Articles & Issues
- Language
- English
- Conflict of Interest
- In relation to this article, we declare that there is no conflict of interest.
- Publication history
-
Received June 6, 2024
Accepted February 21, 2025
Available online May 25, 2025
-
This is an Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/bync/3.0) which permits
unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
All issues
Pyrolysis Products Separation of Lignin via Molecular Distillation and Liquid–Liquid Extraction
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11814-025-00426-z
Abstract
In this communication, two sets of experimental data on lignin pyrolysis were proposed to design processes for product
separation through Aspen Plus V12.1. After simulation, a comprehensive analysis was undertaken, encompassing both
techno-economic evaluations and energy analyses, utilizing Aspen Process Economic Analyzer (APEA) V12 and Aspen
Energy Analyzer (AEA) V12.1. The initial phase involved the development of processes via molecular distillation, facilitating
components separation. Subsequent modifi cations incorporated liquid–liquid-extraction technique, with a comparative
assessment of system performances. Techno-economic analysis revealed that, for the fi rst dataset, solvent extraction resulted
in an 8.9% and 10.3% reduction in total capital cost and equipment cost. Conversely, for the second dataset, one-step solvent
extraction incurred a 25.0% and 26.0% increase in total capital cost and equipment cost, while two-stage solvent extraction
led to a more substantial rise of 52.1% and 55.4%. In parallel, energy analysis outcomes indicated that, for the fi rst dataset
and the fi rst scenario of the second dataset, peak values were observed for heating, with ratios of heating values to the sum
of cooling and process exchanger values at 55.5, 44.8, and 1.0. In alternate scenarios, cooling values surpassed cumulative
sum of heating and process exchanger values, yielding ratios of 1.6 and 1.5 for cooling values to the sum of heating and
process exchanger values.

