Co-Gasification of Colombian Coal
Co-Gasification of Colombian Coal
Co-Gasification of Colombian Coal
C
)
Sawdust 6%
Sawdust 15%
Fig. 2. Temperature prole along the reactor for 6% (bold symbols) and 15% (open symbols) sawdust blends. Rac = 2.8, Rvc = 0.27.
J.F. Vlez et al. / Fuel 88 (2009) 424430 427
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Rvc
D
r
y
g
a
s
c
o
m
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
(
%
v
/
v
)
H2
CO
CO2
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Rvc
D
r
y
g
a
s
c
o
m
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
(
%
v
/
v
)
H2
CO
CO2
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Rvc
D
r
y
g
a
s
c
o
m
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
(
%
v
/
v
)
H2
CO
CO2
a
b
c
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Rvc
D
r
y
g
a
s
c
o
m
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
(
%
v
/
v
)H2
CO
CO2
d
Fig. 3. Gas generated composition versus steam/blend ratio for different blends. (a), (b): Rac = 2.4; coffee husk 6% and 15%, respectively. (c), (d): Rac = 2.8; sawdust 6% and
15%, respectively.
428 J.F. Vlez et al. / Fuel 88 (2009) 424430
the uidized-bed reactors, showing that the ashes melting temper-
ature is lower than the reported by ASTM.
Tar accumulation caused clogging of the pipelines in the free
board. The production of tar and heavy hydrocarbons is another
problem traditionally associated to biomass gasication [15,8
14]. Tar accumulation in the pipelines can be reduced by maintain-
ing a temperature high enough that avoids tar condensation or by
increasing tar oxidation in the freeboard. Aznar et al. [5] have
reached reductions of up to 50% of tars produced during co-gasi-
cation by addition of secondary air to the freeboard zone.
3.5. Energy efciency
Energy hot efciency was calculated based on the ratio between
the energy of the fuel species (CO, H
2
) from the produced syngas
(LHV) along with heat-sensitive from gas efuents fromthe gasier
and the energy input from steam, hot air and the biomasscoal
mixture [29]. The value of the efciency were 61% for some cases;
this value is relatively high considering the relatively low temper-
ature (between 200 C and 300 C) at which the syngas left the
reactor. Energy cold efciency reaches values up to 57%. Syngas
LHV varied between 1.6 and 4.4 MJ m
3
. Main efciency losses
originate from fuel partial oxidation to generate the temperature
required for gasication and from heat losses through walls and
bare anges.
Fig. 5 shows the calculated energy hot efciency for the differ-
ent coal/biomass mixtures, where can see that if we have higher
percentage of coffee and rice husks in the mixture, we get a decre-
ment in process efciency values. However, when we used saw-
dust, we found a similar value of process efciency although its
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
770 790 810 830 850 870 890 910 930 950
Bed Temperature (C)
D
r
y
g
a
s
C
o
m
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
(
%
v
/
v
)
CO2
CO
H2
CO2
CO
H2
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
770 790 810 830 850 870 890 910 930 950
Bed Temperature (C)
D
r
y
g
a
s
C
o
m
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
(
%
v
/
v
)
CO2
CO
H2
CO2
CO
H2
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
770 800 830 860 890 920 950
Bed Temperature (C)
D
r
y
g
a
s
C
o
m
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
(
%
v
/
v
)
CO2
CO
H2
CO2
CO
H2
a
b
c
Fig. 4. Effects of bed temperature on gas composition for 6% (bold symbols) and 15% (open symbols). (a) coffee husk, (b) sawdust and (c) rice husk.
J.F. Vlez et al. / Fuel 88 (2009) 424430 429
process temperature was less than other one. We think that the
physical conditions for co-gasication of sawdust were better than
others one and it is recommendable explore those chemical and
physic characteristic inside sawdust that doing that the results
were different to other type of biomass.
4. Conclusions
Experiments in a uidized-bed pilot plant demonstrated that it
is possible to carry out co-gasication of coal with mixtures of up
to 15% sawdust, rice and coffee husks. Although the presence of
biomass decreases energy efciency, this reduction is minor and
should not overcome the benet of reduced CO
2
emissions ob-
tained by the use of biomass as renewable source.
The produced fuel gas was found to be rich in hydrogen (up to
15%). Other combustible gases present in the syngas are carbon
monoxide (11%), methane (CH
4
) and hydrocarbons (tars). A high-
er proportion of biomass in the fuel increased the content of hydro-
gen in the sample but decreased the energy efciency of the
process. The experiments showed ash agglomeration and tar depo-
sition as minor drawbacks of the gasication process.
Acknowledgements
Authors acknowledge the nancial support of COLCIENCIAS un-
der Research Contract No. 1118 06-17313. We would like also to
acknowledge all invaluable comments of Professor Alejandro Moli-
na O. From National University of Colombia and Mr. Juan David
Cuevas Guarnizo.
References
[1] Pinto F, Franco C, Andr R, Tavares C, Dias M, Gulyurtlu I, et al. Effect of
experimental conditions on co-gasication of coal, biomass and plastics wastes
with air/steam mixtures in a uidized-bed system. Fuel 2003;82:196776.
[2] Pan YG, Velo E, Roca X, Manya JJ, Puigjaner L. Fluidized-bed co-gasication of
residual biomass/poor coal blends for fuel gas production. Fuel
2000;79:131726.
[3] Andr RN, Pinto F, Franco C, Diasa M, Gulyurtlua I, Matosb MAA, et al.
Fluidized-bed co-gasication of coal and olive oil industry wastes. Fuel
2005;84:163544.
[4] Chejne F, Londoo C, Arenas E, Vlez J. Aprovechamiento de Residuos Agrcolas
como biocombustibles en un proceso de co-gasicacin, Colciencias,
Universidad Nacional - Medelln, Universidad Ponticia Bolivariana. Informe
Tcnico Final 2006:8.
[5] Aznar P, Caballero A, Sancho A, Francs E. Plastic waste elimination by co-
gasication with coal and biomass in uidized bed with air in pilot plant. Fuel
Process Technol 2005.
[6] Pinto F, Franco C, Andr RN, Miranda M, Gulyurtlu I, Cabrita I. Co-gasication
study of biomass mixed with plastic wastes. Fuel 2002;81:2917.
[7] Ministerio de Minas y Energa de Colombia, UPME. Boletn no. 11 Estadsticas
Minero-Energticas, Mayo 2000.
[8] Kurkela E, Laatikainen J, Stahlberg P. In: Bemtgen JM, editor. Clean coal
technology programme. Paper C9, vol. III. University of Stuttgart; 1995. p. 1
20.
[9] Sjostrom K, Bjornborn E, Chen GX, Brage C, Rosn C, Yu QZ. In: Bemtgen JM,
editor. Clean coal technology programme. Paper C3, vol. III. University of
Stuttgart; 1995. p. 128.
[10] Chen GX, Sjostrom K, Bjornborn E, Brage C, Rosn C, Yu QZ. In: Xu X, Zhou L,
editors. Proceedings of the third international symposium on coal combustion:
science and technology. Beijing, China: Science Press; 1995. p. 38390.
[11] Brage C, Yu QZ, Sjostrom K. In: Xu X, Zhou L, editors. Proceedings of the third
international symposium on coal combustion: science and technology. Beijing,
China: Science Press; 1995. p. 4552.
[12] Garca-Ibaez P, Cabanillas A, Snchez JM. Gasication of leached orujillo
(olive oil waste) in a pilot plant circulating uidized-bed reactor preliminary
results. Biomass Bioenerg 2004;27:18394.
[13] Hong J, Zhu X, Guo Q, Zhu Q. Gasication of rice husk in a uidized-bed gasier
without inert additives. Fuel 2003:574550.
[14] Murakami T, Xu G, Suda T, Matsuzawa Y, Tani H, Fujimori T. Some process
fundamentals of biomass gasication in a dual uidized bed. Fuel
2007:24455.
[15] Tomeczek J, Kudzia W, Gradon B, Remarczyk L. The inuence of geometrical
factors and feedstock on gasication in a high temperature uidized bed. Can J
Chem Eng 1987;65:785.
[16] Watkinson AP, Cheng G, Prakash CB. Comparison of coal gasication in
uidized and spouted beds. Can J Chem Eng 1983;61:468.
[17] Kawabata J, Yumiyama M, Tazaki Y, Honma S, Takeda S, Yamaguchi H, et al.
Performance of a pressurised two-stage uidized gasication process for
production of low-BTU gas from coal char. Chem Eng Commun 1981;11:335.
[18] Saffer M, Ocampo A, Laguerie C. Gasication of coal in a uidized bed in the
presence of water vapor and oxygen: an experimental study and a rst
attempt at modeling the reactor. Int Chem Eng 1988;28(1):46.
[19] Gururajan VS, Agarwal PK, Agnew JB. Mathematical modeling of uidized-bed
coal gasiers. Trans I Chem E 1992;70(A):211.
[20] Natarajan E, Ohman M. Experimental determination of bed agglomeration
tendencies of some common agricultural residues in uidized-bed combustion
and gasication. Biomass Bioenerg 1998;15:1639.
[21] Corella J, Aznar M, Delgado J, Aldea E. Ind Eng Chem Res 1991;30:225262.
[22] Herguido J, Corella J, Gonzalez-Saiz J. Ind Eng Chem Res 1992;31:127482.
[23] Fernndez Llorente MJ, Escalada Cuadrado R, Murillo Laplaza JM, Carrasco
Garca JE. Combustion in bubbling uidized bed with bed material of
limestone to reduce the biomass ash agglomeration and sintering. Fuel
2006;85(1415):208192.
[24] Garca-Ibaez P, Cabanillas A, Snchez JM. Gasication of leached orujillo
(olive oil waste) in a pilot plant circulating fuidized bed reactor. Preliminary
results. Biomass Bioenerg 2004;27:18394.
[25] Zevenhoven-Onderwater M, Backman R, Skrifvars B, Hupa M, Liliendahl T,
et al. The ash chemistry in uidized bed gasication of biomass fuels. Part II:
ash behavior prediction versus bench scale agglomeration tests. Fuel
2001;80:150312.
[26] Benson Steven A, Sondreal Everett A, Hurley John P. Status of coal ash behavior
research. Fuel Process Technol 1995;44:112.
[27] Wiln C, Moilanen A, Kurkela E. Biomass feedstock analyses. 15 Scandinavian
and European biomass feedstocks. Espoo, Finland: VTT Publication 282; 1996.
[28] Fernndez MJ. Reduccin de la sinterizacin en la ceniza de biomasa en
combustin. Aplicacin al lecho uidizado burbujeante. Ph.D. Thesis. 2004,
Valladolid University [in Spanish].
[29] Valds Carlos F, Vlez J. Fredy, Genes Eder E, Chejne Farid. La eciencia
energtica de procesos de co-gasicacin: Metodologa para su clculo. Revista
Ingeniera Qumica de Espaa. Editorial Alcin. No. 444, Febrero 2007.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Coffee Husk Rice Husk Sawdust
E
f
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
(
%
)
Biomass 6%
Biomass 15%
Fig. 5. Maximum energy efciency for different experiences.
430 J.F. Vlez et al. / Fuel 88 (2009) 424430