Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers 70 (2017) 236–243

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jtice

Microwave torrefaction of sewage sludge and leucaena

Yu-Fong Huang, Hsuan-Te Sung, Pei-Te Chiueh∗, Shang-Lien Lo
Graduate Institute of Environmental Engineering, National Taiwan University, 71, Chou-Shan Rd., Taipei 106, Taiwan, ROC

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study attempted to investigate and compare sewage sludge and leucaena torrefaction using a single-
Received 26 June 2016 mode microwave oven. To discuss reactivity, product characteristics, and energy recovery, microwave tor-
Revised 22 October 2016
refaction of the two feedstocks was carried out at various microwave power levels. Besides, thermal
Accepted 27 October 2016
properties of raw feedstocks and torrefied products were observed by the deconvolution of derivative
Available online 3 December 2016
thermogravimetric profiles. The volatile matter contents of the two biomass feedstocks were substan-
Keywords: tially reduced at relatively low microwave power levels. Because of high heating value and fuel ratio as
Microwave torrefaction well as low atomic H/C and O/C ratios, the biochar could replace coal. Compared with sewage sludge,
Sewage sludge microwave torrefaction of leucaena produced thermally stable biochar at lower microwave power levels,
Leucaena which means that the microwave heating performance of leucaena is better. Compared with conventional
Biochar torrefaction, mass and energy yields of microwave torrefaction were lower, which could be attributable to
Bioenergy
the more severe reaction accomplished by microwave heating. The atomic H/C and O/C ratios of leucaena
biochar were close to those of anthracite, so combustion or gasification of the biochar could form less
smoke. After microwave torrefaction at relatively high microwave power levels, a high HHV (dry ash-free
basis) of sewage sludge biochar was found.
© 2016 Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction drawbacks have given rise to the development of new technolo-

Renewable energy has recently attracted more interest be-
cause of high worldwide energy demand, unstable and uncer-
tain petroleum sources, and concern over global climate change
[1]. One of the promising renewable energy options is bioenergy.
Biomass, including wood, crop and forest residues, and municipal
and industrial wastes [2], is a sustainable carbon-neutral resource
for the production of biofuels and biomaterials [1,3]. Biomass
wastes can be regarded as a cheap and relatively abundant source
of bioenergy [4]. The bioenergy generated from biomass wastes
and residues has gained more importance among the different
sources of renewable energy [5], because these biomass feedstocks
do not compete with food crops and directly or indirectly cause
land-clearing [2].
Untreated biomass has high moisture content, low energy den-
sities, and hydrophilic nature, and it is bulkier with poorer han-
dling and transportation characteristics and is more tenacious to
make it difficult to comminute into small homogeneous particles,
resulting in complicated and expensive storage and transporta-
tion [6–9]. Besides, the high oxygen content of biomass results in
a large amount of smoking during combustion [9]. All of these
∗
Corresponding author. Fax: +886 2 2392 8830.
E-mail address: ptchueh@ntu.edu.tw (P.-T. Chiueh).
gies for biomass modification in order to ensure that its use as
an energy source is environmentally friendly and economically ef-
ficient [7,10]. One way to modify the chemical and physical prop-
erties of biomass is a thermal processing step known as torrefac-
tion [6,10,11]. Torrefaction is a low-temperature (20 0–30 0 °C) ther-
mal pretreatment of biomass operated at atmospheric pressure in
the absence of oxygen [11–13], so it is also known as mild pyroly-
sis [6,7,9,14]. In addition to increasing energy density and decreas-
ing moisture and oxygen content, torrefaction has a great effect
on the grindability and reactivity of biomass [7], and the torrefied
biomass becomes hydrophobic due to the formation of non-polar
unsaturated structures [11].
Most biomass torrefaction researches and applications use con-
ventional electric heaters, whereas there is an alternative method
called microwave heating. Microwave heating which is also re-
ferred to as dielectric heating [15,16] has been attracting increas-
ing interest in recent years [17]. Compared with conventional heat-
ing, microwave heating provides various advantages such as higher
heating efficiency and power density, better heat transfer and pro-
cess control, more uniform heat distribution, and faster internal
heating [15,18–20]. Microwave heating can reach high tempera-
tures in a fraction of the time of conventional heating [21]. The
unique features of microwave heating can be used to improve pro-
cesses, modify selectivities, or perform reactions that do not oc-
cur by conventional heating [22]. According to the aforementioned

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtice.2016.10.056
1876-1070/© 2016 Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 Y.-F. Huang et al. / Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers 70 (2017) 236–243
advantages, the combination of microwaves with torrefaction will
be a promising technique.
Sewage sludge disposal would be one of the most complex
environmental problems [23,24]. In fact, the organic content in
sewage sludge can be utilized as a biomass resource for the pro-
duction of energy [25,26]. Leucaena is a fast growing tree with
high biomass production, so it has a high potential for bioen-
ergy production and can be an alternative to the use of tradi-
tional biomass feedstocks [27,28]. Both sewage sludge and leucaena
feedstocks are abundant and representative biomass resources, al-
though their compositions and characteristics are very different.
This study attempted to investigate and compare the microwave
torrefaction outcomes of the two feedstocks, such as reaction per-
formance and process applicability. The reactivity, product charac-
teristics, and energy recovery of microwave torrefaction were dis-
cussed to evaluate the benefits and potential applications of this
technique.
2. Material and methods
2.1. Materials
Sewage sludge was obtained from the Dihua Sewage Treat-
ment Plant, Taipei, Taiwan. The as-received moisture content of the
sewage sludge was approximately 85 wt%. The raw sewage sludge
was air dried for several months and then dried in an oven at
105 °C for three days. Although the moisture could be nearly com-
pletely removed after oven drying, the sewage sludge would soon
absorb and/or adsorb water molecules in the air because of its
porous property. Leucaena wood was provided by the Kenting Na-
tional Park, Pingtung, Taiwan. The raw leucaena wood was dried
in an oven at 105 °C for 1 hr. Like sewage sludge, the dried leu-
caena showed a low moisture content, which was, however, a lit-
tle higher than that of dried sewage sludge. This should be owing
to the relatively high porosity of the dried leucaena sample. Be-
fore applying to microwave torrefaction and relevant experiments,
sewage sludge and leucaena was dried, shredded, and ground into
powder, and then it was sieved using a 50-mesh screen (0.297 mm
opening).
2.2. Experimental apparatus
A single-mode (focused) microwave oven was used in this
study. This microwave oven operates at a frequency of 2.45 GHz,
and its maximum output power is 20 0 0 W. A schematic diagram of
the overall microwave heating system can be found elsewhere [29].
Both reaction tube (40 cm length, 5 cm outer diameter) and sam-
ple crucible (3 cm height, 4 cm outer diameter) are made of quartz.
There was a three-stub tuner in charge of regulating the incident
angle of microwaves to make sure that microwave peak is located
at the center of reaction zone. At the end of microwave propaga-
tion pathway, a short-circuit plunger was set to adjust the wave-
length phase of microwaves. During the experiment induced by
microwave heating, both three-stub tuner and short-circuit plunger
Table 1
Maximum temperatures of microwave torrefaction.
Sewage sludge
100 150
Maximum temperature (°C) 168 ± 19 217 ± 31
Leucaena
100
Maximum temperature (°C) 232 ± 25
237
were adjusted to minimize reflected microwave power. The heat
caused by the reflected microwave power was absorbed by a wa-
ter load that was cooled down by a refrigerated circulator. Incident
and reflected microwave power was measured by a power meter.
The temperature of the biomass sample was measured by a ther-
mocouple and an infrared thermometer. After passing through a
condenser, the vapor produced during the experiment was divided
into condensable (tar) and incondensable (gas) parts, and the flow
rate of the gaseous product was measured by a digital flow meter.
2.3. Experimental details
The microwave power levels of 100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 350,
and 400 W were applied for sewage sludge torrefaction, and 100,
125, 150, 200, and 250 W for leucaena torrefaction. The microwave
power levels chosen for sewage sludge and leucaena torrefaction
were different because of their different microwave torrefaction
performance. After a preliminary study, it was found that, to reach
the same reaction result, leucaena would need lower microwave
power level than sewage sludge. This will be discussed later. The
reaction cavity was purged with pure nitrogen gas at a flow rate
of 25 ml/min to maintain its inert atmosphere. After sufficient
purging, the power supply of the microwave heating system was
turned on and switched to the prescribed microwave power level
for the total operation time of 30 min. Reflected microwave power
was controlled to be as low as possible during the entire exper-
imental period by adjusting the three-stub tuner and the short-
circuit plunger. The actual working microwave power level was
determined by subtracting the reflected microwave power level
from the incident level. When the prescribed processing time was
reached, the power supply was turned off, the gas purging was
stopped, and the tar and gas collectors were removed and sealed.
After self-cooled down to the room temperature, solid residues
(biochar) remained in the crucible were removed and then placed
in a desiccator for hours. All of the experiments were performed
in triplicate at least to obtain average values for the results. The
maximum temperatures reached during the torrefaction of sewage
sludge and leucaena at different microwave power levels are listed
in Table 1. It can be seen that leucaena would need lower power
level than sewage sludge to achieve the same maximum tempera-
ture.
2.4. Analytical methods
Proximate analyses of biomass samples and torrefied products
were performed according to the standards D7582-12 and D3172-
07a of the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). Ul-
timate analyses were carried out by using a Perkin–Elmer 2400
II CHNS/O elemental analyzer. Higher heating values (HHV) were
measured in a Parr 1341 adiabatic oxygen bomb calorimeter. Each
sample (approximately 1 g) was dried at 105 °C in an oven for 24 h
prior to heating value analysis. Thermogravimetric analyses (TGA)
were carried out by using a TA Instruments SDT Q600 thermo-
gravimetric analyzer with a nitrogen flow rate of 100 ml/min, and
200 250 300 350 400
277 ± 14 310 ± 44 348 ± 36 376 ± 38 404 ± 50
125 150 200 250
264 ± 12 310 ± 39 341 ± 46 367 ± 52
238 Y.-F. Huang et al. / Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers 70 (2017) 236–243
Table 2
Characteristics of sewage sludge and leucaena.
Sewage sludge
Moisture (wt%) 8.98
Volatile matter (wt%)a 52.31
Fixed carbon (wt%)a 18.51
Ash (wt%)a 29.18
C (wt%)b 51.58
H (wt%)b 8.23
O (wt%)b 31.41
N (wt%)b 8.79
HHV (MJ/kg)a 15.04
a
Dry basis.
b
Dry ash-free basis.
each sample (approximately 10 mg) was heated to 900 °C at a rate
of 10 °C/min. All of the samples were tested in triplicate at least to
obtain average values for the results.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Characterization of biomass feedstocks
The general characteristics of sewage sludge and leucaena sam-
ples are listed in Table 2. The volatile matter content (dry basis) of
leucaena was much higher than that of sewage sludge. On the con-
trary, the ash content of sewage sludge was much higher than that
of leucaena. The fixed carbon contents of the two biomass feed-
stocks were almost the same. The combustible proportions (dry
basis) of sewage sludge and leucaena were approximately 71 and
98 wt%, respectively. The C, H, and N contents (dry ash-free ba-
sis) of sewage sludge were higher than those of leucaena, whereas
its O content was lower. The HHV (dry basis) of sewage sludge
was much lower than that of leucaena. However, the HHVs (dry
ash-free basis) of sewage sludge and leucaena were approximately
21.2 and 19.8 MJ/kg, respectively. Therefore, the HHV of sewage
sludge combustibles was slightly higher than that of leucaena com-
bustibles, which might be attributable to its higher C and H con-
tents whereas lower O content.
3.2. Characterization of biochar
The characteristics of biochar produced by microwave torrefac-
tion of sewage sludge are listed in Table 3. Generally, ash and C
contents increased but volatile matter, H, O, and N contents as
well as HHV decreased with increasing microwave power level. The
fixed carbon content was highest when the microwave power level
was 150 W. Therefore, a part of the fixed carbon could be thermally
decomposed at higher microwave power levels due to higher tem-
peratures. The HHVs of biochar were lower than that of the raw
sewage sludge. This could be attributable to that the volatile mat-
ter of sewage sludge was almost thoroughly decomposed after mi-
crowave torrefaction.
Table 3 also shows the characteristics of leucaena biochar. As
can be seen, fixed carbon and C contents as well as HHV increased
but volatile matter, H, and O contents decreased with increasing
microwave power level. Different from those of the sewage sludge
biochar, the fixed carbon content and HHV of leucaena biochar
were both higher at higher microwave power levels. At microwave
Leucaena
10.50
78.80
18.72
2.48
47.93
6.59
38.27
7.21
19.27
power levels of 125–250 W, the fixed carbon content and the HHV
were approximately 74–81 wt% and 29–30 MJ/kg, respectively. The
microwave power level of 100 W could be insufficient for leucaena
torrefaction due to the relatively lower values in fixed carbon con-
tent and HHV. The difference between the leucaena and sewage
sludge biochar should be attributable to their different proximate
and ultimate compositions. The sewage sludge biochar produced
at a microwave power level of 400 W had a higher HHV than the
biochar produced at microwave power levels of 150–350 W. This
could be attributable to the release of O and N elements during the
microwave torrefaction process. Therefore, the biochar produced at
higher microwave power levels had higher C content and HHV.
3.3. Thermogravimetric analysis
The weight loss of biomass due to its devolatilization by heat-
ing can be observed by using the thermogravimetric analysis. The
thermogravimetric (TG) and derivative thermogravimetric (DTG)
profiles of raw sewage sludge and biochar are shown in Fig. 1.
The weight loss of raw sewage sludge can be divided into three
stages: drying (from room temperature to approximately 200 °C),
extensive devolatilization (20 0–50 0 °C), and limited devolatiliza-
tion (50 0–90 0 °C), which are in accordance with the results from
Chen and Kuo [30]. The weight losses in the three stages are listed
in Table 4. The weight losses in the first stage of raw sewage sludge
and biochar were relatively lower, only 2–7%. The weight losses in
the second stage of raw sewage sludge and biochar produced at a
microwave power level of 100 W were approximately 44% and 29%,
respectively. When the microwave power levels were 150–400 W,
the weight losses in the second stage were only 0.3–4% because of
the decomposition of volatile matter during microwave torrefac-
tion. In the third stage, the weight losses of raw sewage sludge
and biochar were 1–11% and generally decreased with increasing
microwave power level. Consequently, the total weight loss of raw
sewage sludge was approximately 59%, whereas the total weight
losses of biochar produced at microwave power levels of 250–
400 W were only 3–9%. Therefore, most of the biochar produced
at the relatively higher microwave power levels should be primar-
ily composed of fixed carbon and ash.
The deconvolution (using the Gaussian distribution) of the DTG
profile of raw sewage sludge in the second stage produced three
peaks, whose centers were located at approximately 269, 336, and
389 °C. As can be seen from Fig. 1, after microwave torrefaction
at a microwave power level of 100 W, the peak at 269 °C substan-
 Y.-F. Huang et al. / Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers 70 (2017) 236–243 239

Table 3
Characteristics of sewage sludge and leucaena biochar.

Sewage sludge biochar

Power level (W) 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Moisture (wt%) 3.48 4.21 4.41 4.31 4.22 4.37 3.63

Volatile matter (wt%)a 36.97 16.12 15.38 4.77 2.66 3.13 1.92
Fixed carbon (wt%)a 25.99 32.54 31.19 30.62 29.80 29.32 25.74
Ash (wt%)a 37.03 51.34 53.44 64.61 67.53 67.55 72.34
C (wt%)b 52.60 57.58 59.27 59.81 62.50 66.81 66.84
H (wt%)b 5.42 4.43 4.10 5.29 3.39 3.11 2.28
O (wt%)b 33.18 30.91 30.03 29.26 30.47 27.19 28.31
N (wt%)b 8.81 7.08 6.59 5.64 3.64 2.89 2.56
HHV (MJ/kg)a 16.16 13.07 12.67 12.23 10.30 10.32 13.21

Leucaena biochar

Power level (W) 100 125 150 200 250

Moisture (wt%) 6.53 7.86 11.45 11.68 12.26

Volatile matter (wt%)a 62.83 19.92 19.15 16.05 13.71
Fixed carbon (wt%)a 35.80 73.96 77.17 79.33 81.21
Ash (wt%)a 1.38 6.11 3.68 4.62 5.07
C (wt%)b 58.67 80.59 80.53 80.85 80.29
H (wt%)b 5.06 2.97 2.78 2.51 2.78
O (wt%)b 35.45 15.19 15.65 15.52 15.86
N (wt%)b 0.83 1.25 1.04 1.13 1.08
HHV (MJ/kg)a 23.50 29.16 29.18 29.19 29.72
a
Dry basis.
b
Dry ash-free basis.

Fig. 1. TG and DTG profiles of raw and torrefied sewage sludge.

Table 4
Weight losses of biomass feedstocks and biochar during the three stages in thermogravimetric analysis.

Sewage sludge

Power level (W) Raw 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

1st (%) 7.05 3.55 3.31 4.60 2.35 2.33 4.26 1.78
2nd (%) 43.69 28.58 3.64 2.60 0.64 0.33 0.62 0.29
3rd (%) 7.90 10.79 9.20 8.31 4.48 3.68 4.05 1.34
Total (%) 58.63 42.91 16.14 15.51 7.47 6.34 8.93 3.41

Leucaena

Power level (W) Raw 100 125 150 200 250

1st (%) 10.64 6.15 8.43 10.92 11.83 12.28

2nd (%) 59.97 36.81 4.82 2.53 1.86 1.83
3rd (%) 22.44 18.89 12.82 12.82 11.51 10.65
Total (%) 93.06 61.84 26.07 26.27 25.20 24.76
240 Y.-F. Huang et al. / Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers 70 (2017) 236–243

Fig. 2. TG and DTG profiles of raw and torrefied leucaena.

tially decreased whereas the peak at 336 °C decreased just a lit- 100
tle. The peak at 389 °C almost remained unchanged. When the mi- Mass yield
crowave power level was raised to 150 W and above, the peak at 80 Energy yield
269 °C disappeared and the peaks at 336 °C and 389 °C decreased
with increasing microwave power level. The three peaks all disap-
Yield (%)

60
peared when the biochar was produced at microwave power lev-
els of 30 0–40 0 W. This result once again shows that the biochar 40
produced by more severe microwave torrefaction should be mainly
composed of fixed carbon and ash, which corresponds to the prox- 20
imate analysis results of the biochar (Table 3).
The TG and DTG profiles of raw leucaena and biochar are il- 0
lustrated in Fig. 2. As can be seen, the weight loss of raw leu- 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
caena can be also divided into three stages. However, the boundary Microwave power level (W)
between the second and third stages would be at approximately
40 0 °C rather than 50 0 °C. This should be attributable to their dif- Fig. 3. Mass and energy yields of microwave torrefaction of sewage sludge.
ferent compositions. Leucaena is a lignocellulosic biomass. Yang et
al. [31] reported that the pyrolytic weight losses of hemicellulose
and cellulose mainly happened at 220–315 °C and 315–400 °C, re- coming from the decomposition of hemicellulose and cellulose, re-
spectively, and lignin gradually decomposed in a wide tempera- spectively. As can be seen from Fig. 2, after microwave torrefaction
ture range (160–900 °C). Therefore, in the second stage, the weight at a microwave power level of 100 W, the two peaks substantially
loss of raw leucaena should be owing to the devolatilization of its decreased. The peak at 307 °C almost disappeared when the mi-
hemicellulose and cellulose components. The weight losses in the crowave power level was raised to 125 W and above. At microwave
first and third stages should be primarily attributable to the re- power levels of 150–250 W, there was no more peak in the second
moval of moisture and lignin, respectively. stage, showing that both hemicellulose and cellulose components
The weight losses of raw leucaena and biochar in the three of leucaena could be thoroughly decomposed.
stages are listed in Table 4. In the first stage, the weight losses
were in the range from 6% to 12% and generally increased with 3.4. Mass and energy yields
increasing microwave power level. The higher moisture content of
the biochar produced at higher microwave power level could be at- The mass and energy yields of microwave torrefaction of
tributable to that there were more pores formed during microwave sewage sludge at different microwave power levels are illustrated
torrefaction to adsorb more water. Compared with sewage sludge in Fig. 3. The yields were calculated on dry ash-free basis [8,11]:
biochar, the porosity of leucaena biochar could be much higher. m 
In the second stage, the weight loss of raw leucaena was as high Mass yield (ηM ) = char
(1)
mfeed daf
as approximately 60%, whereas the weight losses of biochar pro-
duced at microwave power levels of 200–250 W were less than  H HV 
2%. Therefore, after microwave torrefaction at relatively higher mi- Energy yield (ηE ) = ηM char
(2)
H HVfeed daf
crowave power levels, the hemicellulose and cellulose components
of leucaena could be completely decomposed. The weight loss of It can be seen that the mass and energy yields both de-
biochar in the third stage decreased with increasing microwave creased with increasing microwave power level. When the mi-
power level. Consequently, the total weight loss of raw leucaena crowave power level was 100 W, the mass and energy yields were
was approximately 93%, whereas those of the biochar produce at approximately 72% and 82%, respectively. These high percentages
microwave power levels of 125–250 W were only 25–26%. are attributable to low reactivity at the low microwave power level.
Unlike raw sewage sludge, the deconvolution of the DTG pro- At a microwave power level of 400 W, the mass and energy yields
file of raw leucaena in the second stage produced only two peaks, substantially reduced to approximately 9% and 19%, respectively,
whose centers were located at approximately 307 °C and 346 °C, resulting from severe reaction at the high microwave power level.
 Y.-F. Huang et al. / Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers 70 (2017) 236–243 241

80
Mass yield
Energy yield
60

Yield (%)
40

20

0
100 125 150 200 250
Microwave power level (W)

Fig. 4. Mass and energy yields of microwave torrefaction of leucaena.

At moderate microwave power levels of 150–200 W, the mass and 2 Sewage sludge (raw)
energy yields were approximately 40% and 48%, respectively. Sewage sludge (biochar)
The mass and energy yields of microwave torrefaction of leu- Leucaena (raw)
caena at different microwave power levels are shown in Fig. 4. Leucaena (biochar)
Compared with sewage sludge, the mass and energy yields of 1.5
Peat

Atomic H/C ratio

leucaena torrefaction at a microwave power level of 100 W were Lignite
both lower, due to its more severe torrefaction. Therefore, the mi-
Bituminous
crowave absorption ability of leucaena should be better than that 1 Anthracite
of sewage sludge. It has been reported that carbonaceous mate-
rials have higher microwave absorption ability than most of the
common minerals (e.g., SiO2 , CaO, and Al2 O3 ) [32–34]. Carbona-
ceous materials have higher microwave absorption ability because 0.5
of their higher loss tangent which defines the ability of a material
to be heated in the presence of a microwave field [34]. Leucaena
had higher C content but lower ash content than sewage sludge, so
0
the loss tangent and thus microwave absorption ability of leucaena
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
could be better than those of sewage sludge. At microwave power
Atomic O/C ratio
levels of 125–250 W, the mass and energy yields were only 16–
24% and 26–36%, respectively, although energy yields were much
higher than mass yields due to the high HHV (29–30 MJ/kg) of Fig. 5. Van Krevelen diagram for raw sewage sludge and leucaena, biochar, and
biochar. Compared with conventional torrefaction [8,10], both mass coal.

and energy yields of microwave torrefaction were lower, which

would be possibly attributable to more severe reaction accom-
plished by microwave irradiation.
3.5. Elemental composition
The elemental compositions of torrefaction products can be dis-
cussed by using a van Krevelen diagram, a plot of atomic H/C ra-
tio versus atomic O/C ratio. The atomic ratios of raw and torrefied
sewage sludge and leucaena were compared with those of differ-
ent ranks of coal [35], as illustrated in Fig. 5. The atomic ratios
are important indicators, because the combustion or gasification
of biomass feedstocks with higher H/C and O/C ratios would lead
to more formation of smoke [36]. The atomic H/C and O/C ratios
of the raw sewage sludge and leucaena were much higher than
those of the coal, even though the peat. After microwave torrefac-
tion, both H/C and O/C ratios decreased with increasing microwave
power level. At microwave power levels of 350–400 W, the atomic
H/C and O/C ratios of the torrefied sewage sludge were approxi-
mately 0.41–0.56 and 0.31–0.32, respectively. The atomic H/C ratio
was slightly higher than that of anthracite, whereas the atomic O/C
ratio was just between those of peat and lignite.
Microwave torrefaction substantially decreased the atomic H/C
and O/C ratios of leucaena as well. Coincidentally, when the mi-
crowave power levels were between 125 and 250 W, the atomic
H/C and O/C ratios of biochar were around 0.41 and 0.14, respec-
tively. The atomic H/C ratio of leucaena biochar was almost equal
to that of sewage sludge biochar. Therefore, this ratio could be a
limit for the carbonaceous materials. The atomic O/C ratio of leu-
caena biochar was much lower than that of sewage sludge biochar,
even though it was produced at lower microwave power levels.
However, the ratio was still higher than that of bituminous and
anthracitic coal. The allowed lowest atomic H/C and C/O ratios of
biochar produced by using conventional heating would be approx-
imately 1.14 and 0.16 for sewage sludge [5] and approximately 0.91
and 0.26 for woody biomass [37], respectively. Therefore, it can be
concluded that the H and O contents of biochar produced by mi-
crowave torrefaction can be lower than those from conventional
methods, and thus its further applications (e.g., combustion and
gasification) can form less smoke.
3.6. Fuel ratio
Fuel ratio is the ratio of fixed carbon content to volatile mat-
ter content. The typical fuel ratio of bituminous coal is approxi-
mately 1.0–2.5 [38–40]. The fuel ratios of raw sewage sludge and
leucaena as well as their biochar produced at different microwave
power levels are listed in Table 5. As can be seen, the fuel ratios of
raw sewage sludge and leucaena were only 0.35 and 0.24, respec-
tively. After microwave torrefaction, the fuel ratios of biochar both
significantly increased with increasing microwave power level. The
fuel ratios of sewage sludge and leucaena biochar were 6.4–13.4
and 3.7–5.9 when the microwave power levels were 250–400 and
242 Y.-F. Huang et al. / Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers 70 (2017) 236–243
Table 5
Fuel ratios of biomass feedstocks and biochar produced at different microwave power levels.
Sewage sludge
Power level (W) Raw 100
Fuel ratio 0.35 0.70
Leucaena
Power level (W) Raw
Fuel ratio 0.24
125–250 W, respectively. Therefore, to increase fuel ratio substan-
tially, the required microwave power level for leucaena torrefaction
was much lower than that for sewage sludge torrefaction. How-
ever, the fuel ratios of sewage sludge biochar produced at high mi-
crowave power levels were amazingly high. In most cases, fuel ra-
tio increases with increasing heating value [38]. Therefore, the high
fuel ratio of sewage sludge biochar should be reasonable, since the
HHV on dry ash-free basis of the biochar was up to approximately
48 MJ/kg, much higher than that of leucaena biochar. Further tests
are necessary to examine the practical usage and applications, such
as storage, transportation, combustion, pyrolysis, gasification, sorp-
tion, and soil amendment, of the biochar.
3.7. Prospects
This study carried out the microwave torrefaction of two very
different biomass feedstocks, and their products were very dif-
ferent as well. Compared with sewage sludge biochar, leucaena
biochar could be a more favorable option to substitute or co-fire
with coal because of its high HHV, low atomic H/C and O/C ra-
tios, and moderate fuel ratio. Besides, the high moisture content of
leucaena biochar may be attributable to its porous property. Fur-
thermore, the heating performance of leucaena under microwave
irradiation was better than that of sewage sludge. Microwave tor-
refaction of leucaena could produce thermally stable biochar at
lower microwave power levels. Nevertheless, the high HHV (dry
ash-free basis) of sewage sludge biochar was found. How to re-
cover this part of bioenergy could be a difficult but attractive
task. Perhaps co-torrefaction with another biomass feedstock will
work. Compared with conventional torrefaction, microwave tor-
refaction can provide various advantages. In addition to mass and
energy yields as well as atomic H/C and C/O ratios as aforemen-
tioned, it has been reported that the required temperature and res-
idence time of microwave torrefaction are both lower than those
of conventional torrefaction [41]. Besides, the biochar produced
by microwave heating can have higher surface area and adsorp-
tion capacity than conventional methods [41–43]. Therefore, mi-
crowave torrefaction should be a better technique for the produc-
tion of biochar that has better characteristics and applicability. Fur-
thermore, it has been reported that there are synergistic effects
occurred during the co-pelletization and co-pyrolysis of sewage
sludge and biomass [44,45]. These findings indicate that the co-
torrefaction of sewage sludge and leucaena could be workable to
acquire better reaction performance.
4. Conclusions
Microwave torrefaction of sewage sludge and leucaena can pro-
duce biochar with high HHV and fuel ratio as well as low atomic
H/C and O/C ratios. The microwave heating performance of leu-
caena was better than that of sewage sludge, since the required
microwave power level for leucaena was lower. Compared with
conventional torrefaction, the low mass and energy yields of mi-
crowave torrefaction could be attributable to the more severe re-
150 200 250 300 350 400
2.02 2.03 6.42 11.18 9.38 13.41
100 125 150 200 250
0.57 3.71 4.03 4.94 5.92
action under microwave irradiation. The atomic H/C and O/C ra-
tios of leucaena biochar were approximately 0.41 and 0.14, respec-
tively. The low H and O contents represent the possibility of low
smoke formation during combustion or gasification of the biochar.
The HHV (dry ash-free basis) of sewage sludge biochar produced
at a microwave power level of 400 W was up to 48 MJ/kg, much
higher than that of leucaena biochar. Co-torrefaction of sewage
sludge with another biomass feedstock could be a promising tech-
nique for bioenergy recovery with better torrefaction performance.
Further tests are necessary to examine the practical usage and ap-
plications, such as storage, transportation, combustion, pyrolysis,
gasification, sorption, and soil amendment, of the biochar.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support from
the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan, ROC (104-2221-E-
002-029-MY3).
References
[1] Himmel ME, Ding SY, Johnson DK, Adney WS, Nimlos MR, Brady JW,
et al. Biomass recalcitrance: Engineering plants and enzymes for biofuels pro-
duction. Science 2007;315:804–7.
[2] Tilman D, Socolow R, Foley JA, Hill J, Larson E, Lynd L, et al. Beneficial biofuels
– The food, energy, and environment trilemma. Science 2009;325:270–1.
[3] Ragauskas AJ, Williams CK, Davison BH, Britovsek G, Cairney J, Eckert CA,
et al. The path forward for biofuels and biomaterials. Science 2006;311:484–9.
[4] Logan BE, Rabaey K. Conversion of wastes into bioelectricity and chemicals by
using microbial electrochemical technologies. Science 2012;337:686–90.
[5] Atienza-Martinez M, Mastral JF, Abrego J, Ceamanos J, Gea G. Sewage sludge
torrefaction in an auger reactor. Energy Fuels 2015;29:160–70.
[6] Prins MJ, Ptasinski KJ, Janssen FJJG. Torrefaction of wood. Part 2. Analysis of
products. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 2006;77:35–40.
[7] Arias B, Pevida C, Fermoso J, Plaza MG, Rubiera F, Pis JJ. Influence of torrefac-
tion on the grindability and reactivity of woody biomass. Fuel Process Technol
2008;89:169–75.
[8] Bridgeman TG, Jones JM, Shield I, Williams PT. Torrefaction of reed canary
grass, wheat straw and willow to enhance solid fuel qualities and combustion
properties. Fuel 2008;87:844–56.
[9] van der Stelt MJC, Gerhauser H, Kiel JHA, Ptasinski KJ. Biomass upgrading
by torrefaction for the production of biofuels: A review. Biomass Bioenergy
2011;35:3748–62.
[10] Almeida G, Brito JO, Perre P. Alterations in energy properties of eucalyptus
wood and bark subjected to torrefaction: The potential of mass loss as a syn-
thetic indicator. Bioresour Technol 2010;101:9778–84.
[11] Bergman P.C.A., Boersma A.R., Zwart R.W.R., Kiel J.H.A. Torrefaction for biomass
co-firing in existing coal-fired power stations. ECN report, ECN-C-05–013;
2005. Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands, Petten, Netherlands. http:
//www.ecn.nl/biomass/.
[12] Uslu A, Faaij APC, Bergman PCA. Pre-treatment technologies, and their effect
on international bioenergy supply chain logistics. Techno-economic evaluation
of torrefaction, fast pyrolysis and pelletisation. Energy 2008;33:1206–23.
[13] Bates RB, Ghoniem AF. Biomass torrefaction: Modeling of volatile and solid
product evolution kinetics. Bioresour Technol 2012;124:460–9.
[14] Atienza-Martinez M, Fonts I, Abrego J, Ceamanos J, Gea G. Sewage sludge tor-
refaction in a fluidized bed reactor. Chem Eng J 2013;222:534–45.
[15] Jones DA, Lelyveld TP, Mavrofidis SD, Kingman SW, Miles NJ. Microwave heat-
ing applications in environmental engineering – A review. Resour Conserv Re-
cycl 2002;34:75–90.
[16] Mushtaq F, Mat R, Ani FN. A review on microwave assisted pyrolysis of coal
and biomass for fuel production. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;39:555–74.
[17] Borges FC, Du Z, Xie Q, Trierweiler JO, Cheng Y, Wan Y, et al. Fast microwave
assisted pyrolysis of biomass using microwave absorbent. Bioresour Technol
2014;156:267–74.
 Y.-F. Huang et al. / Journal of the Taiwan Institute of Chemical Engineers 70 (2017) 236–243
[18] Ludlow-Palafox C, Chase HA. Microwave-induced pyrolysis of plastic wastes.
Ind Eng Chem Res 2001;40:4749–56.
[19] Lei H, Ren S, Julson J. The effects of reaction temperature and time and particle
size of corn stover on microwave pyrolysis. Energy Fuels 2009;23:3254–61.
[20] Lam SS, Chase HA. A review on waste to energy processes using microwave
pyrolysis. Energies 2012;5:4209–32.
[21] Appleton TJ, Colder RI, Kingman SW, Lowndes IS, Read AG. Microwave tech-
nology for energy-efficient processing of waste. Appl Energy 2005;81:85–113.
[22] Yin C. Microwave-assisted pyrolysis of biomass for liquid biofuels production.
Bioresour Technol 2012;120:273–84.
[23] Werther J, Ogada T. Sewage sludge combustion. Prog Energy Combust Sci
1999;25:55–116.
[24] Dominguez A, Menendez JA, Inguanzo M, Bernad PL, Pis JJ. Gas chro-
matographic–mass spectrometric study of the oil fractions produced by
microwave-assisted pyrolysis of different sewage sludges. J Chromatogr A
2003;1012:193–206.
[25] Manara P, Zabaniotou A. Towards sewage sludge based biofuels via thermo-
chemical conversion – A review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2012;16:2566–82.
[26] Tyagi VK, Lo SL. Microwave irradiation: A sustainable way for sludge treat-
ment. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2013;18:288–305.
[27] Singh V, Toky OP. Biomass and net primary productivity in Leucaena, Acacia
and Eucalyptus, short rotation, high density (‘energy’) plantation in arid India.
J Arid Environ 1995;31:301–9.
[28] Barneto AG, Carmona JA, Alfonso JEM, Ferrer JAC. Use of thermogravime-
try/mass spectrometry analysis to explain the origin of volatiles produced dur-
ing biomass pyrolysis. Ind Eng Chem Res 2009;48:7430–6.
[29] Huang YF, Chiueh PT, Kuan WH, Lo SL. Effects of lignocellulosic composition
and microwave power level on the gaseous product of microwave pyrolysis.
Energy 2015;89:974–81.
[30] Chen WH, Kuo PC. A study on torrefaction of various biomass materials and its
impact on lignocellulosic structure simulated by a thermogravimetry. Energy
2010;35:2580–6.
[31] Yang HP, Yan R, Chen HP, Lee DH, Zheng CG. Characteristics of hemicellulose,
cellulose and lignin pyrolysis. Fuel 2007;86:1781–8.
[32] Haque KE. Microwave energy for mineral treatment processes – A brief review.
Int J Miner Process 1999;57:1–24.
243
[33] Das S, Mukhopadhyay AK, Datta S, Basu D. Prospects of microwave processing:
An overview. Bull Mater Sci 2009;32:1–13.
[34] Menendez JA, Arenillas A, Fidalgo B, Fernandez Y, Zubizarreta L, Calvo EG,
et al. Microwave heating processes involving carbon materials. Fuel Process
Technol 2010;91:1–8.
[35] Ullmann F. Ullmann’s encyclopedia of industrial chemistry, 6th ed. Weinheim,
Germany: Wiley-VCH; 2003.
[36] Tumuluru JS, Sokhansanj S, Hess JR, Wright CT, Boardman RD. A review on
biomass torrefaction process and product properties for energy applications.
Ind Biotechnol 2011;7:384–401.
[37] Chen WH, Hsu HC, Lu KM, Lee WJ, Lin TC. Thermal pretreatment of wood
(Lauan) block by torrefaction and its influence on the properties of the
biomass. Energy 2011;36:3012–21.
[38] Kurose R, Ikeda M, Makino H, Kimoto M, Miyazaki T. Pulverized coal combus-
tion characteristics of high-fuel-ratio coals. Fuel 2004;83:1777–85.
[39] Sutcu H. Pyrolysis by thermogravimetric analysis of blends of peat with coals
of different characteristics and biomass. J Chin Inst Chem Eng 2007;38:245–9.
[40] Park SW, Jang CH. Characteristics of carbonized sludge for co-combustion in
pulverized coal power plants. Waste Manag 2011;31:523–9.
[41] Masek O, Budarin V, Gronnow M, Crombie K, Brownsort P, Fitzpatrick E,
et al. Microwave and slow pyrolysis biochar – Comparison of physical and
functional properties. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 2013;100:41–8.
[42] Franca AS, Oliveira LS, Nunes AA, Alves CCO. Microwave assisted thermal treat-
ment of defective coffee beans press cake for the production of adsorbents.
Bioresour Technol 2010;101:1068–74.
[43] Wu C, Budarin VL, Wang M, Sharifi V, Gronnow MJ, Wu Y, et al. CO2 gasifi-
cation of bio-char derived from conventional and microwave pyrolysis. Appl
Energy 2015;157:533–9.
[44] Jiang L, Liang J, Yuan X, Li H, Li C, Xiao Z, et al. Co-pelletization of sewage
sludge and biomass: The density and hardness of pellet. Bioresour Technol
2014;166:435–43.
[45] Jiang L, Yuan X, Li H, Xiao Z, Liang J, Wang H, et al. Pyrolysis and combustion
kinetics of sludge–camphor pellet thermal decomposition using thermogravi-
metric analysis. Energy Convers Manag 2015;106:282–9.