustion capture technology removes CO2
technology for CO2 capture that allows its application from the mixture of CO2 and hydrogen (H2 ) after the
to the existing emission technologies without combustion of primary fuel with the addition of steam
significant modification compared to pre-combustion or oxygen to produce CO and H2 , and conversion of
and oxy-combustion capture technologies.5 It involves CO to CO2 through water gas shift reaction. This
the removal of CO2 from treated flue gas emitted by process is typically carried out at a temperature of
fossil fuel combustion.15 Figure 1 depicts the process 200–450 °C and total pressure of 14–70 bar with CO2
flow diagram of post-combustion CO2 capture of a concentration of 15–60% in the feed to the CO2 /H2
coal-fired plant. In Figure 1, the capture plant is separation stage.19
normally located between the flue gas desulphurization Furthermore, DAC technology is an alternative
unit and the stack.5 In the post-combustion capture climate change mitigation technology that selectively
process, flue gases generated from the combustion of captures CO2 from the ambient air by a chemical
fossil fuel contain CO2 concentration of 4–15% by adsorbent.21 A concentrated stream of CO2 is then
Figure 2. Pre- and oxy-combustion capture technologies (Reproduced from 20).
Table 1. Typical carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology conditions.16,17,19,22–28
Typical CO2
Carbon capture and storage pressure concentration
(CCS) technology (bar) Temperature (°C) (%)
Pre-combustion 14–70 200–450 15–60
Oxy-combustion 1 −55 17–70
Post-combustion 1 40–60 3–20
Direct air capture 1 25 ∼0.04
generated for disposal or reuse, while at the same time, through pressure tumbling and elutriation of adsorbed
the adsorbent is regenerated and the CO2 -depleted air constituents by gas with low absorptivity.5 The beds are
is released back to the atmosphere.21 Typical process hence prepared for the subsequent cycle of adsorption
conditions of the CCS technology are summarized in after the regeneration.5
Table 1. TSA is a process that alternates the bed temperature
The adsorption process is gaining prominence due to between the adsorption and desorption processes in
its reversible reaction and improved adsorption which flue gas is flowed through the bed.5 A schematic
efficiency through the surface functionalization of the diagram of a single column TSA unit design is
adsorbents.5 It involves two stages: adsorption with presented in Figure 4. Selective adsorption takes place
CO2 and desorption of pure CO2 from loaded on the adsorbent until the equilibrium condition is
adsorbents by PSA, TSA, or TVSA.5 reached.5 Desorption of gas then occurred at elevated
Figure 3 depicts the schematic diagram of a temperature with the addition of heat (i.e., inert, pure,
two-column PSA unit design. A cyclic adsorption and hot gas).5 The regenerated bed is cooled down
process that separates the desired constituent from a prior to another cycle of adsorption at regeneration
single or mixture of gas streams in their continuous temperature according to the characteristics and
and bulk phase under periodic changes of pressure stability of the adsorbent and adsorbate.5 However,
varies depending on their molecular characteristics TSA is higher-priced than PSA due to the requirement
and affinity for adsorbent termed as PSA.5 At the for heating in the desorption process.5 In
beginning of the adsorption process, the CO2 from the post-combustion capture, there is available waste heat
mixture of gases flowing through the packed bed at for TSA.5 Nonetheless, the combination of both PSA
high pressure and low temperature is adsorbed onto and the TSA are normally carried out in industries, for
the surface of the adsorbent and the adsorption reaches instance, desorption or regeneration via lowering the
equilibrium conditions at the exit of the packed bed.5 pressure and heating, followed by low-temperature gas
The regeneration of the beds is then carried out adsorption.5
requirement for regeneration using thermal or pressure

modulation with the absence of water, potential
candidate for dilute gas mixture, large carrying capacity
for CO2 , easy to perform over wide-ranging
temperatures and pressures, faster rates of reaction,
and results in low pressure drop.6,34,35 Low total
maintenance requirements with minimum secondary
waste generation, long-term stability, lower adsorbent
heat capacity, and avoiding the removal of moisture in
flue gas make the adsorption system captivating.5
Preferable CO2 adsorbents should possess high CO2
adsorption rate and capacity, high selectivity for CO2 ,
easy regeneration with equivalent cyclic adsorption
performance, cost-effective operation, high availability,
stable CO2 adsorption capacity over repeated
adsorption–desorption cycles, high surface area,
tailored pore size distribution, and tolerant to moisture
and impurities.5,11,35–37 Since post-combustion capture
is carried out at a low to moderate temperature range
and maintained at atmospheric pressure, suitable
adsorbents are preferred for adsorbing CO2 at
low-temperature conditions.5 In the following section,
various CO2 adsorbents are hence discussed in terms
Figure 3. Schematic diagram of two-column PSA unit of their physical and chemical properties, synthesis
design (Reproduced from 11). approaches, CO2 adsorption performances, and their
advantages of being potential CO2 adsorbent
candidates.
In addition to PSA and TSA, TVSA is another
adsorption–desorption process for cyclic CO2 capture.
TVSA is a combination of TSA and vacuum swing
Types of CO2 adsorbent
adsorption (VSA). The schematic diagram of the TVSA CO2 adsorption aims to capture CO2 from a mixture of
process is presented in Figure 5. In Figure 5, the gas streams onto the surface of solid adsorbents.
adsorbent is initially preloaded in the first column Various types of adsorbents are reported in the
(column 1) to the maximum extent (known as literature, that is, physical adsorbent: zeolites, silica
equilibration (E)).30 Next, the adsorption process is materials, MOF, activated carbon, COF,
carried out in the two columns in series (column 1 and alkali-metal/metal oxides based materials, ordered
2) to purify the waste air stream.30 After adsorption, porous carbon, ACF, graphene, CMS, and their
the regeneration of adsorbent is initiated to desorb the composites through incorporation process using
CO2 from the adsorbent at desired regeneration different adsorbents, and chemical adsorbent:
temperature.30 The effluent CO2 is fed back to the feed composite adsorbents prepared using impregnation
gas stream while the adsorbent is cooled to adsorption with K2 CO3 , binary eutectic mixture (KNO3 and
temperature for the second cycle of LiNO3 ), NaNO3 , Al2 O3 , TiO2 , MnO2 , ZnO, ionic
adsorption–desorption process.30 This process is liquid (IL), and aqueous amine [i.e.,
advantageous over PSA and TSA because of its tetraethylenepentamine (TEPA), poly(allylamine)
minimum energy requirement for regeneration with (PAA), poly(ethyleneimine) (PEI), ethylenediamine
less desorption time of CO2 ,31,32 high CO2 recovery (EDA), diethylenetriamine (DETA),
with 97%,33 and high productivity up to 1.90 mol CO2 pentaethylenehexamine (PEHA), aminopropyl (AP),
kg−1 h−1 .33 N,N’-dimethylethylenediamine (dmeda),
Adsorption emerges as a cost-effective process for monoethanolamine (MEA), lysine, glycine, proline,
CO2 capture because of its minimum energy alanine, triethylenetetramine (TETA), and
Figure 4. Schematic diagram of single column TSA unit design, where MFC is mass flow
controller, PT the pressure transmitter, TT the temperature transmitter, and AT the CO2
analyzer (Reproduced from 29).
2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP)] into the medium39 via hydrothermal method.45,48,50 Figure 6

support adsorbent matrix. These CO2 adsorbents are shows the major types of hierarchical layered zeolite
hence described in the following sections. material. Micropore zeolites undergo transformations
(e.g., swelling, pillaring, and interlayer expanded
zeolite (IEZ) stabilization) for layered precursors to
Zeolites form mesoporous zeolites such as 3D, disordered,
Zeolites have a three-dimensional microporous delaminated, oxide pillared, and IEZ stabilized
crystalline silicate structure composed of zeolites.51
interconnecting channels with uniform pore sizes Park et al.42 reported that zeolite LiX has low CO2
ranging from 0.5-1.2 nm.38,39 The synthesized zeolite adsorption capacity (3.29–4.38 mmol g−1 ) at low
has a specific surface area range of 400–925 m2 pressure range (∼1 bar) but high CO2 adsorption
g−1 .40–42 The presence of aluminium (Al) in the silicate capacity (4.43–5.51 mmol g−1 ) at high pressure range
structure generates a negative charge at oxygen (∼10 bar) at 20, 35, and 50 °C due to strong CO2
surrounding the substituted Al atom to the zeolite adsorption affinity. Yu et al.52 synthesized binderless
framework when pure silica (Si) at the tetrahedral site zeolite NaX microspheres via chitosan-assisted
of the zeolite frameworks substituted by a typical synthesis for CO2 adsorption. The CO2 adsorption
substitute, Al to form anionic silicate-based network.43 capacities of the synthesized microspheres at 25 °C are
These are compensated by the exchangeable alkaline or 5.16 and 7.09 mmol g−1 at 1 and 10 bar,
alkaline-earth cations in the channel of the zeolite respectively.
framework which enables zeolites to be used for Ullah et al.40 studied various modified zeolites
adsorbing CO2 .24,40 such as ZSM-5, mordenite, zeolite-Y, and zeolite-β
Crystalline zeolites are synthesized using a silica for high pressure CO2 adsorption. At 200 bar, ZSM-5
source,44 alumina source,45 inorganic, and/or organic showed a CO2 adsorption capacity of 14–42 mmol g−1
structure directing agent (SDA)46–49 in a basic aqueous at 35, 50, and 65 °C, respectively. The CO2 adsorption
Figure 5. Schematic diagram of three bed TVSA process (shaded area = the adsorbent
loading at the beginning of an adsorption–desorption cycle; dashed line = the adsorbent
loading at the end of an adsorption–desorption cycle; P = purification; E = equilibration;
DR = desorption with recovery; D = desorption without recovery; and C = cooling of
adsorbent to adsorption temperature) (Reproduced from 30).
Figure 6. Major types of hierarchical layered zeolite material (Reproduced from

51).
capacity of Mordenite, zeolite-Y and zeolite-β carbonaceous materials),11,53 and tunable physical
are 30–72 mmol g−1 under similar temperature properties such as high surface area,40 regular
(35, 50, and 65 °C) and pressure (200 bar) conditions. porosity,40 interconnected pores channels40 and
The advantages of microporous zeolites as CO2 shape-selective structures.54 On the other hand,
adsorbent include their molecular sieving effect,39 high zeolites have reduced adsorption efficiency in the
selectivity towards CO2 (5-10 times greater than presence of moisture and impurities (e.g., NOx , SOx ) in
exhibited CO2 adsorption capacity of 5.5-23.5 mmol

g−1 at −5, 0, 10, and 25 °C, respectively.
SBA-15 silica material with a controlled microporous
framework was synthesized by using tetraethoxysilane
(TEOS) as silica source and Pluronic 123 (P123) as
surfactant template with the addition of sodium
chloride (NaCl).62 The microporous SBA-15 was
prepared using different amounts of NaCl added such
as 7.70 mmol (S1) and 15.50 mol (S0). A comparative
study of CO2 adsorption performance was studied
between microporous SBA-15 (S1 and S0) and SBA-15
without adding NaCl (S2) prepared using
tetramethylorthosilicate (TMOS) and P123 surfactant
as template.63 At 1 bar, S2 exhibited the highest CO2
adsorption capacity of 1.39 and 1.05 mmol g−1 at 0 and
10 °C, respectively, followed by S1 (1.25 and 0.96 mmol
Figure 7. Schematics of mesoporous M41S materials: (a)
g−1 ) and S0 (1.12 and 0.82 mmol g−1 ). The CO2
MCM-41 (2D hexagonal structure), (b) MCM-48 (cubic adsorption capacity decreased slightly with decreasing
structure) and Santa Barbara Amorphous type materials degree of framework microporosity on SBA-15
(SBA-n) (c) SBA-15, and (d) SBA-16 (Reproduced from materials. This manifests that high micropore specific
57,60, and 61). surface area (165 m2 g−1 ) and larger micropore volume
of S2 (0.06 cm3 g−1 ) presented a strong potential field
to aid in adsorbing more CO2 molecules.
the gas24,55 and low reaction rate in zeolites Chandrasekar et al.64 tested the adsorbents
regeneration process due to higher energy required for synthesized by templating TEOS silica reagent with
the desorption of water vapor from zeolite.56 poly(ethylene glycol)-block-poly(propylene
glycol)-block-poly(ethylene glycol) (Pluronic P123,
Silica EO20 PO70 EO20 ) under mild acidic condition as
Silica adsorbents are mesoporous materials having a described by Vinu et al.65 such as SBA-15 mesoporous
regular cylindrical mesoporous channel with a pore silica materials for CO2 adsorption. The adsorption
diameter range of 2-30 nm and a large surface area capacity of mesoporous SBA-15 was 7.13 mmol g−1 at
(700–1500 m2 g−1 ).57 Mesoporous silica materials can 25 °C and 40 bar. Mesoporous silica materials however
be used for CO2 adsorption because of their high have low hydrothermal stability in the presence of
chemical and thermal stability, tunable pore diameter, boiling water or steam66 and require functionalization
large specific surface area, and easy silica with various amine functional groups for enhanced
functionalization.57 Mobil Composition of Matter No. CO2 adsorption.58,59,67
41 (MCM-41),57 Mobil Composition of Matter No. 48
(MCM-48),57 Santa Barbara Amorphous No. 15
(SBA-15),58 and Santa Barbara Amorphous No. 16 Metal organic framework
(SBA-16)59 are typical mesoporous silica materials MOF-derived nanostructures have been utilized not
(shown in Figure 7). These mesoporous silica materials only for CO2 adsorption68,69 but also for hydrogen (H2 )
can be synthesized using sol-gel processing, template adsorption,70,71 methane/ethane (CH4 /C2 H6 )
assisted techniques, microwave assisted techniques, adsorption,72 other hydrocarbons adsorption,72 and
and chemical etching methods.57 also in catalysis73 given their extraordinary chemical
Lakhi et al.58 synthesized SBA-15 using pluronic poly tunable pore geometry, surface functionality within the
(ethylene glycol)-block-poly(propylene frameworks, and high surface areas.72 These textural
glycol)-block-poly(ethylene glycol) (P-123) as template characteristics can in turn facilitate large adsorption
under mild acidic conditions. A study of CO2 capture capacities and the selectivity control in adsorption.72
performance was investigated on pure SBA-15. At Figure 8 shows different nanoporous structures of
30 bar, pure SBA-15 mesoporous silica material MOFs synthesized by different research groups. MOFs
Figure 8. Different nanoporous structures of metal organic frameworks (MOFs) synthesized by

different research groups (Reproduced from 73).
exhibit three-dimensional crystallographically without ammonium hydroxide (NH4 OH) as an

well-defined structures and superior surface areas74 of additive. They found that at 0°C and 9.8 bar, Zr-MOFs
1000–10 000 m2 g−1 .75 These adsorbents are novel with NH4 OH exhibited a CO2 adsorption capacity of
hybrid materials composed of metal ions, metal 8.1 mmol g−1 , which was higher than that of Zr-MOFs
clusters, and organic ligands74 with pore sizes ranging without NH4 OH (7.8 mmol g−1 ).
up to 150 nm.76 MOFs are typically synthesized via Ma et al.68 synthesized nanoporous carbons using
hydrothermal (solvothermal),77,78 electrochemical,79,80 MOF-5 template and urea as the carbon source at
mechanochemical,81,82 microwave assisted synthesis,83 different carbonization temperatures (600, 700, 800,
ultrasound assisted synthesis,84,85 spray-drying and 900 °C). At 1 bar, four samples, that is, MUC600,
synthesis,86–88 and flow chemistry.89–91 MUC700, MUC800, and MUC900 have high CO2
Abid et al.69 investigated the CO2 adsorption adsorption capacity in the range of 3.34–3.71 and
performance of zirconium-MOFs (Zr-MOFs) with or 2.22–2.44 mmol g−1 at 0 and 25 °C, respectively. At low
pressure (0.15 bar), all four samples showed lower non-expensive carbonaceous materials with high
adsorption capacity ranging from 0.43 to 0.73 mmol carbon content, low ash content, and significant
g−1 at 25 °C. volatiles matter.109 It generally exhibits high surface
Chen et al.92 investigated MOF-505@GO composites areas, in the range of 700–1800 m2 g−1 after
as solid CO2 adsorbents. MOF-505 exhibited a CO2 carbonization and activation steps.109,110
adsorption capacity of 2.89 mmol g−1 , which was lower The advantages of using activated carbon for CO2
than MOF-505@GO composites in the range of capture include low cost,11,37 good thermal stability at
3.27–3.93 mmol g−1 at 25 °C and 1 bar. high temperatures under inert atmospheres,111 low
Despite their higher CO2 adsorption capacity acid-base reactivity,111 high adsorption capacity at
compared to zeolites and silica, MOFs have poor CO2 ambient pressure,11,37 well-developed porous
adsorption performance at low CO2 partial pressure93 structure,112 large porous surface area,111 adjustable
with reduced CO2 adsorption capacity in the presence surface chemistry and pore structure,111 good
of high water loading.94 MOFs are also susceptible to mechanical properties,112 good stability in moist
degradation after water vapor adsorption and thermal condition,11,37 easy regeneration,11,37 high
treatment,94 have expensive and complicated synthesis hydrophobicity,11 and can be utilized at atmospheric
processes,93 and poor durability and mechanical pressure and moderate temperature.113
strength due to the moisture absorption during CO2 Plaza et at.114 investigated the CO2 adsorption
adsorption.93 performance of activated carbon prepared from olive
stones via CO2 activation at different burn-off degrees
of 20, 40, and 50% and heat treatment with gaseous
Activated carbon ammonia at four different temperatures (400, 600, 800,
Activated carbon is a carbonaceous adsorbent that can and 900 °C).114 The prepared activated carbons have a
be synthesized by physical, chemical activation CO2 adsorption capacity of 1.32–2.43 mmol g−1 at 25
processes, or a combination of both. The physical °C and 0.34–0.73 mmol g−1 at 100 °C when exposed to
activation of the activated carbon is prepared by a 50 cm3 min−1 of pure CO2 . At a similar pure CO2 flow
two-stage process that involves the charring of the rate, the aminated samples have the CO2 adsorption
starting precursor in an inert atmosphere, followed by capacity of 1.55–1.95 mmol g−1 at 25 °C and
activation of carbon-enriched char using temperatures 0.43–0.59 mmol g−1 at 100 °C. This manifests that the
in the range of 800–1100 °C in combination with introduction of nitrogen functionalities can play an
activating agents such as steam, CO2 , a binary mixture important role in CO2 adsorption.
of CO2 and nitrogen (N2 ), or air.95–100 The chemical Serafin et al.115 studied the CO2 adsorption capacity
activation process for the production of activated of activated carbon produced from different biomass
carbon consists of a one-stage carbonization and (i.e., pomegranate peels, tinder fungus: Piptoporus
activation process in an inert atmosphere thermal betulinus and Trametes versicolor (L.) Lloyd, mistletoe
activation at the temperature of 400–600 °C after the branches and leaves, carrot peels, kiwi fruit peels, fern
starting precursor impregnated with selected chemical leaves, and sugar beet pulp). They found that at 0 °C
activating agents.101–105 The activated carbon can be and 1 bar, pomegranate peels showed the highest CO2
produced in a thermal process that involves adsorption capacity of 6.03 mmol g−1 shown in
impregnation of the starting precursor by chemicals, Figure 9a. The pore diameter of 0.35 nm (Figure 10a)
followed by either carbonization under the N2 and the highest CO2 selectivity (15.1) in pomegranate
atmosphere or simultaneous carbonization and peels play a vital role in CO2 adsorption at 0 °C and
thermal activation in the presence of activating gases. 1 bar. At 25 °C and 1 bar, carrot peels exhibited the
The activated carbon has an amorphous structure with highest CO2 adsorption capacity of 4.18 mmol g−1 .
a high degree of porosity, which can be found in High selectivity of CO2 (8.1) in carrot peels compared
powder, granular, spherical, extrudate, bead, fiber, and to fern leaves (5.6) favors the carrot peels presented the
cloth forms.106,107 It has cylindrical, rectangular or highest CO2 adsorption capacity although fern leaves
irregular shapes of pores with pore diameters ranging have a pore diameter of less than 0.35 nm (Figure 10b)
from 0.8–10 nm (micropores), 10–50 nm (mesopores), that is important in CO2 adsorption at 25 °C and 1 bar.
and 50–2000 nm (macropores).108 Moreover, the Fiuza et al.116 reported that the activated carbon
activated carbon can be synthesized from any prepared from yellow mombin fruit stones by chemical
Figure 9. CO2 adsorption isotherms of the activated Figure 10. The narrow micropore size distribution of
carbons at temperatures of (a) 0 °C and (b) 25 °C activated carbons produced from carbon precursors such
(Reproduced from 115). as (a) Pomegranate peels (PP), tinder fungus: Piptoporus
betulinus (TF1), Trametes versicolor (L.) Lloyd (TF2),
mistletoe leaves (ML), carrot peels (CP), kiwi fruit peels (KP),
and sugar beet pulp (SP), and (b) mistletoe branches (MB)
and fern leaves (FL) (Reproduced from 115).
activation (using nitric acid (HNO3 ), phosphoric acid
(H3 PO4 ), and potassium hydroxide (KOH)) and
physical activation (using CO2 ) exhibited CO2 techniques influenced the CO2 adsorption
adsorption capacity of 0.023–0.063 mmol g−1 obtained performance and their pore characteristics.34,117–120
in the mixture of 50% CO2 and 50% nitrogen (N2 ) at
1 bar and 40 °C. The activated carbon prepared via Unconventional CO2 adsorbent
KOH activation, which exhibited the highest CO2 This section presents adsorbents (i.e., covalent organic
adsorption capacity was further tested for 10 framework (COF), alkali-metal/metal oxide-based
adsorption/desorption cycles. It was observed that after adsorbents, ordered porous carbon, ACF, graphene,
10 cycles, only a slight decrease in CO2 adsorption CMS, and layered anionic clays (i.e., layered double
capacity from 0.0633 to 0.0624 mmol g−1 , indicating hydroxide (LDH) and layered double oxide (LDO))
the suitability of KOH as an activating agent. The which is less frequently used for CO2 adsorption
properties of activated carbons are strongly affected by compared to zeolites, silica materials, MOFs, and
the surface functional groups while the physical and activated carbon. There is an average of 2–14 literatures
chemical properties of precursors and the activation on the application of each of these adsorbents with five
literatures on COF, 14 literatures on alkali-metal/metal monomer. The result indicates that CTF-DCBT
oxide-based adsorbents, seven literatures on ordered exhibited a CO2 adsorption capacity of 1.69 mmol g−1
porous carbon, seven literatures on ACF, five literatures at 25 °C and 1 bar, given its ultramicropore and high
on graphene, six literatures on CMS, and six literatures heteroatom contents (N and S). CTF-DCBT showed no
on layered anionic clays for CO2 adsorption. significant loss of CO2 adsorption capacity after six
adsorption-desorption cycles, indicating that
CTF-DCBT has great recyclability. Nevertheless, it is
Covalent organic framework still a great challenge to synthesize COFs that combine
Covalent organic framework (COF) is an ordered all desired properties for CO2 adsorption, that is, high
crystalline porous polymers composed of organic CO2 adsorption, high selectivity, high thermal and
building units (H, O, C, N, B, and Si) which are bonded chemical stabilities, and recyclability without loss of
by stable covalent linkages with an ordered π -structure CO2 capture performance in air/moisture
through strong covalent bonds.121–124 Figure 11 shows atmosphere.124,137
the various structures of COF synthesized using
different synthesis methods. It is typically synthesized
via the solvothermal synthesis,125–127 microwave Alkali-metal/metal oxide-based CO2
synthesis,126,128 ionothermal synthesis,129,130 adsorbent
mechanochemical synthesis,131,132 room-temperature Alkali-metal based CO2 adsorbent can be prepared by
synthesis,133 coupling reactions,134 Schiff base adding alkali-metal (i.e., Na, K, Al, Li) carbonates to
chemistry,134,135 one-step condensation, or various inorganic supports such as carbon materials,
cocondensation reactions.136,137 zirconia, ceramics, silica, and alumina.13,93 The
COF has potential as CO2 adsorbent material due to alkali-metal based CO2 adsorbents have a porous
its low crystal density, high specific surface area, high structure with surface area of 0.09–442.1 m2 g−1 and
porosity, tunable pore size, columnar π -stacking pore size of 0–20 nm.162,163 Seggiani et al.164 studied
structure, a versatile covalent combination of building the CO2 adsorption performance of lithium
units, and high thermal, and chemical stability.122,137,138 orthosilicate (Li4 SiO4 ) with the addition of 30 wt.%
Wang et al.139 synthesized four alkyl amine potassium carbonate (K2 CO3 ) or sodium carbonate
functionalized triphenylamine-based COFs (Na2 CO3 ). Both Li4 SiO4 -carbonate adsorbents showed
(TPA-xC-NH2 ) at different alkyl amine chains, x = a CO2 adsorption capacity of 5.23 mmol g−1 at an
1–4. TPA-4C-NH2 exhibits a high CO2 adsorption optimum adsorption temperature of 580 °C and low
capacity of 3.41 mmol g−1 and 5.26 mmol g−1 at 25 and CO2 partial pressure of 0.04 bar.
0 °C, respectively. This manifests that the alkyl amine Durán-Muñoz et al.165 investigated lithium
length affects the CO2 adsorption capacity of oxosilicate (Li8 SiO6 ) as an adsorbent in CO2
TPA-functionalized COFs. adsorption. The Li8 SiO6 adsorbent exhibited a very
Zhao et al.140 investigated the CO2 adsorption high sorption capacity of about 11.79 mmol g−1 over a
performance of covalent triazine-based framework wide temperature range (T ≥ 650 °C) with an efficiency
(CTF) synthesized at 400 (CTF-1) and 600 °C of 71.1%. Ma et al.166 reported that the alkali
(CTF-1-600). At 0 °C and 1 bar, the CO2 adsorption metal-doped porous carbon materials such as lithium
capacity of CTF-1-600 (3.82 mmol g−1 ) was higher (Li+ ) metal-doping porous carbon material (PC-Li),
than CTF-1 (2.47 mmol g−1 ). Despite CTF-1-600 sodium (Na+ ) metal-doping porous carbon material
having a smaller micropore surface area, CTF-1-600 (PC-Na), potassium (K+ ) metal-doping porous carbon
contains more nitrile groups that have a stronger material (PC-K) showed a CO2 adsorption capacity of
affinity to CO2 than the nitrogen in triazine and causes 8.43–12.46 mmol g−1 , which is about 2.6–3.8 times
higher CO2 adsorption capacity than CTF-1. This higher than the nondoped porous carbon materials
indicates that surface functionalities of the sorbents (3.27 mmol g−1 ) at 25 °C and 1 bar (Figure 12). This
have a more significant effect on low-pressure shows that the doping of alkali metals into the carbon
adsorption. surface plays a vital role in the interaction between the
Wang et al.141 studied the CO2 adsorption carbon surface and CO2 molecules.
performance of 2D CTF prepared using The alkali-metal based CO2 adsorbents do not
1,3-dicyanobenzo[c]thiophene (DCBT) as the require further cooling processes, making them
Figure 11. Structural diversity in covalent organic frameworks (COFs) (Reproduced from (a),142 (b),143 (c),144 (d),145
(e),146 (f),147 (g),148 (h),149 (i),150 (j),151 (k),152 (l),153 (m),154 (n),155 (o),156 (p),157 (q),158 (r),159 (s),160, and (t)161).
technically and economically attractive for properties of adsorbents, and the distribution of the
post-combustion CO2 capture at high temperatures active components.167
and low concentrations.93 However, the carbonation Apart from alkali-metal based CO2 adsorbent,
reaction characteristics of these alkali metal-based CO2 alkaline-earth metal oxides such as calcium oxide
adsorbents are very dependent on the support (CaO) and magnesium oxide (MgO) are also used as
materials, the adsorbent surface area, the physical dry chemical adsorbents to capture CO2 because of
(Ca(CH3 COO)2 ·H2 O) for CO2 adsorption at high

temperature of 550–800 °C. The CaO adsorbent
synthesized from Ca(CH3 COO)2 ·H2 O precursor
(CaAc2 ·H2 O-CaO) presented a high CO2 adsorption
capacity of 17.30 mmol g−1 among the five precursors
at 600 °C after 5 hr carbonation of CO2 . High CO2
adsorption performance of CaAc2 ·H2 O-CaO
adsorbent was ascribed to its large surface area (20.2
m2 g−1 ) and pore volume (0.23 cm3 g−1 ).
Li et al.177 found that dry potassium carbonate
(K2 CO3 )-impregnated MgO/Al2 CO3 adsorbent
prepared via the wet multistep impregnating method
with the loading of 30 wt.% K2 CO3 and 10 wt.% MgO
Figure 12. CO2 adsorption isotherms of porous (KMgAlI3010) has CO2 adsorption capacity of
carbon materials: PC = undoped porous carbon 2.50 mmol g−1 , higher than the adsorbent prepared
material, PC-OH = hydroxyl-doping porous carbon without MgO, KMgAlI3000 (1.80 mmol g−1 ) at 60 °C
material, PC-Li = Lithium (Li+ ) metal-doping in a fluidized bed reactor. This manifests that MgO
porous carbon material, PC-Na = Sodium (Na+ ) attributed to high CO2 amount adsorbed over
metal-doping porous carbon material, PC-K = KMgAlI3010 adsorbent by transforming K2 CO3 to
Potassium (K+ ) metal-doping porous carbon active species such as baylissite (K2 Mg(CO3 )2 ·4H2 O)
material at 25 °C (Reproduced from 166). and dipotassium magnesium carbonate (K2 Mg(CO3 )2 )
to improve the adsorption.
their favorable thermodynamics for CO2 adsorption at Despite the high CO2 adsorption capacity obtained
ambient conditions (MgO) or temperatures above 600 by alkali-metal oxide based adsorbents, however their
°C with possible heat recovery (CaO), presence of basic adsorption performance was rapidly reduced over
sites which is attractive to acidic CO2 gas during multiple carbonation/calcination cycles due to
adsorption, high abundance, being a low cost naturally reduction in their surface area during calcination
present minerals, and environmentally benign natural caused by the sintering of CaO.178–181 Besides, the
material.93,168–170 These alkali-earth metal formation of active species during the carbonation
oxides-based CO2 adsorbents are white solids that process can significantly affect the uptake of CO2 by
exhibit either crystalline or hygroscopic structures with alkali-metal oxide based adsorbents.170,177,182
surface area and pore diameter of 14–340 m2 g−1 and
2–100 nm, respectively.170–174
Li et al.175 investigated the CO2 adsorption capacities Ordered porous carbon
of aluminum oxide (Al2 O3 )-functionalized MgO Ordered porous carbon is another type of
(MgO/Al2 O3 ) adsorbents prepared with different MgO carbonaceous adsorbent. It is typically synthesized via
loadings (0, 5, 10, 20, and 30 wt.%) from simulated flue the mixing of carbon precursors and block copolymers
gas containing 8 vol% CO2 and balanced N2 ) at 30 °C templates to form ordered porous structures and
in a fixed bed reactor. The MgO/Al2 O3 adsorbent nanocasting by using silica materials as structural
loaded with 10 wt.% MgO exhibited the highest CO2 directing hard templates.183–185 It is suitable to be
adsorption capacity of 0.69 mmol g−1 . High surface utilized as CO2 adsorbent given its high specific surface
area (200.91 m2 g−1 ) and high MgO loading (10 wt.%) area (475–3960 m2 g−1186–188 ), uniform, adjustable
on the MgO/Al2 O3 adsorbent facilitated physical and pore size (i.e., micropores (< 2 nm), mesopores
chemical adsorption at the maximum amount of (2-50 nm), macropores (> 50 nm)109,186,189,190 ) and
adsorbed CO2 . pore structure, chemically inert nature, mechanical
Lu et al.176 prepared CaO adsorbents using several stability, and good conductivity.191
precursors such as calcium nitrate tetrahydrate Ma et al.192 found that N-doped porous carbon
(Ca(NO3 )2 ·4H2 O), calcium oxide (CaO), calcium synthesized using a facile one-pot evaporation-induced
hydroxide (Ca(OH)2 ), calcium carbonate (CaCO3 ), self-assembly method had a specific surface area of
and calcium acetate monohydrate 1979 m2 g−1 and an N content of 4.32 wt.% with the
Figure 13. CO2 adsorption isotherms of ordered Figure 14. Micropore size distribution of the ordered
nanoporous carbons (ONCs) measured at 25 °C and nanoporous carbon carbonized at carbonization
1 bar (Reproduced from 194). temperatures of 700–1000 °C (Reproduced from 194).
CO2 adsorption capacity of 4.30 mmol g−1 at 25 °C and

1 bar. By utilizing the soft-templating method, Mahurin
et al.193 reported that the amidoxime-supported porous
carbon showed a CO2 adsorption capacity of
2.49 mmol g−1 and CO2 /N2 selectivity of 22.4 at 25 °C
and 1 bar. These researchers emphasized that balancing
porosity and functionality can play a vital role in
enhancing CO2 selective adsorption.
Yoo et al.194 reported the influence of carbonization
temperature of phenolic resins on the specific surface
areas and total pore volumes of ordered nanoporous
carbons (ONCs). A high CO2 adsorption capacity of
3.59 mmol g−1 was obtained at 25 °C and 1 bar when
the ONC was carbonized at 900 °C (Figure 13) given its
higher specific surface area (775 m2 g−1 ) and narrower Figure 15. Micropore size distribution of the activated
carbon fibers (ACFs) heat-treated at various KOH ratios
micropore size distribution (Figure 14) compared to
(Reproduced from206 ).
samples carbonized at other temperatures (700, 800,
and 1000 °C).
Despite its promising CO2 adsorption capacity, the granular and powdered adsorbents for CO2
ordered porous carbon has limited available types of adsorption.109,199–201 Nonetheless, their CO2
carbon precursor, low robustness in the structure of adsorption characteristics, pore characteristics, and
precursor as well as poor carbonization ability and textural features are affected by the surface chemistry,
nanostructural inheritability when it is subjected to both physical and chemical properties of precursors,
pyrolysis treatment.195 and the activation methods.202–205
The modification of commercially available ACFs via
Activated carbon fibers a chemical activation method was reported by Lee and
Activated carbon fibers (ACFs) have fibrous co-workers.206 They reported that the ACF pore
nanostructures with a large amount of accessible structure can be adjusted by controlling the KOH
micropores exposed to their surfaces109 and relatively concentration intercalated into the graphitic lattice to
high surface area (around 2000 m2 g−1 ), narrow pore enhance the CO2 adsorption capacity. The modified
size distributions (0.5–2.38 nm106,196–198 ), abundant ACF with KOH impregnation ratio of 3 (ACFK-3) has
micrometer porosity, and easier to handle compared to a pore size of ∼0.70 nm (Figure 15) and CO2
Figure 16. CO2 adsorption isotherms of the modified

ACFs with KOH impregnation at 25 °C (Reproduced
from206 ).
Figure 17. CO2 adsorption isotherms measured at 0
°C for the CO2 -activated carbon fibers (KEV-700-5,
adsorption capacity of 5.68 mmol g−1 at 25 °C and KEV-750-3, KEV-800-0.5) and for the KOH-activated
1 bar (Figure 16). When compared to the modified carbon powder (KEV-4-KOH) prepared from Kevlar®
ACF with a KOH impregnation ratio of 4 (ACFK-4), (Reproduced from 196,208).
the ACFK-4 has a considerably lower adsorption
capacity (4.00 mmol g−1 ) although it exhibited a larger
specific surface area (2318 m2 g−1 ) and micropore the large volume of ultramicropores is attributed to
volume (0.99 cm3 g−1 ) than the ACFK-3 (2180 m2 g−1 high CO2 adsorption capacity.
and 0.93 cm3 g−1 ). This indicates that the
ultramicropore size distribution can play a key role in Graphene
enhancing CO2 adsorption capacity rather than by the Graphene is a two-dimensional bonded carbon sheet
specific surface area or micropore volume. arranged in a hexagonal honeycomb lattice with a
Thiruvenkatachari et al.207 synthesized large specific surface area of ∼2600 m2 g−1 209–211 and pore
honeycomb-shaped carbon fiber composite (HMCFC) diameter ranging from 0.70 to 30.86 nm.212–214 It is
adsorbents for large-scale CO2 capture. At 20 °C, generally synthesized from graphite precursors via
HMCFC exhibited an average CO2 adsorption capacity oxidation–exfoliation–reduction in the form of
of 2.70 mmol g−1 in a simulated flue gas adsorption graphene oxide (GO).211 The largely expanded and
(13% CO2 , 5.5% O2 , and the balance N2 ). They found tuneable layer structure of GO provides a wide range of
that the HMCFC adsorbents are more effective in functionalities and reaction sites for chemical
capturing CO2 in a combined vacuum and thermal modifications which is advantageous in CO2
decomposition process. adsorption.211 Moreover, the graphene-based material
Choma et al.196 studied the CO2 adsorption is also widely researched for CO2 adsorption given its
performance of ACFs prepared from Kevlar® fibers via high Young’s modulus and good thermal and electrical
CO2 activation at different activation temperatures conductivities.211,215,216 Most of the graphene materials
(700, 750 or 800 °C). It can be seen from Figure 17 that are however sensitive to structural defects and the
CO2 activated Kevlar® -derived carbon fiber activated at number of layers. Therefore, the synthesis methods and
750 °C for 3 hr (KEV-750-3) showed the highest CO2 conditions are important to modify the structure and
uptake (6.58 mmol g−1 ) among all ACFs. The three properties of graphene.211
other ACFs had lower CO2 adsorption capacities in the Lee and Park217 reported an isothermal exfoliated GO
range of 4–5 mmol g–1 than KEV-750-3 due to their prepared using a new CO2 pressure swing method,
smaller volumes of ultra-micropores (0.3–0.4 cm3 g−1 ) with a surface area of 547 m2 g−1 and a total pore
than the KEV-750-3 (0.44 cm3 g−1 ). This shows that volume of 2.47 cm3 g−1 exhibits a CO2 adsorption
biomass and coal by pyrolyzation, covering, and carbon

deposition methods.222–232 The chemical vapor
deposition (CVD) method utilizes carbon deposition
agents such as acetylene,233 benzene,221,229,234
methylpentane,227 cyclohexane,229 and methane235,236
either in liquid or vapor form for pyrolytic carbon
deposition at pore mouth to match the pore entrance
with the adsorbate size.220 The advantage of using
CMS-based CO2 adsorbent is its versatile selectivity for
gas molecule separation with different molecular
sizes.237 Different molecules based on the molecular
size, shape, diffusion rate, or adsorption equilibrium
can be separated due to their microporous structure
Figure 18. CO2 adsorption isotherms of 3D and micropore size distribution.237,238
surface-microporous graphene (3D G) and its derived 3D Song et al.239 investigated the CO2 adsorption
activated graphene (3D AG) (Reproduced from 219).
performance of the commercial CMS with different
particle diameters (0.8–2.0 mm), packing density
(650–690 kg m−3 ), and compressive strength (≥110 to
capacity of 6.41 mmol g−1 at 25 °C and 30 bar. Meng ≥130 N). They found that at 10 bar, the CMS with
et al.218 investigated a novel thermally exfoliated particles diameter of 1.8–2.0 mm, packing density of
graphene nanoplates CO2 adsorbent. The graphene 650–670 kg m−3 , and compressive strength of ≥110 N
nanoplates showed high CO2 adsorption capacities of (CMS-1) exhibited the highest CO2 adsorption
56.35 mmol g−1 at 25 °C and 30 bar due to its larger capacity of 6.72, 5.33, and 4.50 mmol g−1 at 25, 35, and
interlayer spacing (0.358–0.364 nm) than the natural 45 °C, respectively. At similar conditions, the CMSs
graphite (0.335 nm) and high interior void volume. (CMS-2 and CMS-3) with particle diameters of
Tian et al.219 synthesized 3D surface-microporous 0.8–1 mm, packing densities of 670–690 mm, and
graphene (3D G) and its derived 3D activated graphene compressive strengths of ≥130 N showed lower CO2
(3D AG) via KOH activation at 500 (3D AG-500), 600 adsorption capacity (2.57–3.35 mmol g−1 ) compared to
(3D AG-600), and 700 °C (3D AG-700) for CO2 CMS-1. This indicates that higher specific surface area
adsorption. The results showed that the adsorption (1018.94 m2 g−1 ) and larger micropore volume (0.45
performance of the 3D AG-600 was better than the 3D cm3 g−1 ) are favored for high CO2 adsorption capacity.
AG-500, 3D AG-700, and 3D G. The 3D AG-600 Cho et al.240 studied the CO2 adsorption
exhibited a CO2 adsorption capacity of 3.13 mmol g−1 performance of CMS modified with various hydrogen
at 25 °C and 1 bar. 3D AG-600 has the highest peroxide (H2 O2 ) concentration solutions (3.5, 10.5, or
adsorption capacity (Figure 18) due to its larger 17.5%). It can be seen from Figure 19 that the CO2
amount of oxygen functional groups on its surface adsorption capacity of all samples, that is, untreated
which is increased by the activation with KOH. These CMS (Raw-CMS) and H2 O2 -modified CMS (O1-CMS
oxygen functional groups are attributed to the chemical (3.5% H2 O2 doped), O3-CMS (10.5% H2 O2 doped),
adsorption of CO2 . and O5-CMS (17.5% H2 O2 doped)) increased from
1.6 mmol g−1 (Raw-CMS) to 2.2 mmol g−1 (O3-CMS)
Carbon molecular sieve at 25 °C and 1.1 bar due to the H2 O2 treatment with
Carbon molecular sieve (CMS) belongs to a special various concentrations. The highest CO2 adsorption
group of activated carbon.220 Similar to the activated capacity was presented by O3-CMS compared to
carbon, the CMS has an amorphous microporous unmodified CMS due to its oxygen content, O/C ratio,
structure with a pore size similar to that of the critical and the degree of functional groups on its surface.
adsorbate sizes (i.e., 0.330 nm for CO2 , 0.380 nm for Carrott et al.221 reported CMS synthesized from
CH4 , 0.364 nm for N2 , and 0.346 nm for O2 )221 and polyester (PET) textile fibers via chemical vapor
smaller pore surface area.222,223 It can be prepared from deposition (CVD) using N2 saturated with benzene
any inexpensive carbonaceous material with low vapor (P810). The CO2 adsorption performance of
inorganic compounds such as lignocellulosic materials, P810 is compared with the carbonized PET sample
Figure 19. CO2 adsorption performance for the CMSs

functionalized using H2 O2 at 25 °C (Reproduced from Figure 21. Schematic diagram of layered
240). double hydroxide (LDH) structure
(Reproduce from244 ).
is dependent on the pyrolytic reaction or carbon

deposition conditions.221,242
Layered anionic clays

Layered double hydroxides (LDHs) are classified as
synthetic anionic clays.243 They are isostructural
materials composed of brucite (Mg(OH)2 )-like layered
structure and water molecules balanced by interlayer
carboxylate anions (Figure 21).243,244 LDHs are
generally represented as
[(M2+ )1−x (M3+ )x (OH)2 ]x+ (An− )x/n ·yH2 O], where
M2+ [e.g., Mg2+ , Cu2+ , Ni2+ , and Zn2+ ] and M3+ [e.g.,
Al3+ , Fe3+ , and Ga3+ ] are denoted as divalent and
trivalent cations, and An– represented the interlayer
Figure 20. N2 adsorption isotherms of A4A0 and the CVD
anions (i.e., CO3 2− , NO3 2− , and Cl− ) and water
treated samples, P8t at 800 °C for t = 5, 7, 10, and 60 min.
Open symbols are adsorption, closed symbols are
molecules.243,244 Calcination of LDHs is a versatile
desorption. (Reproduced from 221) method to prepare layered double oxides (LDOs).245,246
Primarily, LDH can be synthesized via solid state (i.e.,
mechanochemical process using wet and dry milling
(A4A0). Both A4A0 and P810 showed CO2 adsorption methods247,248 ) synthesis, liquid state (i.e.,
capacity of 1.55 and 1.66 mmol g−1 , respectively, at 25 coprecipitation, anion exchange,
°C and 1 bar. The CO2 adsorption was not significantly reconstruction/rehydration, and solution mixing
influenced by the chemical vapor deposition (CVD) method [i.e., hydrothermal or solvothermal methods])
treatment. The carbon deposition only narrowed the synthesis approach, and sol-gel methods.244,249–253
pore mouth but not inside the pores (Figure 20). In Among the solid state and liquid state synthesis
addition to its low CO2 adsorption capacity, the CMS is methods, liquid state synthesis method is commonly
not favored as a CO2 adsorbent due to its high toxicity employed to prepare LDH.244 Of the five
and high cost of depositing agents.236,241 It can also abovementioned liquid state synthesis methods,
generate intermediates during the deposition coprecipitation technique is the most frequently used
process220,233,236 and the CO2 adsorption performance for the synthesis of LDH by promoting the
coprecipitation of metallic salts through hexa-aquo two-dimensional structure, positive charge on the
complexes condensation caused by the addition of surface, and adjustable interior architecture),
alkali or urea in metal cations to form brucite-like nontoxicity, thermal stability, excellent anion exchange
metal cations layers containing solvated interlamellar capacity, low synthesis cost, easy to synthesize, and
anions.243,244 good adsorbing properties,256,257 they can be a
Qin et al.249 investigated the effect of intercalated potential candidate for CO2 adsorption application.
carboxylic anions carbon chain length of Mg3 Al1 However, the CO2 adsorption capacity of LDHs will
organo-derived layered double hydroxides (LDHs) on greatly influence by the nature of divalent cations,
the CO2 adsorption performance at 200 °C. Lower trivalent cations, charge compensating anions, and
adsorption capacity ranging from 0.45 to 0.61 mmol trivalent metal (Mg/Al) ratio in the structure, synthesis
g−1 was obtained by Mg3 Al1 organo-derived LDHs method, temperature and time of calcination,
with short carbon chain organic anions (C = 2–10). impregnation of alkali metal, presence of SO2 and H2 O,
The CO2 adsorption capacity increased from 0.61 to particle size, and preparation of hybrids.258–269
0.91 mmol g−1 when the carbon chain increased from
10 to 16, while the highest adsorption capacity
(0.91 mmol g−1 ) was achieved by the Mg3 Al1 -C16 Composite adsorbent
derived LDH. A quasi-amorphous structure that Composite adsorbents comprise particulate material,
formed from the long carbon chain organic anions (C preferably selected from the group of common
= 16) intercalated LDHs attributed to the maximum adsorbents such as zeolite, silica material, MOF, and
CO2 adsorption capacity of Mg3 Al1 -C16 derived LDH. activated carbon, binding with either another type of
Shang et al.254 prepared three types of M adsorbent, metal oxide, or ionic liquid.270–276 It can be
(Mg/Ni/Cu)-Al-CO3 layered double hydroxides prepared through the incorporation of an adsorbent
(LDHs) via aqueous miscible organic solvent treatment such as graphite oxide (GO), activated carbon, or
(AMOST) approach. At 1200 mbar, Ni-Al-CO3 LDH mesoporous silica into either MOF or zeolite by mixing
showed the highest CO2 adsorption capacity of 0.87, with a solvent or binder solution, solid-solid mixing,
0.87, and 0.60 mmol g−1 compared to Mg-Al-CO3 impregnation, in situ self-assembly, and in situ
(0.83, 0.83, and 0.35 mmol g−1 ) and Cu-Al-CO3 LDHs interfacial growth method induced via Pickering
(0.21, 0.21, and 0.10 mmol g−1 ) at 50, 80, and 120 °C, emulsion technique.277–283 Figure 22 depicts the
respectively. High Ni/Al ratio in Ni-Al-CO3 LDH leads schematic diagram of the forming process of the
to larger amount of basic active sites on its surface that composite adsorbent. This section is dedicated to the
attributed to its high CO2 adsorption capacity at all description of the features of composite adsorbent, its
three temperatures, although it has lower surface area surface area, pore volume, pore diameter, advantages,
of 249.45 m2 g−1 than Mg-Al-CO3 LDH (455.31 m2 and disadvantages as CO2 adsorbent, in particular a
g−1 ). combination of zeolite and activated carbon, MOF and
Zhu et al.255 found that the doping of K2 CO3 into GO, mesoporous silica and MOF, activated carbon and
magnesium-aluminum layered double oxides MOF, activated carbon and graphene, activated carbon
(K-LDOs) which prepared from the calcination of and activated carbon themselves, ordered mesoporous
three commercial LDHs (MG30, MG63, and MG70) carbon and MOF, and other composite materials.
enhanced their CO2 adsorption capacity. The LDOs Composite adsorbents exhibit surface area ranging
impregnated with 20 wt. % K2 CO3 (K2 CO3 /MG30, from 281 to 2310 m2 g−1 with pore diameters of
K2 CO3 /MG63, and K2 CO3 /MG70) exhibited CO2 0.53–3.50 nm. The composites of adsorbent displayed
adsorption capacity ranging from 0.75 to 0.83 mmol different porous structures depending on their
g−1 higher than non-impregnated LDOs combination of fabrication. A larger particle with
(0.18–0.36 mmol g−1 ) at 400 °C and 1 bar. The surface regular microporous octahedral structure resulted
basicity of K-LDOs caused by the partial replacement from the fabrication of MOF-activated carbon and
of Mg2+ with Al3+ and K2 CO3 doping generates MOF-ordered mesoporous carbon composite
stronger CO2 adsorption sites and higher materials.279 MOF-GO composite material has a
thermodynamic stability after CO2 is adsorbed. porous structure containing pores that similar to CO2
Owing to the exceptionally tunable chemical molecule sizes with several open copper sites, while
composition and structure (i.e., high surface area, ordered hierarchical microstructure with rectangular
Figure 22. Schematic diagram of forming process of composite adsorbent (Reproduced from51,57,73,287–290 ).
well-arranged platelets by MOF-mesoporous silica Bian et al.277 investigated the CO2 adsorption
composites.278,283 The composites of activated carbon performance of MOF, Cu3 (BTC)2 (also named
and zeolite exhibited a larger angular and slit shape of HKUST-1)-GO composites on dry and pure CO2 . At
crystalline structure.282 Porous structures containing 25 °C, Cu3 (BTC)2 -GO composites (Cu3 (BTC)2 /GO-l,
micropores and mesopores resulted in the production Cu3 (BTC)2 /GO-m, and Cu3 (BTC)2 /GO-h) exhibited
of activated carbon-graphene composite material.280 CO2 adsorption capacity of 2.66, 3.13, and 3.37 mmol
Fabrication of activated carbon-activated carbon g−1 , respectively with an added amount of 2, 5, and
composite showed two different structures either 10 mL GO aqueous suspension compared to pure
fibrous sponge-like structures with micropores and Cu3 (BTC)2 at 2.77 mmol g−1 . High pore volume and
macropores or dense structures, varying with the dense Cu3 (BTC)2 nanocrystals dispersion on the
application of thermal treatment.281 surface of exfoliated GO sheets with increasing added
Composite adsorbents are a potential candidate for amounts of GO aqueous suspension resulted in more
CO2 adsorption because of their various prominent active adsorption sites that manifest high CO2
features (i.e., open sites containing metal clusters and adsorption capacity in Cu3 (BTC)2 -GO composites
organic linkers, tunable pore structures, capable of except those prepared with 5 mL GO aqueous
modifying its surface functionalities, adjustable pore suspension (Cu3 (BTC)2 /GO-m). The presence of a
sizes, highly ordered channels, regular and uniform small number of Cu3 (BTC)2 in the Cu3 (BTC)2 /GO-m
porous structure, high thermal stability, and high composite formed from the high addition of GO causes
hydrophilicity) which overcomes the weaknesses of the a small contribution of GO itself to low CO2
single adsorbent incorporated in the composite adsorption capacity.
material.277,278,282,284,285 Despite its various desirable Pal et al.280 prepared composite adsorbents by
properties, the development of pore structure and incorporating graphene nanoplatelets (GNPs) into an
functionalities of the composite adsorbent was affected activated carbon structure. The GNP-activated carbon
by the combination of adsorbent types which, composites have a CO2 adsorption capacity ranging
consequently, influenced its CO2 adsorption capacity. from 0.038–0.060 mmol g−1 at 30 °C. The adsorption
of CO2 in the composites was emerged by their high the applications of CO2 capture (Figure 23). They have
surface area, high pore volume, and narrower been widely used because of their adsorptive properties
micropores and mesopores. attributed to their unique morphology and internal
In some works, to enhance CO2 adsorption, chemical structures, chemical nature, containing a large number
modification was performed on these support of enormous pores to adsorb CO2 molecules, and free
adsorbents by impregnation or grafting methods using surface-active sites for the immobilization of chemical
alkali, aqueous amine, or metal to form doping agents. These physical and chemical properties
functionalized-adsorbent composite materials. An of the CO2 adsorbents significantly influence their CO2
amine-functionalized adsorbent was synthesized by adsorption capacity. In this section, the physical
impregnating 10–40 wt.% PEHA on SBA-16 properties and CO2 adsorption capacity and selectivity
mesoporous silica.59 The CO2 adsorption capacity of of these adsorbents in various CO2 capture conditions
the amine-functionalized adsorbent increased with are tabulated in Table S2.
increasing temperature and showed higher CO2 This section discusses each type of CO2 adsorbent’s
adsorption capacity (1.6–2.1 mmol g−1 ) compared to performance in lab scale CO2 adsorption as discussed
SBA-16 (0.03 mmol g−1 ) at 70 °C. When the in types of CO2 adsorbent section and identifies its
temperature increased to 80 °C, the adsorption highest adsorption capacity from Table S2 regardless of
capacity decreased to 1.4–1.8 mmol g−1 due to partial its adsorption condition. Selectivity of CO2 for each
CO2 desorption. The sample loaded with 30 wt.% adsorbent is identified and summarized in Table S2 to
PEHA (SP-30) showed stable adsorption performance evaluate the preferential adsorption of CO2 in relation
with only a 2.5% drop in the adsorption capacity after to the material framework of the adsorbent over N2 ,
20 adsorption-desorption cycles. CO, and CH4 . The adsorption of CO2 by zeolites is
Veselovskaya et al.286 prepared a potassium carbonate favored on their pore surfaces because of the strong
(K2 CO3 )-containing composite materials via an electrostatic interaction between the CO2 molecules
epoxide-assisted sol-gel method using supercritical and the alkali-metal cations (i.e., Li, Na, and Al) in the
drying in ethanol by impregnating mesoporous structure of the zeolites and their molecular sieving
zirconia (ZrO2 ) aerogel with an aqueous K2 CO3 at effect.39,294,295 Based on Table S2, 13X zeolite showed
different K2 CO3 loading of 9–29 wt.%. The the highest CO2 adsorption capacity of 7.37 mmol g−1
K2 CO3 /ZrO2 composite adsorbents were tested for at 4 °C and 10 bar.296 The adsorption capacity of CO2
CO2 adsorption from the air with 25% relative on 13X zeolite is greater than other zeolite materials
humidity. The K2 CO3 /ZrO2 composite adsorbent because of the main cation, sodium (Na) in 13X zeolite.
impregnated with 23 wt.% K2 CO3 (ZK-3) showed CO2 The 13X zeolite contains a higher amount of Na cation
adsorption capacity of 1.05 mmol g−1 higher than in its structure that creates an electrostatic field
those impregnated with 9 wt.% (ZK-1), 16 wt.% resulting in strong interaction with quadrupole
(ZK-2), and 29 wt.% (ZK-4) with adsorption capacity moments of CO2 molecules.297 However, zeolites
of 0.091, 0.50, and 0.11 mmol g−1 , respectively. The commonly have a high energy penalty for
formation of crystalline potassium bicarbonate regeneration,298 low high-pressure CO2 adsorption
(KHCO3 ) formed from the interaction of K2 CO3 with capacity given its small pore volume, and difficulty in
the zirconia aerogel surface as observed in ZK-3 does precisely functionalizing and tuning intrinsic
not actively involve the CO2 adsorption and desorption structures.124 The CO2 adsorption performance of
processes. This makes ZK-3 a promising adsorbent by zeolite materials also decreases in the presence of
exhibiting high and stable adsorption capacity in TSA moisture due to easy saturation with water.299,300
cycles with a regeneration temperature of 200 °C. Compared to zeolites, silica materials, such as Korea
Advanced Institute of Science and Technology no. 6
(KIT-6)301,302 with the presence of water content (Rw =
Adsorbents CO2 capture performance at 2.48) has a higher CO2 adsorption capacity of
various capture conditions 14.29 mmol g−1 at 2 °C and 33 bar than that of 13X
Various types of CO2 adsorbents that is, zeolites, silica zeolite (7.37 mmol g−1 ). The CO2 hydrates formation
materials, MOF, activated carbon, COF, in the pore spaces leads to a higher adsorption amount
alkali-metal-based materials, ordered porous carbon, of CO2 at a hydrate formation pressure when the
ACF, graphene, CMS, and their composites are used in hydrate starts to form.303 However, dry silica materials
Figure 23. CO2 capture application by various types of solid adsorbents (Reproduced from
51,57,73,157,244,287–289,291–293).
normally show limited adsorption ability for CO2 and under humid conditions.124,309,310 In addition, many
the selectivity is low compared to wet silica materials MOF synthesis require expensive ligands or the use of
due to the weak interaction between their molecular costly and non-reusable solvents.93
sieves and CO2 .304 From Table S2, covalent organic framework (COF)
MIL-101 exhibited a relatively higher CO2 adsorption such as perfluorinated triazine-based covalent organic
capacity (40 mmol g−1 at 30 °C and 50 bar) compared framework (COF) (FCFT-1) showed the highest CO2
to other MOFs materials (0.25–15.50 mmol g-1 at adsorption capacity of 5.53 mmol g−1 at 0 °C and 1 bar.
22–80 °C and 1–47 bar). The influence of three Under similar condition (0 °C and 1 bar), carbon
activation conditions of MIL-101 (i.e., as-synthesized, mesostructured by KAIST-3 (CMK-3) ordered porous
activated in hot ethanol, and activated in hot ethanol carbon, pitch-based ACFs, thermally treated graphene
and using potassium fluoride (KF)) leads to the nanosheets (GPN), and mesophase pitches based CMS
variations of its CO2 adsorption capacity.305 The CO2 presented CO2 adsorption capacity of 5.80, 4.34, 2.89,
adsorption performance of most MOFs is strongly and 8.63 mmol g−1 , respectively. Alkali-metal based
governed by the open metal sites on its pore surface adsorbent such as Li8 SiO6 exhibited 34.56 mmol g−1 at
that bond preferentially and strongly with CO2 .306–308 650 °C, while adsorption capacities of 5.09 and
However, the CO2 adsorption capability of MOFs is 13.99 mmol g−1 were presented by magnesium oxalate
reduced gradually in real flue gas operation with the (MgC2 O4 ·2H2 O)-derived calcined MgO adsorbent and
presence of water, given that polarizable water CaO-based carbide slag (CS) adsorbent at 200 °C and
molecules strongly interact with the open metal sites 750 °C, respectively. The new emerging magnesium
on their pore surface.306 Several studies reported that (Mg) particle-reinforced aluminum (Al) matrix
the CO2 adsorption of MOFs severely decreased with (Mg-Al) layered double hydroxide (Mg-Al-NO3 LDH)
increasing humidity in either pure CO2 or a mixture of exhibited CO2 adsorption capacity of 0.24 mmol g−1 at
CO2 and N2 , particularly over repeated operations 200 °C. Alkali-metal based adsorbent, Li8 SiO6 showed
high CO2 adsorption capacity at elevated temperature adsorbent candidate given its simple preparation
of 650 °C, indicating its potential as a promising process, potential to be produced from any available,
adsorbent for CO2 adsorption at high temperatures and low cost carbonaceous material, and retention of
(650–700 °C).165 Nevertheless, at low adsorption high performance even in the presence of water.11,37,109
condition, that is, 0 °C and 1 bar, mesophase pitches Compared to composite adsorbents, adsorption
based CMS showed higher CO2 adsorption capacity of resulting from the incorporation of different
8.63 mmol g−1 than those performed under similar adsorbents showed comparable performance as the
CO2 adsorption condition due to its highly developed pristine adsorbent. At 1 bar, the composite adsorbents
narrow microporosity up to 1.42 cm3 g−1 with the exhibited CO2 adsorption capacities 1.57–8.03 mmol
presence of large voids.311 g−1 over the wide-ranging temperature of 0–50 °C with
COF is susceptible to hydrolytic instability in humid a maximum adsorption capacity of 8.03 mmol g−1
air due to the reversibility of B–O bonds with constant achieved by MOF and activated carbon composite
CO2 capture performance in a humid atmosphere.124 material. The presence of ultra-micropores in the
The ordered porous carbon is disadvantageous for CO2 MOF-activated carbon composite material correlates
adsorption due to its limited available types of carbon with its micropore volume for pores below 0.70 nm
precursor127 whereas the ACFs show high adsorption (0.42 nm) which increases the adsorption for CO2 .318
performance dependence on the precursors used and However, the adsorption capacities of composite
activation conditions.124,132,133 Moreover, adsorbents decreased from the highest 8.03 mmol g−1
lithium-based CO2 adsorbents exhibit substantial CO2 to the lowest 0.038 mmol g−1 when increasing
chemisorption at temperatures 400–700 °C.163,312,313 adsorption pressure from 1 bar to 50 bar. Influence of
However, the conventional solid-state synthesis route surface area and average particle diameter of graphene
of the lithium-based CO2 adsorbents requires a high nanoplatelets (GNPs) (H-grade (H25) (50–80 m2 g−1
preparation temperature of 700–1000 °C, difficulty in and 5, 15, or 25 μm) and C-grade (C750) (300, 500,
controlling the particle size and the crystal phases, is and 750 m2 g−1 and less than 2 μm)) and their added
energy intensive, with a long reaction time.162,314–316 composition (20 wt.% and 40 wt.%) in the formation of
The graphite-based adsorbents (composed of many activated carbon and GNPs based composites tend to
layers of graphene) have a low surface area and weak lower their affinity to CO2 molecules.280,319,320 Binding
affinity towards CO2 that limit the CO2 adsorption of different adsorbents onto another type of adsorbent
ability.317 On the other hand, the CO2 adsorption enhanced the tolerance of the pristine adsorbent
performance of CMS is dependent on the pyrolytic towards humidity in the flue gas. The CO2 adsorption
reaction or carbon deposition conditions.221,242 capacity of MOF-GO composite reduced slightly in flue
Activated carbon prepared from corn cob exhibited gas adsorption with the presence of humidity from
the highest CO2 adsorption capacity of 15.47 mmol g−1 2.66–3.37 mmol g−1 in the adsorption of dry flue gas to
at −47 °C and 1 bar among the biomass-based 1.57–3.19 mmol g−1 , but high CO2 adsorption capacity
activated carbon. Under the condition of 1 bar, the was obtained in the MOF-GO composite materials
corn cob-based activated carbon showed higher compared to pristine Cu3 (BTC)2 (0.64 mmol g−1 ) in
adsorption capability for CO2 than that of mesophase wet flue gas adsorption.277 The incorporation of GO
pitches-based CMS, the second highest adsorption sheets enhanced the surface water-resistance of the
capacity CO2 adsorbent under 1 bar CO2 capture with MOF-GO composite as most of the water molecules
maximum 8.63 mmol g−1 at 0 °C, given its high surface are predominantly adsorbed onto GO sheets, which
area (2789 m2 g−1 ) compared to mesophase decreased the accessibility of the water molecules while
pitches-based CMS (2450 m2 g−1 ). Although activated allowing the diffusion of CO2 molecules into the pores
carbon has disadvantageous of low CO2 selectivity of MOF, Cu3 (BTC)2 nanocrystals, and hence improved
(3.27-46), small low-pressure adsorption capacity (i.e., CO2 adsorption capacity of the composite.277 Apart
0.74–1.36, 0.40–1.51, and 0.69–2.11 mmol g−1 for CO2 from the incorporation process using different
adsorption of activated carbon prepared from olive adsorbents, the preparation of composite adsorbent
stone, almond shell, and rice husk, respectively at 0–25 can be performed through the impregnation of K2 CO3 ,
°C and 0.1 bar), disordered pore width, high adsorption binary eutectic mixture (KNO3 and LiNO3 ), NaNO3 ,
performance dependence on the precursors used and Al2 O3 , TiO2 , MnO2 , ZnO, ionic liquid (IL), and
pyrolytic reaction conditions,124 it is a promising CO2 aqueous amine (i.e., TEPA, PAA, PEI, EDA, DETA,
PEHA, AP, AMP, dmeda, MEA, lysine, glycine, proline, which is very close to 0, with an inapparent uphill
alanine, and TETA) into the adsorbent skeleton. From linear pattern, indicating a weaker linear relationship
Table S2, at 1 bar, the 60 wt. % TEPA-functionalized than COF.
SBA-15 exhibited the highest CO2 adsorption capacity In Figure 24(a), the relation between CO2 adsorption
of 5.22 mmol g−1 at 75 °C in a pure and humid CO2 capacity of adsorbent and adsorption temperature at
gas, whereas TiO2 -functionalized NH2 -UiO-66 loading 1 bar shows a strong downhill exponential pattern and
with 81% mass of TiO2 showed the lowest adsorption a correlation of 0.9906 and 0.8976 for silica material
capacity of 0.32 mmol g−1 at 25 °C. At elevated and ordered porous carbon, respectively. The
temperature (250–600 °C), the composite adsorbent correlation ranges of 0.5099 to 0.6905 presented in
synthesized by intercalating eutectic mixture (EM) of exponential line patterns of zeolite, ACF, and activated
KNO3 and LiNO3 into the alkali activated MgO carbon show a moderate downhill relationship
adsorbent matrix presented the highest CO2 between their CO2 adsorption capacity and adsorption
adsorption capacity of 10.22 mmol g−1 at 600 °C. The temperature. MOF, COF, alkali-metal based adsorbent,
introduction of promoting agent, EM enhanced the graphene, CMS, and composite adsorbent gave
CO2 adsorption performance, increased the thermal polynomial trend with correlation coefficient ranges
stability, and tolerance towards the irreversible between 0.1509 and 0.5649 in Figure 24(a). All relation
adsorption caused by the continuous alteration in the trendlines show a downhill relationship except for the
morphology and phase during adsorption of the relation trendline of alkali-metal based adsorbent.
modified MgO adsorbent, in addition to the naturally Figure 24(c) depicts the correlation between CO2
occurring basic sites on the surface of pristine MgO adsorption capacities of zeolite and MOF with
adsorbent for adsorption.321 adsorption temperature at 10 bar. A strong relationship
was found between the CO2 adsorption capacity and
the temperature as shown in the relation trendline
CO2 adsorption performance evaluation pattern of MOF and alkali-metal based adsorbent with
CO2 adsorption capacity data listed in Table S2 are high values of correlation coefficient near to 1 (0.9979
utilized to plot the various adsorbents’ adsorption for MOF and 0.9572 for alkali-metal based adsorbent).
capacity over their various adsorption temperature and The relation trendline of MOF demonstrates an uphill
pressure. Figure 24 presents these plots over adsorption exponential pattern, indicating a strong positive
temperature range of (−47 to 710 °C) at the pressure of exponential correlation. Whereas, an increasing
0.1, 1, 10, 30–39 and 40–51 bar. These plots are then polynomial trending is illustrated in the relation
used to determine the co-relationship between CO2 trendline pattern of alkali-metal based adsorbent.
adsorption capacity and temperature. A summary of Comparing MOF and zeolite, the relation trendline of
the correlation analysis and the value of the correlation zeolite shows a negative polynomial correlation with a
coefficient for the CO2 adsorption performance of lower correlation coefficient of 0.2856 than MOF.
these respective adsorbents are summarized in Table The correlation of silica material, MOF, COF, and
S3. composite adsorbent CO2 adsorption capacity with the
Based on Table S3, at 0.1 bar, two types of adsorbents temperature at 30–39 bar and 40–51 bar are shown in
such as activated carbon and covalent organic Figures 24(d) and (e), respectively. From Figure 24(d),
framework (COF) performed the CO2 adsorption at 0 no meaningful correlation can be obtained for silica
and 25 °C, respectively, by exhibiting adsorption material and COF since adsorption was performed at a
capacity of 1.24–2.11 mmol g−1 on activated carbon single temperature within the specified pressure ranges
and 0.37-1.76 mmol g−1 on COF. Figure 24(b) (30–39 bar). Conversely, the relation trendline of MOF
demonstrates that the CO2 adsorption capacity of COF shows a decreasing trend with a correlation of 1.
can vary with temperatures (0 and 25°C) with a Despite the fact that the relation trendline of MOF
decreasing line pattern and a correlation coefficient of presents a strong linear relationship, however no
0.3404, showing a weak linear relationship is present. meaningful correlation can be obtained for MOF since
Comparing activated carbon and COF, the variation of the equation of trendline used to calculate the
CO2 adsorption capacity of activated carbon with the correlation coefficient was executed from only two
adsorption temperature shows a correlation of 0.0015 measured points based on its CO2 adsorption capacity
a 16
CO2 adsorption capacity

10
14 8
CO2 adsorption capacity (mmol g¯¹)
(mmol g¯ 1)
6
12 4 R² = 0.9709
R² = 0.6905 2
10 0
R² = 0.1509 0 200 400 600 800
8 Temperature (°C)
R² = 0.5097
Alkali-metal based adsorbent
6 R² = 0.6132 Relation trendline (Alkali-metal based adsorbent)
R² = 0.386
4 R² = 0.4825
R² = 0.5099 R² = 0.8976
2
R² = 0.4389
R² = 0.9906
0
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Temperature (°C)
Zeolite Silica material
MOF Activated carbon
COF Ordered porous carbon
ACF Graphene
CMS Composite adsorbent
Relation trendline (Zeolite) Relation trendline (Silica material)
Relation trendline (MOF) Relation trendline (Activated carbon)
Relation trendline (COF) Relation trendline (Ordered porous carbon)
Relation trendline (ACF) Relation trendline (Graphene)
Relation trendline (CMS) Relation trendline (Composite adsorbent)
b 2.5 c 9
CO2 adsorption capacity (mmol g–1)
0.1 bar 10 bar

8
2 2
R = 0.9979
7
6
1.5
5
R2 = 0.9572
R2 = 0.0015 R2 = 0.2856
1 4
3
0.5 R2 = 0.3404 2
1
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Temperature (°C)
Temperature (°C)
Activated carbon (AC) COF Relation trendline (AC) Relation trendline (COF) Zeolite MOF
Alkali-metal based adsorbent Relation trendline (Zeolite)
Relation trendline (MOF) Relation trendline (Alkali-metal based adsorbent)
d 25
30-39 bar
20 P = 36 bar, T = 22°C; Cap.

= 21.28mmol g¯ ¹
15
R2 = 1
10
P = 33 bar, T = 80°C; Cap.
= 12.06mmol g¯ ¹
5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Temperature (°C)
Silica material MOF
COF Relation trendline (Silica material)
Figure 24. Correlation of various adsorbents CO2 adsorption capacity and temperatures (−47 to 710 °C) at pressures of:
(a) 1, (b) 0.1, (c) 10, (d) 30–39, and (e) 40–51 bar.
e 50
0.06

45 0.05
0.04
(mmol g–1)
P = 50 bar, T = 30°C; Cap. = 40
40 0.03
mmol g ¹
0.02
P = 50 bar, T = 30°C; Cap. = 34
35 mmol g ¹ 0.01
P = 50 bar, T = 30°C; Cap. = 28
mmol g ¹ 0
30 0 10 20 30 40
Temperature (°C)
25 Composite adsorbent
20
P = 41 bar, T = 45°C; Cap. = 17.63 P = 51 bar, T = 80°C; Cap. = 12.59
mmol g ¹ mmol g ¹
15
10
R² = 0.8786
5 P = 47 bar, T = 45°C; Cap. = 14.91
mmol g¯ ¹
40-51 bar
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Temperature (°C)
MOF Relation trendline (MOF)
Figure 24. Continued
and temperature at 30–39 bar from Table S3. A indicating that the CO2 adsorption capacity increases
logarithmic function can describe the relation between with increasing temperature irrespective of the
CO2 adsorption capacity of MOF and temperature. pressure.
Comparing Figure 24(d) and (e), the relation trendline Compared to other adsorbents such as zeolite, silica
of MOF in Figure 24(e) shows a correlation of 0.8786, material, MOF, activated carbon, COF, ordered porous
slightly weaker than the relation trendline of MOF in carbon, ACF, graphene, CMS, and composite
Figure 24(d), which signifies a negative polynomial adsorbent, the alkali-metal based adsorbent
relationship between its adsorption capacity for CO2 predominantly Li-containing adsorbent was the most
and the adsorption temperature under 40–51 bar. The promising candidate for high temperature CO2 capture
relation trendline of composite adsorbent does not because of the lithium oxide (Li2 O) in the crystal
show a significant relationship between the CO2 structure of the Li-containing adsorbent reacts
adsorption capacity and the adsorption temperature reversibly with CO2 during adsorption.164 This
since the adsorption is carried out at the same mechanism did not significantly influence the
temperature (30 °C) and pressure (50 bar). adsorption capacity of Li-containing adsorbent with
Most adsorbents inclusive of zeolite, silica material, the increasing adsorption temperature. On the
MOF, activated carbon, COF, ordered porous carbon, contrary, the CO2 adsorption of porous material likes
ACF, graphene, CMS, and composite adsorbent present zeolite, silica material, MOF, activated carbon, COF,
a weak to a strong downhill relationship in their ordered porous carbon, ACF, graphene, CMS, and
relation trendline. This manifests that the CO2 composite adsorbent was governed by their different
adsorption capacity of these adsorbents shows a types of pore size (i.e., micropores, mesopores,
negative linear relationship with the adsorption macropores, and ultra-micropores), which was
temperature. The negative correlation signifies that preferable for low temperature adsorption at 0—120 °C.
CO2 adsorption capacity decreases with increasing The CO2 adsorption performance of each CO2
temperature regardless of varying pressure conditions. adsorbent at various carbon capture conditions was
In contrast to the above-mentioned adsorbents, the evaluated in this review. The highest CO2 adsorption
relation trendline of alkali-metal based adsorbents performance of each absorbent at the operating
shows a moderate to a strong positive relationship, conditions of CSS were identified and listed in Table S4.
60
10

8
Post-combustion CO capture region

50
(mmol g–1)
6
R2 = 1
4
40
2
Directaircapture region 0
30 0 200 400 600 800
Temperature (°C)
P = 1 bar - Alkali-metal based adsorbent
20
R2 = 1 P = 0.1 bar
10 R2 = 1 R2 = 1 P = 30 - 50 bar
P = 1 bar
R2 = 1 P = 10 bar
R² = 1 P = 1 bar (Extrapolated)
0
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Temperature (°C)
P = 1 bar - Silica material P = 1 bar - CMS P = 30 - 50 bar - Silica material P = 30 - 50 bar - COF
P = 1 bar - CMS - Extrapolated P = 0.1 bar - AC P = 1 bar - Zeolite P = 1 bar - MOF
P = 1 bar - AC P = 1 bar - Ordered porous carbon P = 10 bar - Zeolite P = 10 bar - MOF
P = 10 bar - Alkali-metal based material P = 30 - 50 bar - MOF P = 1 bar - Composite adsorbent P = 1 bar - MOF - extrapolated
P = 1 bar - AC - Extrapolated P = 1 bar - Composite adsorbent - Extrapolated P = 1 bar - Ordered porous carbon - Extrapolated P = 1 bar - Zeolite - Extrapolated
P = 1 bar - Silica material - Extrapolated
Figure 25. Overview of CO2 adsorbents highest adsorption capacity at various carbon capture conditions.
60
P = 0.1 bar P = 1 bar P = 10 bar
P = 30 - 50 bar
Direct air capture region
50
40
30
20
10
0
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750
Temperature (°C)
Rice husk-P,0.1 NaX-P,1 SBA-15-P,1
MOF-5-P,1 Bagasse-derived AC-P,1 Coffee ground wastes-derived AC-P,1
Corn cob-derived AC-P,1 Wood-derived AC-P,1 Li4SiO4-P,1
NMCs-P,1 RF-based carbon-P,1 Mesophase pitches based CMS-P,1
MOF(Cu-BTC)/GO-P,1 NaX@NaA core-shell microspheres-P,1 PEI800-functionalized KIT-6-P,1
MCM-41-TEPA-AMP-P,1 MOF-177-TEPA-P,1 SBA-15/TEPA-P,1
PEHA-ASK-P,1 5A-P,10 13X-P,10
MIL-101-P,10 Li8SiO6-P,10 KIT-6-P,30-50
MIL-101-P,30-50 HKUST-1-P,30-50 APTES-COF-1-P,30-50
MOF(Cu-BTC)/GO-P,1-Extrapolated MOF-5-P,1-Extrapolated Corn cob-derived AC-P,1-Extrapolated
Wood-derived AC-P,1-Extrapolated Coffee ground wastes-derived AC-P,1-Extrapolated Bagasse-derived AC-P,1-Extrapolated
PEI/G-silica sheets-P,1-Extrapolated RF-based carbon-P,1-Extrapolated NMCs-P,1-Extrapolated
Mesophase pitches based CMS-P,1-Extrapolated NaX-P,1-Extrapolated SBA-15-P,1-Extrapolated
MCM-41-TEPA-AMP-P,1-Extrapolated MOF-177-TEPA-P,1-Extrapolated SBA-15/TEPA-P,1-Extrapolated
Figure 26. Overview of the highest CO2 adsorption performance of individual adsorbent at various carbon capture
operating conditions.
This aid to identify the highest performing adsorbent Maximum CO2 adsorption capacity: NaX@NaA
for utilization at various CSS condition. Figures 25 core-shell microspheres composite material
and 26 present an overview of the different types of (5.60 mmol g−1 ) > N-doped ordered mesoporous
adsorbents and their species’ highest adsorption carbons (NMCs), resorcinol-formaldehyde (RF)-based
capacity at various carbon capture conditions. carbon, and mesophase pitches-based CMS
Based on Figure 25, zeolite, MOF, activated carbon, extrapolated at (3.09 mmol g−1 ) > corn cob-derived
ordered porous carbon, ACF, graphene, and composite activated carbon, wood-derived activated carbon,
adsorbent are used for direct CO2 capture from coffee ground wastes-derived activated carbon, and
ambient air and can be rank as below: bagasse-derived activated carbon extrapolated at
(2.36 mmol g−1 ) > MOF(Cu-BTC)/GO, CO2 adsorbents, MOF-177-TEPA composite adsorbent
MCM-41-TEPA-AMP, MOF-177-TEPA, exhibited the highest CO2 adsorption capacity of
SBA-15/TEPA, PEHA-KIT-6(ASK), and 4.60 mmol g−1 for post-combustion adsorption at
PEI800-functionalized KIT-6 composite adsorbents 55 °C and 1 bar, whereas MOF-5 achieved the lowest
extrapolated at (2.33 mmol g−1 ) > MOF-5 extrapolated adsorption capacity of 0.54 mmol g−1 at 59 °C. MOF-5,
at (2.11 mmol g−1 ) > NaX extrapolated at (1.63 mmol NMCs, NaX zeolite, and SBA-15/TEPA composite
g−1 ) > SBA-15 extrapolated at (0.58 mmol g−1 ). adsorbent showed 0.75, 0.52, 0.30, 0.32, and 0.14%
Extrapolations were performed to predict carbon lower CO2 adsorption capacity than MOF-177-TEPA
capture performance at the post-combustion and DAC composite adsorbent. The linear structure and low
temperature at 1 bar for adsorbents including MOF-5, molecular weight of TEPA attributed to its well
corn cob-derived activated carbon, wood-derived dispersion into the MOF-177 inner pores regardless of
activated carbon, coffee ground wastes-derived its amount loaded. This property leads to the
activated carbon, bagasse-derived activated carbon, enhancement in the adsorption capacity of the
NMCs, RF-based carbon, mesophase pitches-based MOF-177-TEPA composite adsorbent by aiding the
CMS, MOF(Cu-BTC)/GO, MCM-41-TEPA-AMP, CO2 to overcome the diffusion resistance and access
MOF-177-TEPA, SBA-15/TEPA, PEHA-KIT-6(ASK), easily to the amine active sites.322 This result manifests
and PEI800-functionalized KIT-6 composite that MOF-177-TEPA composite adsorbent is preferable
adsorbents. In Figure 25, the adsorption capacities as CO2 adsorbent for post-combustion CO2 adsorption
correlation coefficients indicate a negative relationship which contradicts the selection from the general CO2
between CO2 adsorption capacity and temperature adsorption performance (Table S2). The adsorbents
with R2 equal to unity, 1 which are greater than used in adsorption at 10 bar and the CO2
correlation coefficients R1 (0.1509–0.8976) in Table S3. concentration used is not within the specified range of
It can be seen from Figure 26 that zeolite–zeolite post-combustion CO2 capture process hence removed
composite adsorbent (NaX@NaA core-shell from consideration under post-combustion condition.
microspheres) showed the highest adsorption capacity Based on Figures 25 and 26, the adsorption of
of 5.60 mmol g−1 under DAC at 1 bar. Composite alkali-metal based adsorbents such as lithium
adsorbents (MOF(Cu-BTC)/GO, oxosilicate (Li8 SiO6 ) for CO2 at temperature of
MCM-41-TEPA-AMP, MOF-177-TEPA, 200–350°C falls within the pre-combustion CO2
SBA-15/TEPA, PEHA-KIT-6(ASK), and capture region. At 10 bar, Li8 SiO6 exhibited CO2
PEI800-functionalized KIT-6), MOF (MOF-5), adsorption capacity of 1.64, 1.10, 4.10, and 6.80 mmol
activated carbon (corn cob, wood, coffee ground, and g−1 at 200, 250, 300, and 350 °C. However, the CO2
bagasse-derived activated carbon), ordered porous adsorption of Li8 SiO6 is not considered for
carbon (NMCs and RF-based carbon), and CMS pre-combustion CO2 capture since the adsorption was
(mesophase pitches-based CMS) CO2 adsorption not conducted within 15–70 bar for pre-combustion
capacity at DAC condition are obtained through condition, and hence extrapolation of CO2 adsorption
extrapolation using the correlation from Table S3. capacity of Li8 SiO6 is not executed.
N-doped ordered mesoporous carbons (NMCs), Figure 27 shows an overview of the different types of
resorcinol-formaldehyde (RF)-based carbon, and adsorbents and their species’ highest adsorption
mesophase pitches-based CMS are found to exhibit the capacity at various carbon capture temperatures and
highest extrapolated CO2 adsorption capacity of pressure of 1 bar. For CO2 capture from
3.09 mmol g−1 compared to other adsorbents, which oxy-combustion process, we propose adsorption at
have adsorption capacity ranging between 0.58 mmol temperature range of 200–450 °C (similar to
g−1 by SBA-15 and 2.36 mmol g−1 by corn cob-derived pre-combustion) at 1 bar to investigate the CO2
activated carbon, wood-derived activated carbon, adsorption performance of adsorbents instead of CO2
coffee ground wastes-derived activated carbon, and capture via cooling to −55 °C. The adsorption
bagasse-derived activated carbon. capacities of NaX zeolite, SBA-15, MOF-5, corn
Adsorbents used for post-combustion CO2 capture cob-derived activated carbon, wood-derived activated
include NaX zeolite, MOF such as MOF-5, ordered carbon, bagasse-derived activated carbon, RF-based
porous carbon (NMCs) and composite adsorbent carbon, and NMCs extrapolated from correlation to
(MOF-177-TEPA and SBA-15/TEPA). Among these the pre-combustion temperature range gave adsorption
60
P = 1 bar
Direct air capture region

50
40
30
20
10
0
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750
Temperature (°C)
NaX-P,1 SBA-15-P,1 MOF-5-P,1
Bagasse-derived AC-P,1 Coffee ground wastes-derived AC-P,1 Corn cob-derived AC-P,1
Wood-derived AC-P,1 Li4SiO4-P,1 NMCs-P,1
RF-based carbon-P,1 Mesophase pitches based CMS-P,1 MOF(Cu-BTC)/GO-P,1
NaX@NaA core-shell microspheres-P,1 PEI800-functionalized KIT-6-P,1 MCM-41-TEPA-AMP-P,1
MOF-177-TEPA-P,1 SBA-15/TEPA-P,1 PEHA-ASK-P,1
MOF(Cu-BTC)/GO-P,1-Extrapolated MOF-5-P,1-Extrapolated Corn cob-derived AC-P,1-Extrapolated
Wood-derived AC-P,1-Extrapolated Coffee ground wastes-derived AC-P,1-Extrapolated Bagasse-derived AC-P,1-Extrapolated
PEI/G-silica sheets-P,1-Extrapolated RF-based carbon-P,1-Extrapolated NMCs-P,1-Extrapolated
Mesophase pitches based CMS-P,1-Extrapolated NaX-P,1-Extrapolated SBA-15-P,1-Extrapolated
MCM-41-TEPA-AMP-P,1-Extrapolated MOF-177-TEPA-P,1-Extrapolated SBA-15/TEPA-P,1-Extrapolated
PEHA-KIT-6-P,1-Extrapolated PEI800-functionalized KIT-6-P,1-Extrapolated
Figure 27. Overview of the highest CO2 adsorption performance of individual adsorbent at 1 bar.
capacity from 0.0000026 to 48.71 mmol g−1 , with the strongly with CO2 through covalent bonding to their
highest adsorption capacity (48.71 mmol g−1 ) obtained organic polymer linker molecules or cluster of metal
by MOF-5. ions in chemical adsorption at moderate to high
Based on the adsorbent CO2 adsorption performance temperature. However, alkali-metal based adsorbent
analysis, the adsorption capacity of adsorbents was such as lithium silicate (Li2 SiO3 ) and lithium zirconate
extrapolated from correlation since they are not (Li2 O3 Zr) are suitable for CO2 adsorption at elevated
typically utilized to adsorb CO2 at the pre-combustion temperature of 500—700 °C,28 while conversely, MOF
condition which interrelated to the interaction between and COF are potential adsorbents for pre-combustion
CO2 and adsorbent during adsorption. Carbon-based CO2 capture which could potentially provide high
adsorbents (i.e., activated carbon, ordered porous adsorption capacity, given their high surface area.323,324
carbon adsorbent, and CMS) and zeolite are potential Nonetheless, weak interaction between CO2 and the
adsorbents for CO2 capture at temperature up to 120 adsorbent is still the significant factor that must be
°C.28 Due to the low temperature adsorption process overcome for the adsorbents to be suitable for pre- and
(−55 °C) for CO2 capture in oxy-combustion carbon oxy-combustion carbon capture.
capture, physical adsorption involves weak Van der
Waals force by the carbon-based adsorbents and zeolite
materials exhibiting low CO2 adsorption. This could be Limitations and future enhancement
attributed to the weak interaction between the CO2 of adsorbent on large scale CO2
and adsorbents at low temperatures. On the other adsorption
hand, a moderate to a high temperature adsorption Each type of adsorbent has unique characteristics that
process (200–450 °C) also causes low CO2 adsorption. make it suitable for certain conditions of CO2
CO2 shows a weak affinity to the adsorbent surface and separation. However, large scale CO2 adsorption is
the CO2 surface interacts through a weak interaction crucial in many real-life industrial processes.5 There is
force with increased temperature. On the contrary, minimal literature on pilot-scale CO2 adsorption of the
MOF, COF, and alkali-metal based materials interact above-mentioned adsorbents. With the shortage of
pilot-scale study of CO2 capture from flue gas streams K2 CO3 /Al2 O3 composite adsorbent with minimal
by these adsorbents, there exists a gap in research of a alumina loading (KEP-CO2P2). The KEP-CO2P2 was
comprehensive study of the adsorbents for CO2 tested for pilot scale CO2 capture from flue gas in a 0.5
adsorption in real pilot-scale. MWe capture test bed consisting of a fast fluidized-bed
Park et al.325 studied the CO2 capture with reactor with small-sized auxiliary flue gas
regenerable potassium carbonate (K2 CO3 )-based solid desulfurization (FGD) facility. After continuous
adsorbents using a bench scale unit (BSU) facility adsorption for 650 hr, the KEP-CO2P2 adsorbent
under a real flue gas stream atmosphere from a showed 85% CO2 removal rate with the conversion of
coal-fired circulating fluidized bed combustor at Korea the removed CO2 is 11 ton CO2 day−1 and achieved
Institute of Energy Research (KIER). The results CO2 purity of 90–92 vol%. The use of KEP-CO2P2
revealed that >80% CO2 removal was maintained for does not induce the formation of potassium dawsonite
more than 50 hr and a maximum of 85% of removal (KAlCO3 (OH)2 ) and the side products such as K2 CO3
can be achieved. Besides, the overall CO2 capture and Al2 O3 , making it more regenerable adsorbent.
performance of a 0.5 MW scale pilot plant located at Park et al.329 tested K2 CO3 -based solid adsorbents
Hadong Coal-Fired Power Plant, Korea Southern prepared at different active component amount
Power Company, which is constructed based on the (35 wt.% or 40 wt.%) and Al2 O3 composition (alpha
BSU results, had exhibited 85% CO2 removal. alumina or gamma alumina) in a 0.5 MWe -scale
Hornbostel326 reported that the CO2 capture test-bed integrating real coal fired power plant
performance of a 40 kW pilot system using advanced comprised of fast fluidized-bed carbonator, bubbling
carbon adsorbents with a slipstream of coal-derived fluidized-bed regenerator, and bubbling fluidized-bed
flue gas at the National Carbon Capture Center sorbent cooler. The CO2 adsorption performance in
(NCCC) presented 68% capture efficiency while the test bed located in a Hadong coal-fired power plant
generating 93% of pure CO2 . The estimated cost for for continuous operation of 3 days reported better
CO2 capture is $52 per tonne. adsorption performance with CO2 removal efficiency
There are limitations of using these adsorbents for achieved 88–90% by the K2 CO3 -based solid adsorbents
large scale CO2 adsorption due to low production of with 40 wt.% active component and alpha alumina as
adsorbent materials, poor long-term durability and support material. The CO2 removal efficiency of the
stability of adsorbents over several adsorbent was maintained with the presence of > 1.5
adsorption–desorption cycles, high-priced adsorption H2 O/CO2 mole ratio in flue gas stream.
system, high volumetric flow rate of the feed gas, high Apart from that, for adsorbents, the interaction
accommodation requirement for adsorbate in the feed between the CO2 molecules and the adsorbent surface
during adsorption, prolonged time for switching gas influences the adsorbent efficiency which depends on
flow path between adsorption and regeneration, high the adsorption operating temperature used. To
capture cost in post-combustion, large CO2 separation, improve their CO2 adsorption capacity, incorporation
and presence of water (∼7%) and impurities in flue of amine, alkali metal (i.e., Li, Na, or K), or metal oxide
gas.5,306,327 ions into the framework of adsorbent is necessary to
To overcome the limitations, mass production of utilize chemical adsorption to facilitate adsorption at
adsorbent materials with improved durability and various temperatures. The potential future
stability as well as tolerance of both water and development could focus on synthesizing adsorbents
impurities is essential for capturing CO2 on a large with comparable adsorption capacity by incorporating
scale over multiple adsorption-desorption cycles.17 A with an amine, alkali metal or metal oxide ions but at a
relevant design of the adsorption system unit is reduced cost through the use of fewer resources to
necessary to counter the massive flow of feed gas and promote source reduction. Minimal literature studies
minimum cycle time to accommodate the adsorbate in the preparation of the conventional adsorbent such as
the feed throughout the adsorption. Moreover, the zeolite, silica material, and activated carbon from waste
selection of an appropriate and simple approach to materials (i.e., fly ash, rice husk ash, oil sands coke, and
capturing CO2 from the flue gas is recommended with waste tea) and modified by amine (PEI,
lower capturing cost.5 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane (APTES), DEA, methyl
Some progress has been made by Kim et al.328 to diethanolamine (MDEA), and TEPA) or metal (rare
develop a new durable and completely regenerable earth metal: lanthanum (La) and cerium (Ce)).330–335
Among these modified adsorbents, La-functionalized 200–450°C, pressure: 14–70 bar, and CO2
LiX zeolite exhibited the highest CO2 adsorption concentration: 15–60%) was not estimated since the
capacity of 4.36 mmol g−1 at 0 °C and 1 bar, followed adsorption operating range from earlier research
by 62 wt.% PEI-modified rice husk ash derived databases were mostly performed at atmospheric
MCM-41 (3.02 mmol g-1 at 75 °C), 57 wt.% pressure (1 bar) and temperature lower than 200°C,
PEI-modified pulverized coal fly ash derived MCM-41 using either pure CO2 concentration (> 99%) in inlet
(2.97 mmol g-1 at 75° C), and EDA-modified waste tea gas stream or no available concentration is stated.
derived activated carbon (MWTAC) (2.48 mmol Approximation of the adsorbent adsorption capacity
g−1 ).332,333,335 Low CO2 adsorption capacity is within pre-combustion capture temperature at 1 bar for
presented by PEI (molecular weight: 600 and 1200 g oxy-combustion process obtained adsorption capacity
mol−1 )-impregnated fly ash derived activated carbons, of 0.0000026–48.71 mmol g−1 . To date, most studies
APTES-modified rice husk derived silica material focus on the experimental and bench study of CO2
(ASiO2 ), and activated carbons impregnated with 1.15, adsorption with a low amount of adsorbents used.
0.49, and 1.03 mmol N g−1 AC of DEA, MDEA, and Limitations of CO2 adsorption with the adsorbents in
TEPA ranging between 0.16 and 0.90 mmol g−1 after the pilot system include low adsorbents production,
the modification.330,331,334 poor adsorbent durability and stability for multiple
adsorption-desorption cycles in long-term condition,
high cost to customize appropriate adsorption system,
Conclusion high volumetric flow rate of the feed gas, high
Adsorption is attractive as a post-combustion CO2 adsorbate accommodation required in the feed
separation due to its low energy requirement in throughout the adsorption process, lengthy gas flow
regeneration, cost advantage, applicability for dilute gas path switch between adsorption and regeneration,
mixture, high carrying capacity for CO2 , easy to dealing with large CO2 separation, and presence of
perform for a wide range of temperatures and water and impurities in the flue gas. Therefore, future
pressures, faster reaction rates, and minimum pressure studies are needed in developing low-cost mass
drop. Various solid adsorbents such as zeolites, silica production of adsorbents that possess desirable
materials, MOFs, activated carbon, COFs, characteristics related to their durability, stability, and
alkali-metal/metal oxides-based adsorbents, ordered tolerance towards water and impurities that can be
porous carbon, ACFs, graphene, CMS, and their applied to large scale CO2 adsorption using real flue
composites by incorporation using different adsorbents gas streams for several adsorption-desorption cycles.
or impregnation with alkali, amine, or metals are Also, the selection of an appropriate, low cost, and
commonly used for application in CO2 adsorption at simple CO2 capture method with relevant adsorption
certain conditions given their unique characteristics, system unit design is hence desirable for massive feed
making them as potential CO2 adsorbents. Among the gas flow and lengthy cycle time to accommodate the
CO2 adsorbents, at 1 bar, the adsorption performance adsorbate in the feed during the adsorption.
of composite adsorbent, NaX@NaA core-shell
microspheres for capturing CO2 from ambient air
showed the highest adsorption capacity of 5.60 mmol References
g−1 at 25 °C, while, MOF-177-TEPA composite 1. Elfving J, Bajamundi C and Kauppinen J, Characterization
and performance of direct air capture sorbent. Energy
adsorbent, conversely, has the highest CO2 adsorption Procedia 114:6087–6101 (2017).
capacity with 4.60 mmol g−1 for post-combustion 2. Jiang L, Wang RQ, Gonzalez-Diaz A, Smallbone A, Lamidi
adsorption at 55 °C. The highest CO2 uptake by the RO and Roskilly AP, Comparative analysis on temperature
MOF-177-TEPA composite adsorbent is mainly swing adsorption cycle for carbon capture by using internal
heat/mass recovery. Appl Therm Eng 169:1–10 (2020).
attributed to the linear structure and low molecular
3. Riboldi L and Bolland O, Overview on pressure swing
weight of TEPA that lead to its well dispersion into the adsorption (PSA) as CO2 capture technology:
MOF-177 inner pores regardless of its amount loaded State-of-the-art, limits and potentials. Energy Procedia
by aiding the CO2 to overcome the diffusion resistance 114:2390–2400 (2017).
4. Schell J, Casas N, Marx D and Mazzotti M, Precombustion
and access easily to the amine active sites.
CO2 capture by pressure swing adsorption (PSA):
Extrapolation of CO2 adsorption capacity of the Comparison of laboratory PSA experiments and simulations.
adsorbents at pre-combustion condition (temperature: Ind Eng Chem Res 52(24):8311–8322 (2013).
5. Mukherjee A, Okolie JA, Abdelrasoul A, Niu C and Dalai AK, 20. Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute. CO2 capture
Review of post-combustion carbon dioxide capture technologies: technology options for CO2 capture. Global
technologies using activated carbon. J Environ Sci 83:46–63 Carbon Capture and Storage Institute, EPRI (Electric Power
(2019). Research Institute) 2012.
6. Saxena R, Singh VK and Kumar EA, Carbon dioxide capture http://hub.globalccsinstitute.com/sites/default/files/
and sequestration by adsorption on activated carbon. Energy publications/29701/co2-capture-technologies.pdf [16
Procedia 54:320–329 (2014). October 2018].
7. Etheridge DM, Steele LP, Langenfelds RL & Francey RJ Law 21. Socolow R, Desmond M, Aines R, Blackstock J, Bolland O,
dome atmospheric CO2 data (1800-1850). [Online]. Division Kaarsberg T et al., Direct air capture of CO2 with chemicals.
of Atmospheric Research, CSIRO (2001). Available: A Technology Assessment for the APS Panel on Public
https://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/paleo/icecore/ Affairs. Report. APS Physics, College Park, MD (2011).
antarctica/law/law_co2.txt [7 October 2019]. 22. Jansen D, Gazzani M, Manzolini G, Dijk E and Carbo M,
8. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Pre-combustion CO2 capture. Int J Greenh Gas Con
Recent monthly average Mauna Loa CO2 . [Online]. NOAA, 40:167–187 (2015).
Earth System Research Laboratory for Global Monitoring 23. Sanz-Pérez ES, Murdock CR, Didas SA and Jones CW,
Division (2019). Available: Direct capture of CO2 from ambient air. Chem Rev
https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/ [7 October 116(19):11840–11876 (2016).
2019]. 24. Spigarelli BP and Kawatra SK, Opportunities and challenges
9. Lindsey R, Climate change: atmospheric carbon dioxide. in carbon dioxide capture. J CO2 Util 1:69–87 (2013).
[Online]. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 25. Theo WL, Lim JS, Hashim H, Mustaffa AA and Ho WS,
(NOAA) (2020), Available: https: Review of pre-combustion capture and ionic liquid in
//www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/ carbon capture and storage. Appl Energy 183:1633–1663
climate-change-atmospheric-carbon-dioxide [1 December]. (2016).
10. (IPCC), IPoCC, Climate change 2014: mitigation of climate 26. Veselovskaya JV, Derevschikov VS, Kardash TY, Stonkus
change. Working group III contribution to the fifth OA, Trubitsina TA and Okunev AG, Direct CO2 capture from
assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate ambient air using K2 CO3 /Al2 O3 composite sorbent. Int J
change, New York (2014). Greenh Gas Con 17:332–340 (2013).
11. Ben-Mansour R, Habib MA, Bamidele OE, Basha M, Qasem 27. Buhre BJP, Elliott LK, Sheng CD, Gupta RP and Wall TF,
NAA, Peedikakkal A et al., Carbon capture by physical Oxy-fuel combustion technology for coal-fired power
adsorption: Materials, experimental investigations and generation. Prog Energy Combust Sci 31(4):283–307 (2005).
numerical modeling and simulations – a review. Appl Energy
28. Singh R, Ram Reddy MK, Wilson S, Joshi K, Diniz da Costa
161:225–255 (2016).
JC and Webley P, High temperature materials for CO2
12. Hedin N, Chen LJ and Laaksonen A, Sorbents for CO2 capture. Energy Procedia 1(1):623–630 (2009).
capture from flue gas—aspects from materials and
29. Ntiamoah A, Ling JH, Xiao P, Webley PA and Zhai YC, CO2
theoretical chemistry. Nanoscale 2(10):1819–1841
capture by temperature swing adsorption: Use of hot
(2010).
CO2 -rich gas for regeneration. Ind Eng Chem Res
13. Samanta A, Zhao A, Shimizu GKH, Sarkar P and Gupta R, 55(3):703–713 (2016).
Post-combustion CO2 capture using solid sorbents: A
30. Boger T, Salden A and Eigenberger G, A combined vacuum
review. Ind Eng Chem Res 51(4):1438–1463 (2012). and temperature swing adsorption process for the recovery
14. Zhao HY, Luo XN, Zhang HJ, Sun NN, Wei W and Sun YH, of amine from foundry air. Chem Eng Process 36(3):231–241
Carbon-based adsorbents for post-combustion capture: A (1997).
review. Greenh Gases Sci Technol 8(1):11–36 (2018).
31. Hsu SC, Lu CS, Su FS, Zeng WT and Chen WF,
15. Olajire AA, CO2 capture and separation technologies for Thermodynamics and regeneration studies of CO2
end-of-pipe applications – a review. Energy 35(6):2610–2628 adsorption on multiwalled carbon nanotubes. Chem Eng Sci
(2010). 65(4):1354–1361 (2010).
16. Hornbostel MD, Bao JE, Krishnan G, Nagar A, Jayaweera I, 32. Lu CS, Su FS, Hsu SC, Chen WF, Bai HL, Hwang JF et al.,
Kobayashi T et al., Characteristics of an advanced carbon Thermodynamics and regeneration of CO2 adsorption on
sorbent for CO2 capture. Carbon 56:77–85 (2013). mesoporous spherical-silica particles. Fuel Process Technol
17. Modak A and Jana S, Advancement in porous adsorbents for 90(12):1543–1549 (2009).
post-combustion CO2 capture. Microporous Mesoporous 33. Plaza MG, García S, Rubiera F, Pis JJ and Pevida C,
Mater 276:107–132 (2019). Post-combustion CO2 capture with a commercial activated
18. Chen ZH, Deng SB, Wei HR, Wang B, Huang J and Yu G, carbon: Comparison of different regeneration strategies.
Activated carbons and amine-modified materials for carbon Chem Eng J 163(1):41–47 (2010).
dioxide capture - a review. Front Envir Sci Eng 7(3):326–340 34. Shafeeyan MS, Daud WMAW, Houshmand A and Shamiri A,
(2013). A review on surface modification of activated carbon for
19. Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate carbon dioxide adsorption. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis
Change (IPCC), IPCC, 2005: IPCC Special Report on Carbon 89(2):143–151 (2010).
Dioxide Capture and Storage, ed. by Metz B, Davidson O, 35. Xu XC, Song CS, Miller BG and Scaroni AW, Adsorption
Coninck Hd, Loos M and Meyer L. Cambridge University separation of carbon dioxide from flue gas of natural
Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, pp. 1–431 gas-fired boiler by a novel nanoporous “molecular basket”
(2005). adsorbent. Fuel Process Technol 86(14):1457–1472 (2005).
36. Arenillas A, Smith KM, Drage TC and Snape CE, CO2 capture 52. Yu L, Gong J, Zeng CF and Zhang LX, Synthesis of
using some fly ash-derived carbon materials. Fuel binderless zeolite X microspheres and their CO2 adsorption
84(17):2204–2210 (2005). properties. Sep Purif Technol 118:188–195 (2013).
37. Plaza MG, Pevida C, Arias B, Fermoso J, Rubiera F and Pis 53. Herzog H, Meldon J and Hatton A, Advanced
JJ, A comparison of two methods for producing CO2 capture post-combustion CO2 capture. Clean Air Task Force 1:39
adsorbents. Energy Procedia 1(1):1107–1113 (2009). (2009).
38. Chester AW and Derouane E, Zeolite Characterization and 54. Koohsaryan E and Anbia M, Nanosized and hierarchical
Catalysis: A Tutorial, Springer, New York (2009). zeolites: A short review. Chin J Catal 37(4):447–467
39. Srivastava R, Synthesis and applications of ordered and (2016).
disordered mesoporous zeolites: Present and future 55. Choi SH, Drese JH and Jones CW, Adsorbent materials for
prospective. Catal Today 309:172–188 (2018). carbon dioxide capture from large anthropogenic point
40. Ullah R, Ali H Salah Saad M, Aparicio S and Atilhan M, sources. ChemSusChem 2(9):796–854 (2009).
Adsorption equilibrium studies of CO2 , CH4 and N2 on 56. Oktariani E, Nakashima K, Noda A, Xue B, Tahara K, Nakaso
various modified zeolites at high pressures up to 200 bars. K et al., The feasibility of desorption on zeolite-water pair
Microporous Mesoporous Mater 262:49–58 (2018). using dry gas. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 344:1–7 (2018).
41. Bezerra DP, Oliveira RS, Vieira RS, Cavalcante CL and 57. Kumar S, Malik MM and Purohit R, Synthesis methods of
Azevedo DCS, Adsorption of CO2 on nitrogen-enriched mesoporous silica materials. Mater Today Proc 4:350–357
activated carbon and zeolite 13X. Adsorption 17(1):235–246 (2017).
(2011). 58. Lakhi KS, Singh G, Kim SH, Baskar AV, Joseph S, Yang JH
42. Park YH, Moon DK, Kim YH, Ahn HW and Lee CH, et al., Mesoporous Cu-SBA-15 with highly ordered porous
Adsorption isotherms of CO2 , CO, N2 , CH4 , Ar and H2 on structure and its excellent CO2 adsorption capacity.
activated carbon and zeolite LiX up to 1.0 MPa. Adsorption Microporous Mesoporous Mater 267:134–141 (2018).
20(4):631–647 (2014). 59. Liu YM, Lin XY, Wu XH, Liu MY, Shi RH and Yu XJ,
43. Muraoka K, Chaikittisilp W and Okubo T, Energy analysis of Pentaethylenehexamine loaded SBA-16 for CO2 capture from
aluminosilicate zeolites with comprehensive ranges of simulated flue gas. Powder Technol 318:186–192 (2017).
framework topologies, chemical compositions, and 60. El-Nahhal IM, Salem JK, Tabasi NS, Hempelmann R and
aluminum distributions. J Am Chem Soc 138(19):6184–6193 Kodeh FS, Synthesis and structural characterization of
(2016). ZnO-and CuO-NPs supported mesoporous silica materials
44. Mohamed RM, Aly HM, El-Shahat MF and Ibrahim IA, Effect (hexagonal SBA-15 and lamellar-SiO2 ). Chem Phys Lett
of the silica sources on the crystallinity of nanosized ZSM-5 691:211–218 (2018).
zeolite. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 79(1):7–12 61. Gonzalez G, Sagarzazu A, Cordova A, Gomes ME, Salas J,
(2005). Contreras L et al., Comparative study of two silica
45. Barbosa AdS, Barbosa AdS, Barbosa TLA and Rodrigues mesoporous materials (SBA-16 and SBA-15) modified with a
MGF, Synthesis of zeolite membrane (NaY/alumina): Effect of hydroxyapatite layer for clindamycin controlled delivery.
precursor of ceramic support and its application in the Microporous Mesoporous Mater 256:251–265 (2018).
process of oil–water separation. Sep Purif Technol 62. Yan XL, Komarneni S and Yan ZF, CO2 adsorption on Santa
200:141–154 (2018). Barbara Amorphous-15 (SBA-15) and amine-modified Santa
46. Variani YM, Rojas A and Pergher SBC, Synthesis and Barbara Amorphous-15 (SBA-15) with and without controlled
characterization of Ti-STF zeolite using microporosity. J Colloid Interface Sci 390(1):217–224 (2013).
1,2,3-triethyl-4-methylimidazolium as structure-directing 63. Zhao DY, Sun JY, Li QZ and Stucky GD, Morphological
agent. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 262:106–111 control of highly ordered mesoporous silica SBA-15. Chem
(2018). Mater 12(2):275–279 (2000).
47. Wang YR, Zhu JC, Sun MY, Wang LX, Yang JC, Wu Q et al., 64. Chandrasekar G, Son WJ and Ahn WS, Synthesis of
The synthesis of RZM-3 zeolite with EWT topology structure mesoporous materials SBA-15 and CMK-3 from fly ash and
using 1,1,6,6-tetramethyl-1,6-diazacyclododecane-1,6-diium their application for CO2 adsorption. J Porous Mat
dihydroxide as structure-directing agent. Microporous 16(5):545–551 (2009).
Mesoporous Mater 275:87–94 (2019).
65. Vinu A, Murugesan V, Tangermann O and Hartmann M,
48. Ogawa A, Iyoki K, Kamimura Y, Elangovan SP, Itabashi K Adsorption of cytochrome c on mesoporous molecular
and Okubo T, Seed-directed, rapid synthesis of MAZ-type sieves: Influence of pH, pore diameter, and aluminum
zeolites without using organic structure-directing agent. incorporation. Chem Mater 16(16):3056–3065 (2004).
Microporous Mesoporous Mater 186:21–28 (2014).
66. Chew TL, Ahmad AL and Bhatia S, Ordered mesoporous
49. Xie B, Song JW, Ren LM, Ji YY, Li JX and Xiao FS, silica (OMS) as an adsorbent and membrane for separation of
Organotemplate-free and fast route for synthesizing beta carbon dioxide (CO2 ). Adv Colloid Interface Sci 153(1):43–57
zeolite. Chem Mater 20(14):4533–4535 (2008). (2010).
50. García-Villén F, Flores-Ruíz E, Verdugo-Escamilla C and 67. Harlick PJE and Sayari A, Applications of pore-expanded
Huertas FJ, Hydrothermal synthesis of zeolites using sanitary mesoporous silicas. 3. Triamine silane grafting for enhanced
ware waste as a raw material. Appl Clay Sci 160:238–248 CO2 adsorption. Ind Eng Chem Res 45(9):3248–3255
(2018). (2006).
51. Opanasenko MV, Roth WJ and Čejka J, Two-dimensional 68. Ma XC, Li LQ, Chen RF, Wang CH, Li HL and Wang SB,
zeolites in catalysis: Current status and perspectives. Catal Heteroatom-doped nanoporous carbon derived from MOF-5
Sci Technol 6(8):2467–2484 (2016). for CO2 capture. Appl Surf Sci 435:494–502 (2018).
69. Abid HR, Pham GH, Ang HM, Tade MO and Wang SB, for nitroaromatic sensing. Ultrason Sonochem 42:112–118
Adsorption of CH4 and CO2 on Zr-metal organic frameworks. (2018).
J Colloid Interface Sci 366(1):120–124 (2012). 85. Sargazi G, Afzali D, Mostafavi A and Ebrahimipour SY,
70. Xiang ZH, Hu Z, Yang WT and Cao DP, Lithium doping on Ultrasound-assisted facile synthesis of a new tantalum(V)
metal-organic frameworks for enhancing H2 storage. Int J metal-organic framework nanostructure: Design,
Hydrogen Energy 37(1):946–950 (2012). characterization, systematic study, and CO2 adsorption
71. Rostami S, Nakhaei Pour A, Salimi A and Abolghasempour A, performance. J Solid State Chem 250:32–48 (2017).
Hydrogen adsorption in metal-organic frameworks (MOFs): 86. Gholampour N, Chaemchuen S, Hu ZY, Mousavi B, Van
Effects of adsorbent architecture. Int J Hydrogen Energy Tendeloo G and Verpoort F, Simultaneous creation of metal
43(14):7072–7080 (2018). nanoparticles in metal organic frameworks via spray drying
72. Herm ZR, Bloch ED and Long JR, Hydrocarbon separations technique. Chem Eng J 322:702–709 (2017).
in metal–organic frameworks. Chem Mater 26(1):323–338 87. Zhang AJ, Li XY, Zhang SY, Yu ZK, Gao XM, Wei XR et al.,
(2014). Spray-drying-assisted reassembly of uniform and large
73. Yap MH, Fow KL and Chen GZ, Synthesis and applications of micro-sized MIL-101 microparticles with controllable
MOF-derived porous nanostructures. Green Energy Envir morphologies for benzene adsorption. J Colloid Interface Sci
2(3):218–245 (2017). 506:1–9 (2017).
74. Liu YY, Wang ZYU and Zhou HC, Recent advances in carbon 88. Sun JZ, Kwon HT and Jeong HK, Continuous synthesis of
dioxide capture with metal-organic frameworks. Greenh high quality metal–organic framework HKUST-1 crystals and
Gases Sci Technol 2(4):239–259 (2012). composites via aerosol-assisted synthesis. Polyhedron
153:226–233 (2018).
75. Furukawa H, Cordova KE, O’Keeffe M and Yaghi OM, The
chemistry and applications of metal-organic frameworks. 89. Polyzoidis A, Altenburg T, Schwarzer M, Loebbecke S and
Science 341:1–12 (2013). Kaskel S, Continuous microreactor synthesis of ZIF-8 with
high space–time-yield and tunable particle size. Chem Eng J
76. Huang LM, Wang HT, Chen JX, Wang ZB, Sun JY, Zhao DY
283:971–977 (2016).
et al., Synthesis, morphology control, and properties of
porous metal–organic coordination polymers. Microporous 90. McKinstry C, Cathcart RJ, Cussen EJ, Fletcher AJ,
Mesoporous Mater 58(2):105–114 Patwardhan SV and Sefcik J, Scalable continuous
(2003). solvothermal synthesis of metal organic framework (MOF-5)
crystals. Chem Eng J 285:718–725 (2016).
77. Peña-Rodríguez R, Márquez-López E, Guerrero A, Chiñas LE,
Hernández-González DF and Rivera JM, Hydrothermal 91. Tai SJ, Zhang WQ, Zhang JS, Luo GX, Jia Y, Deng ML et al.,
synthesis of cobalt (II) 3D metal-organic framework acid Facile preparation of UiO-66 nanoparticles with tunable sizes
catalyst applied in the transesterification process of in a continuous flow microreactor and its application in drug
vegetable oil. Mater Lett 217:117–119 (2018). delivery. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 220:148–154
78. Wu YH, Pang HW, Yao W, Wang XX, Yu SJ, Yu ZM et al., (2016).
Synthesis of rod-like metal-organic framework (MOF-5) 92. Chen YW, Lv DF, Wu JL, Xiao J, Xi HX, Xia QB et al., A new
nanomaterial for efficient removal of U(VI): Batch experiments MOF-505@GO composite with high selectivity for CO2 /CH4
and spectroscopy study. Sci Bull 63(13):831–839 (2018). and CO2 /N2 separation. Chem Eng J 308:1065–1072 (2017).
79. Mandegarzad S, Raoof JB, Hosseini SR and Ojani R, 93. Lee SY and Park SJ, A review on solid adsorbents for carbon
MOF-derived Cu-Pd/nanoporous carbon composite as an dioxide capture. J Ind Eng Chem 23:1–11 (2015).
efficient catalyst for hydrogen evolution reaction: A 94. Liu J, Wang Y, Benin AI, Jakubczak P, Willis RR and LeVan
comparison between hydrothermal and electrochemical MD, CO2 /H2 O adsorption equilibrium and rates on
synthesis. Appl Surf Sci 436:451–459 (2018). metal−organic frameworks: HKUST-1 and Ni/DOBDC.
80. Yang HM, Liu X, Song XL, Yang TL, Liang ZH and Fan CM, In Langmuir 26(17):14301–14307 (2010).
situ electrochemical synthesis of MOF-5 and its application 95. Arami-Niya A, Daud WMAW and Mjalli FS, Comparative
in improving photocatalytic activity of BiOBr. Trans Nonferr study of the textural characteristics of oil palm shell activated
Metal Soc 25(12):3987–3994 (2015). carbon produced by chemical and physical activation for
81. Li YJ, Miao JP, Sun XJ, Xiao J, Li YW, Wang HH et al., methane adsorption. Chem Eng Res Des 89(6):657–664
Mechanochemical synthesis of Cu-BTC@GO with enhanced (2011).
water stability and toluene adsorption capacity. Chem Eng J 96. Hoseinzadeh Hesas R, Arami-Niya A, Wan Daud WMA and
298:191–197 (2016). Sahu J, Microwave-assisted production of activated carbons
82. Singh NK, Gupta S, Pecharsky VK and Balema VP, from oil palm shell in the presence of CO2 or N2 for CO2
Solvent-free mechanochemical synthesis and magnetic adsorption. J Ind Eng Chem 24:196–205 (2015).
properties of rare-earth based metal-organic frameworks. J 97. Hoseinzadeh Hesas R, Arami-Niya A, Wan Daud WMA and
Alloys Compd 696:118–122 (2017). Sahu JN, Comparison of oil palm shell-based activated
83. Vakili R, Xu SJ, Al-Janabi N, Gorgojo P, Holmes SM and Fan carbons produced by microwave and conventional heating
XL, Microwave-assisted synthesis of zirconium-based metal methods using zinc chloride activation. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis
organic frameworks (MOFs): Optimization and gas 104:176–184 (2013).
adsorption. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 260:45–53 98. Nasri NS, Hamza UD, Ismail SN, Ahmed MM and Mohsin R,
(2018). Assessment of porous carbons derived from sustainable
84. Gharib M, Safarifard V and Morsali A, Ultrasound assisted palm solid waste for carbon dioxide capture. J Clean Prod
synthesis of amide functionalized metal-organic framework 71:148–157 (2014).
99. Rafatullah M, Ahmad T, Ghazali A, Sulaiman O, Danish M and biomass for CO2 capture and effective micropores at
Hashim R, Oil palm biomass as a precursor of activated different conditions. J CO2 Util 18:73–79 (2017).
carbons: A review. Crit Rev Env Sci Technol 116. Fiuza RA, Medeiros de Jesus Neto R, Correia LB and
43(11):1117–1161 (2013). Carvalho Andrade HM, Preparation of granular activated
100. Rodríguez-Reinoso F and Molina-Sabio M, Activated carbons from yellow mombin fruit stones for CO2 adsorption.
carbons from lignocellulosic materials by chemical and/or J Environ Manage 161:198–205 (2015).
physical activation: An overview. Carbon 30(7):1111–1118 117. Kiciński W, Szala M and Bystrzejewski M, Sulfur-doped
(1992). porous carbons: Synthesis and applications. Carbon 68:1–32
101. Katesa J, Junpiromand S and Tangsathitkulchai C, Effect of (2014).
carbonization temperature on properties of char and 118. Ahmed MJ and Theydan SK, Adsorption of cephalexin onto
activated carbon from coconut shell. Suranaree J Sci Technol activated carbons from Albizia lebbeck seed pods by
20(4):269–278 (2013). microwave-induced KOH and K2 CO3 activations. Chem Eng
102. Loredo-Cancino M, Soto-Regalado E, Cerino-Córdova FJ, J 211–212:200–207 (2012).
García-Reyes RB, García-León AM and Garza-González MT, 119. Przepiórski J, Skrodzewicz M and Morawski AW, High
Determining optimal conditions to produce activated carbon temperature ammonia treatment of activated carbon for
from barley husks using single or dual optimization. J Environ enhancement of CO2 adsorption. Appl Surf Sci
Manage 125:117–125 (2013). 225(1):235–242 (2004).
103. Sangchoom W and Mokaya R, Valorization of lignin waste: 120. Vargas DP, Giraldo L, Erto A and Moreno-Piraján JC,
Carbons from hydrothermal carbonization of renewable lignin Chemical modification of activated carbon monoliths for CO2
as superior sorbents for CO2 and hydrogen storage. ACS adsorption. J Therm Anal Calorim 114(3):1039–1047 (2013).
Sustain Chem Eng 3(7):1658–1667 (2015).
121. Feng X, Ding XS and Jiang DL, Covalent organic frameworks.
104. Sevilla M and Mokaya R, Energy storage applications of Chem Soc Rev 41(18):6010–6022 (2012).
activated carbons: Supercapacitors and hydrogen storage.
122. Ding SY and Wang W, Covalent organic frameworks (COFs):
Energy Environ Sci 7(4):1250–1280 (2014).
From design to applications. Chem Soc Rev 42(2):548–568
105. Tang SH and Zaini MAA, Potassium hydroxide activation of (2013).
activated carbon: A commentary. Carbon Lett 16(4):275–280
123. Waller PJ, Gándara F and Yaghi OM, Chemistry of covalent
(2015).
organic frameworks. Acc Chem Res 48(12):3053–3063
106. Ooi CH, Lee T, Pung SY and Yeoh FY, Activated carbon fiber (2015).
derived from single step carbonization-activation process. 124. Zeng YF, Zou RQ and Zhao YL, Covalent organic frameworks
ASEAN Eng J B 4(1):40–50 (2013). for CO2 capture. Adv Mater 28(15):2855–2873 (2016).
107. Dodevski V, Janković B, Stojmenović M, Krstić S, Popović J,
125. Wang HP, Jiao FL, Gao FY, Huang JJ, Zhao Y, Shen YH
Pagnacco MC et al., Plane tree seed biomass used for
et al., Facile synthesis of magnetic covalent organic
preparation of activated carbons (AC) derived from pyrolysis.
frameworks for the hydrophilic enrichment of
Modeling the activation process. Colloids Surf, A 522:83–96
N-glycopeptides. J Mater Chem B 5(22):4052–4059 (2017).
(2017).
126. Wei H, Chai SZ, Hu NT, Yang Z, Wei LM and Wang L, The
108. McDougall GJ, The physical nature and manufacture of
microwave-assisted solvothermal synthesis of a crystalline
activated carbon. J South Afr Inst Min Metall 91(4):109–120
two-dimensional covalent organic framework with high CO2
(1991).
capacity. Chem Commun 51(61):12178–12181 (2015).
109. Manocha SM, Porous carbons. Sadhana 28(1):335–348
127. Chandra S, Kandambeth S, Biswal BP, Lukose B, Kunjir SM,
(2003).
Chaudhary M et al., Chemically stable multilayered covalent
110. Jeguirim M, Belhachemi M, Limousy L and Bennici S, organic nanosheets from covalent organic frameworks via
Adsorption/reduction of nitrogen dioxide on activated mechanical delamination. J Am Chem Soc
carbons: Textural properties versus surface chemistry – a 135(47):17853–17861 (2013).
review. Chem Eng J 347:493–504 (2018). 128. Zhang W, Qiu LG, Yuan YP, Xie AJ, Shen YH and Zhu JF,
111. Ao WY, Fu J, Mao X, Kang QH, Ran CM, Liu Y et al., Microwave-assisted synthesis of highly fluorescent
Microwave assisted preparation of activated carbon from nanoparticles of a melamine-based porous covalent organic
biomass: A review. Renew Sust Energy Rev 92:958–979 framework for trace-level detection of nitroaromatic
(2018). explosives. J Hazard Mater 221–222:147–154 (2012).
112. Sumathi S, Bhatia S, Lee KT and Mohamed AR, Optimization 129. Bojdys MJ, Jeromenok J, Thomas A and Antonietti M,
of microporous palm shell activated carbon production for Rational extension of the family of layered, covalent,
flue gas desulphurization: Experimental and statistical triazine-based frameworks with regular porosity. Adv Mater
studies. Bioresour Technol 100(4):1614–1621 (2009). 22(19):2202–2205 (2010).
113. Rashidi NA and Yusup S, An overview of activated carbons 130. Kuhn P, Antonietti M and Thomas A, Porous, covalent
utilization for the post-combustion carbon dioxide capture. J triazine-based frameworks prepared by ionothermal
CO2 Util 13:1–16 (2016). synthesis. Angew Chem Int Ed 47(18):3450–3453 (2008).
114. Plaza MG, Pevida C, Arias B, Fermoso J, Casal MD, Martín 131. Wang XL, Ma RY, Hao L, Wu QH, Wang C and Wang Z,
CF et al., Development of low-cost biomass-based Mechanochemical synthesis of covalent organic framework
adsorbents for postcombustion CO2 capture. Fuel for the efficient extraction of benzoylurea insecticides. J
88(12):2442–2447 (2009). Chromatogr, A 1551:1–9 (2018).
115. Serafin J, Narkiewicz U, Morawski AW, Wróbel RJ and 132. Das G, Shinde DB, Kandambeth S, Biswal BP and Banerjee
Michalkiewicz B, Highly microporous activated carbons from R, Mechanosynthesis of imine, β-ketoenamine, and
hydrogen-bonded imine-linked covalent organic frameworks 147. Spitler EL, Colson JW, Uribe-Romo FJ, Woll AR, Giovino MR,
using liquid-assisted grinding. Chem Commun Saldivar A et al., Lattice expansion of highly oriented 2D
50(84):12615–12618 (2014). phthalocyanine covalent organic framework films. Angew
133. Lin G, Gao CH, Zheng Q, Lei ZX, Geng HJ, Lin Z et al., Chem Int Ed 124(11):2677–2681 (2012).
Room-temperature synthesis of core–shell structured 148. Chen L, Furukawa K, Gao J, Nagai A, Nakamura T, Dong YP
magnetic covalent organic frameworks for efficient et al., Photoelectric covalent organic frameworks: Converting
enrichment of peptides and simultaneous exclusion of open lattices into ordered donor–acceptor heterojunctions. J
proteins. Chem Commun 53(26):3649–3652 (2017). Am Chem Soc 136(28):9806–9809 (2014).
134. Wang K, Qi DD, Li YL, Wang TY, Liu HB and Jiang JZ, 149. Huang N, Zhai LP, Coupry DE, Addicoat MA, Okushita K,
Tetrapyrrole macrocycle based conjugated two-dimensional Nishimura K et al., Multiple-component covalent organic
mesoporous polymers and covalent organic frameworks: frameworks. Nat Commun 7:1–12 (2016).
From synthesis to material applications. Coord Chem Rev 150. Chen X, Addicoat M, Jin EQ, Xu H, Hayashi T, Xu F et al.,
378:188–206 (2019). Designed synthesis of double-stage two-dimensional
135. Ma YF, Yuan F, Zhang XH, Zhou YL and Zhang XX, Highly covalent organic frameworks. Sci Rep 5:1–19 (2015).
efficient enrichment of N-linked glycopeptides using a 151. Dalapati S, Jin E, Addicoat M, Heine T and Jiang DL, Highly
hydrophilic covalent-organic framework. Analyst emissive covalent organic frameworks. J Am Chem Soc
142(17):3212–3218 (2017). 138(18):5797–5800 (2016).
136. Cote AP, Benin AI, Ockwig NW, O’keeffe M, Matzger AJ and 152. Dalapati S, Jin SB, Gao J, Xu YH, Nagai A and Jiang DL, An
Yaghi OM, Porous, crystalline, covalent organic frameworks. azine-linked covalent organic framework. J Am Chem Soc
Science 310(5751):1166–1170 (2005). 135(46):17310–17313 (2013).
137. Olajire AA, Recent advances in the synthesis of covalent 153. Jin SB, Sakurai T, Kowalczyk T, Dalapati S, Xu F, Wei H et al.,
organic frameworks for CO2 capture. J CO2 Util 17:137–161 Two-dimensional tetrathiafulvalene covalent organic
(2017). frameworks: Towards latticed conductive organic salts.
138. Li N, Du JJ, Wu D, Liu JC, Li N, Sun ZW et al., Recent Chem Eur J 20(45):14608–14613 (2014).
advances in facile synthesis and applications of covalent 154. Dalapati S, Addicoat M, Jin SB, Sakurai T, Gao J, Xu H et al.,
organic framework materials as superior adsorbents in Rational design of crystalline supermicroporous covalent
sample pretreatment. Trends Anal Chem 108:154–166 organic frameworks with triangular topologies. Nat Commun
(2018). 6:1–8 (2015).
139. Wang MH, Wei SX, Wu ZH, Zhou SN, Wang ZJ, Wang JH 155. Du Y, Yang HS, Whiteley JM, Wan S, Jin YH, Lee SH et al.,
et al., Alkyl amine functionalized triphenylamine-based Ionic covalent organic frameworks with spiroborate linkage.
covalent organic frameworks for high-efficiency CO2 Angew Chem Int Ed 55(5):1737–1741 (2016).
capture and separation over N2 . Mater Lett 230:28–31 156. Feng X, Dong YP and Jiang DL, Star-shaped
(2018). two-dimensional covalent organic frameworks.
140. Zhao YF, Yao KX, Teng BY, Zhang T and Han Y, A CrystEngComm 15(8):1508–1511 (2013).
perfluorinated covalent triazine-based framework for highly
157. Wang XR, Han X, Zhang J, Wu XW, Liu Y and Cui Y,
selective and water-tolerant CO2 capture. Energy Environ Sci
Homochiral 2D porous covalent organic frameworks for
6(12):3684–3692 (2013).
heterogeneous asymmetric catalysis. J Am Chem Soc
141. Wang KK, Tang YZ, Jiang Q, Lan YS, Huang HL, Liu DH et al., 138(38):12332–12335 (2016).
A thiophene-containing covalent triazine-based framework
158. Hunt JR, Doonan CJ, LeVangie JD, Côté AP and Yaghi OM,
with ultramicropore for CO2 capture. J Energy Chem
Reticular synthesis of covalent organic borosilicate
26(5):902–908 (2017). frameworks. J Am Chem Soc 130(36):11872–11873 (2008).
142. Côté AP, El-Kaderi HM, Furukawa H, Hunt JR and Yaghi OM, 159. Lin GQ, Ding HM, Yuan DQ, Wang BS and Wang C, A
Reticular synthesis of microporous and mesoporous 2D pyrene-based, fluorescent three-dimensional covalent
covalent organic frameworks. J Am Chem Soc organic framework. J Am Chem Soc 138(10):3302–3305
129(43):12914–12915 (2007). (2016).
143. Spitler EL, Koo BT, Novotney JL, Colson JW, Uribe-Romo 160. Bunck DN and Dichtel WR, Internal functionalization of
FJ, Gutierrez GD et al., A 2D covalent organic framework with three-dimensional covalent organic frameworks. Angew
4.7-nm pores and insight into its interlayer stacking. J Am Chem Int Ed 124(8):1921–1925 (2012).
Chem Soc 133(48):19416–19421 (2011).
161. El-Kaderi HM, Hunt JR, Mendoza-Cortés JL, Côté AP, Taylor
144. Wan S, Guo J, Kim JB, Ihee H and Jiang DL, A belt-shaped, RE, OʼKeeffe M et al., Designed synthesis of 3D covalent
blue luminescent, and semiconducting covalent organic organic frameworks. Science 316(5822):268–272 (2007).
framework. Angew Chem Int Ed 47(46):8826–8830
162. Wang K, Guo X, Zhao PF, Wang FZ and Zheng CG, High
(2008).
temperature capture of CO2 on lithium-based sorbents from
145. Sun Q, Aguila B, Perman J, Earl LD, Abney CW, Cheng Y
rice husk ash. J Hazard Mater 189(1):301–307 (2011).
et al., Postsynthetically modified covalent organic
frameworks for efficient and effective mercury removal. J Am 163. Díaz-Herrera PR, Ramírez-Moreno MJ and Pfeiffer H, The
Chem Soc 139(7):2786–2793 (2017). effects of high-pressure on the chemisorption process of
CO2 on lithium oxosilicate (Li8 SiO6 ). Chem Eng J 264:10–15
146. Ding XS, Guo J, Feng X, Honsho Y, Guo JD, Seki S et al.,
(2015).
Synthesis of metallophthalocyanine covalent organic
frameworks that exhibit high carrier mobility and 164. Seggiani M, Puccini M and Vitolo S, Alkali promoted lithium
photoconductivity. Angew Chem Int Ed 50(6):1289–1293 orthosilicate for CO2 capture at high temperature and low
(2011). concentration. Int J Greenh Gas Con 17:25–31 (2013).
165. Durán-Muñoz F, Romero-Ibarra IC and Pfeiffer H, Analysis of 184. Ma TY, Liu L and Yuan ZY, Direct synthesis of ordered
the CO2 chemisorption reaction mechanism in lithium mesoporous carbons. Chem Soc Rev 42(9):3977–4003
oxosilicate (Li8 SiO6 ): A new option for high-temperature CO2 (2013).
capture. J Mater Chem A 1(12):3919–3925 (2013). 185. Matei Ghimbeu C, Le Meins J-M, Zlotea C, Vidal L, Schrodj
166. Ma XC, Li LQ, Chen RF, Wang CH, Zhou K and Li HL, Doping G, Latroche M et al., Controlled synthesis of NiCo nanoalloys
of alkali metals in carbon frameworks for enhancing CO2 embedded in ordered porous carbon by a novel
capture: A theoretical study. Fuel 236:942–948 (2019). soft-template strategy. Carbon 67:260–272 (2014).
167. Zhao CW, Chen XP, Anthony EJ, Jiang X, Duan LB, Wu Y 186. Yao C, Li GY, Wang JK, Xu YH and Chang LM, Template-free
et al., Capturing CO2 in flue gas from fossil fuel-fired power synthesis of porous carbon from triazine based polymers and
plants using dry regenerable alkali metal-based sorbent. their use in iodine adsorption and CO2 capture. Sci Rep
Prog Energy Combust Sci 39(6):515–534 (2013). 8(1):1–9 (2018).
168. Manovic V and Anthony EJ, Sintering and formation of a 187. Srinivas G, Krungleviciute V, Guo ZX and Yildirim T,
nonporous carbonate shell at the surface of cao-based Exceptional CO2 capture in a hierarchically porous carbon
sorbent particles during CO2 -capture cycles. Energy Fuels with simultaneous high surface area and pore volume. Energy
24(10):5790–5796 (2010). Environ Sci 7(1):335–342 (2014).
169. Ito BR, Metal oxide sorbents for carbon dioxide capture 188. Xiao Y, Chen HB, Zheng MT, Dong HW, Lei BF and Liu YL,
prepared by ultrasonic spray pyrolysis. Thesis, Graduate Porous carbon with ultrahigh specific surface area derived
College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, pp. from biomass rice hull. Mater Lett 116:185–187 (2014).
1–86 (2011). 189. Ogoshi T, Yoshikoshi K, Sueto R, Nishihara H and Yamagishi
170. Kumar S and Saxena SK, A comparative study of CO2 T, Porous carbon fibers containing pores with sizes
sorption properties for different oxides. Mater Renew Sustain controlled at the Ångstrom level by the cavity size of
Energy 3(3):30 (2014). pillar[6]arene. Angew Chem Int Ed 54(22):6466–6469 (2015).
171. Li S, Combustion synthesis of porous MgO and its 190. Juhl AC, Elverfeldt C-P, Hoffmann F and Fröba M, Porous
adsorption properties. Int J Ind Chem 10(1):89–96 carbon monoliths with pore sizes adjustable between 10 nm
(2019). and 2 μm prepared by phase separation – new insights in the
172. Yang SL, Huang PP, Peng L, Cao CY, Zhu YN, Wei F et al., relation between synthesis composition and resulting
Hierarchical flowerlike magnesium oxide hollow spheres with structure. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 255:271–280
extremely high surface area for adsorption and catalysis. J (2018).
Mater Chem A 4(2):400–406 (2016). 191. Wei J, Zhou DD, Sun ZK, Deng YH, Xia YY and Zhao DY, A
173. Bartley JK, Xu CL, Lloyd R, Enache DI, Knight DW and controllable synthesis of rich nitrogen-doped ordered
Hutchings GJ, Simple method to synthesize high surface mesoporous carbon for CO2 capture and supercapacitors.
area magnesium oxide and its use as a heterogeneous base Adv Funct Mater 23(18):2322–2328 (2012).
catalyst. Appl Catal, B 128:31–38 (2012). 192. Ma X, Cao M and Hu C, Bifunctional HNO3 catalytic
174. Ohmi T, Ishihara Y, Suzuki K, Sakoda K, Misumi O and synthesis of N-doped porous carbons for CO2 capture. J
Watanabe T Google Patents US20090246524A1 (2009). Mater Chem A 1(3):913–918 (2013).
175. Li L, Wen X, Fu X, Wang F, Zhao N, Xiao FK et al., MgO/Al2 O3 193. Mahurin SM, Górka J, Nelson KM, Mayes RT and Dai S,
sorbent for CO2 capture. Energy Fuels 24(10):5773–5780 Enhanced CO2 /N2 selectivity in amidoxime-modified porous
(2010). carbon. Carbon 67:457–464 (2014).
176. Lu H, Reddy EP and Smirniotis PG, Calcium oxide based 194. Yoo HM, Lee SY and Park SJ, Ordered nanoporous carbon
sorbents for capture of carbon dioxide at high temperatures. for increasing CO2 capture. J Solid State Chem 197:361–365
Ind Eng Chem Res 45(11):3944–3949 (2006). (2013).
177. Li L, Li Y, Wen X, Wang F, Zhao N, Xiao FK et al., CO2 195. Xu F, Wu DC, Fu RW and Wei BQ, Design and preparation of
capture over K2 CO3 /MgO/Al2 O3 dry sorbent in a fluidized porous carbons from conjugated polymer precursors. Mater
bed. Energy Fuels 25(8):3835–3842 (2011). Today 20(10):629–656 (2017).
178. Abanades JC, The maximum capture efficiency of CO2 using 196. Choma J, Osuchowski L, Marszewski M, Dziura A and
a carbonation/calcination cycle of CaO/CaCO3 . Chem Eng J Jaroniec M, Developing microporosity in Kevlar® -derived
90(3):303–306 (2002). carbon fibers by CO2 activation for CO2 adsorption. J CO2
Util 16:17–22 (2016).
179. Abanades JC and Alvarez D, Conversion limits in the reaction
of CO2 with lime. Energy Fuels 17(2):308–315 (2003). 197. Duan XH, Srinivasakannan C, Wang X, Wang F and Liu XY,
Synthesis of activated carbon fibers from cotton by
180. Glasson DR, Reactivity of lime and related oxides. I.
microwave induced H3 PO4 activation. J Taiwan Inst Chem E
Production of calcium oxide. J Appl Chem 8(12):793–797
70:374–381 (2017).
(1958).
198. Xu JG, Shi JS, Cui HM, Yan NF and Liu YW, Preparation of
181. Borgwardt RH, Calcination kinetics and surface area of
nitrogen doped carbon from tree leaves as efficient CO2
dispersed limestone particles. AIChE J 31(1):103–111
adsorbent. Chem Phys Lett 711:107–112 (2018).
(1985).
199. Park SJ, Carbon Fibers, Springer, Singapore (2018).
182. Lee SC, Choi BY, Lee TJ, Ryu CK, Ahn YS and Kim JC, CO2
absorption and regeneration of alkali metal-based solid 200. Suzuki M, Activated carbon fiber: Fundamentals and
sorbents. Catal Today 111(3):385–390 (2006). applications. Carbon 32(4):577–586 (1994).
183. Lee J, Kim J and Hyeon T, Recent progress in the synthesis 201. Park SJ, Seo MK and Lee YS, Surface characteristics of
of porous carbon materials. Adv Mater 18(16):2073–2094 fluorine-modified PAN-based carbon fibers. Carbon
(2006). 41(4):723–730 (2003).
202. Park SJ and Kim KD, Influence of activation temperature on 221. Carrott PJM, Cansado IPP and Carrott MMLR, Carbon
adsorption characteristics of activated carbon fiber molecular sieves from PET for separations involving CH4 ,
composites. Carbon 39(11):1741–1746 (2001). CO2 , O2 and N2 . Appl Surf Sci 252(17):5948–5952 (2006).
203. Im JS, Park SJ and Lee YS, Preparation and characteristics 222. Daud W, Ahmad M and Aroua M, Carbon molecular sieves
of electrospun activated carbon materials having meso- and from palm shell: Effect of the benzene deposition times on
macropores. J Colloid Interface Sci 314(1):32–37 (2007). gas separation properties. Sep Purif Technol 57(2):289–293
204. Im JS, Park SJ and Lee YS, Superior prospect of chemically (2007).
activated electrospun carbon fibers for hydrogen storage. 223. Sethupathi S, Bashir MJK, Akbar ZA and Mohamed AR,
Mater Res Bull 44(9):1871–1878 (2009). Biomass-based palm shell activated carbon and palm shell
205. Park SJ and Kim BJ, Ammonia removal of activated carbon carbon molecular sieve as gas separation adsorbents. Waste
fibers produced by oxyfluorination. J Colloid Interface Sci Manage Res 33(4):303–312 (2015).
291(2):597–599 (2005). 224. Mohamed AR, Mohammadi M and Darzi GN, Preparation of
206. Lee SY and Park SJ, Determination of the optimal pore size carbon molecular sieve from lignocellulosic biomass: A
for improved CO2 adsorption in activated carbon fibers. J review. Renew Sust Energy Rev 14(6):1591–1599 (2010).
Colloid Interface Sci 389(1):230–235 (2013). 225. Bello G, Garcıá R, Arriagada R, Sepúlveda-Escribano A and
207. Thiruvenkatachari R, Su S, Yu XX and Bae JS, Application of Rodrıǵuez-Reinoso F, Carbon molecular sieves from
carbon fibre composites to CO2 capture from flue gas. Int J Eucalyptus globulus charcoal. Microporous Mesoporous
Greenh Gas Con 13:191–200 (2013). Mater 56(2):139–145 (2002).
208. Choma J, Osuchowski Ł, Dziura A, Kwiatkowska-Wójcik W 226. Cabrera AL, Zehner JE, Coe CG, Gaffney TR, Farris TS and
and Jaroniec M, Właściwości adsorpcyjne wegli
˛ aktywnych Armor JN, Preparation of carbon molecular sieves, I.
otrzymanych z włókien Kevlar® . Ochrona Środowiska Two-step hydrocarbon deposition with a single hydrocarbon.
36(4):3–8 (2014). Carbon 31(6):969–976 (1993).
209. Chen Y, Zhang B, Liu G, Zhuang XD and Kang ET, Graphene 227. Hu ZH and Vansant EF, Carbon molecular sieves produced
and its derivatives: Switching ON and OFF. Chem Soc Rev from walnut shell. Carbon 33(5):561–567 (1995).
41(13):4688–4707 (2012). 228. Verma SK, Development of molecular sieving properties in
210. Stoller MD, Park S, Zhu Y, An J and Ruoff RS, microporous carbons. Carbon 29(6):793–803 (1991).
Graphene-based ultracapacitors. Nano Lett 8(10):3498–3502 229. Kawabuchi Y, Kishino M, Kawano S, Whitehurst DD and
(2008). Mochida I, Carbon deposition from benzene and
211. Gadipelli S and Guo ZX, Graphene-based materials: cyclohexane onto active carbon fiber to control its pore size.
Synthesis and gas sorption, storage and separation. Prog Langmuir 12(17):4281–4285 (1996).
Mater Sci 69:1–60 (2015). 230. Nguyen C and Do DD, Preparation of carbon molecular
212. Chowdhury S, Parshetti GK and Balasubramanian R, sieves from macadamia nut shells. Carbon 33(12):1717–1725
Post-combustion CO2 capture using mesoporous (1995).
TiO2 /graphene oxide nanocomposites. Chem Eng J 231. Kawabuchi Y, Kawano S and Mochida I, Molecular sieving
263:374–384 (2015). selectivity of active carbons and active carbon fibers
213. Yang SB, Zhan L, Xu XY, Wang YL, Ling LC and Feng XL, improved by chemical vapour deposition of benzene. Carbon
Graphene-based porous silica sheets impregnated with 34(6):711–717 (1996).
polyethyleneimine for superior CO2 capture. Adv Mater 232. Prasetyo I and Do DD, Pore structure alteration of porous
25(15):2130–2134 (2013). carbon by catalytic coke deposition. Carbon
214. Chowdhury S and Balasubramanian R, Highly efficient, rapid 37(12):1909–1918 (1999).
and selective CO2 capture by thermally treated graphene 233. Ahmad M, Preparation of carbon molecular sieves from palm
nanosheets. J CO2 Util 13:50–60 (2016). shell: Effect of benzene deposition conditions. Adsorption
215. Novoselov KS, Fal V, Colombo L, Gellert P, Schwab M and 15(5):489–495 (2009).
Kim K, A roadmap for graphene. Nature 490:192–200 234. Adinata D, Wan Daud WMA and Aroua MK, Production of
(2012). carbon molecular sieves from palm shell based activated
216. Wang X, Zhi LJ and Müllen K, Transparent, conductive carbon by pore sizes modification with benzene for methane
graphene electrodes for dye-sensitized solar cells. Nano Lett selective separation. Fuel Process Technol 88(6):599–605
8(1):323–327 (2008). (2007).
217. Lee SY and Park SJ, Isothermal exfoliation of graphene oxide 235. Zhang TY, Walawender WP and Fan LT, Preparation of
by a new carbon dioxide pressure swing method. Carbon carbon molecular sieves by carbon deposition from methane.
68:112–117 (2014). Bioresour Technol 96(17):1929–1935 (2005).
218. Meng LY and Park SJ, Effect of exfoliation temperature on 236. Mohammadi M, Najafpour DG and Mohamed AR, Production
carbon dioxide capture of graphene nanoplates. J Colloid of carbon molecular sieves from palm shell through carbon
Interface Sci 386(1):285–290 (2012). deposition from methane. Chem Ind Chem Eng Q
17(4):525–533 (2011).
219. Tian YQ, Lin Y, Hagio T and Hu YH, Surface-microporous
graphene for CO2 adsorption. Catal Today 356:514–518 237. Wahby A, Silvestre-Albero J, Sepúlveda-Escribano A and
(2020). Rodríguez-Reinoso F, CO2 adsorption on carbon
molecular sieves. Microporous Mesoporous Mater
220. Demiral H and Demiral İ, Preparation and characterization of
164:280–287 (2012).
carbon molecular sieves from chestnut shell by chemical
vapor deposition. Adv Powder Technol (2018) 238. Dabrowski
˛ A, Adsorption — from theory to practice. Adv
29(12):3033–3039. Colloid Interface Sci 93(1):135–224 (2001).
239. Song X, Wang La, Ma X and Zeng YM, Adsorption 254. Shang SS, Hanif A, Sun MZ, Tian YM, Ok YS, Yu IKM et al.,
equilibrium and thermodynamics of CO2 and CH4 on carbon Novel M (Mg/Ni/Cu)-Al-CO3 layered double hydroxides
molecular sieves. Appl Surf Sci 396:870–878 (2017). synthesized by aqueous miscible organic solvent treatment
240. Cho SH, Yu HR, Choi TH, Jung MJ and Lee YS, Surface (AMOST) method for CO2 capture. J Hazard Mater
functionalization and CO2 uptake on carbon molecular 373:285–293 (2019).
sieves: Experimental observation and theoretical study. Appl 255. Zhu XC, Chen CP, Wang Q, Shi YX, OʼHare D and Cai NS,
Surf Sci 447:8–14 (2018). Roles for K2 CO3 doping on elevated temperature CO2
241. Villar-Rodil S, Navarrete R, Denoyel R, Albiniak A, Paredes JI, adsorption of potassium promoted layered double oxides.
Martínez-Alonso A et al., Carbon molecular sieve cloths Chem Eng J 366:181–191 (2019).
prepared by chemical vapour deposition of methane for 256. Sajid M and Basheer C, Layered double hydroxides:
separation of gas mixtures. Microporous Mesoporous Mater Emerging sorbent materials for analytical extractions. Trends
77(2):109–118 (2005). Anal Chem 75:174–182 (2016).
242. Silvestre-Albero J, Wahby A, Sepúlveda-Escribano A, 257. Del Hoyo C, Layered double hydroxides and human health:
Martínez-Escandell M, Kaneko K and Rodríguez-Reinoso F, An overview. Appl Clay Sci 36(1):103–121 (2007).
Ultrahigh CO2 adsorption capacity on carbon molecular 258. Dadwhal M, Kim TW, Sahimi M and Tsotsis TT, Study of CO2
sieves at room temperature. Chem Commun diffusion and adsorption on calcined layered double
47(24):6840–6842 (2011). hydroxides: The effect of particle size. Ind Eng Chem Res
243. Roy Ad, Forano C and Besse JP, Layered double hydroxides: 47(16):6150–6157 (2008).
Synthesis and post-synthesis modification, in Layered 259. Gao YS, Zhang Z, Wu JW, Yi XF, Zheng AM, Umar A et al.,
Double Hydroxides: Present and Future, ed. by Rives V. Nova Comprehensive investigation of CO2 adsorption on
Science Publishers, Inc., New York, pp. 1–39 (2006). Mg–Al–CO3 LDH-derived mixed metal oxides. J Mater Chem
244. Razzaq A, Ali S, Asif M and In S-I, Layered double hydroxide A 1(41):12782–12790 (2013).
(LDH) based photocatalysts: An outstanding strategy for 260. Li S, Shi YX, Yang Y, Zheng Y and Cai NS, High-performance
efficient photocatalytic CO2 conversion. Catalysts CO2 adsorbent from interlayer potassium-promoted
10(1185):1–43 (2020). stearate-pillared hydrotalcite precursors. Energy Fuels
245. Jiang GM, Fu WY, Shu S, Zhang ZY, Zhang S, Zhang YX 27(9):5352–5358 (2013).
et al., MgAl layered double oxide: One powerful sweeper of 261. Oliveira ELG, Grande CA and Rodrigues AE, CO2 sorption on
emulsified water and acid for oil purification. J Hazard Mater hydrotalcite and alkali-modified (K and Cs) hydrotalcites at
367:658–667 (2019). high temperatures. Sep Purif Technol 62(1):137–147 (2008).
246. Wang YH, Li QR, Bo LF, Wang XP, Zhang T, Li SH et al., 262. Ram Reddy MK, Xu ZP, Lu GQ and Diniz da Costa JC,
Synthesis and oil absorption of biomorphic MgAl layered Layered double hydroxides for CO2 capture: Structure
double oxide/acrylic ester resin by suspension evolution and regeneration. Ind Eng Chem Res
polymerization. Chem Eng J 284:989–994 (2016). 45(22):7504–7509 (2006).
247. Zhang QW, Wang J, Yin S, Sato T and Saito F, Synthesis of a 263. Ram Reddy MK, Xu ZP, Lu GQM and Diniz da Costa JC,
visible-light active TiO2−x Sx photocatalyst by means of Influence of water on high-temperature CO2 capture using
mechanochemical doping. J Am Ceram Soc 87(6):1161–1163 layered double hydroxide derivatives. Ind Eng Chem Res
(2004). 47(8):2630–2635 (2008).
248. Liu XL, Shao YW, Zhang YJ, Meng GZ, Zhang T and Wang 264. Sharma U, Tyagi B and Jasra RV, Synthesis and
FH, Using high-temperature mechanochemistry treatment to characterization of Mg−Al−CO3 layered double hydroxide
modify iron oxide and improve the corrosion performance of for CO2 adsorption. Ind Eng Chem Res 47(23):9588–9595
epoxy coating – I. High-temperature ball milling treatment. (2008).
Corros Sci 90:451–462 (2015).
265. Wang JY, Mei XY, Huang L, Zheng QW, Qiao YQ, Zang KT
249. Qin QQ, Wang JY, Zhou TT, Zheng QW, Huang L, Zhang Y et al., Synthesis of layered double hydroxides/graphene
et al., Impact of organic interlayer anions on the CO2 oxide nanocomposite as a novel high-temperature CO2
adsorption performance of Mg-Al layered double hydroxides adsorbent. J Energy Chem 24(2):127–137 (2015).
derived mixed oxides. J Energy Chem 26(3):346–353 (2017).
266. Wang Q, Gao YS, Luo JZ, Zhong ZY, Borgna A, Guo ZH
250. Lopez T, Bosch P, Ramos E, Gomez R, Novaro O, Acosta D et al., Synthesis of nano-sized spherical Mg3 Al–CO3 layered
et al., Synthesis and characterization of sol− gel double hydroxide as a high-temperature CO2 adsorbent.
hydrotalcites. Structure and texture. Langmuir 12(1):189–192 RSC Adv 3(10):3414–3420 (2013).
(1996).
267. Wang Q, Tay HH, Guo ZH, Chen LW, Liu Y, Chang J et al.,
251. Ahmed MA, brick AA and Mohamed AA, An efficient Morphology and composition controllable synthesis of
adsorption of indigo carmine dye from aqueous solution on Mg–Al–CO3 hydrotalcites by tuning the synthesis pH and the
mesoporous Mg/Fe layered double hydroxide nanoparticles CO2 capture capacity. Appl Clay Sci 55:18–26 (2012).
prepared by controlled sol-gel route. Chemosphere 268. Wang Q, Tay HH, Ng DJW, Chen LW, Liu Y, Chang J et al.,
174:280–288 (2017). The effect of trivalent cations on the performance of
252. Qu J, Zhang QW, Li XW, He XM and Song SX, Mg-M-CO3 layered double hydroxides for high-temperature
Mechanochemical approaches to synthesize layered double CO2 capture. ChemSusChem 3(8):965–973 (2010).
hydroxides: A review. Appl Clay Sci 119:185–192 (2016).
269. Wang Q, Wu ZH, Tay HH, Chen LW, Liu Y, Chang J et al.,
253. Cermelj K, Ruengkajorn K, Buffet J-C and OʼHare D, Layered High temperature adsorption of CO2 on Mg–Al hydrotalcite:
double hydroxide nanosheets via solvothermal delamination. Effect of the charge compensating anions and the synthesis
J Energy Chem 35:88–94 (2019). pH. Catal Today 164(1):198–203 (2011).
270. Chen YF, Hu ZQ, Gupta KM and Jiang JW, Ionic 286. Veselovskaya JV, Derevschikov VS, Shalygin AS and
liquid/metal–organic framework composite for CO2 capture: Yatsenko DA, K2 CO3 -containing composite sorbents
A computational investigation. J Phys Chem C based on a ZrO2 aerogel for reversible CO2 capture from
115(44):21736–21742 (2011). ambient air. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 310:1–9
271. Tzialla O, Veziri C, Papatryfon X, Beltsios KG, Labropoulos A, (2021).
Iliev B et al., Zeolite imidazolate framework–ionic liquid 287. Choi MK and Ryoo R, Ordered nanoporous polymer–carbon
hybrid membranes for highly selective CO2 separation. J composites. Nat Mater 2(7):473–476 (2003).
Phys Chem C 117(36):18434–18440 (2013). 288. Fellinger T-P, Sol–gel carbons from ionothermal syntheses. J
272. Jang DI and Park SJ, Influence of nickel oxide on carbon Sol-Gel Sci Technol 81(1):52–58 (2017).
dioxide adsorption behaviors of activated carbons. Fuel 289. Reina G, González-Domínguez JM, Criado A, Vázquez E,
102:439–444 (2012). Bianco A and Prato M, Promises, facts and challenges for
273. Liu Z and Green WH, Experimental investigation of sorbent graphene in biomedical applications. Chem Soc Rev
for warm CO2 capture by pressure swing adsorption. Ind Eng 46(15):4400–4416 (2017).
Chem Res 52(28):9665–9673 (2013). 290. Baby R, Saifullah B and Hussein MZ, Carbon nanomaterials
274. Nowrouzi M, Younesi H and Bahramifar N, Superior CO2 for the treatment of heavy metal-contaminated water and
capture performance on biomass-derived carbon/metal environmental remediation. Nanoscale Res Lett
oxides nanocomposites from Persian ironwood by H3 PO4 14(1):341–357 (2019).
activation. Fuel 223:99–114 (2018). 291. Duan YH, Pfeiffer H, Li BY, Romero-Ibarra IC, Sorescu DC,
275. Somy A, Mehrnia MR, Amrei HD, Ghanizadeh A and Safari M, Luebke DR et al., CO2 capture properties of lithium silicates
Adsorption of carbon dioxide using impregnated activated with different ratios of Li2 O/SiO2 : An ab initio thermodynamic
carbon promoted by zinc. Int J Greenh Gas Con 3(3):249–254 and experimental approach. Phys Chem 15(32):13538–13558
(2009). (2013).
276. Song HK and Lee KH, Adsorption of carbon dioxide on 292. Hamm JBS, Muniz AR, Pollo LD, Marcilio NR and Tessaro IC,
chemically modified carbon adsorbents. Sep Sci Technol Experimental and computational analysis of carbon
33(13):2039–2057 (1998). molecular sieve membrane formation upon polyetherimide
277. Bian ZJ, Xu J, Zhang SP, Zhu XM, Liu HL and Hu J, pyrolysis. Carbon 119:21–29 (2017).
Interfacial growth of metal organic framework/graphite oxide 293. Zheng WH, Hu JT, Rappeport S, Zheng Z, Wang ZX, Han ZS
composites through pickering emulsion and their CO2 et al., Activated carbon fiber composites for gas phase
capture performance in the presence of humidity. Langmuir ammonia adsorption. Microporous Mesoporous Mater
31(26):7410–7417 (2015). 234:146–154 (2016).
278. Chen C, Li BX, Zhou LJ, Xia ZF, Feng NJ, Ding J et al., 294. Zhang J, Singh R and Webley PA, Alkali and alkaline-earth
Synthesis of hierarchically structured hybrid materials by cation exchanged chabazite zeolites for adsorption based
controlled self-assembly of metal–organic framework with CO2 capture. Microporous Mesoporous Mater
mesoporous silica for CO2 adsorption. ACS Appl Mater Inter 111(1–3):478–487 (2008).
9(27):23060–23071 (2017). 295. Dunne J, Rao M, Sircar S, Gorte R and Myers A, Calorimetric
279. Liu YY, Ghimire P and Jaroniec M, Copper heats of adsorption and adsorption isotherms. 2. O2 , N2 , Ar,
benzene-1,3,5-tricarboxylate (Cu-BTC) metal-organic CO2 , CH4 , C2 H6 , and SF6 on NaX, H-ZSM-5, and Na-ZSM-5
framework (MOF) and porous carbon composites as efficient zeolites. Langmuir 12(24):5896–5904 (1996).
carbon dioxide adsorbents. J Colloid Interface Sci 296. Arefi Pour A, Sharifnia S, NeishaboriSalehi R and Ghodrati M,
535:122–132 (2019). Performance evaluation of clinoptilolite and 13X zeolites in
280. Pal A, Uddin K, Rocky KA, Thu K and Saha BB, CO2 CO2 separation from CO2 /CH4 mixture. J Nat Gas Sci Eng
adsorption onto activated carbon–graphene composite for 26:1246–1253 (2015).
cooling applications. Int J Refrig 106:558–569 (2019). 297. Silva JAC, Schumann K and Rodrigues AE, Sorption and
281. Plaza MG, Durán I, Rubiera F and Pevida C, CO2 adsorbent kinetics of CO2 and CH4 in binderless beads of 13X zeolite.
pellets produced from pine sawdust: Effect of coal tar pitch Microporous Mesoporous Mater 158:219–228 (2012).
addition. Appl Energy 144:182–192 (2015). 298. Konduru N, Lindner P and Assaf-Anid NM, Curbing the
282. Rostami M, Mofarahi M, Karimzadeh R and Abedi D, greenhouse effect by carbon dioxide adsorption with zeolite
Preparation and characterization of activated carbon–zeolite 13X. AIChE J 53(12):3137–3143 (2007).
composite for gas adsorption separation of CO2 /N2 system. 299. Li G, Xiao P, Webley P, Zhang J, Singh R and Marshall M,
J Chem Eng Data 61(7):2638–2646 (2016). Capture of CO2 from high humidity flue gas by vacuum
283. Zhao YX, Seredych M, Jagiello J, Zhong Q and Bandosz TJ, swing adsorption with zeolite 13X. Adsorption 14(2):415–422
Insight into the mechanism of CO2 adsorption on Cu–BTC (2008).
and its composites with graphite oxide or aminated graphite 300. Li G, Xiao P, Webley PA, Zhang J and Singh R, Competition
oxide. Chem Eng J 239:399–407 (2014). of CO2 /H2 O in adsorption based CO2 capture. Energy
284. Zhou HC, Long JR and Yaghi OM, Introduction to Procedia 1(1):1123–1130 (2009).
metal–organic frameworks. Chem Rev 112(2):673–674 301. Hüsing N and Hartmann S, Inorganic-Organic Hybrid Porous
(2012). Materials, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, New York
285. Li M, Li D, O’Keeffe M and Yaghi OM, Topological analysis of (2009).
metal–organic frameworks with polytopic linkers and/or 302. Xu RR, Pang WQ, Yu JH, Huo QS and Chen JS, Chemistry of
multiple building units and the minimal transitivity principle. Zeolites and Related Porous Materials: Synthesis and
Chem Rev 114(2):1343–1370 (2014). Structure, John Wiley & Sons (Asia), Singapore (2009).
303. Zhang ZZ, Wang H, Chen XQ, Xie RY, Gao P, Wei W et al., https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/catalog/product/aldrich/
CO2 sorption in wet ordered mesoporous silica KIT-6: Effects 900407?lang=en&region=US [4 November 2020].
of water content and mechanism on enhanced sorption 320. Sigma-Aldrich Graphene nanoplatelets (25 μm particle size,
capacity. Adsorption 20(7):883–888 (2014). surface area 50–80 m2 /g)-900411. [Online]. (2020). Available:
304. Zhang L, Li Y and Zhou HC, Preparation and characterization https://www.sigmaaldrich.com/catalog/product/aldrich/
of DBU-loaded MCM-41 for adsorption of CO2 . Energy 900411?lang=en&region=US [4 November 2020].
149:414–423 (2018). 321. Hiremath V, Hwang S and Seo JG, Enhanced cyclic stability
305. Llewellyn PL, Bourrelly S, Serre C, Vimont A, Daturi M, and CO2 capture performance of MgO-Al2 O3 sorbent
Hamon L et al., High uptakes of CO2 and CH4 in mesoporous decorated with eutectic mixture. Energy Procedia
metal—organic frameworks MIL-100 and MIL-101. Langmuir 114:2421–2428 (2017).
24(14):7245–7250 (2008). 322. Lin ZF, Wei JW, Geng LL, Mei DJ and Liao L, Adsorption of
306. Yaghi OM, Kalmutzki MJ and Diercks CS, Introduction to carbon dioxide by a novel amine impregnated ZSM-5/KIT-6
Reticular Chemistry: Metal-Organic Frameworks and composite. RSC Adv 7(86):54422–54430 (2017).
Covalent Organic Frameworks, Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & 323. Chung YCG, Gómez-Gualdrón DA, Li P, Leperi KT, Deria P,
Co. KGaA, Weinheim (2019). Zhang HD et al., In silico discovery of metal-organic
307. Zhang ZJ, Tao J, Xiang SC, Chen BL and Zhou W, New frameworks for precombustion CO2 capture using a genetic
Progress of Microporous Metal-Organic Frameworks in CO2 algorithm. Sci Adv 2(10):1–9 (2016).
Capture and Separation, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New 324. Song YP, Sun Q, Aguila B and Ma SQ, Opportunities of
Jersey (2018). covalent organic frameworks for advanced applications. Adv
308. Mohamedali M, Nath D, Ibrahim H and Henni A, Review of Sci 6(2):1–34 (2019).
Recent Developments in CO2 Capture Using Solid Materials: 325. Park YC, Jo SH, Ryu CK and Yi CK, Demonstration of pilot
Metal Organic Frameworks (MOFs), IntechOpen (2016). scale carbon dioxide capture system using dry regenerable
https://doi.org/10.5772/62275 sorbents to the real coal-fired power plant in Korea. Energy
309. Kizzie AC, Wong-Foy AG and Matzger AJ, Effect of humidity Procedia 4:1508–1512 (2011).
on the performance of microporous coordination polymers as 326. Hornbostel M, Pilot-scale Evaluation of An Advanced Carbon
adsorbents for CO2 capture. Langmuir 27(10):6368–6373 Sorbent-based Process for Post-combustion Carbon
(2011). Capture, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA, p. P22221
310. Liu J, Tian J, Thallapally PK and McGrail BP, Selective CO2 (2016).
capture from flue gas using metal–organic frameworks–a 327. Danaci D, Bui M, Mac Dowell N and Petit C, Exploring the
fixed bed study. J Phys Chem C 116(17):9575–9581 limits of adsorption-based CO2 capture using MOFs with
(2012). PVSA–from molecular design to process economics. Mol
311. Wahby A, Ramos-Fernández JM, Martínez-Escandell M, Syst Des Eng 2020(5):212–231 (2020).
Sepúlveda-Escribano A, Silvestre-Albero J and 328. Kim K, Yang S, Lee JB, Eom TH, Ryu CK, Lee H-J et al., A
Rodríguez-Reinoso F, High-surface-area carbon molecular long-term test of a new CO2 sorbent (KEP-CO2P2) in a 0.5
sieves for selective CO2 adsorption. ChemSusChem MWe CO2 capture test bed. Korean J Chem Eng
3(8):974–981 (2010). 32(4):677–684 (2015).
312. Kim HB, Jang HD and Choi MK, Facile synthesis of 329. Park YC, Jo S-H, Kim J-Y, Won Y, Nam H, Yi C-K et al.,
macroporous Li4 SiO4 with remarkably enhanced CO2 Carbon dioxide capture from a real coal-fired flue gas using
adsorption kinetics. Chem Eng J 280:132–137 (2015). K-based solid sorbents in a 0.5 MWe -scale test-bed facility.
313. Nakagawa K and Ohashi T, A novel method of CO2 capture Int J Greenh Gas Con 103:1–6 (2020).
from high temperature gases. J Electrochem Soc 330. Bakdash RS, Aljundi IH, Basheer C and Abdulazeez I, Rice
145(4):1344–1346 (1998). husk derived aminated silica for the efficient adsorption of
314. Wang K, Zhao PF, Guo X, Li YM, Han DT and Chao Y, different gases. Sci Rep 10:1–12 (2020).
Enhancement of reactivity in Li4 SiO4 -based sorbents from 331. Dindi A, Quang DV, Nashef E and Zahra MRMA, Effect of PEI
the nano-sized rice husk ash for high-temperature CO2 impregnation on the CO2 capture performance of activated
capture. Energy Convers Manage 81:447–454 (2014). fly ash. Energy Procedia 114:2243–2251 (2017).
315. Yi KB and Eriksen DØ, Low temperature liquid state 332. Panek R, Wdowin M, Franus W, Czarna D, Stevens LA, Deng
synthesis of lithium zirconate and its characteristics as a CO2 H et al., Fly ash-derived MCM-41 as a low-cost silica support
sorbent. Sep Sci Technol 41(2):283–296 (2006). for polyethyleneimine in post-combustion CO2 capture. J
316. Ida J and Lin Y, Mechanism of high-temperature CO2 CO2 Util 22:81–90
sorption on lithium zirconate. Environ Sci Technol (2017).
37(9):1999–2004 (2003). 333. Wang YS, Jia H, Chen P, Fang X and Du T, Synthesis of La
317. Wang JY, Huang L, Yang RY, Zhang Z, Wu JW, Gao YS et al., and Ce modified X zeolite from rice husk ash for carbon
Recent advances in solid sorbents for CO2 capture and new dioxide capture. J Mater Res Technol 9(3):4368–4378
development trends. Energy Environ Sci 7(11):3478–3518 (2020).
(2014). 334. Gholidoust A, Atkinson JD and Hashisho Z, Enhancing CO2
318. Presser V, McDonough J, Yeon SH and Gogotsi Y, Effect of adsorption via amine-impregnated activated carbon from oil
pore size on carbon dioxide sorption by carbide derived sands coke. Energy Fuels 31(2):1756–1763 (2017).
carbon. Energy Environ Sci 4(8):3059–3066 (2011). 335. Rattanaphan S, Rungrotmongkol T and Kongsune P, Biogas
319. Sigma-Aldrich Graphene nanoplatelets (surface area improving by adsorption of CO2 on modified waste tea
750 m2 /g)-900407. [Online]. (2020). Available: activated carbon. Renew Energy 145:622–631 (2020).
Jia Yen Lai Siti Salwa Hashim

Jia Yen Lai is currently taking Ph.D. Siti Salwa Hashim is a Lecturer in
study in chemical engineering under Chemical Engineering at Faculty of
supervision of Ir. Dr. Ngu Lock Hei at Engineering, Computing and Science,
the Swinburne University of Technology Swinburne University of Technology
Sarawak Campus, Malaysia. Her Sarawak Campus. Her research
research focuses on the synthesis of interests include gas separation,
porous carbon materials and biomass reaction engineering, and more
adsorbents for CO2 adsorption. recently carbon capture, utilization,
and storage.
Lock Hei Ngu
Lock Hei Ngu is a senior lecturer in
Chemical Engineering at Swinburne
University of Technology Sarawak
Campus, Malaysia. Her current field
of research includes CO2 absorption
and adsorption, carbon utilization
and biomass adsorbents for
wastewater treatment.

A Review of CO2 Adsorbents Performance For Different Carbon Capture Technology Processes Conditions

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Review of CO2 Adsorbents Performance For Different Carbon Capture Technology Processes Conditions

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Review

A review of CO2 adsorbents

Introduction MOFs were found to be capable of capturing CO2

Figure 1. Process flow diagram of post-combustion CO2 capture of a coal-fired plant

Figure 2. Pre- and oxy-combustion capture technologies (Reproduced from 20).

Table 1. Typical carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology conditions.16,17,19,22–28

requirement for regeneration using thermal or pressure

2-amino-2-methyl-1-propanol (AMP)] into the medium39 via hydrothermal method.45,48,50 Figure 6

Figure 6. Major types of hierarchical layered zeolite material (Reproduced from

exhibited CO2 adsorption capacity of 5.5-23.5 mmol

Figure 8. Different nanoporous structures of metal organic frameworks (MOFs) synthesized by

exhibit three-dimensional crystallographically without ammonium hydroxide (NH4 OH) as an

(Ca(CH3 COO)2 ·H2 O) for CO2 adsorption at high

CO2 adsorption capacity of 4.30 mmol g−1 at 25 °C and

Figure 16. CO2 adsorption isotherms of the modified

biomass and coal by pyrolyzation, covering, and carbon

Figure 19. CO2 adsorption performance for the CMSs

is dependent on the pyrolytic reaction or carbon

Layered anionic clays

CO2 adsorption capacity

0.1 bar 10 bar

20 P = 36 bar, T = 22°C; Cap.

CO2 adsorption capacity

Figure 24. Continued

CO2 adsorption capacity

Post-combustion CO capture region

Direct air capture region

Jia Yen Lai Siti Salwa Hashim

You might also like