The design, evaluation and costing of biomass gasifiers

The objective of this study has been to enable a greater understanding of the biomass gasification process through the development and use of process and economic models. A new theoretical equilibrium model of gasification is described using the operating condition called the adiabatic carbon boundary. This represents an ideal gasifier working at the point where the carbon in the feedstock is completely gasified. The model can be used as a `target' against which the results of real gasifiers can be compared, but it does not simulate the results of real gasifiers. A second model has been developed which uses a stagewise approach in order to model fluid bed gasification, and its results have indicated that pyrolysis and the reactions of pyrolysis products play an important part in fluid bed gasifiers. Both models have been used in sensitivity analyses: the biomass moisture content and gasifying agent composition were found to have the largest effects on performance, whilst pressure and heat loss had lesser effects. Correlations have been produced to estimate the total installed capital cost of gasification systems and have been used in an economic model of gasification. This has been used in a sensitivity analysis to determine the factors which most affect the profitability of gasification. The most important influences on gasifier profitability have been found to be feedstock cost, product selling price and throughput. Given the economic conditions of late 1985, refuse gasification for the production of producer gas was found to be viable at throughputs of about 2.5 tonnes/h dry basis and above, in the metropolitan counties of the United Kingdom. At this throughput and above, the largest element of product gas cost is the feedstock cost, the cost element which is most variable.

Downdraft gasification of biomass

The objectives of this research were to investigate the parameters affecting the gasification process within downdraft gasifiers using biomass feedstocks. In addition to investigations with an open-core gasifier, a novel open-topped throated gasifier was designed and used. A sampling system was designed and installed to determine the water, tar and particular content of the raw product gas. This permitted evaluation of the effects of process parameters and reactor design on tar and particular production, although a large variation was found for the particulate measurements due to the capture of large particles. For both gasifiers, the gasification process was studied in order to identify and compare the mechanisms controlling the position and shape of the reaction zones. The stability of the reaction zone was found to be governed by the superficial gas velocity within the reactor. A superficial gas velocity below 0.2 Nms-1 resulted in a rising reaction zone in both gasifiers. Turndown is achieved when the rate of char production by flaming pyrolysis equals the rate of char gasification over a range of throughputs. A turndown ratio of 2:1 was achieved for the hybrid-throated gasifier, compared to 1.3:1 for the open-core. It is hypothesized that pyrolysis is a surface area phenomenon, and that in the hybrid gasifier the pyrolysis front can expand to form a dome-shape. The rate of char gasification is believed to increase as the depth of the gasification zone increases. Vibration of the open-core reactor bed decreased the bed pressure drop, reduced the voidage, aided solids flow and gave a minor improvement in the product gas energy content. Insulation improved the performance of both reactors by reducing heat losses resulting in a reduced air to feed ratio requirement. The hybrid gasifier gave a higher energy conversion efficiency, a higher product gas heating value, and a lower tar content than the open-core gasifier due to efficient gas mixing in a high temperature tar cracking region below the throat and reduced heat losses.

Fluidized bed gasification of biomass

A fluidized bed process development unit of 0.8 m internal diameter was designed on basis of results obtained from a bench scale laboratory unit. For the scaling up empirical models from the literature were used. The process development unit and peripheral equipment were constructed, assembled and commissioned, and instruments were provided for data acquisition. The fluidization characteristics of the reactor were determined and were compared to the design data. An experimental programme was then carried out and mass and energy balances were made for all the runs. The results showed that the most important independent experimental parameter was the air factor, with an optimum at 0.3. The optimum higher heating value of the gas produced was 6.5 MJ/Nm3, while the thermal efficiency was 70%. Reasonably good agreement was found between the experimental results, theoretical results from a thermodynamic model and data from the literature. It was found that the attainment of steady state was very sensitive to a continuous and constant feedstock flowrate, since the slightest variation in feed flow resulted in fluctuations of the gas quality. On the basis of the results a set of empirical relationships was developed, which constitutes an empirical model for the prediction of the performance of fluidized bed gasifiers. This empirical model was supplemented by a design procedure by which fluidized bed gasifiers can be designed and constructed. The design procedure was then extended to cover feedstock feeding and gas cleaning in a conceptual design of a fluidized bed gasification facility. The conceptual design was finally used to perform an economic evaluation of a proposed gasification facility. The economics of this plant (retrofit application) were favourable.

Technoeconomic modelling of coal conversion processes for liquid fuel production

Since the oil crisis of 1973 considerable interest has been shown in the production of liquid fuels from alternative sources. In particular processes utilizing coal as the feedstock have received considerable interest. These processes can be divided into direct and indirect liquefaction and pyrolysis. This thesis describes the modelling of indirect coal liquefaction processes for the purpose of performing technical and economic assessment of the production of liquid fuels from coal and lignite, using a variety of gasification and synthesis gas liquefaction technologies. The technologies were modeled on a 'step model' basis where a step is defined as a combination of individual unit operations which together perform a significant function on the process streams, such as a methanol synthesis step or a gasification and physical gas cleaning step. Sample results of the modelling, covering a wide range of gasifiers, liquid synthesis processes and products are presented in this thesis. Due to the large number of combinations of gasifier, liquid synthesis processes, products and economic sensitivity cases, a complete set of results is impractical to present in a single publication. The main results show that methanol is the cheapest fuel to produce from coal followed by fuel alcohol, diesel from the Shell Middle Distillate Synthesis process,gasoline from Mobil Methanol to Gasoline (MTG) process, diesel from the Mobil Methanol Olefins Gasoline Diesel (MOGD) process and finally gasoline from the same process. Some variation in production costs of all the products was shown depending on type of gasifier chosen and feedstock.

Pyrolysis and gasification of biomass and acid hydrolysis residues

This research was carried for an EC supported project that aimed to produce ethyl levulinate as a diesel miscible biofuel from biomass by acid hydrolysis. The objective of this research was to explore thermal conversion technologies to recover further diesel miscible biofuels and/or other valuable products from the remaining solid acid hydrolysis residues (AHR). AHR consists of mainly lignin and humins and contains up to 80% of the original energy in the biomass. Fast pyrolysis and pyrolytic gasification of this low volatile content AHR was unsuccessful. However, successful air gasification of AHR gave a low heating value gas for use in engines for power or heat with the aim of producing all the utility requirements in any commercial implementation of the ethyl levulinate production process. In addition, successful fast pyrolysis of the original biomass gave organic liquid yields of up to 63.9 wt.% (dry feed basis) comparable to results achieved using a standard hardwood. The fast pyrolysis liquid can be used as a fuel or upgraded to biofuels. A novel molybdenum carbide catalyst was tested in fast pyrolysis to explore the potential for upgrading. Although there was no deoxygenation, some bio-oil properties were improved including viscosity, pH and homogeneity through decreasing sugars and increasing furanics and phenolics. AHR gasification was explored in a batch gasifier with a comparison with the original biomass. Refractory and low volatile content AHR gave relatively low gas yields (74.21 wt.%), low tar yields (5.27 wt.%) and high solid yields (20.52 wt.%). Air gasification gave gas heating values of around 5MJ/NM3, which is a typical value, but limitations of the equipment available restricted the extent of process and product analysis. In order to improve robustness of AHR powder for screw feeding into gasifiers, a new densification technique was developed based on mixing powder with bio-oil and curing the mixture at 150°C to polymerise the bio-oil.