Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 67 references

Potential of Atmospheric Pressure Thermal Plasma Technology towards Waste Processing: A Comprehensive Review

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This review argues that thermal plasma pyrolysis and gasification can turn municipal solid waste, plastics, tyres, sludge, and biomass into a combustible syngas (5–15 MJ/Nm³) and a vitrified slag, making it a promising alternative to…

desk verdict Useful review tables, but the energy-generation claim needs net energy balances before the paper's conclusion can be trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.10565 v1 pith:SJ5P2CBR submitted 2026-08-11 physics.plasm-ph

Tejashwi Rana , Aishik Basu Mallick , Radhika T P , Suryasunil Rath , Pratyay Chattopadhyay , Satyananda Kar This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.plasm-ph
keywords thermalplasmawaste-to-energygasificationpyrolysissyngasmunicipalsolidwasteDCarcmicrowave
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This review sets out to establish that atmospheric-pressure thermal plasma is a workable route to waste processing. Drawing on lab-scale and pilot studies, it argues that plasma pyrolysis/gasification converts municipal solid waste, plastics, tyres, sewage sludge, and biomass into a combustible syngas with a lower heating value of roughly $5$ to $15$ MJ/Nm$^3$, leaving a vitrified slag or ash as the non-combustible by-product. Comparing DC, AC, RF-ICP, and microwave torch types, the review finds DC arc plasma best suited to industrial-scale waste-to-energy duty, while electrodeless RF and microwave systems avoid electrode erosion and contamination. If the conclusion holds, waste managers would gain a disposal route that both shrinks waste volume and yields fuel and reusable materials, with a different emission profile from incineration.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the thermal arc plasma, a high-energy-density gas discharge in local thermal equilibrium with electron densities of $10^{23}$ to $10^{28}$ m$^{-3}$ and electron temperatures of 1–2 eV. The paper treats the plasma as a heat source that transfers energy to waste by conduction, convection, and radiation, governed by the net heat balance $Q_{\mathrm{net}} = hA(T_p - T_s) + Aq_r - \sigma\varepsilon A(T_s^4 - T_a^4)$, where the last term is radiative loss from the material to the reactor wall. Torch type and carrier gas (air, CO$_2$, steam, N$_2$, Ar) set the temperature, quench rate, and syngas composition, while the high heat flux melts the inorganic fraction into vitrified slag. This single heat-transfer machinery is what lets the process gasify organics and immobilize inorganics at the same time.

What would settle it

A controlled pilot-scale audit would settle the central claim: process one defined waste stream in a thermal plasma gasifier while measuring electrical input, syngas flow and composition, and slag mass and leachability. If the electricity consumed regularly exceeds the chemical energy recovered in the syngas by a wide margin, with no auxiliary recovery path, the paper's characterization of plasma treatment as a promising waste-to-energy route would lose its quantitative support.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that a single family of devices—atmospheric-pressure thermal arc plasma torches—can process a broad spectrum of waste streams and return two usable outputs. The authors' claim is that plasma pyrolysis/gasification predominantly converts waste into a combustible syngas with a calorific value ranging from $5$ to $15$ MJ/Nm$^3$ and produces vitrified slag or ash as a by-product. They survey four torch families: DC arcs at roughly 5000–10000 K with torch powers up to 1.5 MW and scaling to 6 MW, AC torches with electro-thermal efficiency above 90%, RF-ICP torches that are electrodeless and scalable beyond 1 MW, and microwave torches with high electron density and no electrode erosion. Across the assembled experimental tables, hydrogen and carbon monoxide dominate the syngas, with $\mathrm{H_2}$ shares from roughly 9% to 62% and $\mathrm{CO}$ from 3% to 72% depending on feedstock and carrier gas. From this the paper concludes that thermal plasma waste treatment is a promising route to energy generation and material recovery and recommends DC torches for industrial-scale operations.

Load-bearing premise

The conclusion rests on the assumption that the single-point experimental results gathered in Tables 3–6 are accurate, mutually comparable, and representative of what an industrial-scale reactor would achieve, even though the tables report no measurement uncertainties, mass-balance closures, or energy-balance closures.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim holds, municipalities could route mixed MSW, plastics, tyres, and sludge through one plasma process and obtain a syngas with a lower heating value of 5–15 MJ/Nm³ instead of landfilling or incinerating the material.
  • DC arc systems would be the first industrial choice because of stable operation and reduced refractory wear, at the price of electrode erosion and the capital cost of AC–DC power electronics.
  • Electrodeless RF-ICP and microwave torches would offer longer service life and no metallic-vapour contamination, which matters for feedstocks that require high purity or low maintenance.
  • The reported syngas compositions (H₂ 9–62 vol%, CO 3–72 vol%) imply the process can be tuned through feedstock and carrier-gas choice, so a single facility could target either a hydrogen-rich fuel gas or a CO-rich chemical feedstock.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the tabulated studies do not close mass or energy balances, so the decisive next experiment is a pilot-scale audit on a single feedstock that reports electrical input, syngas yield, and slag quality with stated uncertainties.
  • Editorial inference: the practical competition is likely economic—whether the combined value of syngas and slag exceeds electricity and capital costs relative to incineration—and the paper does not attempt a levelized-cost comparison.
  • Editorial inference: standardizing reported operating conditions (power, feed rate, carrier-gas flow, residence time) would allow a quantitative map of syngas H₂/CO ratio to plasma parameters, a testable extension the review itself does not perform.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript is a review of atmospheric-pressure thermal plasma technology for waste treatment, covering plasma generation principles, DC/AC/RF-ICP/microwave torch designs, and a survey of experimental studies on syngas production from municipal solid waste, plastics, tyres, biomass, and other feedstocks. The abstract and conclusion claim that thermal plasma pyrolysis/gasification 'facilitates energy generation and material recovery' and that the process yields syngas with a lower heating value of 5-15 MJ/Nm3. The review organizes a substantial amount of recent literature into four technology-specific tables and offers a comparative discussion of torch characteristics and reactor configurations.

Significance. If its central claim is adequately supported, the review would provide a useful, current synthesis of plasma-based waste-to-energy research. Its strengths include broad coverage of torch types, a clear qualitative comparison (e.g., electrode erosion in DC vs. electrodeless RF/MW operation), and a compact tabulation of many primary studies with feedstock, carrier gas, power, and product composition. The paper is strongest as a landscape overview rather than as a quantitative techno-economic assessment. However, the central quantitative claims about 'energy generation' and the syngas heating-value range are not supported by the data as presented, and several table entries mix non-atmospheric-pressure and numerical-modeling results with experimental atmospheric-pressure data. These issues are load-bearing for the paper's main message, so the manuscript needs targeted revision rather than acceptance in its current form.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3, Tables 3-6] The abstract and conclusion state that thermal plasma waste treatment 'facilitates energy generation' and produces syngas with a calorific value of 5-15 MJ/Nm3, but no table reports a net energy balance or specific electricity consumption per kilogram of waste. For example, the surgical mask entry in Table 3 lists 56.9 kW, 10 kg/h, and 3.4 m3/kg syngas at 14.5 MJ/m3, yet the run duration is omitted, so the electrical energy input cannot be compared with the chemical energy output. The only row with an explicit energy surplus is the miniature-scale Sturm et al. study in Table 6 (1.84x), and the text does not state whether any other entry consumes more electrical energy than it produces. To support the 'energy generation' claim, the review should add a column for specific energy consumption (kWh/kg) and, where available, cold-gas efficiency or energy return ratio for each table row, or explicitly moderate the claim to 'energy recovery potential' with the caveat that net energy production is not demonstrated for most studies.
  2. [Table 1] Table 1 lists the electron density of thermal plasma as 10^23-10^28 m^-3. The upper bound is implausible: such densities approach solid-state electron densities and exceed typical thermal arc plasma values by several orders of magnitude (typical values are 10^21-10^24 m^-3 depending on pressure and current). No citation supports this range. Because Table 1 is the first quantitative characterization of thermal plasma in the review, an incorrect range undermines the technical credibility of the paper. Please correct the range with an appropriate reference or replace it with a citation-based table of characteristic parameters.
  3. [Section 3.3 and Table 5; Section 3.4 and Table 6] The review is titled 'Atmospheric Pressure Thermal Plasma Technology,' yet Table 5/Table 6 include data that are not atmospheric pressure and are not experimental. Specifically, the tire pyrolysis study of Tang et al. (Table 5) operated at reactor pressures of 3000-8000 Pa, which is sub-atmospheric, and the coal gasification entry of Ibrahimoglu et al. (Table 6) is a numerical modeling study rather than an experiment. Placing these entries alongside atmospheric-pressure experimental measurements without any annotation implies comparability that does not hold. Please mark pressure conditions and simulation/experiment status explicitly in the tables, and restrict atmospheric-pressure claims to data obtained at approximately 1 atm, or adjust the title and scope accordingly.
  4. [Section 1] The sentence in Section 1 that plasma treatment 'has the advantages of reducing emissions to zero' is an unconditional, unsupported claim. No citation is provided, and it is inconsistent with the well-documented formation of NOx, SOx, and other species in thermal plasma processing of waste. This overstatement sits at the center of the paper's motivation. Please replace it with a referenced, qualified statement about emission reductions, e.g., lower dioxin/furan formation relative to incineration, while acknowledging that trace pollutants can still be formed.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 2.2, Eq. (1)] The name 'Stephan-Boltzmann constant' should be 'Stefan-Boltzmann constant'; also, define the symbols h, A, qr, and emissivity just below Equation (1) for reader convenience.
  2. [Section 3.1] The sentence 'The life can be minimised using argon as carrier gas' appears to state the opposite of the intended meaning. What is minimised is electrode erosion, or equivalently the lifetime is maximised; please rephrase.
  3. [References, [22]] Reference [22] is a live SCOPUS search URL, which is not a stable or reproducible citation. Please replace it with a standard citation or provide the search query, database, and access date.
  4. [Figure 1] The Figure 1 caption does not specify the exact search string used in SCOPUS for the left and right panels, nor whether the data include all document types; please clarify the methodology and the time window of the bibliometric search.
  5. [Conclusion] The Conclusion first states that 'DC plasma torches are recommended for industrial-scale operations' and then notes that RF-ICP and MW torches are electrodeless and avoid electrode erosion and maintenance issues. This apparent tension should be resolved by stating the selection criteria (e.g., technology readiness, power scalability, waste throughput, or cost) that lead to the DC recommendation.
  6. [Section 3.4] The statement that microwave plasmas 'exhibit significantly higher electron densities compared to other low-frequency plasmas' appears to conflict with Table 1, which assigns very high electron densities to thermal plasmas generally; please clarify the pressure and discharge conditions for which the MW comparison is intended.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation; review is a literature compilation with only minor, non-load-bearing self-citations.

full rationale

This paper is a narrative review, not a derivation or modeling study. There are no equations that map outputs back to inputs, no fitted parameters later relabeled as predictions, and no uniqueness or existence theorems imported from the authors' prior work. The central claim—that thermal plasma pyrolysis/gasification is a promising waste-to-energy approach—is supported by a broad set of external experimental studies (e.g., Hrabovsky et al., Yousef et al., Rutberg et al., Surov et al., Shie et al., Sturm et al.) whose reported syngas compositions, yields, and calorific values are tabulated independently of the authors' own results. Some table entries and methodological references do come from the authors' own laboratory: Rana and Kar [34] in Table 3, Mallick et al. [35–37] in Table 3, Radhika T P and Kar [10–11], Mallick et al. [12], Yadav et al. [13], and Rath and Kar [25]. These self-citations are, however, experimental data points or standard background descriptions, not unverified theoretical premises that the review's conclusion depends on. Removing the authors' own entries from Tables 3–6 would not collapse the review's evidentiary base, because numerous independent studies remain. The statement in Section 3 that 'one significant barrier to commercializing these technologies is the capital cost of higher energy consumption' is a caveat, not a circular justification. The absence of net energy balances for most tabulated runs is a substantive correctness or completeness concern, but it is not an instance of circular reasoning: the review does not define its conclusion into existence. Overall, the review is self-contained as a compilation, and the level of circularity is negligible.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 2 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced; the review only describes existing plasma sources and waste-treatment configurations. The free-parameter list is empty because nothing is fitted in a review. The two axioms reflect the paper's reliance on LTE modeling and on the accuracy of the assembled literature data.

assumptions (2)
  • domain assumption Thermal plasma at atmospheric pressure can be treated as a fluid in local thermal equilibrium with thermodynamic and transport properties.
    Invoked in Section 2.2 to justify the heat-transfer formulation in Equation (1); not all regions of an atmospheric arc, especially near electrodes or cold walls, satisfy LTE.
  • domain assumption The published experimental values in Tables 3-6 are accurate and correctly transcribed.
    The review's central conclusion is an aggregation of these literature values; the paper does not independently verify them.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Potential of Atmospheric Pressure Thermal Plasma Technology towards Waste Processing: A Comprehensive Review." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SJ5P2CBR

@misc{pith2026260810565,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Potential of Atmospheric Pressure Thermal Plasma Technology towards Waste Processing: A Comprehensive Review},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SJ5P2CBR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.10565}
}
read the original abstract

The enhancement of living standards has significantly contributed to the rapid growth of urban populations, resulting in a substantial increase in municipal solid waste (MSW) generation. This trend underscores the critical need for sustainable, environmentally friendly, cost-effective, and highly efficient waste management solutions. This study highlights the pressing necessity for effective MSW management and examines plasma pyrolysis/gasification as an emerging technology to address this challenge. The article provides a detailed analysis of thermal plasma generation techniques employing diverse power sources, including direct current, alternating current, radiofrequency inductively coupled, and microwave-based systems. A comparative evaluation of various plasma torch designs is conducted, emphasizing their applicability in waste-to-energy and waste treatment processes. A comprehensive overview of the treatment of a broad spectrum of waste materials, such as MSW, sewage sludge, coal, wood, plastics, tyres, and rubber, using thermal arc plasma technology is presented. The process predominantly converts waste into a combustible gas (syngas) with a calorific value ranging from 5 to 15 MJ/Nm3 and produces vitrified slag or ash as a by-product. The findings suggest that thermal plasma pyrolysis/gasification offers a promising approach to waste management, facilitating energy generation and material recovery while addressing the challenges of increasing MSW generation.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    This trend underscores the critical need for sustainable, environmentally friendly, cost-effective, and highly efficient waste management solutions

    1 Potential of Atmospheric Pressure Thermal Plasma Technology towards Waste Processing: A Comprehensive review Tejashwi Rana, Aishik Basu Mallick, Radhika T P, Suryasunil Rath, Pratyay Chattopadhyay, Satyananda Kar* Plasma Applications Laboratory, Department of Energy Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, Hauz Khas, New Delhi, Ind...

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    Table 2 shows a comparative study of different thermal plasma

    Characteristics of Thermal and Non-thermal Plasma Thermal/equilibrium/hot plasma High energy density Te = Th Electron density – 1023 – 1028 m-3 Electron temperature – 1-2 eV Non-thermal/non-equilibrium/cold Lower energy density Te ≥ Th Electron density < 1020 m-3 Electron temperature – few eV Te – electron temperature, Th – Heavy particle temperature (ion...

    work page 2000

  3. [3]

    Kaza, L.C

    S. Kaza, L.C. Yao, P. Bhada-Tata, F. Van Woerden, What a Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050,

    work page

  4. [4]

    Plasma Pyrolysis Technology,

    Central Pollution Control Board, Study on Plastic Waste Disposal through “Plasma Pyrolysis Technology,” 110032 (2016) 1–53. https://cpcb.nic.in/displaypdf.php?id=cGxhc3RpY3dhc3RlL1BsYXNtYS1QeXJvbHlzaXMtZmluYWwtUmVwb3J0LTIxLTExLTE2LnBkZg==

    work page 2016

  5. [5]

    Diaz-Barriga-Fernandez, J.E

    A.D. Diaz-Barriga-Fernandez, J.E. Santibañez-Aguilar, N. Radwan, F. Nápoles-Rivera, M.M. El-Halwagi, J.M. Ponce-Ortega, Strategic Planning for Managing Municipal Solid Wastes with Consideration of Multiple Stakeholders, ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 5 (2017) 10744–10762. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b02717

    work page doi:10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b02717 2017

  6. [6]

    Munir, I

    M.T. Munir, I. Mardon, S. Al-Zuhair, A. Shawabkeh, N.U. Saqib, Plasma gasification of municipal solid waste for waste-to-value processing, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 116 (2019) 109461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109461

    arXiv 2019

  7. [7]

    J. Li, K. Liu, S. Yan, Y. Li, D. Han, Application of thermal plasma technology for the treatment of solid wastes in China: An overview, Waste Manag. 58 (2016) 260–269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2016.06.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2016.06.011 2016

  8. [9]

    Conrads, M

    H. Conrads, M. Schmidt, Plasma generation and plasma sources, Plasma Sources Sci. Technol. 9 (2000) 441–454. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-0252/9/4/301

    work page doi:10.1088/0963-0252/9/4/301 2000

Show all 67 references
  1. [10]

    R. T P, S. Kar, Glow-to-arc discharge transitions in a radio frequency atmospheric pressure plasma jet, Phys. Fluids 36 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0218872

    2024 doi

  2. [11]

    R. T P, S. Kar, Effect of an additional floating electrode on radio frequency cross-field atmospheric pressure plasma jet, Sci. Rep. 13 (2023) 10665. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-37805-7

    2023 doi

  3. [12]

    Mallick, G.V

    A.B. Mallick, G.V. Prakash, S. Kar, R. Narayanan, Development of a pulse modulated sub-radio frequency power supply for atmospheric pressure plasma devices, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 94 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0173873

    2023 doi

  4. [13]

    Yadav, S

    A. Yadav, S. Karmakar, S. Kar, M. Kumar, Numerical modelling of a direct current non-transferred thermal plasma torch for optimal performance, Contrib. to Plasma Phys. 63 (2023) e202200088. https://doi.org/10.1002/ctpp.202200088

    2023 doi

  5. [14]

    Sikarwar, M

    V.S. Sikarwar, M. Hrabovský, G. Van Oost, M. Pohořelý, M. Jeremiáš, Progress in waste utilization via thermal plasma, Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 81 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2020.100873

    2020

  6. [15]

    L. Tang, H. Huang, H. Hao, K. Zhao, Development of plasma pyrolysis/gasification systems for energy efficient and environmentally sound waste disposal, J. Electrostat. 71 (2013) 839–847. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elstat.2013.06.007

    2013 doi

  7. [16]

    Huang, L

    H. Huang, L. Tang, Treatment of organic waste using thermal plasma pyrolysis technology, Energy Convers. Manag. 48 (2007) 1331–1337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2006.08.013

    2007 doi

  8. [18]

    B. Ruj, S. Ghosh, Technological aspects for thermal plasma treatment of municipal solid waste - A review, Fuel Process. Technol. 126 (2014) 298–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2014.05.011

    2014 doi

  9. [19]

    Sanito, S.-J

    R.C. Sanito, S.-J. You, Y.-F. Wang, Application of plasma technology for treating e-waste: A review, J. Environ. Manage. 288 (2021) 112380. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112380

    2021

  10. [20]

    X. Cai, C. Du, Thermal Plasma Treatment of Medical Waste, Plasma Chem. Plasma Process. 41 (2021) 1–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11090-020-10119-6

    2021 doi

  11. [21]

    S. Safa, G. Soucy, Liquid and solution treatment by thermal plasma: A review, Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 11 (2014) 1165–1188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-013-0356-3

    2014 doi

  12. [24]

    Gomez, D.A

    E. Gomez, D.A. Rani, C.R. Cheeseman, D. Deegan, M. Wise, A.R. Boccaccini, Thermal plasma technology for the 9 treatment of wastes: A critical review, J. Hazard. Mater. 161 (2009) 614–626. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.04.017

    2009 doi

  13. [25]

    S. Rath, S. Kar, Microwave atmospheric pressure plasma jet: A review, Contrib. to Plasma Phys. n/a (n.d.) e202400036. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/ctpp.202400036

    doi

  14. [26]

    Gabbar, S.A

    H.A. Gabbar, S.A. Darda, V. Damideh, I. Hassen, M. Aboughaly, D. Lisi, Comparative study of atmospheric pressure DC, RF, and microwave thermal plasma torches for waste to energy applications, Sustain. Energy Technol. Assessments 47 (2021) 101447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta...

    2021

  15. [27]

    Hrabovsk\`y, Generation of thermal plasmas in liquid-stabilized and hybrid dc-arc torches, Pure Appl

    M. Hrabovsk\`y, Generation of thermal plasmas in liquid-stabilized and hybrid dc-arc torches, Pure Appl. Chem. 74 (2002) 429–433

    2002

  16. [28]

    Heberlein, A.B

    J. Heberlein, A.B. Murphy, Thermal plasma waste treatment, J. Phys. D. Appl. Phys. 41 (2008) 53001. https://doi.org/10.1088/0022-3727/41/5/053001

    2008 doi

  17. [30]

    Hrabovsky, M

    M. Hrabovsky, M. Hlina, M. Konrad, V. Kopecky, T. Kavka, O. Chumak, A. Maslani, Thermal plasma gasification of biomass for fuel gas production, High Temp. Mater. Process. An Int. Q. High-Technology Plasma Process. 13 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1615/HighTempMatProc.v13.i3-4.40

    2009 doi

  18. [31]

    Yousef, A

    S. Yousef, A. Tamošiūnas, M. Aikas, R. Uscila, D. Gimžauskaitė, K. Zakarauskas, Plasma steam gasification of surgical mask waste for hydrogen-rich syngas production, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 49 (2024) 1375–1386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.09.288

    2024 doi

  19. [32]

    Yayalık, A

    İ. Yayalık, A. Koyun, M. Akgün, Gasification of Municipal Solid Wastes in Plasma Arc Medium, Plasma Chem. Plasma Process. 40 (2020) 1401–1416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11090-020-10105-y

    2020 doi

  20. [33]

    Nema, K.S

    S.K. Nema, K.S. Ganeshprasad, Plasma pyrolysis of medical waste, Curr. Sci. 83 (2002) 271–278. https://doi.org/jstor.org/stable/24106885

    2002

  21. [34]

    T. Rana, S. Kar, Assessment of energy consumption and environmental safety measures in a plasma pyrolysis plant for eco-friendly waste treatment, J. Energy Inst. 114 (2024) 101617. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joei.2024.101617

    2024

  22. [35]

    Mallick, P

    R. Mallick, P. Vairakannu, Experimental studies on CO2-thermal plasma gasification of refused derived fuel feedstock for clean syngas production, Energy 288 (2024) 129766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2023.129766

    2024

  23. [36]

    Mallick, P

    R. Mallick, P. Vairakannu, Experimental investigation of acrylonitrile butadiene styrene plastics plasma gasification, J. Environ. Manage. 345 (2023) 118655. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118655

    2023

  24. [37]

    Mallick, P

    R. Mallick, P. Vairakannu, CO2 plasma gasification of bakelite-based electrical switch waste feedstock, J. Clean. Prod. 423 (2023) 138813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138813

    2023

  25. [38]

    L. Tang, H. Huang, Z. Zhao, C.Z. Wu, Y. Chen, Pyrolysis of polypropylene in a nitrogen plasma reactor, Ind. \& Eng. Chem. Res. 42 (2003) 1145–1150

    2003

  26. [39]

    L. Tang, H. Huang, Thermal plasma pyrolysis of used tires for carbon black recovery, J. Mater. Sci. 40 (2005) 3817–3819

    2005

  27. [40]

    Huang, L

    H. Huang, L. Tang, C.Z. Wu, Characterization of gaseous and solid product from thermal plasma pyrolysis of waste rubber, Environ. Sci. \& Technol. 37 (2003) 4463–4467. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1021/es034193c

    2003 doi

  28. [41]

    Karimi, M.R

    H. Karimi, M.R. Khani, M. Gharibi, H. Mahdikia, B. Shokri, Plasma pyrolysis feasibility study of spent petrochemical catalyst wastes to hydrogen production, J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag. 22 (2020) 2059–2070. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1007/s10163-020-01089-0

    2020 doi

  29. [42]

    Vaidyanathan, J

    A. Vaidyanathan, J. Mulholland, J. Ryu, M.S. Smith, L.J. Circeo Jr, Characterization of fuel gas products from the treatment of solid waste streams with a plasma arc torch, J. Environ. Manage. 82 (2007) 77–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.12.006

    2007 doi

  30. [43]

    Rutberg, V.A

    P.G. Rutberg, V.A. Kuznetsov, E.O. Serba, S.D. Popov, A. V Surov, G. V Nakonechny, A. V Nikonov, Novel three-phase steam--air plasma torch for gasification of high-caloric waste, Appl. Energy 108 (2013) 505–514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.03.052

    2013 doi

  31. [44]

    Bratsev, V.E

    A.N. Bratsev, V.E. Popov, A.F. Rutberg, S. V Shtengel’, A facility for plasma gasification of waste of various types, High Temp. 44 (2006) 823–828. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10740-006-0099-7

    2006 doi

  32. [45]

    A. V. Surov, S.D. Popov, V.E. Popov, D.I. Subbotin, E.O. Serba, V.A. Spodobin, G. V. Nakonechny, A. V. Pavlov, Multi-gas AC plasma torches for gasification of organic substances, Fuel 203 (2017) 1007–1014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2017.02.104

    2017 doi

  33. [46]

    Boulos, J

    M. Boulos, J. Mostaghimi, Thermal Plasma Sources: How Well are They Adopted to Process Needs?, Plasma Chem. \& Plasma Process. 35 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11090-015-9616-y

    2015 doi

  34. [47]

    Colombo, A

    V. Colombo, A. Concetti, E. Ghedini, M. Gherardi, P. Sanibondi, B. Vazquez, Rf Thermal Plasma Vitrification of Incinerator Bottom and Fly Ashes with Waste Glasses from Fluorescent Lamps, Ispc_20 (2011) 2–5

    2011

  35. [48]

    McClenathan, W.C

    D.M. McClenathan, W.C. Wetzel, S.E. Lorge, G.M. Hieftje, Effect of the plasma operating frequency on the figures of merit of an inductively coupled plasma time-of-flight mass spectrometer, J. Anal. At. Spectrom. 21 (2006) 160–167. https://doi.org/10.1039/B515719F

    2006 doi

  36. [49]

    Reed, Induction ‐ Coupled Plasma Torch , 824 (2008) 821–824

    T.B. Reed, Induction ‐ Coupled Plasma Torch , 824 (2008) 821–824. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1736112

    2008 doi

  37. [50]

    A. You, M. Be, I. In, High temperature–high pressure thermal conductivity of argon, 3947 (2020) 3939–3947. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1063/1.437946

    2020 doi

  38. [51]

    Kawajiri, T

    K. Kawajiri, T. Sato, H. Nishiyama, Experimental analysis of a DC–RF hybrid plasma flow, Surf. Coatings Technol. 171 (2003) 134–139. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0257-8972(03)00256-1

    2003 doi

  39. [52]

    investigated the pyrolysis of waste tyres in an RF-ICP reactor, operating at power levels between 1600 and 2000 W and maintaining reactor pressures of 3000 to 8000 Pa. This setup achieved a reactive plasma environment with temperatures between 1200 K and 1800 K and employed du...

    2000

  40. [53]

    introduced a novel RF thermal plasma pyrolysis apparatus with a remarkable 89 wt.% conversion efficiency without producing tar. Their system featured an 8-turn copper RF-ICP torch within a 12 L thermochemical reactor, capable of maintaining stable operation for over 30 minutes...

    2000

  41. [54]

    L. Tang, H. Huang, Some observations from studies of RF plasma pyrolysis of waste tires, Chem. Eng. Commun. 197 (2010) 1541–1552. https://doi.org/10.1080/00986445.2010.485013. 10

    2010

  42. [55]

    Aboughaly, H.A

    M. Aboughaly, H.A. Gabbar, V. Damideh, I. Hassen, RF-ICP Thermal Plasma for Thermoplastic Waste Pyrolysis Process with High Conversion Yield and Tar Elimination, Processes 8 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8030281

    2020 doi

  43. [56]

    Shie, L.-X

    J.-L. Shie, L.-X. Chen, K.-L. Lin, C.-Y. Chang, Plasmatron gasification of biomass lignocellulosic waste materials derived from municipal solid waste, Energy 66 (2014) 82–89. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.12.042

    2014 doi

  44. [57]

    Tu, J.-L

    W.-K. Tu, J.-L. Shie, C.-Y. Chang, C.-F. Chang, C.-F. Lin, S.-Y. Yang, J.T. Kuo, D.-G. Shaw, Y.-D. You, D.-J. Lee, Products and bioenergy from the pyrolysis of rice straw via radio frequency plasma and its kinetics, Bioresour. Technol. 100 (2009) 2052–2061. https://doi.org/htt...

    2009 doi

  45. [58]

    Huang, L

    H. Huang, L. Tang, Pyrolysis treatment of waste tire powder in a capacitively coupled RF plasma reactor, Energy Convers. Manag. 50 (2009) 611–617. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2008.10.023

    2009 doi

  46. [59]

    Tatarova, F.M

    E. Tatarova, F.M. Dias, E. Felizardo, J. Henriques, M.J. Pinheiro, C.M. Ferreira, B. Gordiets, Microwave air plasma source at atmospheric pressure: Experiment and theory, J. Appl. Phys. 108 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3525245

    2010 doi

  47. [60]

    Uhm, Y.H

    H.S. Uhm, Y.H. Na, Y.C. Hong, D.H. Shin, C.H. Cho, Production of hydrogen-rich synthetic gas from low-grade coals by microwave steam-plasmas, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 39 (2014) 4351–4355. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.01.020

    2014 doi

  48. [61]

    Lin, C.-H

    W.-C. Lin, C.-H. Tsai, D.-N. Zhang, S.-S. Syu, Y.-M. Kuo, Recycling of aluminum dross for producing calcinated alumina by microwave plasma, Sustain. Environ. Res. 32 (2022)

    2022

  49. [62]

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s42834-022-00160-9

    doi

  50. [63]

    Sturm, A.N

    G.S.J. Sturm, A.N. Muñoz, P. V Aravind, G.D. Stefanidis, Microwave-Driven Plasma Gasification for Biomass Waste Treatment at Miniature Scale, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 44 (2016) 670–678. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPS.2016.2533363

    2016

  51. [64]

    Khongkrapan, P

    P. Khongkrapan, P. Thanompongchart, N. Tippayawong, T. Kiatsiriroat, Microwave plasma assisted pyrolysis of refuse derived fuels, Cent. Eur. J. Eng. 4 (2014) 72–79. https://doi.org/10.2478/s13531-013-0142-5

    2014 doi

  52. [65]

    Yoon, Y.M

    S.J. Yoon, Y.M. Yun, M.W. Seo, Y.K. Kim, H.W. Ra, J.-G. Lee, Hydrogen and syngas production from glycerol through microwave plasma gasification, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 38 (2013) 14559–14567. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.09.001

    2013 doi

  53. [66]

    Lin, Y.-C

    K.C. Lin, Y.-C. Lin, Y.-H. Hsiao, Microwave plasma studies of Spirulina algae pyrolysis with relevance to hydrogen production, Energy 64 (2014) 567–574. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.09.055

    2014 doi

  54. [67]

    M. Hu, W. Deng, Y. Su, L. Wang, G. Chen, Production of hydrogen-rich syngas through microwave-assisted gasification of sewage sludge in steam-CO2 atmosphere, Fuel 357 (2024) 129855. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2023.129855

    2024

  55. [68]

    Ibrahimoglu, M.Z

    B. Ibrahimoglu, M.Z. Yilmazoglu, Numerical modeling of a downdraft plasma coal gasifier with plasma reactions, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 45 (2020) 3532–3548. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.12.198

    2020 doi

  56. [69]

    Delikonstantis, G

    E. Delikonstantis, G. Sturm, A.I. Stankiewicz, A. Bosmans, M. Scapinello, C. Dreiser, O. Lade, S. Brand, G.D. Stefanidis, Biomass gasification in microwave plasma: An experimental feasibility study with a side stream from a fermentation reactor, Chem. Eng. Process. - Process I...

    2019

  57. [70]

    Hong, S.J

    Y.C. Hong, S.J. Lee, D.H. Shin, Y.J. Kim, B.J. Lee, S.Y. Cho, H.S. Chang, Syngas production from gasification of brown coal in a microwave torch plasma, Energy 47 (2012) 36–40. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.05.008

    2012 doi

  58. [71]

    Tanaka, Y

    Y. Tanaka, Y. Yokomizu, M. Ishikawa, T. Matsumura, Particle composition of high-pressure SF/sub 6/ plasma with electron temperature greater than gas temperature, IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 25 (1997) 991–995. https://doi.org/10.1109/27.649615. Corresponding author e-mail: satyanad...

    1997 doi

  59. [2018]

    https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1329-0

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.