D20b - European Workshop Sept 2009

Grant agreement no. EIE/06/078/SI2.
447511 Project acronym: Gasification Guide Full title of the action: Guideline for safe and eco-friendly biomass gasification Intelligent Energy Europe (IEE) Key action: ALTENER
Deliverable D 20b Report on the second European Workshop
On the way to safe and eco-friendly biomass gasification

Date: Venue: Authors: Thursday, 3rd of September 2009 Integrated within the ICPS conference 31th - 2nd of September Vienna, Austria
Michael Fuchs, Hermann Hofbauer Vienna University of Technology Getreidemarkt 9/166 1060 Vienna Austria John Vos, Harrie Knoef BTG biomass technology group P.O. Box 217 7500 AE Enschede The Netherlands
The project is co-funded by the European Commission.
EIE/06/078/SI2.447511 - Gasification Guide
Introduction
Dissemination, considered as a whole of all marketing issues to promote several topics and therefore to rise up sensitivity for future challenges are getting more and more important in all fields of scientific work. The taken actions should transport the results of research and remark the level of best available technique. Generally, poor awareness and lack of understanding of health, safety and environment (HSE) hazards in development, planning, designing, engineering, construction, operation and maintenance of gasification plants is recognized a major non-technical obstacle to the market penetration of small-to-medium scale biomass gasifiers for power generation. The project "Guideline for Safe and Ecofriendly Biomass Gasification" aims to effectively tackle this barrier and therefore accelerate the market penetration of smallto-medium scale biomass gasifiers by the development of a Guideline and Software Tool for easy and simple assessment of HSE risks. The tools are intended for use by manufacturers, developers, implementers, owners, financiers, investors, researchers and others interested in biomass gasification systems. To promote the use of the designated project output by the target groups several workshops, articles, conference contributions and presentations have been organized.
History - the 1st European workshop

First of all it has to be underlined that the HSE subject was already on the agenda of international networks since early 2000. This back-up support form recognized international experts in biomass gasification were an important reason to the EC to support the gasification guide project financially. IEA Bioenergy Task 33 on Biomass Gasification and the European ThermalNet network should reasonable are also directly linked to the further project progress. So it was a great opportunity to organize the first workshop sandwiched by the IEA Bioenergy - Task 33 on Biomass Gasification and the Thermal Net meetings in Vienna, Austria in April 2008.
The Organization of the 2nd European workshop

The strategy of organizing the 1st European workshop in close junction with other topic related meetings in 2008 brought a lot of advantages especially in attracting a great number of interested attendees of the several target groups of the gasification guide project. Therefore Technical University of Vienna decided to keep on with that strategy. Since the ThermalNet project had ended in 2008 it was quite difficult to get another high ranking meeting, ThermalNet had been the only real network, to Vienna. So we decided to organize the 2nd European Workshop on Health, safety and Environmental issues of biomass gasification in junction with a new established conference, the International Conference on Polygeneration strategies arranged in Vienna starting with 31st of august 2009 with a duration of 4 days. The Integration of the workshop in the conference seemed to be necessary to attract the aspired number of attendees and therefore get the desired impact of this dissemination activity. Furthermore the bonding of the framing HSE issues to the basic techniques outlined the potential of the biomass technology presented via an integrated perspective from development respectively research to safe, healthy and environment friendly application and could therefore also be taken as a sign to permitting authorities and future investors.
D20b 2nd European Workshop - Report - Page 2 of 10
Workshop program structure and number of attendees

After month of preparations and PR activities, primarily mailings to an address database of more than 2000 potential attendees and the appliance of a conference/workshop homepage an overall number of 141 attendees could be welcomed at the 2nd European workshop. In the morning session the focus was on presenting the technical output and the experiences gained from experimental, demonstration and economical operating small to middle scale biomass gasification plants to frame the HSE topic and to clearly underline the already reached level in technical, especially HSE related fields (see next section part one). The afternoon session was dedicated to a panel discussion which were introduced by the presentation of the final guideline and the software tool (see next section part two). The agenda respectively the program of the whole conference is attached in Annex A.
Statistics
Over 3000 persons had been invited to the event and 141 people of 23 nationalities attended the conference and the workshop. The workshop, see Annex B. There background categorized to target groups are listed below: Industry: 23 Designers, Consultants, etc.; - 11 - 6 of them from big energy suppliers Universities: 60 14 of them PhD or diploma Students Researchers: 42 Public bodies: 5 authorities, etc.
Annex
The Annexes are categorized by the level of accordance to the milestones of this deliverable resp. the milestones covered within. Annexes categorized by a number contain additional information to show and document the made efforts in this dissemination activity. Annexes categorized by an alphabetic ranked character are necessary documents to prove the completion of the claimed milestones. All presentations are available at the project website www.gasification-guide.eu respectively the homepage of the ICPS conference www.icps09.org. Promotional material General Flyer Gasification Guide Annex O.1 Announcement WS (stand alone) and Conference (integrated) Annex O.2 Program Program Annex A Objective evidence (milestone) List of attendees Annex B Publications Presentations Book of abstract (Workshop Thursday 3rd of September 2009) Annex C (covering the whole conference) Annex 0.3
Promotional material Annex O.1 - General Flyer Gasification Guide
Gasification guide
Actual Status
Recent information on the project progress will be published on the project homepage.
Target Groups
The Main target groups of this project are: Manufacturers of biomass gasification plants Technical advisers to biomass gasification plants developers, implementers, owners, financiers, and investors, and Authorities charged with permitting biomass
Project output
The main outputs of the project are A guideline for safe and eco-friendly biomass gasification that is suitable for use across Europe A Software Tool facilitating the assessment of health, safety and environment hazards by manufacturers, developers, implementers,
Bringing Safe and Eco-friendly Biomass Gasification into practice
gasification plants and regulating health, safety and environment issues.

Further Information: Mr. John Vos Mr. Harrie Knoef Phone: Fax: [email protected] [email protected]
owners, financiers, investors, researchers and others interested in biomass gasification.
BTG biomass technology group BV +31-53-4861186 +31-53-4861180
P.O. Box 217 7500 AE Enschede The Netherlands
Pictures: www.photocase.de; Vienna University of Technology, A; Biomass technology Group, NL The sole responsibility for the content of this publication lies with the authors. It does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Communities. The European Commision is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. Vienna University of Technology, 2008; HSE (Health Safety and Enviroment) is equivalent to SHE (Safety, Health and Enviroment)
www.gasification-guide.eu
Project Overview
Poor awareness and lack of understanding of health, safety and environment (HSE) hazards in development, planning, design, engineering, construction, operation and maintenance of gasification plants is recognised a major non-technical obstacle to the market penetration of small-to-medium scale biomass gasifiers for power generation. The project "Guideline for Safe and Ecofriendly Biomass Gasification" aims to effectively tackle this barrier and aims to accelerate the market penetration of small-to-medium scale biomass gasifiers by the development of a Guideline and Software Tool for easy and simple assessment of HSE risks. The tools are intended for use by manufacturers, developers, implementers, owners, financiers, investors, researchers and others interested in biomass gasification systems.
Perspective
The development of a practical biomass gasification guideline in close consultation with a leading HSE authority and based on realised and planned biomass gasification plants will help to ensure that in future permitting authorities draw up reasonable and fair HSE requirements, thus effectively removing an identified barrier to the market uptake of this technology. Raise the awareness of communities, (potential) customers and public authorities on HSE issues with a view to of and reducing biomass objections gasifiers of to the the construction shortening procedures; Guide manufacturers and technology developers in the development of safe designs and safe operation objective and is to accelerate the of market biomass & maintenance of biomass gasification plants; Disseminate the guideline and spin-off results to the target groups and other stakeholders to help remove the non-technical barriers; Decrease the financial risks of investors Remove associated non-technical factors like the sometimes bioenergy; Benchmark legal framework of plant permission & operation, and best practices; Propose changes to (and help harmonise) EUlegislation in favour of biomass gasification; Create a framework for the further development of the guideline to an international accepted standard, which can be used for commissioning/guarantee/ acceptance testing and certification; unfavourable public perception of commercialisation and
simplifying
permitting
Objectives
The main introduction
gasification plants of up to about 5MWth capacity by developing an accepted guideline how to assess potential HSE hazards of biomass gasifiers.
Specific objectives
The specific objective is the removal of one of the most important non-technical barriers for widespread market introduction of biomass gasifiers, i.e. the awareness of HSE hazards. This includes: Identification of possible HSE hazards associated with construction, operation and maintenance of biomass gasifier plants, and making recommendations to reduce these hazards; Simplify administrative procedures; Stimulate the market implementation;
Background
Biomass gasification experts have found health, safety and environment (HSE) issues to be an important barrier to the market uptake of biomass gasification technology. Pilot and prototype (trial) limits are gasifiers usually often operate for under which For temporary emission environmental licenses
somewhat
relaxed.
gasifiers intended for commercial operation permitting authorities have a tendency to impose unreasonably strict emission limits and safety measures due to their lack of familiarity with and understanding of the technology. For permitting authorities and other key market actors it is difficult to appreciate the HSE risks correctly.
Promotional material Annex O.2 - Announcement WS (stand alone) and Conference (integrated)
Health Safe
Environment Worksho
as apar t ofthe:
"On the way to safe and ecofriendly biomass gasification"

3 of September 2009 University of Technology Vienna, Austria
HSE
rd
09
International Conference on Polygeneration Strategies
Vienna University of Technology 1 st to 4 t h ofSeptember 2009 Vienna - Austria wwvv.icps09.org
~~
IWTTUGraz ".__
Inst. ofThermaI E"'lineen"ll
=~::.;;.,
CO-wr
TU
VIENNA
I|C|P|S 09
charges Regular: Students: 450,- 300,--
September | 1st-4th | 2009 Vienna | Austria
InformatIon Vienna University of technology Institute of Chemical Engineering Department of Chemical Process Engineering and Fluidization ICPS `09 Organization Committee Getreidemarkt 9/166 1060 Vienna +43 1 588 01-15954 www.icps.org
I|C|P|S
09
Please register at
www.Icps09.org
PAPer or A ll f C
The Gasification Guide Project is funded by the European Union
www.icps09.org
I|C|P|S 09
I|C|P|S 09
topIcs Gas production Gas cleaning Syngas utilization Life cycle analysis scIentIfIc commIttee Hermann Hofbauer Martin Kaltschmitt Johan Einar Hustad Pier Ugo Foscolo Samuel Stucki aIm of the conference Biomass gasification is a key technology for biomass utilization in the future. All forms of energy currently used can be produced via conversion of solid biomass into syngas: heat, electricity and synthetic biofuels. In former years, the main focus of R&D in the field of biomass conversion was on heat and electricity production. This was the topic of several conferences. Today, things have changed. Syngas production, syngas cleaning and syngas utilization are subject of research programs in several countries and enormous progress has been achieved in this field in the recent years. Furthermore, polygeneration is the key word for future efficient and sustainable biomass utilization. The main aim of the conference is to present the current state-of-the-art of syngas production, syngas cleaning and syngas utilization. Furthermore, to offer a platform for exchange of information, results and experiences as well as networking. Therefore, national and international researchers as well as industrial representatives from the manufacturer and utility side are invited to contribute to the success of the conference.
program the three-day program for the conference includes: Overview lectures describing the state-of-the-art in different technologies Oral presentations on research, development and demonstration projects Poster presentations on research, development and demonstration projects A Workshop on Health, Safety and Environment aspects of biomass gasification plants - this workshop is jointly hosted by the EU project Gasification Guide An excursion to demonstration plants - optionally on the fourth day
tImelIne 2nd of February 2009 13th of March 2009 30th of April 2009 30th of June 2009 1st-3rd of Sept. 2009 4th of Sept. 2009 Timeframe for electronic abstract submission opens Deadline for Submission of Abstracts Papers and Posters Notification of Acceptance and Request for Full Paper1 Deadline for paper submission Conference Excursion to demonstration plants (optional)
Monday 31. 08. 2009 Agenda Item Organizational Issues Social Events
1
Tuesday 01. 09. 2009 Conference
Wednesday 02. 09. 2009 Conference
Thursday 03. 09. 2009 Workshop and Conference Closure
Friday 04. 09. 2009 Excursion
Registration Barbecue Dinner Dinner
The ICPS`09 is organized as an abstract reviewed conference
Program Annex A - Program
September | 1st-4th | 2009 Vienna | Austria
I|C|P|S 09
PROGRAM
www.icps09.org
I|C|P|S 09
topics Gas production Gas cleaning Syngas utilization Life cycle analysis scientific committee Hermann Hofbauer Martin Kaltschmitt Johan Einar Hustad Pier Ugo Foscolo Samuel Stucki Aim of the conference
chArges Regular: Students: 450,- 350,--
Biomass gasification is a key technology for biomass utilization in the future. All forms of energy currently used can be produced via conversion of solid biomass into syngas: heat, electricity and synthetic biofuels. In former years, the main focus of R&D in the field of biomass conversion was on heat and electricity production. This was the topic of several conferences. Today, things have changed. Syngas production, syngas cleaning and syngas utilization are subject of research programs in several countries and enormous progress has been achieved in this field in the recent years. Furthermore, polygeneration is the key word for future efficient and sustainable biomass utilization. The main aim of the conference is to present the current state-of-the-art of syngas production, syngas cleaning and syngas utilization. Furthermore, to offer a platform for exchange of information, results and experiences as well as networking. Therefore, national and international researchers as well as industrial representatives from the manufacturer and utility side are invited to contribute to the success of the conference.
I|C|P|S 09
Adress vienna University of technology Karlsplatz 13 1040 Wien
mAp
conference venUe
sociAl events
Tuesday 1rd of September 2009 start time: 19:30pm Rathaus - Vienna City Hall Lichtenfelsgasse 2 1010 Wien
Wednesday 2nd of September 2009 Heurigenrestaurant Schbl Auer Zahnradbahnstrasse 17 1190 Wien
progrAm
tUesdAy, 1st of September 2009
08:00 Registration 09:00 Initial welcome Hofbauer H. Gas Production 09:10 Gas Production Key Note Lecture Foscolo P.U. University of LAquila (Italy) 09:40 The new Chalmers research-gasifier Seemann M. C., Thunman H. CHALMERS Technical University 10:00 Pressurized Entrained Gasification of Slurries from Biomass Stahl R., Henrich E. Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe 10:20 Influence of operating conditions on gas composition, soot and tar in entrained flow gasification of biomass Ke Q., Weigang L. Technical University of Denmark 10:40 Coffee break 11:15 Study of pressure effect in steam gasification of biomass Ravel S., Valin S. CEA Grenoble 11:35 The Development and Operation of a 100kW Dual Fluidised Bed Biomass Gasifier for Production of High Quality Producer Gas Bull D. R., Gilmour I. A. Iowa State University 12:15 Gasification characteristics of biomass/coal blend in a dual circulating fluidized bed reactor Seo M. W., Goo J H. Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology 12:35 Improvement of biomass steam gasification in DFB process by in-situ CO2 absorption Marquard-Mllenstedt T., Zuberbhler U. Zentrum fr Sonnenenergie- und Wasserstoff-Forschung Baden-Wrttemberg (ZSW) 12:55 Lunch Gas cleaninG 14:00 Gas Cleaning and Gas Utilization - Key Note Lecture Comparative Assessment of Polygeneration Strategies (working title) Hansen J. B., Hjlund-Nielsen P. E. Haldor Topse A/S 14:40 POX Steam Reforming in a Plasma-Assisted GlidArc Reformer Owrang F., Foong C. Department of Energy and Process Engineering, NTNU 15:00 High Temperature Gas Treatment for the Operation of a Solid Oxide Fuel Cell (SOFC) Martini S. , Kleinhappl M. Bioenergy 2020+ 15:20 Coffee break 15:50 Flexible dry high temperature syngas cleaning Leibold H., Mai R. Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe 16:10 Novel Bio-syngas Cleanup Process Leppin D., Basu A. Gas Technology Institute (GTI) 16:30 Experiences on tar removal strategies in a 3 MWth fluidised bed gasification unit Gomez-Barea A., Campoy M. University of Seville 16:50 Catalytic Ceramic Filters Integrated in a Fluidized Bed Biomass Gasifier Rapagn S., Gallucci K. University of LAquila 19:3022:30 Social program Reception at Vienna City hall
progrAm
WednesdAy, 2nd of September 2009
08:00 Registration 09:00 Opening Hofbauer H. Gas utilization 09:10 Allothermal gasification of biomass into chemicals and secondary energy carriers Zwart R. W. R., Van der Drift A. Energy research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN) 09:30 From SynGas to Fuels Microreactor Technology in Fischer-Tropsch (FT) Synthesis Lukas M., Tekautz G. Joanneum Research 09:50 Bio-SNG from biomass - First results of a demonstration plant Rehling B., Hofbauer H. Vienna University of Technology 10:10 Long-term tests on methanation with tar and sulphur loaded syngas Kienberger T. Graz University of Technology 10:40 Coffee break 11:05 Low Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Enabled by Microchannel Technology McDaniel J., Kilanowski D. Velocys, Inc. 11:25 Production of DME from wood Mevissen N., Schulzke T. Fraunhofer UMSICHT 11:55 Poster session 12:35 Lunch life cycle analysis, simulation and techno economical studies 13:45 Life Cycle Analysis, Simulation and Techno Economical Studies Key Note Lecture Kaltschmitt M. Technical University Hamburg-Harburg 14:25 Life Cycle Assessment of the Polygeneration of FT-Fuels, SNG, Electricity and Heat via Gasification of Wood and Straw Examples from Austria Jungmeier G., Lingitz A. Joanneum Research 14:45 Gasification and Green Gas development in the Netherlands van Asselt W. A. SenterNovem 15:05 Coffee break 15:35 Biomass versus bio-oil gasification for syngas production for BTL Bridgwater A. V. , Dimitriou I. Bioenergy Research Group Aston University 15:55 Small-Scale Generation of Substitute Natural Gas Karl J., Gallmetzer G. Graz University of Technology 16:15 Bio-SNG concept development with focus on environmental aspects Rnsch S., Schmersahl R. German Biomass Research Centre 16:35 Biomass gasification for ammonia production Gilbert P., Thornley P. University of Manchester 19:30 23:30 Social program Heuriger Schbl Auer in Nudorf
progrAm
thUrsdAy, 3rd of September 2009
08:00 Registration 08:45 Welcome Hofbauer H. small and middle scale Gasifiers from exPeriment to Practice 09:00 Experiences and results derived from the gasifier at the TUV Pfeifer C. Vienna University of Technology 09:20 Design, construction and operational experiences with a 3 MW Torbed wood gasifier in the Netherlands Poldervaart J , van Doorn J Polow Energy Systems 09:40 Preliminary Results with a 450kWth Bubbling Bed Gasifier Ufuk K, Serhat G, Hayati O TUBITAK MAM Energy Institute 10:00 Ankur Biomass Gasification Technology - Field Experiences Jain B C Ankur Scientific Energy Technologies Pvt. Ltd. 10:20 Safety relevant experiences on Biomass gasifier CHPs Seifert U Fraunhofer UMSICHT 10:40 Coffee break Gasification Guide 11:15 Introduction EU project Gasification Guide - Project Team 11:35 Presentation of the final Guideline Voss J., Knoeff H. BTG Biomass Technology Group, Netherlands 12:15 Further Developments EU project Gasification Guide - Project Team 12:35 Lunch 13:45 Plenary Discussion EU project Gasification Guide - Project Team 14:45 Summing up EU project Gasification Guide - Project Team icPs 2009 15:05 Compendium of the 1st International conference on Polygeneration Strategies Hofbauer H., Kaltschmitt M., Hustad J. E., Foscolo P. U., Stucki S.
fridAy, 4th of September 2009

08:0012:00 12:0013:00 13:0018:00 Excursion Lunch Excursion Visitation of the CHP Oberwart Visitation of the CHP Gssing (Technikum, BioFT, BioSNG)
I|C|P|S 09
excUrsion Friday the 4th of September 2009

The new biomass gasifier (CHP) plant in Oberwart
during the excursion the following places of interest will be visited The new biomass gasifier (CHP) plant in Oberwart The biomass gasifier CHP plant in Gssing The BioSNG demonstration plant The BioFiT (Fischer Tropsch) research plant The new Bioenergy 2020+ competence center in Gssing plAces of interest
The new Bioenergy 2020+ competence center
The CHP Gssing and the BioSNG plant nearby
The CHP Gssing in front of the history castle
I|C|P|S 09
chArges Regular: Students: 450,- 350,--
informAtion vienna University of technology Institute of Chemical Engineering Department of Chemical Process Engineering and Fluidization ICPS `09 Organization Committee Getreidemarkt 9/166 1060 Vienna +43 1 588 01-15954 www.icps.org
Please use the quick link to the secured confernece booking page at our homepage: www.icps09.org
The Gasification Guide Project is funded by the European Union
Objective evidence (milestone) Annex B - List of attendees
EIE/06/078/SI2.447511 Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Gender Mrs. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mrs. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mrs. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mrs. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mrs. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mrs. Mr. Title First Name Angela Engineer Tibaut Sr. Institute Engineer Dennis Dr.Ing. Arnstein Dr. Ralph Dr. Dipl.-Ing Gerfried Prof. Todd PhD Farshid Priv.-Doz. Dr. Michael Dipl.-Ing. Tim Serge Dr Laurent PhD Student Gabriel Doug Dr. Chihiro Dipl.-Ing. Michael Dr Paul Luca M.Sc. John Professor Sang Done Dipl.-Ing. Ute Jeffery Doctorial Candidate Myungwon DI Peter DI Christoph Dr. Ho-Jung PhD Ke Prof. Petr Doctor Pierre Jrme Dr Jrgen Donatella Muhammad Hamid Professor Tim Ir Mathieu Ing WA Stefan Sami Katja Ir. Robin DI Dr. Harald Dipl.-Ing. Thomas Prof. Norihiko Dipl.-Ing. Markus Engineer Morten Engineer Bjarne Prof. Joo Hong Dr. Reinhard Barbara Assistant Prof. Sergio Last Name Potetz Theys Leppin Norheim Stahl Jungmeier Pugsley Owrang Mller Schulzke Ravel Van de Steene Teixeira Bull Fushimi Halwachs Gilbert di Felice Hansen Kim Wolfesberger McDaniel Seo Bielansky Schnberger Ryu Qin Buryan Girods Lemonon Held Barisano Rafiq Krantz Dumont van Asselt Rnsch Kokki Lappi Zwart Schablitzky Kienberger Orita Stemann Groen Skyum Choi Rauch Rehling Rapagn
Gasification Guide
Organization Vienna University of Technology De Smet Engineers & Contractors Gas Technology Institute Institute for Energy Technology Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe Joanneum Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH Saskatchewan Norwegian University of Science and Technology Forschungszentrum Jlich GmbH Fraunhofer Institut Umsicht Cea Cirad University of Toulouse University of Canterbury The University of Tokyo Vienna University of Technology University of Manchester University of l'Aquila Haldor Topse A/S Kaist Vienna University of Technology Velocys, Inc. Kaist Vienna University of Technology Vienna University of Technology Korea Institute of Energy Research The Technical University of Denmark ICP Prague Universit Henri Poincar, Nancy I Universit Henri Poincar Swedish Gas Centre Enea - Italian National Agency Norwegian University of Science and Technology University of Redlands SenterNovem SenterNovem Dbfz Foster Wheeler Energia Oy Foster Wheeler Energia Oy Energy Research Centre of The Netherlands Omv Graz Universitiy of Technology Miyagi National College oif Technology H S Energieanlagen Gmbh Weiss AS Weiss AS Gyoungsang National University Vienna University of Technology Vienna University of Technology University of Teramo City VIENNA LA HULPE DES PLAINES KJELLER EGGENSTEIN-LEOPOLDSHAFEN GRAZ SASKATOON TRONDHEIM JLICH OBERHAUSEN GRENOBLE CEDEX 9 MONTPELLIER MONTPELLIER AMES, IOWA TOKYO PINKAFELD MANCHESTER L'AQUILA LYNGBY DAEJEON VIENNA PLAIN CITY, OH DAEJEON VIENNA VIENNA DAEJEON KGS.LYNGBY PRAGUE EPINAL EPINAL MALM ROTONDELLA TRONDHEIM REDLANDS UTRECHT UTRECHT LEIPZIG VARKAUS VARKAUS PETTEN SCHWECHAT GRAZ NATORI FREISING HADSUND HADSUND JINJU VIENNA VIENNA TERAMO Country AUSTRIA BELGIUM UNITED STATES NORWAY GERMANY AUSTRIA CANADA NORWAY GERMANY GERMANY FRANCE FRANCE FRANCE UNITED STATES JAPAN AUSTRIA UNITED KINGDOM ITALY DENMARK KOREA SOUTH AUSTRIA UNITED STATES KOREA SOUTH AUSTRIA AUSTRIA KOREA SOUTH DENMARK CZECH REPUBLIC FRANCE FRANCE SWEDEN ITALY NORWAY UNITED STATES NETHERLANDS NETHERLANDS GERMANY FINLAND FINLAND NETHERLANDS AUSTRIA AUSTRIA JAPAN GERMANY DENMARK DENMARK KOREA SOUTH AUSTRIA AUSTRIA ITALY
D20b 2nd European Workshop
1 of 3
EIE/06/078/SI2.447511 Number 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 Gender Mr. Mrs. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mrs. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mrs. Mr. Mrs. Mrs. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mrs. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mrs. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mrs. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mrs. Mr. Mrs. Title Prof. PhD Student Dipl.Ing. Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Ing. Ass. Prof. Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Di Dr. Dr. Dipl. Ing. Dr. Dr Dipl.-Ing. DI, MBA Dipl.-Ing. Dr. Prof. Dr. Ing. Prof. Dr. Dipl. Ing. Dipl.-Ing. Di Dr.-Ing. Dr. Professor Dipl.-Ing. Dipl.-Ing. Dr. Ph.D. First Name Franz Mirella Gerhard Thomas Christian Peter Arendt Evelyne Stefan Takahashi Wolfgang Christoph Isabella Tobias Adriana Tamara Guillaume Michael Hermann Vera Martin Pier Ugo Sebastian Friedrich Martin Agnes Ulrich Won Uen Do Tony Wolfgang Sarah Stefan Michael Pal Jesper Gerald Henrik Harrie Anton Ruedi Joep Jrgen Jochen Harald Friedrich Matthias Miroslav Diana Carolina Ignacio Ioanna Last Name Winter Virginie Kampichler Klotz Filzmaier Jensen Daxer Martini Tohru Becker Pfeifer Aigner Proell De Stefanis Mayer Peureux Fuchs Hofbauer Nemanova Kaltschmitt Foscolo Gellert Kirnbauer Hauth von Garnier Seifert Yang Lee Bridgwater Kppel Alexander Koppatz Lukas Szentannai Noes Marinitsch Thunman Knoef Larsson Bhler Van Doorn Karl Brellochs Kohl Heggemeier Rohm Puncochar Guio Perez Diaz Castro Dimitriou
Gasification Guide
Organization Vienna University of Technology Universit de Strasbourg EVN AG Ortner Ges.M.B.H. Ortner Ges.M.B.H. Technical University of Denmark Ortner Ges.M.B.H. Bioenergy 2020+ GmbH Tokyo Gas CO., LTD. Fraunhofer Institut fr Chemische Technologie (Fh-ICT) Vienna University of Technology Vienna University of Technology Vienna University of Technology National Council of Research Vienna University of Technology Gdf Suez Vienna University of Technology Vienna University of Technology Royal Institute of Technology Technische Universitt Hamburg-Harburg Universit degli Studi dell'Aquila Technische Universitt Hamburg-Harburg Vienna University of Technology Graz Universitiy of Technology Outotec GmbH Fraunhofer Institut Umsicht Korea Institute of Industrial Technology Korea Institute of Industrial Technology Aston University DVGW Forschungsstelle am Engler-Bunte-Insitut der Universitt Karlsruhe (TH) Aston University Vienna University of Technology Joanneum Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH Vienna University of Technology Stirling Danmark Stirling Danmark Chalmers Btg Chalmers U+E Polow Energy Systems University of Technology Graz Zentrum fr Sonnenenergie- und Wasserstoffforschung Baden-Wrttemberg Vienna University of Technology Boson Energy SA Vienna University of Technology Academy of Sciences, Czech Republic Vienna University of Technology Vienna University of Technology Aston University City VIENNA STRASBOURG CEDEX 2 MARIA ENZERSDORF INNSBRUCK INNSBRUCK KGS LYNGBY INNSBRUCK GRAZ YOKOHAMA-CITY,KANAGAWA KARLSRUHE VIENNA VIENNA VIENNA MONTEROTONDO SCALO WIEN SAINT-DENIS LA PLAINE CEDEX VIENNA VIENNA STOCKHOLM HAMBURG MONTELUCO DI ROIO HAMBURG WIEN GRAZ OBERURSEL OBERHAUSEN CHONAN-SI, CHUNGNAM CHEONAN BIRMINGHAM KARLSRUHE BIRMINGHAM WIEN GRAZ VIENNA LYNGBY KALSDORF BEI GRAZ GOTEBORG ENSCHEDE GTEBORG MASCHWANDEN THE HAGUE GRAZ STUTTGART WIEN LUXEMBOURG WIEN PRAGUE WIEN WIEN BIRMINGHAM Country AUSTRIA FRANCE AUSTRIA AUSTRIA AUSTRIA DENMARK AUSTRIA AUSTRIA JAPAN GERMANY AUSTRIA AUSTRIA AUSTRIA ITALY AUSTRIA FRANCE AUSTRIA AUSTRIA SWEDEN GERMANY ITALY GERMANY AUSTRIA AUSTRIA GERMANY GERMANY KOREA SOUTH KOREA SOUTH UNITED KINGDOM GERMANY UNITED KINGDOM AUSTRIA AUSTRIA AUSTRIA DENMARK AUSTRIA SWEDEN NETHERLANDS SWEDEN SWITZERLAND NETHERLANDS AUSTRIA GERMANY AUSTRIA LUXEMBOURG AUSTRIA CZECH REPUBLIC AUSTRIA AUSTRIA UNITED KINGDOM
Professor Ph.D Dr. Univ.-Prof. Dr.-Ing. Dipl.-Ing. Dipl.Ing. Dr. Di Di
2 of 3
EIE/06/078/SI2.447511 Number 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 Gender Mr. Mrs. Mr. Mrs. Mr. Mrs. Mrs. Mr. Mr. Mrs. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mrs. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr Mrs. Mrs. Mr. Title MSc First Name Jacques Claudia Andrea Markus Sabine Mark Lise-Lott Jenny Paolo Han Monika Wennan Walter Norman Josef Alexandre Allan Gregor Stefan Emanuele Klemens Axel Jan Rafal Adam Veronika Palmo Antonio Klinar Matteo Stefan Ren Alexander Silvester Serhat Sander Stephan Michael J. Andreas Siegfried Stefan Pucker Martina Loncar Last Name Poldervaart Villegas Timm Fritsch Fleck Van De Ven Niva Nystrm Piermartini Raas Nasterska Zhang Vanselow Poboss Lichtscheidl Bacq Hart Tondl Penthor Taibi Marx Klling Najser Chlond Wilk Cavallo Dusan Porta Kern Bhme Reichhold Fail Gl Van Poosen Messner Dichand Kstler Kiss Bergmann Johanna Ammer Drazen
Gasification Guide
Organization Polow Energy Systems Bv Nuon Energy NV - Vattenfall Linde-KCA-Dresden GmbH Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe Kema Eskilstuna Energi & Milj AB Eskilstuna energy and environment Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe Nuon Energy NV Vienna University of Technology Mid Sweden University SWF Energie Service GmbH University of Stuttgart OMV Refining & Marketing XYLOWATT Sa Organization Vienna University of Technology Vienna University of Technology Unido Vienna University of Technology ERK Eckrohrkessel GmbH VSB Technical University of Ostrava VSB Technical University of Ostrava Bioenergy 2020 Energy Recuperator Spa Scientific Research Centre Bistra Ptuj University of Genua Bioenergy 2020 TU Dresden Vienna University of Technology Vienna University of Technology Tubitac.MRC Shell Gssing Renewable Energy GmbH Gssing Renewable Energy GmbH Gssing Renewable Energy GmbH Rohel Aufsuchungs AG Simtech GmbH Joanneum Research Forschungsgesellschaft mbH Vienna University of Technology University of Zagreb City THE HAGUE AMSTERDAM DRESDEN EGGENSTEIN-LEOPOLDSHAFEN ARNHEM ESKILSTUNA ESKILSTUNA EGGENSTEIN-LEOPOLDSHAFEN DUIVEN VIENNA SUNDSVALL FLENSBURG STUTTGART SCHWECHAT CHARLEROI DRIEBERGEN VIENNA VIENNA WIEN VIENNA BERLIN OSTRAVA-PORUBA OSTRAVA-PORUBA GRAZ CARPENEDOLO - BSPTUJ GENOVA GRAZ DRESDEN WIEN WIEN KOCAELI AMSTERDAM GSSING GSSING GSSING WIEN GRAZ GRAZ WIEN ZAGREB Country NETHERLANDS NETHERLANDS GERMANY GERMANY NETHERLANDS SWEDEN SWEDEN GERMANY NETHERLANDS AUSTRIA SWEDEN GERMANY GERMANY AUSTRIA BELGIUM NETHERLANDS AUSTRIA AUSTRIA AUSTRIA AUSTRIA GERMANY CZECH REPUBLIC CZECH REPUBLIC AUSTRIA ITALY SLOVENIA ITALY AUSTRIA GERMANY AUSTRIA AUSTRIA TURKEY NETHERLANDS AUSTRIA AUSTRIA AUSTRIA AUSTRIA AUSTRIA AUSTRIA AUSTRIA CROATIA
Dr. MSc. Energy-Engineer PhD M.Sc. Ir. Dr. Diplom Ingenieur Dr. Ir. Di Dott.Ing. Dipl.Ing.
3 of 3
Publications Annex C - Presentations (Workshop Thursday 3rd of September 2009)
Experiences and results derived from the gasifier at the TUV

Christoph Pfeifer
Vienna University of Technology
3rd of September 2009
Content
Dual fluidised bed (DFB) steam gasification Design development 100kW process development unit Experimental results Summary/Conclusion y
Christoph Pfeifer
DFB steam gasification: Principle of the process I

Producer Gas
(CH4, CO, H2, CO2, H2O)
Flue gas Heat
Gasification (~ 850 C) Biomass Circulation Ci l ti (bed material, char coal)
Combustion (~ 920 C) Add. fuel
Steam
Air
Christoph Pfeifer
DFB steam gasification: Principle of the process II

producer gas flue gas
loop seal
gasifier riser biomass

additional fuel
connecting chute
steam air
Component H2O, vol% CH4, vol%db l db C2H4, vol%db C3-Fract., vol%db CO, vol%db CO2, vol%db H2, vol%db Tar g/m3n db LHV MJ/m3n db
Conventional process 3045 1011 22.5 0.50.7 2426 2022 3840 25 12.913.6
4
Christoph Pfeifer
Design development I: DFB cold flow model

Full set of scaling criteria applied Hot conditions: 850-950C, atmospheric pressure, olivine t h i li i particles Cold flow model: air, ambient temperature and pressure Linear scale 1:4 Bronze particles in CFM
Christoph Pfeifer
Design development II
1993-1996, FICFB gasifier 1995-1999
Christoph Pfeifer
Design development III

1999-2003 2004-now
Christoph Pfeifer
Flohsheet of the DFB pilot plant
Christoph Pfeifer
Variation of the fuel water content I
40 35
40 35
product gas [vol %]
product gas [vol %]
30 25 20 15 10 H2 5 0 CO2 CO
30 25 20 15 H2 10 5 0
6 19
CO2 CO CH4
19
CH4
30
40
water co nt
ent [wt % ]
water co
ntent
[wt %]
Product gas composition vs. fuel water content, gasification temperature 810C
Product gas composition vs. fuel water content, gasification temperature 850C
Christoph Pfeifer
Variation of the fuel water content II
10 9 Tar content in product gas [g/Nm dry] ] 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

6 19 30 40
Fuel water content [wt%] Gasification temperature 850C Gasification temperature 810C
Tar content in the product gas vs. fuel water content, gasification temperature 810/850C
Christoph Pfeifer
10
Variation of the steam-to-fuel ratio

sfr mw _ fuel _ in mw _ fluid _ in m fuel _ dry _ in
50 45 40
concentration [vol% dry gas]
35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
H2 CO CO2 CH4
steam fuel ratio [kg/kg dry fuel]
Product gas composition vs. steam-to-fuel ratio, gasification temperature: 850 C, bed material: olivine, fuel: wood pellets
Christoph Pfeifer
11
Variation of the gasification temperature
Product gas composition vs. gasification temperature, fuel: wood pellets
Christoph Pfeifer
12
Variation of the fuel

60 50 product gas [vol%] ] 40 30 20 10 0
Wood pellets p Wood chips c B Bark Wood chips (willo ow) Wood/straw mix xt. 80/20wt% t. Wood/straw mixt 60/40wt% H2 CO2 CO CH4 Lignite Coal
Product gas composition for different fuels
Christoph Pfeifer
Sewage sludge e
13
Summary
Cold flow models and pilot plants are powerful tools for process development Fuel flexibility is an important issue Higher steam-to-fuel ratios lead to lower tar levels Higher gasification temperature lead to lower tar levels Increased steam-to-fuel ratio and increased gasification temperature decrease the overall efficiency Drying of biomass is energetically as well as economically advantegeous The dual fluidised bed gasification technology is demonstrated commercially (Guessing since 2001, Oberwart since 2007)
Christoph Pfeifer
14
Thank you for your attention.
Christoph Pfeifer
15
Design, construction and operational experiences with a 3 MWth Torbed wood gasifier in the Netherlands
Jacques Poldervaart, Joep van Doorn, Otto Coops ICPS, Vienna, 3 September 2009
www.polow.nl
[email protected]
Polow Energy Systems over 20 years of experience in thermal process engineering

Founded in 1987 (development of new installations for thermal processing) Cooperation with Torftech Ltd. since 1999 (development of new applications for TORBED technology in processing biomass) First commercial installation in 2004 Todays turnover Euro ~ 2 5 mln Today s 2.5 Staff: ~ 6 members direct and 12 indirect
Polow in development
First vision on TORBED Development torrefaction with the TORBED
Test plant torrefaction in operation
1987
1998 - 2002
2003
2006
2008
2009
2010
Founding PES
Gasification of demolition wood 3,5 MW
60 kt demo torrefaction factory
Testing a.o. on chicken manure
First combustion of waste wood
Combustion of wet paper sludge 12 MW

3
Experiences / approach
Polow has experience with sludges, manure, wood, biomass and slob oil Polow has its own test reactor to do test work on new feedstock or even on new processes or to resolve operational problems if any on existing installations through Torftech Testing of new control systems are possible
Development trajectory
All new processes are tested on our test installation
Proven track record in Torbed energy applications

Tielen in Castenray, The Netherlands (2001) Pilot plant for gasifying chicken manure Sappi in Maastricht, The Netherlands (2006) Process installation for drying paper pulp & sludge Remijn in Vlissingen, The Netherlands (2006) Process installation for gasifying wood as replacement for natural gas Atlantic Packiging in Toronto, Canada (2008) Process installation for combusting paper sludge and g raising steam Topell in Essen, Germany (2009) Pilot plant for torrefaction of biomass Topell in Duiven, Netherlands (2010) Plant for production of torrefied wood (60.000 tons/yr)
TORBED-technology
Torbed-reactor How it functions
Why is a Torbed reactor different?

Heat/mass transfer rates per unit volume higher than existing technologies Particles are processed faster and with more precision High velocity gas streams are used without high system pressure losses Lower capex and lower operating costs
Advantages of a Torbed
Reaction kinetics Precise control Simple scaling up Can process a large variety of particle sizes No moving parts in the reactor Relatively low pricing Low on maintenance
Comparison of various gas/solid reactor technologies

Gas Flow Solids Flow R Recycle Ratio
0<R<1
1 < R < 10
R > 10 Fast Transport Reactor
Increasin Velocity ng
Classical Fluidised Bed Bubbling
0<R<1 Compact TORBED Reactor
0<R<1 Expanded TORBED Reactor
ity Veloc Gas Mean Slip Velocity
Limits for Coventional and TORBED Reactors
Mean Solids Velocity
Increasing Expansion
10
Industrial drying process Vlissingen original situation

Drying of waste from food processing industry Rotary d R drum d i fi d with natural gas drier fired i h l
Reasons for installation of gasifier: -Odour nuisance -Dust nuisance -Emissions -Emission reduction measures d -Use of renewables -Reduction in costs for fuel (NG)
11
Industrial drying process: original situation
chimney Air burner cyclone
NG
drumdryer washer
12
Industrial drying process: Situation with Torbed gasifier

After burner
Torbed reactor Product cooler
Heat exchanger Rotary drier
cyclone chimney
13
Industrial drying process: Torbed gasification plant
14
Industrial drying process: Torbed gasification plant
15
Gasifier results
Fuel: shredded waste wood (12 wt% moisture) Max. Max dimensions: 70 x 10 mm Fuel flow: 800 kg/hr Fuel gas composition:
CO H2 CO2 CH4: H 2O N2 14 vol % 6 vol % 14 vol % 3,5 l 3 5 vol % 11 vol % balance
Fuel gas flow: 2,400 Nm3/hr

16
Gasifier results
Fuel gas composition: Total tar: 3,000 mg/Nm3 Tar dew point: ca. 200 oC Main tar components: Benzene Toluene Naphtalene N h l Acenaphtylene Phenanthrene
17
Bottlenecks
Integration of in-line shredder with gasifier Solution: off line feedstock preparation off-line Tar deposition Solution: better insulation of valves Operational issues Solution: automation
18
Results integral installation

Flue gas composition: O2 15,6 mol% CO2 4,1 mol% NOx 70 ppm dust < 25 mg/Nm3
19
Results integral installation

Dust and odour emissions are within limits Saving on natural gas (300 m3/h Heat production from wood Operation relatively simple Easy procedure for start-up and shut-down
20
10
Present activities
Design CHP based on Torbed gasification for a number of clients Start of construction end of 2009 Use of Torbed reactor for torrefaction Tests at 50 kg batch scale with different types of biomass Design full scale Design of full-scale torrefaction plant for wood in the Netherlands completed Start of construction end of 2009
21
Polow Energy Systems

www.polow.nl [email protected] i f l l
Polow Energy Systems P.O.box 230 2501 CS The Hague The Netherlands
22
11
To rbed or not To rbed It is not the question, it is the solution!
23
12
18.11.2009
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON POLYGENERATION STRATEGIES September 2009, Vienna, Austria
Preliminary Results with a 450 kWth Bubbling Fluidized Bed Gasifier
U. Kayahan, S.Gl*, H.Olgun, B.Bay, Y.Cetin, E.Caglayan, A.Unlu, H.Karatas, A.Yazar TUBITAK MAM, Energy Institute, Kocaeli,Turkey S.Ozdogan Marmara University, Faculty of Engineering, Istanbul, Turkey
Scope of Presentation
Introduction Pilot Scale Gasification System Description Experimental Results Operational problems Conclusion Future Plans Related Project
18.11.2009
Introduction
TUBITAK MARMARA RESEARCH CENTER
Marmara Research Center is goverment institution and has 8 Institute located at Kocaeli where the nearby of Istanbul. One of these Insttute is Energy Insttude and has 7 different research group. One of these group is Gasification/Combustion of Biomass/Coal Group and has 13 researcher.
Introduction
Gasification/Combustion of Biomass/Coal Group Activities
Group is focusing on the combustion and gasification technologies of solid fuels. Auxilary infrasutructure for gasification has been developed. ( fuel preperation, ) Gas cleaning technologies are developed. ( particle, tar ) Power application is studied with the integration of gasifier unit with gas engine.
4
18.11.2009
Introduction
Gasification/Combustion of Biomass/Coal Group Activities
Group has been started its activities at 2005 with EU project BIGPOWER with the aim of being the excellence center of gasification/combustion process in Turkey. In paralel to this project, nationaly funded project has been started and laboratory scale and pilot scale test facilities has been constructed. Current Laboratory Scale Test Facilities;
Bubbling fluidised bed gasifier ( 20 kWfuel ) Fixed bed gasifier ( 40 kWfuel ) Circulating fluidised bed combuster ( 20 kWth )
Current Pilot Scale Test Facility;

Bubbling fluidised bed gasifier ( 450 kWfuel )
Under construction test facilities;

Circulating Fluidised bed combuster ( 35 kWth ) Circulating Fluidised bed combuster ( 750 kWth ) Fixed bed gasifier ( 350 kWfuel ) 5
450 kWth Pilot Scale Gasification System Description

System concept according to multipurpose design;
Gasifier Capacity (kWth) Fuel feeding (kg/h) Crossection Diameter (cm) ( ) Height (cm) Refractory ( cm) pressure 450 100 Circular 45 650 12,5 atmospheric
Combustor Capacity (kWth) Fuel feeding (kg/h) Crossection Lenght (cm) Height (cm) Refractory ( cm) pressure 130 30 Square 26 550 athmospheric
18.11.2009
Pilot Scale Gasification System Description

System concept according to operation;
Gasifier Fuel feeding (kg/h) Gasification agent Fuel type Bed Material Static Bed height ( cm ) Pressure Superficial velocity ( m/s ) 50 air Hazelnut shell sand 50 + 15 mbar 0,7
measurements Fuel feeding Air flowrate pressure Temperature Gas composition Tar measurement calibration data orifice meter 6 point 5 point CO, CO2, H2, CH4, N2, O2 Not yet
Experimental Results
Materials;
- Gasification agent : Athmospheric air with flowrate of 70 130 Nm3/h. - Bed material; Silica sand with particle size distribution from 0,18 mm to 0,85 mm. Avarage is 0,45 mm. - Fuel ; Hazelnutshell with particle size distribution 1 2 mm mm.
Proximate Analysis Total Moisture, wt% Ash, wt% Volatile matter, wt% Fixed Carbon, wt% Lower Heating Value, kcal/kg Higher Heating Value, kcal/kg Ultimate Analysis C, wt% H, wt% N, wt% O, wt% (by difference) S, wt%
As fed basis 11.97 1.52 64.73 21.77 4525 4858
Dry basis 1.73 73.54 24.74 5215 5518
Dry basis 55.77 5.40 0.50 37.08 0.02
18.11.2009
Experimental Results
Operational values and results;
Air flow rate ( Nm3/h ) Fuel Flow rate ( kg/h ) ER CO (%) CO2 (%) CH4 (%) H2 (%) O2 (%) N2 (%) LHV (MJ/Nm3) Syngas flow rate (Nm3/h) Cold gas efficiency (%) Carbon conversion (%)
66 77 89 100
50 50 50 50
0.3
11.90 16.92
4.38 4.98 4.42 3.91
9.12 8.73 7.17 5.17
0.57 0.60 0.32 0.23
57.11 54.44 57.69 62.69
4.05 4.47 4.11 3.49
92 112 122 126
39.36 53.00 53.06 46.54
66,71 88,92 92,98 88,02
0.35 13.81 17.44 0.4 13.90 16.50
0.45 12.14 15.86
Operational Problems
- Feeding problems ;
The pressure inside reactor is +15 mbar, there is backflow of hot gas to the hooper. Heat up the screew feeder and starts to pyrolysis of fuels and becomes sticky. Rotary air lock is not a solution alone. The system was modified with ID fan d f and pressure becomes 5 mbar. b b
- Start up burner problem;

The start up burner that is run with propone, is mounted on the reactor just above the distributor and because of the wild enviroment of the fluidised bed, it is frequently failed. System will be modified with mounting the burner before the distributor plate. For this purpose, start up burner has to be suitable for high pressure application.
-Temperature distribution problem;

The temperature distribution along the gasifier is not homogenous. The diffence betweeen bottom and top of the gasifier is 500 C. Free board region is at 400 600 C. In order to increase this temperature, secondary air injection will be applied.
10
18.11.2009
Conclusion
-The main focus of this study is preliminary aspests of gasification process. - Hazelnut shell has been gasified and acceptable LHV of syngas was achieved. achieved - There is no agglomeration obsereved during the hazelnut shell gasification. -The maximum LHV is achived at ER:0,35, however, the maximum efficiency is achived at ER:0,40. -Carbon conversion is increased up to 0,40 and decreased at 0,45 which Carbon is considered as the effect of shorter residence time at fluidised bed region. -Temperature difference along the gasifier is high without secondary air injection.
11
Future Plans
-Parametric studies will be performed to observe the effect of selected operational parameters such as; - Secondary air, - steam gasification, gasification - bed height , - fuel feeding point, - bed residence time effect , on gas composition, tar content of the gas yield, carbon conversion and cold gas efficiency. y g - A catalytic bed for tar cracking will be applied. - Wet electrostatic precipitator will be integrated to the gas clean up section. - Integration of gas cleaning system to the gasifier and run the 50 kWe capacity diesel engine with the clean syngas.
12
18.11.2009
RelatedProject TRIGEN
Starting date : June 2009 Duration : 48 month Coordinator : TUBITAK ( GI ) Project partners : MRC, 2 Universities, 2 private company
General scheme of the project
Thank You
View of Gasification system during operation
[email protected]
14
ICPS Vienna, Sep. 3, 2009
Safety-relevant Experience with Biomass Gasifier CHPs

Ulrich Seifert [email protected] Fraunhofer-Institute for Environmental, Safety, and Energy Technologies UMSICHT
Scope Introduction Examples of fire incidents in biomass gasifier CHPs Analysis of focal points Fire protection recommendations from the "Gasification Guide"
Introduction Within the past few years, there have been an number of fire incidents in biomass gasifier CHPs in Europe. Thank you to all manufacturers, operators and other experts who have provided information about these incidents! Understandably, there are different views on these incidents; in some cases, the reported causes vary for the same incident.
Internet Reporting: Auxiliary Fire Brigade
Perception of Incidents and Consequences raising of awareness (investors, authorities, insurers) stop of operation of a plant in Germany due to requirements raised by fire insurance company number of "small incidents" (without serious damage) is unknown Increased need for explanations even for plants that have been unaffected so far
Examples of Fires in Biomass Gasifier Plants fire in ash / coke container of a gasifier starting from dust ignition (deflagration) in the ash / coke removal system fire starting at the wood chip feeding system of a gasifier after technical failure in feeding control system ignition of wood dust layers on (irregular) hot surfaces of equipment and resulting fire several incidents
Examples of Fires in Biomass Gasifier Plants air filter of a gas engine catches fire after backfiring into the fuel-air inlet line => resulting fire destroys plant deflagration of pyrolysis gas / air mixture in gasifier air supply line after a short (gas booster) standstill destruction of a gasification reactor and resulting fire after "clogging" of the reactor due to excessive amount of fine material in the fuel
Fires in Biomass Gasifier Plants: Focal Points

Biomass
Storage (Drying)
Gasifier
Gas cleaning
Gas engine
ash removal
dust removal
Interfaces between Subsystems fuel feeding to the gasification reactor ash removal from the gasifier dust removal from hot gas cleaning gas supply to CHP engine
Fires in Biomass Gasifier Plants: Focal Points Reactive Solids wood dust carbon-rich gasifier ashes, "gasifier coke residues from hot (dry) producer gas dedusting
Wood Dust Problem
Dust deposits on an open belt conveyor feeding a gasifier
Wood Dust Problem dust is released when handling (dried) wood chips formation of dust deposits self-ignition hazard with dust layers on surfaces of - hot equipment (e.g. reactor) - heat-releasing equipment (e.g. electrical engines) fire and (dust) explosion hazard
preventive measure: routine removal of dust deposits ("good housekeeping")
Problem of Reactive Gasifier Residue (Gasifier Ash or Coke) carbon-rich residue (gasifier coke): reaction with air is similar to that of fresh charcoal / activated carbon risk of self-ignition of hot gasifier coke in case of contact with air fire and (dust) explosion hazard cooling down without air contact or wet coke / ash removal separation of coke/ash storage from hot reactor (cf. biomass storage)
for comparison: low-carbon gasifier ash
Safe Storage of Biomass (Wood Chips) Guidelines: "Merkblatt C.A.R.M.E.N. 01/07" (in German) NIC-Guideline NT ENVIR 010 (10/2008)
Excerpts from "Gasification Guide" regarding Fire
Section 5: Potential hazards and good design principles Primary safety considerations Good engineering and operation practice Safety related issues in practice Norms and standards Documentation
Gasification Guide, 5.3: Good Design Practice 5.3.1: related to plant building construction structural fire protection: separation between fuel storage and gasification building separation of control and staff rooms from remainder of the plant two escape routes should lead from each point within the gasifier building to the outside
Gasification Guide, 5.3: Good Engineering Practice 5.3.2: related to process equipment All air inlets and gas outlets to/from gasifier, including fuel feeding section, flare and engine should be equipped with block devices or anti-backfiring valves in series Pressure and temperature sensors included in the safety concept should be duplicated or tripled Temperature sensors should be installed before and after the main plant reactor system components Preferred and allowable operating temperatures shall be secured with proper alarm levels
Gasification Guide, 5.4: Safety related issues in practice 5.4.1: Explosion / deflagration 5.4.2: Fire When and where: What happens: Possible reduction measures:
Gasification Guide, 5.4.1: Fire When and where after an explosion self-ignition of moist and high piles of biomass feedstock in cases where maximum allowable temperatures are exceeded sparks from hot work (welding, cutting, grinding and sawing) removal of hot ashes wrong gas engine ignition timing failure of anti-backfiring system due to unexpected foreign material, failure in fuel dosing routines and apparatus
Gasification Guide, 5.4.1: Fire What can happen physical injury to human beings damage or destruction of the BGP and other buildings fire may act as an ignition source for an explosion release of toxic fumes
Gasification Guide, 5.4.1: Fire Possible reduction measures fuel should be stored in a closed container, fire isolated, or in a separate room or building fire-resistant separation between the fuel storage and the gasifier (with a specified fire resistance time) may be required according to local fire-protection regulations installation of anti back-firing system at reactor, flare and the air inlet to the engine may be required according to national regulations humidification system at the ash removal in order to prevent fire hazard from glowing particles or nitrogen inerting on ash removal screws
Thank you for your attention Do you have any questions?
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Introduction to the Gasification Guideline

Harrie Knoef BTG Biomass Technology Group The Netherlands
HSE conference, Vienna
3 September 2009
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Content

Consortium

History and background Workplan f th W k l of the project j t
BTG TU-Graz TU Graz Frauenhofer-Umsicht TU-Vienna HSE COWI TU Sofia TU-Sofia

Umwelt+Energie FEE
3 September 2009
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
History and Background

Introduction and history of the way so far With thanks to Ruedi Bhler, Umwelt + Energie, Switzerland Preliminary remark: Todays conference and Guideline refers to gasification plants up to about 5 MWth
3 September 2009
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
HSE is an important topic
HSE Barriers in implementation of small scale biomass small-scale gasification: Manufacturers do not know the risks Manufacturers do not know how to assess HSE risks and how to minimise them Manufacturers do not know the standards which have to be fulfilled HSE permitting authorities are not familiar with biomass gasification Different regulations in European countries Different interpretations by different authorities
3 September 2009
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Problems

Installed plants with insufficient (no) H+S protection measures Installed plant with expensive H+S protection measure, which might not be necessary or without or with negative H+S effect Inappropriate requirements Without detailed knowledge, which HSE requirements have to be fulfilled, a reliable offer to a client is not possible
Joint effort to solve these problems since 2002

(IEA Bioenergy Gasification and ThermoNet/ThermalNet)
3 September 2009
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Objectives of the joint tasks

Improve / Create Awareness: HSE is important Establish a state of the art procedure to assess and avoid risks Harmonise and accelerate the permitting procedure Reduce objections against the use of biomass Initiate a Guideline for safe and eco-friendly Biomass Gasification Plants
3 September 2009
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Activities in 2002 HSE expert presentation at Strasbourg
Guideline is important
Questionnaire 1: What manufacturers know about Health and Safety
Result: Manufacturers have little knowledge as regards Health and Safety
3 September 2009
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Activities in 2003
Questionnaire 2: Ask Manufacturers what they need as regards HSE
Results of the questionnaire:

Most of them ask for support in HSE Support the intention to develop a guideline
3 September 2009
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Activities in 2004
Handbook of Gasification (H Knoef Editor) Sept (H. Knoef, Editor), Sept. 2005 Health, Safety and Environmental Aspects of Biomass Gasification
Austrian HSE Project started EC project proposal: Guideline f safe and j t l G id li for f d ecofriendly Biomass Gasification and Pyrolysis
Project proposal rejected
3 September 2009
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Activities in 2005 Austrian HSE project finished > important input on European level Joint HSE workshop of GasNet and IEA: Innsbruck, 28th September 2005

gaseous emissions waste water risk assessment and risk management permission procedure Proceedings available: download from websites.
3 September 2009
10
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Activities in 2006
New EC project proposal: Guideline for safe and ecofriendly Biomass Gasification, Gasification Guide
Project accepted
3 September 2009
11
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Activities in 2007 Project Guideline for safe and ecofriendly biomass Guideline gasification started Information exchange Gasification Guide - ThemalNet - IEA Biomass Gasification
Objective: Further close cooperation in HSE of ThermalNet, ThermalNet Gasification Guide and IEA Biomass Gasification.
3 September 2009
12
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Objectives
Accelerate the market introduction of small scale biomass gasifiers (< 5 MWth) by developing an accepted guideline and software tool

Remove non-technical barrier (awareness HSE hazards) Identify HSE hazards in construction and O&M Guidance to manufacturers and technology developers Dissemination to target group Simplication of procedures Propose harmonization in EU-legislation Roadmap for standardisation of the Guideline
3 September 2009
13
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Project Overview www.gasification-guide.eu
3 September 2009
14
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Workpackages and approach

WP 1 Project Management
WP 3 - Risk assessment (Safety, Health and Environment) WP 5 Dissemination and Communication WP 6 Common Dissemination
WP 4 - Case Studies and Validation
3 September 2009
European Commission
Target Group & Key Market Actors
WP 2 - Legal frame of plant permission and operation
15
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Advisory Group (20 members)

Review progress Guidance to the project j on encountered problems
Advise
Different background and expertise

Risk assessment method

Description of HSE risks Questionnaire for case studies Legislation and harmonisation issues (draft) Guideline and Software tool
3 September 2009
16
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
WP2 - Legal frame + harmonization

Legal frame - European and national layer
European & E national Legislation
Recommendations for a permission procedure
manufacturers
Environment Emissions
(exhaust gas, waste water etc.)
national/local permission
Health
Plant utilities (producer gas, condensates etc.)
permitting authorities
case studies
Safety
(Explosion, Fire etc.)
operators
3 September 2009
17
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
WP2 - Gasification and Permitting

Unknown technology: time consuming Very strict regulation (WID) Local, state, national authority = f (scale) Different interpretation Similar procedure to combustion/incineration In most cases: fuel dependent
3 September 2009
18
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
WP3 - Risk Assessment

Exhaust gas
to Chimney
Process Automation
Gas Utilization
Flare
Biomass
Agents
(air, steam etc.)
Gas Cooling
Gas Cleaning
Dusts
Gas fired Boilers Gas Engine
Heat
to District Heating
Gasifier
Heat
Int. Demand
Generator
Waste Water & Condensates
Power
to Local Grid
Condensates
Waste Water Treatment

Sludge
to Disposal
Waste Water
to Canalisation or Disposal
Ash
to Disposal
Dusts/Ash
to Disposal
3 September 2009
19
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
WP3 - Risk Assessment

Risk assessment methods (identification/selection) Hazard identification Risk assessment and reduction

Risk = severity * frequency Risk matrix: acceptable, unacceptable, ALARP
Software Tool for Risk Assessment Potential hazards in practice

Listing of possible events Listing of possible consequences
Good design practice

HSE conference, Vienna 3 September 2009 20
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
WP4 - Case Studies and Validation
Existing plants

Eqtec Biomass Eng. Xylowatt . . . .
Draft Final
Plants in preparation

Eqtec Pyroforce Gssing DTU Biomass Engineering Xylowatt Other target groups
Data collection
Guideline validation
3 September 2009
21
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
WP4: Case Studies - Results
Risk assessment has been done in all cases

Using different methods HAZOP was executed in at least 3 cases One supplier constructs explosion proof (10 bar) Leakages and mechanical failures are considered as most dangerous Most of the potential hazards are controlled by automation (PLC) All suppliers have CE mark on the installation Declaration of Conformity needed on the whole installation not needed, as long as the RA has been conducted and documented not needed The conducted Case Studies do not represent most likely the average! Discussion on BAT is useless Difference between incineration and gasification should be explained more clear

3 September 2009
22
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
WP4: Case Studies Remarkable results
Biomass gasification is a commercial activity

For
at least three entrepreneurs its their only business criteria for the discussion: what/when commercial
New
Mass production of 12 + 16 units One manufacturer employed a professional safety expert Risk Assessment is an on-going activity and will never be completed
At least two customers demanded for a complete risk assessment, assessment CE marking and proper documentation thereof.
3 September 2009
23
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
WP5 - Communication and Dissemination
Target group: manufacturers, technology and project developers, consultants, investors, permitting and legislation d l lt t i t itti d l i l ti authorities, scientists, . Networks: IEA Bioenergy Task 33, Thermalnet, national networks Website: www.gasification-guide.eu Workshops: 2 at EU level, 3 at regional level, g 1 German workshop (January 2009, Stuttgart) Promotional material (flyers) Papers at EU conferences (Berlin, Valencia, Hamburg)
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Remaining activities 2009

2nd EU conference in Vienna on 3 September 2009 Regional workshop for New Member States in Plovdiv, Bulgaria on 29 September 2009; contact [email protected] Regional workshop for Nordic States in Stockholm, Sweden on 22 October 2009; contact [email protected] Final progress meeting in Stockholm, 21 October 2009 Existence and Acceptance of the Guideline and Software Tool Final report
HSE conference, Vienna 3 September 2009
25
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Questions on the project overview
Short break
3 September 2009
26
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Presentation of the Guideline almost final version

seventy pages 90 requests for the draft version collection of feedback
3 September 2009
27
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Content

Preface with acknowledgement to those who contributed y on a voluntary bases Abbreviations and Definitions 1. Introduction 2. Technology description 3. Legal Framework for Biomass Gasification Technology 4. Theoretical Aspects of Risk Assessment 5. 5 Potential Hazards and Good Design Principles 6. Emission abatement in biomass gasification plants Annexes: checklist
3 September 2009
28
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Target Groups
Views and needs may differ: conflicting interest

Manufacturer versus plant owner End-user/manufacturer versus permitting authority
Target groups needs to know

HSE risks during BGP operation Risk reducing measures Procedures to follow and documentation to prepare Procedures to follow to get permit in compliance with legislation Are measures incorporated, documentation up-to-date
3 September 2009
29
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Technology description (Chapter 2)

Fuel supply/ storage Gasifier Gas cooling & g Gas cleaning Gasutilisation
Process Automation System exemplarily configuration c

- biomass storage - utilities storage - intermediate storage of gasification residues id - conveying technology - input units or rotary valves, vibro conveyor etc. - fixed bed gasification - fluidized bed - gasification utilities (water vapour vapour, air, additives) - gasification boundaries (pressurised, atmospheric) - cyclone - bag house - filtering - wet dedusting/ cleaning - residues treatment - etc. - gas engine - gas turbine - micro gas turbine - synthetic fuel applications - etc.
3 September 2009
30
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Technology description Reactor designs (small scale)
3 September 2009
31
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Technology description
Gas cooling

To allow gas cleaning (fabric/bag filter) To utilize in the gas in engine (increase energy density) Recommendation: recover heat by heat exchanger To meet specifications of engine supplier

Gas cleaning
Cyclone (primary de-dusting) Bag filter (fine de-dusting) Hot-gas filter (fine de-dusting) Packed bed (sand, active coal, etc.) Scrubbers (water, oil)
3 September 2009
32
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Technology description
Gas utilisation

Gas engines: commercial commodity Exhaust gas emissions due to slip (about 1%) CO and NOx reduction measures needed

Post-combustion Catalytic convertors
Automation and Control

Unmanned operation Safety S f t procedures can be implemented i control system d b i l t d in t l t

Fuel feeding Oxygen supply Cleaning of filters Air-gas ratio to the gas engine
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Producer gas properties

Parameter CO (vol %) H2 (vol %) CH4 (vol%) CO2 (vol %) N2 (vol%) Heating value MJ/Nm3 Explosion range (vol%) Air to gas ratio Producer gas 12-20 15-35 1-5 10-15 40-50 4.8-6.4 5-59 1.1-1.5 Biogas <1 <1 50-75 20-50 <1 18-26 3-14 5-7.5 Natural gas <0.5 <0.5 90-99 <1 <1 35 4.5-15 10
Explosion range: lowest and highest fraction of the combustible gas that is still flammable
3 September 2009
34
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Legal Framework for Biomass Gasification (Chapter 3 with thanks to Ulrich Seifert)
Scope and main tasks

Analyse and compare the legal framework for biomass gasification in a number of European states Give hints to manufacturers and operators of biomass gasification plants on relevant legal requirements Describe gaps or contradictions in the legal framework and make suggestions how to resolve them Assume 31/12/2007 as the reference date for regulations
3 September 2009
35
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Benchmark of legal framework

Key Results
With regard to European directives for manufacturing, there is no evidence of any problems with national implementation European directives on environmental protection and on health and safety at work (with regard to operation of plants): considerable variation in the ways of implementing these directives at national level has become apparent Key problem: various classification schemes for different aspects of HSE protection, even within a single Member State
3 September 2009
36
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
European Directives applicable to manufacturing of BGPs

Directive: Number, Scope Examples of application (BGP equipment)
73/23/EEC: Low voltage equipment [2006/95/EC] 89/336/EEC: Electromagnetic compatibility [2004/108/EC] 98/37/EC: Machinery [2006/42/EC] 94/9/EC: Equipment for use in potentially explosive atmospheres (ATEX directive) 97/23/EC: Pressure equipment
electrical instruments drives control instruments, drives, systems, generator electrical instruments, drives, control systems drives, pumps, blowers, moving mechanical parts, gas engine, fuel feeding system, ash removal system blowers, measuring devices, flame arrestors heat exchangers/boilers, compressed air system
3 September 2009
37
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Examples
Application of Directive 94/9/EC (ATEX-95) to BGPs

Contains requirements concerning equipment for use in potentially explosive atmospheres (+ protective equipment) Devices with permanent sources of ignition (e.g. gas boilers) are not in the scope of directive 94/9/EC Installations are not in the scope of directive 94/9/EC (but assemblies are
Application of Pressure Equipment Directive

Equipment that can be pressurised (> 0.5 bar g) in case of explosions only: Does the Pressure Equipment Directive (PED) apply? Suggestion from explosion experts: explosion pressure resistant equipment [druckfest] => PED equipment explosion pressure surge protected equipment [druckstofest] => no PED equipment
(such equipment may be damaged by explosion pressure surge, which requires inspection and may lead to replacement, but this damage may not pose an immediate HSE hazard)
Should be clarified between PED experts and explosion experts at European level
3 September 2009
38
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Regulations concerning construction and operation of BGPs

Occupational safety
Health and safety at work, general Substances hazardous to health Fire and explosion hazards Installations subject to monitoring Pressure equipment Electrical equipment Explosion protection Machinery
Environmental impact
Permit requirements (Integrated ll i i d l) pollution prevention and control) Major Accident Hazards Waste treatment Handling of substances constituting a hazard to water Emissions to atmosphere: gases, dust, smell Noise emission Waste production Waste water
Other Regulations
Renewable Energies / Biomass Fire safety of buildings Land use planning
3 September 2009
39
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Permit requirements for construction and operation of BGPs
Classification criteria
Type of gasifier feedstock: waste biomass or natural biomass Thermal input or output rating (thermal capacity) Electrical rating of the CHP gas engine Operation as a stand-alone unit or as part of a larger installation Gas engine type (e.g. compression ignition, spark ignition) Operating time per year (peak load or continuous operation) Properties of the plant location (e.g. industrial, commercial, agricultural, or residential area) Date of putting the plant into service
3 September 2009
40
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Permit procedures

Requirements have been collected in EU countries Procedures are country specific in terms of

Competent authorities Information to be provided in written application Application forms to be used Applicant (name, address, ) Plant location Plant desciption (flowsheet, equipment, fuel, emissions, waste) Reference to relevant regulations
Basic information in written applications include:

Consult the competent local authority at an early stage to identify the regulations that apply!
41
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Occupational safety & health: empoyers duties

prevent or minimise occupational risks provide information and training provide the necessary organization and means perform hazard identification and risk assessment draw up documents on the results, which include: - registry of hazardous substances - explosion protection document
- written company-specific operating instructions
3 September 2009
42
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Emission limit values for BGPs in Europe

In most European states, emission limit values (ELVs) specific to biomass gasification plants with gas engines have not been defined yet Denmark: ELVs for gas engine exhaust gas in biomass gasification plants (reference state: dry exhaust gas at STP, 5% O2) NOx: 550 mg/m3 UHC: 1500 mg C/m3 (valid for 30% electrical efficiency) uncombusted hydrocarbons CO: 3000 mg/m3
3 September 2009
43
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Best Available Techniques (BAT) issue

The term ("BAT) has been introduced within the IPPC Directive (96/61/EC) [integrated pollution prevention and control] Emission limit values (or equivalent parameters and technical measures) shall be based on the "best available techniques" for industrial activities listed in Annex I of the IPPC Directive Small and medium biomass gasification plants are not in the scope of the IPPC Directive (but may be in the scope of national transpositions of that directive) Emission limit values for small and medium BGPs to be based on BAT is - not required at European level, but - required at national level in some states
3 September 2009
44
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Risk Assessment (Chapter 4)
Need for complete and well-documented RA:

Health: hazards t h H lth h d to human h lth t i gases, health, toxic Safety: human, explosion hazards, fire hazards, Environment: plant emissions, toxic substances,
Risk assessment has to be done by experienced team with different expertise and background Technology description Identification of possible hazards, malfunctions/events Risk consequences and assessment Risk minimization measures
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Risk assessment procedures

Check list Dow and Mond Index Preliminary Ri k A l i P li i Risk Analysis What-If-Method Hazard and Operability Studies (HAZOP) Failure Modes Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMEA) Fault tree analysis Event tree analysis PQM-method (Prognosis-Quantification-Minimization) Fault or failure simulation for process control units MOSAR-Method (Method Organized for a Systematic Analysis of Risk) Delphi Method
46
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Systematic approach
1. 2.
Technology description and classification Risks in biomass gasification plants concerning

a) ) b) c)
health (e.g. exposure gaseous vaporized plant utilities d i normal h lth ( i d l t tiliti during l operation, emergency cases or maintenance work) safety (e.g. explosion risks, risks from electric current) environment ( e.g. emissions from biomass gasification plants in shape of gaseous, liquid or solid utilities)
3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Differentiation between event/malfunction/hazardous event and consequences (check list)!!! Assessment of the risk Counter measures to certain/uncertain risks Implementation, updating and further development of safety routines Documentation and update of documentation
3 September 2009
47
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Risk Matrix
3 September 2009
48
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Types of countermeasures

Technical countermeasures Process control countermeasures Organisational countermeasures
Implementation of Risk Assessment is a software tool p Risk Analyser (next presentation)
3 September 2009
49
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Potential hazards and good design principles (Chapter 5)
3 September 2009
50
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
As low as reasonably practicable (ALARP)
Principle 1: "HSE starts with the expectation that suitable controls must be in
place to address all significant hazards and that those controls, as a minimum, must implement authoritative good practice irrespective of situation based risk estimates".
Principle 2: "The zone between the unacceptable and broadly acceptable regions
is the tolerable region. Risks in that region are typical of the risks from activities that people are prepared to tolerate in order to secure benefits in the expectation that:

the nature and level of the risks are properly assessed and the results used properly to determine control measures; the residual risks are not unduly high and kept as low as reasonably practicable (the ALARP principle); and the risks are periodically reviewed to ensure that they still meet the ALARP criteria, for example, by ascertaining whether further or new controls need to be introduced to take into account changes over time, such as new knowledge about the risk or the availability of new techniques for reducing or eliminating risks." g y q g g
Principle 3: both the level of individual risks and the environment must be
considered when deciding whether a risk is acceptable or not, and risk at the level of individual risk also give rise to risk to the environment, which is often deciding whether a risk is acceptable or not
3 September 2009
51
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Good engineering and operation practice

A decent risk assessment is compulsory Good design practice related to:

Plant building construction (fuel storage, control rooms, escape routes, ventilation, warning signs, ) Process equipment (material choice, gas tightness, valves, electrical devices, control/safety devices, rotating parts, hot surfaces, gas flaring system, ) Operation and monitoring procedures (start-up/shutdown procedure, normal operation, emergency shutdown, )
3 September 2009
52
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Safety related issues in practice

Explosion / deflagration Fire hazards Toxic liquid escape Toxic gas escape Operator failures / neglectence
When
can it happen?
Where? What
happens?
What can be done (countermeasures)?
3 September 2009
53
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
When?

Explosion / deflagration
Explosive mixture and ignition source Explosive mixture: within certain oxygen concentrations (LEL/UEL) Ignition source: glowing particles, sparks, very hot surfaces Dust explosion in feeding section At almost every section of the plant In case of air ingress or gas escape Backfiring (flare, engine) During repairs (welding, cutting, grinding,) Mostly minor explosion (Verpffung) Max. 8 bar (lowering at increasing temperature)
Where?

What happens?

Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Explosion / deflagration
Possible reduction measures (according ATEX)
Primary measures (avoidance explosive atmosphere)

O2 sensor inside the plant CO sensor outside the plant plant, Inertise with nitrogen at start-up and shutdown Secure technical gas tightness to avoid air intake or gas escape Avoid bridging in the reactor? Proper grounding and safe electrical installation Water seal acting as flame arrestor Permit to work system in case of repairs like welding Explosion safe construction (max explosion pressure may be higher with interconnected vessels Water seal or rupture/bursting discs (not preferred)
Secondary measures (avoid ignition source)

Tertiary measures (mitigate the explosion effect)

3 September 2009
55
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Fire
When and where?

After an explosion Sparks / smoking Ash removal Self-ignition fuel storage Bad ignition of gas engine Failure of anti back-firing system May act as an ignition source Damage to installation / building Physical injury Release of toxic fumes
What happens?

56
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Fire
Possible reduction measures

Fire resistant separation of fuel storage from gasifier according local fire protection regulations (60 minutes) Fire extinguishing system (Sprinkler, manual fire extinguisher) Anti backfiring system on gasifier (valve, double sluice) Anti backfiring on air inlet to the engine Spraying removed ashes Monitoring temperature wood storage pile M it i t t d t il Ample ventilation Fire response plan
3 September 2009
57
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Toxic liquid escape

When?
Leakages / maintenance in gas cooling section and storage tanks Wet scrubber / condensing heat exchanger Physical contact may lead to injury, suffocation, irritation, Liquid may evaporise with risk of inhalation Environmental pollution Wearing protective gloves, glasses, shoes Storage in containers Ample ventilation
Where?
What happens?

Possible measures

Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
When?

Toxic gas escape
Leakages of gas or liquids Maintenance Overpressure Exhaust gas CO poisoning, irritation, danger of suffocation Some PAH are carcinogenic Protective measures: portable and online CO monitor Gastight construction Ample ventilation
Where?

What happens?

Possible measures

Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Operator failures

Unauthorised re-programming or re-arrange the alarm se gs Set-points us settings. Se po s must be reset ese Safety-related changes to the process control system must be performed by trained trained personnel only and documented properly Operational procedures should be in place, which indicates whether the plant should be operated by only one or two operators or maybe unmanned operators,
3 September 2009
60
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Norms and Standards
BGPs must be apporved for the design, construction and pp g , safe operation by the local fire department and permitting authority Norm for gas tightness

Norms applied in chemical industry may be applicable to BGPs Standards for gas tightness that might be applicable are listed in a Table in the Guideline document Guidance on explosion protection measures are listed in a Table in the Guideline document
3 September 2009
61
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Documentation
Operation and Maintenance Manual

To be supplied by the manufacturer To be kept updated by operator in case of modifications
Emergency procedures Accident register Training manual Log book Design book Permits (building, environment, CE marking, )
3 September 2009
62
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Emission abatement techniques
Fuel storage, pretreatment transport feeding storage pretreatment, transport,

Store only dry biomass Enclosed conveying systems Good housekeeping Gas tight Double sluice lock hoppers Flaring system Prevent self-ignition of ashes
Gasification reactor

3 September 2009
63
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Emission abatement techniques
Gas cooling and gas cleaning

Recycling of hydrocarbons (tar) Use activated carbon before discharge to sewage system Off-site controlled treatment Use silencers and sound-absorbing walls Catalytic convertors Post combustion
Gas engine and exhaust gas cleaning

3 September 2009
64
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Emission limit values

Do emission limit values establised for other gases like biogas reflect the best currently avaliable techniques for emission reduction in gas engines using producer gas from BGPs?
Producer gas contains high volume percentage of CO Emission limits based on BAT for CO-free fuel gas may not be applicable to BGPs Recommendation: determine appropriate emission limits for smallscale BGPs from continued experience with plants in operation and from measurements performed at these plants; only very limited emission values have been measured in practice
3 September 2009
65
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078

Specific emission limit values for gas engines using producer gas are established in Denmark only. In Germany some agreement is reached on emission limits by licensing authorities. One requirement is 1 mg/m3 for benzene, which is considered as problematic for gas engines operating on producer gas
3 September 2009
66
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Regulation in the Netherlands

White list fuels: clean fuels, meet the definition of biomass (2001/80/EG) Yellow list fuels: waste fuels Different emission regime fuels from the yellow list can be gasified p y g producing a g g gaseous fuel which is clean and part of the white list Clean gas from waste wood more favorable emission regime
VROM circular (2 October 2006):

3 September 2009
67
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078

Good news from US EPA EPA proposes to classify gasifiers as:

Fuel manufacturing facility Safer, more efficient & distinguished from incinerators
Even hazardous waste are considered fuel feedstock and not solid waste Gasification G ifi ti promotes the production of a Marketable t th d ti f M k t bl fuels and chemicals from materials that otherwise destined for waste treatment, disposal or a less benign recycling activity
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Harmonization of legal framework
New definition of activity 1.4 in Annex I of the 14 proposed new IPPC Directive

Current definition: coal gasification and liquefaction plants New definition: gasification or liquefaction of fuels
Suggestion: Provide an indication to the European Commission about the unwanted side sideeffect of the new definition and include the suggestion to add a threshold value to this activity
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Checklist
3 September 2009
70
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Feedback

Benz(a)pyrene and dust are not problematic, only benzene, even y y after oxy-catalyst Benzene levels led environmental authorities to force the close down of 2 plants in Germany You need a driving license to drive your car! What is a safe shutdown procedure? Should the plant be equipped with explosion relief panels? One potential hazard can lead to more consequences in parallel and/or sequential All 90 contacts who requested the draft Guideline will be asked to give feedback
71
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Feedback
Luis Sanchez, EQTEC, ES manufacturer positive feedback on technical contents of Gasification Guide Movialsa plant: commissioning of Jenbacher CHP engines is underway update on p p plant operation p p parameters no problems with emission limit values so far (producer gas is co-fired in heavy oil engines with 2,000 mg/m3 NOx limit)
3 September 2009
72
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Feedback
Des Mitchell, O-GEN UK operator consultant authority advisor operator, consultant, O-GEN: timber resource recovery centres gasification of used timber (= "waste" according to WID) 3.6 MW electricity, 72 t/d wood gasifier + IC engines fulfil WID requirements O-GEN expect to set new standards for BGPs using waste wood in terms of BAT and BPEO ("best practicable environmental option")
73
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Feedback
Legal situation for gasification of used wood in the UK E European C t d i i on L hti l Court decision Lahti legal case (D l (Dec. 2008) 2008): a) purified syngas from waste can be a product b) the waste gasifier is regarded as a waste incinerator c) WID does not apply to combustion of purified syngas from waste UK Environmental Agency does not accept this decision if an operator cannot guarantee that each single piece of wood will fulfil "biomass" specs, the BGP will be deemed a waste incineration facility (in the UK)
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Feedback
Anja Nowack, Federal Environmental Agency (UBA), D authority (advising) compilation of state-of-the-art (BAT) for CHP engines is underway, including BGP gas engines (Mueller-BBM) project results expected in Aug./Nov. 2009 apart from benzene, no other major concern components in p , j p exhaust gas have emerged so far benzene target value of 1 mg/m3 appears to be a challenge for BGPs
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Feedback
Anja Nowack, Federal Environmental Agency (UBA), D UBA urges to re-introduce permit requirements for small BGPs while novel renewable energy technologies receive a bonus in terms of feed-in tariffs in Germany, there should be no "emission bonus" according to UBA
3 September 2009
76
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Involving permitting authorities

Important to obtain approval of the Guideline Permitting authorities are mostly interested in safety HSL has been successful in establishing contact with UK authorities; they will provide feedback HSL has started to establish contact with Stazione sperimentale per i Combustibili (Italy) Project partners will establish contacts with authorities within their country
3 September 2009
77
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Benzene problem, limit in Germany = 1 mg/m3

Hersteller Messinstitut Vergasungsverfahren Gasreinigung Benzol im Holzgas Motorabgas O2 CO NOx GesamtC NMHC Formaldehyd Benzol BaP Staub Nach Kat: CO NOx [g/m] Gesamt C NMHC Formaldehyd Benzol BaP Staub XXX LfU Gleichstrom Nass M1 11 0,47 0 47 0,67 2 6-9 <1 2 XXX TV Sd Gleichstrom Nass 3,5 35 M2 11 0,18 0 18 0,68 1 5 <1 2 XXX LfU Gleichstrom Trocken XXX MllerBBM Gleichstrom Trocken 2,6 26 XXX MllerBBM Gleichstrom Trocken + Nass M2 6,4 12,1 1,5 3,2 0,09 47 12 - 34 < 20 1 M1 3,4 0,76 0,23 11 2,5 < 20 1 XXX TV Gleichstrom Trocken XXX MllerBBM Wirbelschicht Nass 1,5 15
[g/m]
[%] [g/m] [g/m] [mg/m] [mg/m] [mg/m] [g/m] [mg/m] [g/m] [g/m] [mg/m] [mg/m] [mg/m] [g/m] [mg/m]
7,5 3,5 0,38 0,44 0 44 0,38 426 0,1 8 12 <1 4
0,7 1,2 2,7 46 20 -
2,5 1,8 151 22 <1 0,16 0 16 0,63 31 0 4,7 <1 -
5,2 0,53 0 53 0,30 20 -
8,0 4,2 0,32 96 2 - 15 10 - 20 1 -
3 September 2009
78
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Guideline is available at www.gasification-guide.eu

English, German and French version will become available
3 September 2009
79
Gasification-Guide
EIE-06-078
Thank you for your attention

We are looking forward to welcome you at the regional workshops in Plovdiv on 29 September p Stockholm on 21 October
3 September 2009
80
Software Tool - Risk Analyzer
International Conference on Polygeneration Strategies GASIFICATION GUIDE

3. September, Vienna, Austria
Martin Hauth Institute of Thermal Engineering
Institut fr Wrmetechnik
Univ.-Prof. Dr.-Ing. Jrgen Karl Institut fr Wrmetechnik, Inffeldgasse 25B A-8010 Graz, Austria, www.iwt.tugraz.at
Outlook
Methodology of the Risk Analyzer Structural Approach of the Software Tool Risk Assessment Reporting and Documentation Illustration of using the Software Tool
Martin Hauth
Vienna, September 3rd
ICPS 2009 2
Motivation
Detailed Risk Assessment of Biomass Gasification Plants is a big challenge for small and medium enterprises Complexity => Barrier to market introduction Software Tool provides helpful and structured approach for risk assessment Software Tool as a supporting Guideline for Risk Assessment in companies
Martin Hauth
ICPS 2009 3
Preparation Analysis & System Description

Plant
Technology description and Classification Description of the actual plant state (existing plants) Description of p p plant utilities
Ambience
Abutting owner (private person, industry, etc.) Infrastructure Meteorological and geographical basic data
Risk Identification and Occurrence Probability

Check list, What-if-Method, Dow and Mond Index Hazard and Operability Studies HAZOP Failure Modes Effects and Criticality Analysis Delphi Method, MOSAR Method
Consequence Analysis
Effects Propagation Effect assessment .. on people, animals, the environment, the plant side, ..
Risk Assessment Risk Matrix

Risk = f ( Effects or Consequences, Occurrence probability or frequency)
Risk Minimization Measures

Weak spot elimination, Gradual reduction of possible hazards, Consequence limitation, Package of technical and organisational measures Martin Hauth Vienna, September 3rd ICPS 2009 4
Function based indentification of Hazards Function

Process
1. Hazards and Consequences? - E g : Pressure drop too high? E.g.: Analysis of the considered function and the involved parts/units/functions - Selection of a possible consequence (e.g. blockage) or creation of a new consequence - Application of the risk matrix 2. Is the resulting risk .. acceptable/ALARP or not? next event countermeasure
Event List
Pressure drop too high
Consequence List
Blockage
Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 Part .
Risk Matrix
Martin Hauth
ICPS 2009 5
Hazard Identification - Events/Consequences List Events Consequences E plosion Explosion L k Leakages Fire Gas escapes Danger from electricity Air intake Poisoning Leakages steam system Danger to health Leakages in water caring system etc etc. temp out of normal operation areas temp. pressure fluctuations etc. a list of events and consequences are provided within the guideline and are implemented in the software tool. tool.
Martin Hauth Vienna, September 3rd ICPS 2009 6
Approach during the use of the Software Tool

Step 1
Definition of the basic data of the plant
Step 2
Definition of the process units
Step 3
Definition of the functions of the process units
Step 4
Definition of the parts of the functions
Step 5
Definition of the plant utilities
Step 6
RISK ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE
Events / malfunctions
Consequences
additional to predefined events/consequ.

Martin Hauth Vienna, September 3rd ICPS 2009 7
Martin Hauth
ICPS 2009 8
Auditability of set Countermeasures during the Risk Assessment

Preventive measures (in advance of consequ.) -> lowers frequency Mitigation measures (due to consequence) -> lowers severity technical (e.g. CO-sensor) (e g CO sensor) organisational (e.g. manual) constructive Process and Control System (e.g. additional temperature sensor)
Martin Hauth
ICPS 2009 9
Definition of the Frequency and Severity of a hazardous event

Example: Frequency
Notation probable b bl mprobable unlikely very unlikely
Frequency
Systematic > 1 / year 1x 10-2 to 1x / year 10-4 to 10-2 x / year 10-6 to 10-4 x / year < 10-6 x / year
Definition can be chosen by oneself Risk Assessment expert is adventageous
Severity
Category Human beings Environment minor light injury olfactory pollution, elevated emissions (short time)
extremely unlikely
Consequences
significant injury long lasting olfactory pollution, slightly increased emissions severe severe injury emission of toxic substances of little amounts major disablement, death emission of toxic substances of amounts critical plant damage concerning the whole plant or plat sectoins, standstill of plant catastrophic death emission of toxic substances of huge amounts enormous plant dextruction /damage concerning the whole plant
no plant shut down, Property/ goods online reparation possible, little costs
Martin Hauth
plant damage, cold plant stop. Warm start start necessary, possible, standstill of standstill of the plant 1 the plant < 2 days to 3 weeks rd
Vienna, September 3
ICPS 2009 10
Documentation and Reporting

Report of total risk assessment is automatically generated. (PDF file) Documentation to be used during licensing procedure.
Martin Hauth
ICPS 2009 11
Illustration Approach during risk assessement
1. General Plant Data 2. Structuring into Process Units 3. Definition of Functions within the Process Units incl. description of the Operating Modes 4. Definition of the involved Parts within a Function incl. description of the Process Parameter 5. Risk Assessment and setting of Countermeasures 6. Reporting
Martin Hauth
ICPS 2009 12
1. General Plant Data

Plant manufacturer: Address, manuf. Plant operator: Address, operator Performance Data: Pth, Pel,.
Martin Hauth
ICPS 2009 13
2. Structuring into Process Units

Process Units: Storage, auxiliary Aggregates, Flare, electr. Switchboard, Reactor, Screw Conveyor, Filter, .
Martin Hauth
ICPS 2009 14
3. Definition of the Functions within the Process Units

Unit Filter: Purge Filter Material, Ash Removal, Gas Cooling, .
Operating Modes: Normal Mode Start-Up Sh t Do n Shut-Down Emergency Stop
Martin Hauth
ICPS 2009 15
4. Definition of the involved Parts within a Function

Function Purge Filter Material: Drive, CO-Sensor, Pressure Cylinder, Gland Nut for Filter
Process Parameters of Function: Stroke Di t St k Distance, P Pressure, Oil Content, Pressurized Air
Martin Hauth
ICPS 2009 16
5a. Risk Assessment within a Function
Hazards
Consequ.
Risk Assessment
Frequency x Severity = Risk
Martin Hauth
ICPS 2009 17
5b. Setting Countermeasures

Original Risk before setting Countermeasures
Risk after setting Countermeasures
Risk Matrix with the stepwise illustration of the risk minimization
Martin Hauth
ICPS 2009 18
6. Reporting
Assessed Hazard Original Risk Countermeasure New Risk Final Risk
Martin Hauth
ICPS 2009 19
Software Tool - Summary

Software Tool free for download under: www.gasification-guide.eu Software Tool provides structural approach for a systematic segmentation of the p pp y g plant in: Units/Functions/Parts Stepwise selection and assessment of the potential hazards and consequences Definition of the risk by the means of severity and frequency of the consequence (Estimation has to be done by oneself!) Placing countermeasures for risk reduction (Loop) Printing of a report to document the approach of the risk assessment Database already provides an extensive list of possible hazards and consequences Database can be extended constantly and freely by the user
Thank you very much for your attention

Vienna, September 3rd ICPS 2009 20
Martin Hauth
10
Publications Annex 0.3 - Book of abstract (covering the whole conference)
September
lIs _4
t
th
12009
I II
09
International Conference on
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
www.icps09.org
Sponsors
VIENNA REGION Der beste Sitz fr Unternehmen. www.viennaregion.at
Foreword
Introduction to the ICPS09 It is generally agreed that biomass will contribute essentially to a future sustainable energy system worldwide. Furthermore, biomass gasification will be a key technology for such an energy system. By conversion of solid biomass into a producer gas heat and electricity can be generated efficiently. In former years combined heat and power (CHP) production was the main focus of R&D&D and also main topic of several conferences. Nowadays, CHP on gasification can be considered as commercial available technology although the number of plants in operation is still low. However, there are several plants with a lot of experience and more than 50.000 hours of successful operation. In recent years things have changed. In all steps of the process chain e.g. gas production, gas cleaning and gas utilization enormous progress have been achieved. Furthermore, besides heat and power generation the production synthetic biofuels gain more and more interest in research as well as for industrial applications. Polygeneration is now the key word for future efficient and sustainable biomass utilization. Polygeneration in this sense means the production of at least three different products e.g. heat, electricity and biofuels. Polygeneration based on thermochemical biomass conversion can also be characterized as one type of a biorefinery, a so-called syngas platform based biorefinery. The main aim of ICPS09 is to present and review the current state-of-the-art of syngas production, syngas cleaning and syngas utilization. Life cycle analysis, simulation and techno economic studies are further integrated parts of the conference. Numerous abstracts to all these topics from all parts of the world were presented to the conference organizers which show the necessity and importance of this conference. To keep up the focus, unfortunately not all abstracts could be accepted as some where not within the general idea and guideline of the conference. This book contains a collection of the abstracts accepted for the ICPS09 conference in Vienna. The abstracts are classified according to the above mentioned topics which where already announced in the call for papers. For all these topics a sufficient number papers have been offered and some of them were selected for oral presentation. Almost all important developments currently under way in the field of polygeneration are included in the programme and are part of the oral or visual presentations. In this sense the main aim of the conference could be fulfilled, namely, to present the current state-of-the-art of polygeneration technologies and to stimulate discussion and information exchange and to contribute to a further development of polygeneration strategies. Moreover it is a pleasure and honour for me to, beside of the explained scientific focus of this conference, grant for true Austrian hospitality in these days, which I hope you will enjoy during the st International Confernce on PolygenerationtStrategies. Vienna, September 009
Hermann Hofbauer Chairman of the Conference
Committees
Scientific Committee
Hermann Hofbauer Martin Kaltschmitt Johan Einar Hustad Pier Ugo Foscolo Samuel Stucki
Vienna University of Technology, Austria Deutsches Biomasse Forschungszentrum, Germany Norges teknisk - naturvitenskapelige universite (NTNU), Norway Universita degli Studi dellAquila, Italy Paul Scherrer Institut, Switzerland
Local Organizing Committee
Michael Fuchs Alexey Kopchinskiy Christoph Pfeifer Reinhard Rauch Tobias Prll
Vienna University of Technology, Austria Vienna University of Technology, Austria Vienna University of Technology, Austria Vienna University of Technology, Austria Vienna University of Technology, Austria
Conference Support and Registry
Helga Eismair Karin Ackerl Christine Wukovits
Austropa Interconvention Austropa Interconvention Vienna University of Technology, Austria
Content
I Gas production 6
II
Gas cleaning
14
III
Gas Utilization
23
IV
Life Cycle Analysis, Simulation and Techno Economic Studies
32
Small and Middle Scale Gasifiers From Experiment to Practice
41
VI
Poster presentations
47
VII
Gasification Guide - On the way to safe and ecofriendly biomass gasification
92
VIII
Index of Authors
99
IX
Imprint
104
Gas Production
Io2 THE NEW CHALMERS RESEARCH-GASIFIER Seemann M C, Thunman H Department of Energy conversion, Chalmers University of Technology, Gteborg, Sweden During summer 00 a - MWth indirect gasification section was integrated into the loop of the existing 8- MWth circulating fluidized bed boiler at Chalmers University. With help of a particle distributor the gasification unit is connected to the loop after the cyclone. Hot bed material entrained from the boiler is so transferred to the gasifier providing the heat for the production of a nearly nitrogen free product gas. The non gasified char is recycled together with the bed material into the boiler and converted. Biomass can be fed into both sections; the boiler and the gasifier. The gasification is separated from the boiler via two loop seals. By means of the particle distributor, directing particles either back to the boiler or into the gasification section, the operation mode of the CFB installation can be changed anytime during full operation from only combustion to combined combustion/gasification mode. Due to that design the investment costs are considerably lower than for standalone gasification units of that size. This retrofit is an easy way to extend the potential of a CFB Boiler towards bi- and tri generation (heat, power, fuel). The Chalmers gasifier is designated to research and therefore equipped with a multitude of sampling ports spread out over the front of the reactor. By means of different probes, sampling of gas and bed material is possible to acquire information about the progressing fuel-conversion. The first two experimental seasons (winter 0/08 and winter 08/09) proved stable operation of both the boiler and the gasification. Furthermore tests with different feedstock, wood pellets, woodchips and bark were performed. Analysis of the producer gas composition shows high contents of methane, making the kind of installation a good match for power or substitute natural gas production.
Io3 PRESSURISEd ENTRAINEd FLOW GASIFICATION OF SLURRIES FROM BIOMASS Stahl R, Henrich E, Raffelt K Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Institut fr Technische Chemie, CPV
The European Union intends to increase its biomass contributions in the energy mix up to several percent until the year 00. To reach this goal the energy potential of the abundant lignocellulosic biomass residues from agriculture must be used covering about 0% of the European primary consumption. Mainly the production of chemicals and fuels provides to be much more effective than combustion. All fast growing biomass like straw and strawlike biofuels contains high ash, alkalis and chlorine however. The technology for its efficient energetical use is therefore difficult and not well developed. The bioliq process a new two stage pyrolysis/gasification concept has been developed in Germany at the Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe: In the first step biomass is liquefied by fast pyrolysis which produces a condensable pyrolysis oil and pyrolysis char as well as small amounts of gas. The pulverised pyrolysis char and the oil are mixed. In the second step the resulting slurry is transported from several small pyrolysis plants to a large central high pressurised entrained flow gasifier. There the slurry is used for the production of raw syngas. After gas cleaning the generated synthesis gas can be used for catalysed synthesis of chemicals or liquid fuels. Four experimental campaigns in the pressurised entrained flow pilot gasifier at Future Energy, Freiberg (formerly Noell company, today Siemens company), proved the feasibility on a reliably large MW(th) scale. The gasifier, fitted with a special inner cooling screen in a pressure resistant steel shell allows the gasification of different feedstocks with a large and fluctuating ash content and composition expected in the large spectrum of herbaceous biomass species. Compared to direct bio-oil combustion in diesel engines or turbines, the purity requirements for the gasification of bio-oil-slurry are very low. Several pyrolysis oils and char from beechwood pyrolysis for commercial charcoal production and intermediate pyrolysis of straw have been used for slurry preparation. Beechwood tar with a room temperature viscosity of 0. Pas, had a density of 8 kg/m and a LHV of 9 MJ/kg. Charcoal was pulverised into different sizes between 0 and 00 um and had a LHV MJ/kg. Stable slurries with different weight percents of charcoal dust have been prepared by mechanical mixing, without any stabiliser. To simulate the ash melting behaviour of straw slag, % straw ash and 0.% KCl have been added. Slurry properties have been as follows: room temperature viscosity 5 Pas, density 50+ kg/m, LHV MJ/kg. A slurry stream of ~0. 0, t/h was transferred with a screw pump into the gasifier chamber at 5 bar and pneumatically atomised with pure oxygen in a special nozzle. With an O2-stoichiometry of = 0.4 to 0.5, gasification temperatures of 00 00C and more than 99% carbon conversion have been attained. A molten slag layer drains down on the inner screen walls and protects the SiC-liner from corrosion. A suitable slag viscosity is adjusted with the O-flow (temperature) and if desirable suitable inorganic additives in the feed to modify the slag composition. As the hot pressurised syngas is tar-free expensive efforts for tar removal or syngas compression can be avoided. The measured raw syngas composition indicate an approximate equilibration for the homogeneous shift reaction CO + HO D CO + H, as expected. Crude material and energy balances have been derived from the known feed composition The process concept and the results of the experimental gasification campaigns will be given in detail.
Io4 INFLUENCE OF OPERATING CONdITIONS ON GAS COMPOSITION, SOOT ANd TAR IN ENTRAINEd FLOW GASIFICATION OF BIOMASS Ke Q, Weigang L, Peter A J, Anker d J Department of Chemical and Biochemical Engineering, Technical University of Denmark
Gasification is one of the key technologies for utilization of biomass, especially in the field of integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) and production of liquid fuels and chemicals. In production of synthetic liquid fuels for transportation from biomass, one of the key problems to be solved is to control the syngas quality from gasification with respect to both the H/CO ratio and the harmful impurities. Entrained flow gasifier has the advantage of high gasification efficiency with the possibility to run at high pressure, which fits the pressure in the downstream synthesis process. Although gasification of coal in entrained flow gasifiers been studied extensively, systematic studies on gasification of biomass in entrained flow gasifier are scarce. In addition the mechanisms during biomass gasification at temperatures relevant to the entrained flow gasifier are not fully understood. In this work, gasification of biomass in a laboratory scale entrained flow reactor is presented, with a focus on the influence of the operating parameters, such as temperature, air ratio and steam to carbon ratio, on the gas composition, soot and tar in the producer gas. The entrained flow reactor has an inner diameter of 0.08 m and a length of m. The reactor is externally heated by seven independent electric heating elements, with which a uniform temperature in the reactor can be realized and, the influence of temperature and air ratio on the composition of the syngas can be studied independently. Two typical bio-fuels (wood and straw) have been used in the study. The influence of air ratio, temperature and steam to carbon ratio is investigated. In the experimental study, the air ratio varied from 0. to 0., and a temperature in the range from 000 to 50C was used. The results show that the amount of producer gas increases with an increase in temperature at a fixed value of air ratio, for example, from 0.98 Nm/ (kg fuel) at 000 C to .5 Nm/ (kg fuel) at 50C, at an air ratio of 0.5. The amount of carbon monoxide and hydrogen increases at higher temperature. At a fixed temperature, the amount of carbon monoxide and hydrogen decreases with an increase of air ratio, for example, at 50C the hydrogen yield decreases from mole/(kg fuel) at air ratio of 0. to 8 mole/(kg fuel) at an air ratio of 0.5. It was found that the tar content in the syngas is very low at a temperature of 50C (<0.mg/ m) at an air ratio of 0.5. However, significant soot was produced at this temperature (0 g/ (kg fuel)). This trade off between tar and soot may result partly from soot formation by tar polymerization at high temperatures. With addition of steam, the hydrogen to carbon monoxide ratio increases as a result of the water shift reaction. The soot production can be reduced by addition of steam, but could not be eliminated in the present experiments with a maximum temperature of 50C. Moreover, it appears that the applied type of biomass (straw and wood) has little influence on the composition of the syngas. A good carbon mass balance closure is achieved from all conducted experiments.
Io5 STUdy OF PRESSURE EFFECT IN STEAM GASIFICATION OF BIOMASS RAVEL S, VALIN S, dEFOORT d, GUILLAUdEAU J CEA DEN/DTN/SE2T/LPTM - 17, rue des Martyrs 38054 GRENOBLE (France) In the scope of the production of SNG (Synthetic Natural Gas) from biomass, it could be interesting to gasify biomass at high pressure. Thermodynamical calculations predict an increase of CH production in the synthetic gas. The High Temperature Fluidized Bed facility implemented in CEA Grenoble (France) is able to perform tests at high pressure (up to 0 bars). Several tests at 800C and different pressures from atmospheric pressure to 0 bars were performed with a continuous wood sawdust feeding of several kg/h. Percentage of steam in fluidization gas, steam/biomass ratio and fluidization velocity were kept constant for all tests. So, the effect of pressure during steam gasification was isolated from other relevant parameters influencing gasification. Gas, tars and char generated by the steam gasification were quantified and analysed. Mass balance and carbon conversion rate were calculated
0
Io6 THE dEVELOPMENT ANd OPERATION OF A 100KW dUAL FLUIdISEd BEd BIOMASS GASIFIER FOR PROdUCTION OF HIGH QUALITy PROdUCER GAS Bull d R, Gilmour I A, Williamson C, Pang S Chemical and Process Engineering Department, University of Canterbury, New Zealand Abstract for International Conference on Polygeneration Strategies 009. The Development and Operation of a 00kW Dual Fluidised Bed Biomass Gasifier for Production of High Quality Producer Gas By Douglas Bull, Ian Gilmour, Chris Williamson, Shusheng Pang Department of Chemical and Process Engineering, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand. The production of high quality producer gas from a dual fluidised bed (DFB) gasifier fuelled with radiata pine wood pellets has been studied over the past four years at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand. Research has focused on the operational performance and commercialisation potential of advanced DFB gasification systems for New Zealand industrial settings. Significant progress has been made towards stable and reliable gasifier operation, as well as the collection of extensive experimental data to benchmark the systems performance regarding yield, composition, tar levels and water vapour content of the producer gas.

Io7 GASIFICATION CHARACTERISTICS OF BIOMASS/COAL BLENd IN A dUAL CIRCULATING FLUIdIzEd BEd REACTOR Seo M W 1, Goo J H 1, Kim S d 1, Lee S H 2, Choi y C 2 Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Energy and Environmental Research Center, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), 373-1, Guseong-dong, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 305-701 1 Thermal Process Research Center, Korea Institute of Energy Research, 71-2 Jang-dong, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-343, Republic of Korea 2 A dual circulating fluidized bed reactor (riser: 0.0 m 0. m .5 m- high; gasifier: 0.0 m 0.85 m . m-high) was designed and constructed for gasification of biomass/coal blend. In a dual circulating fluidized bed reactor, the energy generated from combustion of fuel in the riser is transferred by circulating the bed material as heat carriers to endothermic steam gasification reaction in a gasifier.
In this study, the effects of reaction temperature (50900 ), steam/(biomass or coal) ratio (0.0.8) and biomass/blend ratio (0, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5, ) on the gasification characteristics have been determined. Indonesian tinto sub-bituminous coal and Quercus acutissima sawdust were used as coal and biomass materials, respectively. The compositions of the product gas from the steam gasification are H (coal: ..%, biomass: 8..%, blend: 0. .5%), CO (coal: 5.8.%, biomass: ..%, blend: .5.%), CH (coal: 5.08.0%, biomass: ..%, blend: 0.8.5) and CO (coal: 8..5%, biomass: .5.9%, blend: ..%). The product gas yields increase with increasing biomass/ blend ratio, carbon conversion and cold gas efficiency of biomass are higher than that of coal. The maximum product gas yields were obtained at the biomass/blend ratio of 0.5 and 0.5. The calorific values of the product gas are 9.9. MJ/m for the coal, .0.9 MJ/m for the biomass and .. MJ/m for the blend of coal and sawdust. Since combustion and gasification reactions take place in a separate fluidized bed reactor, the product gas has the medium calorific value gas without nitrogen dilution.

Io8 STOICHIOMETRy AdJUSTMENT OF BIOMASS STEAM GASIFICATION IN dFB PROCESS By IN SITU CO2 ABSORPTION Marquard-Mllenstedt T, zuberbhler U, Specht M, Pfeifer C, Rauch R, Hofbauer H, Koch M ZSW, Zentrum fr Sonnenenergie- und Wasserstoff-Forschung, Baden-Wrttemberg, Industriestr. 6, D-70565 Stuttgart 1 Vienna University of Technology, Getreidemarkt 9/166, A-1060 Vienna 2 BKG, Biomasse Kraftwerk Gssing, Europastr. 8, A-7540 Gssing 3 The steam gasification of solid biomass by means of the absorption enhanced reforming (AER) process yields a high quality product gas with an increased H concentration and a reduced content of CO, CO, and tars. On the basis of allothermal steam gasification in a dual fluidised bed reactor, the biomass conversion reactions are coupled with in situ CO removal by using a CaO-containing sorbent bed material. This bed material takes-up CO in the gasification zone and is regenerated in a second fluidised bed reactor by calcination of the formed CaCO. The product gas is suitable for a wide range of applications, which covers combined heat and power (CHP) production as well as the generation of liquid or gaseous fuels (e.g., substitute natural gas (SNG), H).

II
Gas Cleaning

IIo1 COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF POLyGENERATION STRATEGIES Hansen J B, Hjlund-Nielsen P E Haldor Topse A/S The Topsoe Group has for several decades developed catalysts and technologies applicable for polygeneration based on biomass. Amongst the most pertinent ones can be mentioned: Tar Reforming Ammonia Decomposition Shift (Sour as well as sweet) Desulfurisation Methanol DME Synthetic Gasoline Synthetic natural Gas
Topsoe Fuel Cell A/S is developing SOFC technology, which is uniquely suited for polygeneration schemes. The paper will provide a comparative assesment with respect to efficiency, synergies and adaptibility to different gasifier types and feedstocks.
5
IIo2 POX STEAM REFORMING IN A PLASMA-ASSISTEd GLIdARC REFORMER Owrang F 1, Guitard F 1, Rafiq H 1, Hustad J 1, Grnli M 1, Czernichowski A 2, Olsson J 3, Pedersen J 3 Department of Energy and Process Engineering, NTNU 1 ECP, France 2 Arealia AB, Sweden 3 Small and medium sized reformers are frequently used for converting propane (the main LPG product) to syngas for a wide range of applications. The cost, optimal operation and especially the stability of these reformers are the most important factors. In this study, a relatively cheap small scale catalytic reformer the so called GlidArc based on high-voltage discharges, has been used for conversion of propane to syngas. The maximum energy produced in this reformer is 5 kW corresponding to the lower heating value (LHV) of the syngas produced. The aim is to experimentally study the effect of steam on stability, conversion and product selectivity of this reformer. Normally in the steam reformers, the steam is pre-generated in a steam generator before injection into the reaction zone. In this study, the steam is generated by the waste heat produced from the reformer. The gliding arc formed between two high-voltage diverging electrodes (knives) is powered by a single-phase transformer. The discharges form at the closest points of the electrodes with a very short contact time, spread by gliding along the edges of the electrodes. The arc disappears then at the end of the knives. Other discharges immediately reform at the initial spots. The high-voltage (0kV, 0.A) self-maintained discharges strike directly across the propane, air and steam flow. The electrodes are not cooled so that all the electrical energy is directly and totally transferred to the processed gas. The syngas produced was immediately flared. The GlidArc has a double mantle structure. The inner ceramic cylinder contains a special Ni-based catalyst surrounded by the outer mantel. The liquid water at room temperature has been injected into the space between the two mantles. The water is then evaporated by absorbing the internal heat produced from the exothermic reactions in the reformer. The experimental results show the syngas quality depending on temperature, mass flow of propane and steam. Detailed mass and energy balance has been performed. The temperature and the input electrical power have been kept constant during the experiment. The effect of steam injection on the optimal air/propane vs. energy power input and the amount and selectivity of syngas produced has been calculated.

IIo3 HIGH TEMPERATURE GAS TREATMENT FOR THE OPERATION OF A SOLId OXIdE FUEL CELL (SOFC) Martini S, Kleinhappl M, Hofbauer H Bioenergy 2020+ GmbH, Area II Biomass Gasification Inffeldgasse 21b; A-8010 GRAZ Steam gasification of biomass delivers product gas of high hydrogen content and high volumetric energy density because of low nitrogen fraction. Together with carbon monoxide and methane this gas is expected to be an almost perfect fuel for high-temperature-fuel cells, such as SOFC (Solid Oxide Fuel Cell). By the conversion of these fuel components the fuel cell technology can be a future perspective technology for energetic conversion of product gas. High overall efficiencies combined with extremely low emissions can be expected. In a running project Bioenergy 00+ (former Austrian Bioenenergy Centre) is doing R&D since 00. The fundamentals of high temperature gas cleaning and micro scale operation of SOFCReactor units are investigated under real conditions. For successful operation of SOFC-units the characteristics of the (fuel-) product gas and the operational behaviour of the fuel cell unit should be brought together. In detail this means, that the quality of the product gas after clean up and the handling of the fuel cell application are in focus. This paper shows the high temperature gas treatment, including hot gas filtration and desulphurisation including quality analytics, demonstrated at the Gssing Biomass Gasification Plant with a side stream (5 m/h, usc). The most relevant impurities of the gas, such as dust, tars and sulphur derivates, can reduce the capacity of the fuel cells or even damage the cells (=clean gas consumer technology). To remove these impurities from the gas the cleaning unit consists of two process units, the hot gas filtration and the adsorption. The filtration is realised with filter candles, which can be cleaned alternately during the operation. By the filtration particulate matter (containing coarse ash, fractions of fly coke and soot) are precipitated out of the reductive acting product gas at temperatures of 00 to 800 C. Successful operation was demonstrated under test conditions of 5 to 0 g/m dust load from the crude gas (usual conditions of fluidised bed gasification). The residual dust load after one continuous operating filtration stage was reduced below 5 mg/m. Back flushing with nitrogen shows successful operation of the GST-filter candles, in the tests different operational parameters are investigated. The separation of the initial dust load and also the final clean up before the cell unit is important for successful long term operation (see below attrition from adsorption materials). Without additional cooling in the adsorption column hydrogen sulphide and organic sulphur compounds are treated at temperatures up to 00 C. Actually running test series are showing the behaviour (capacity, ability of regeneration) of different adsorbent materials, such as different modifications of zinc oxide, under real conditions.

In the column also combinations of adsorbent materials and staged precipitation are optional. The quality and effectiveness of this treatment is shown in concentration levels of the different sulphur components and the absolute capacity of the adsorbent used. Therefore suitable detection technology is necessary, see below. Depending on the operational temperature a residual content of hydrogen sulphur between 0, and 5 mg/m was achieved. The lowest value is held at 00C and increased values at 550C, when zinc oxide is used as adsorbent. These results are effected from reactive kinetics and reduced capacity at elevated temperatures. The initial load of sulphur contains about 00 mg/m hydrogen sulphide and 0-0 mg/m of different organic sulphur components. Suitable technology for sampling the quality is necessary to monitor non energetic parameter. Bioenergy 00+ has developed appropriate equipment for sampling of standard parameter in biomass gasification product gas. The sampling and treatment procedure are done according to the Sampling guideline for particle and tars. Additional to these procedures long term experience does exist for chemical defined parameter like hydrogen sulphide. During the last year of R&D-work a semi continuous working detection method for total sulphur content has been developed. At high concentration levels the organic sulphur components are enriched in a special solvent or at activated carbon and then detected with oxygen combustion under lab conditions. At lower concentrations levels the total sulphur content is converted at the sampling location via combustion directly. The detection is operated via IC or conductivity. Summary of current results: The side stream test rig - located at the Gssing Biomass gasification power plant - shows successful operation of the hot gas filtration and the desulphurisation of product gas to operate a SOFC-unit. The back flushing of the filter unit is tested under different conditions. Different adsorbents for desulphurisation are tested. Proper technology for detection of the sulphur content have been developed and can be concerned as crucial for the further development of clean gas consumer technologies. After the raw product gas is conditioned, a share of it (about 0 to 0 %) is used in the SOFC-reactor for operation. See for the operational results of the SOFC-technology in a detailed paper.
8
IIo4 FLEXIBLE dRy HIGH TEMPERATURE SyNGAS CLEANING Leibold H, Mai R, Stoehr J, Linek A, Seifert H Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Institute for Technical Chemistry, Hermann-von-HelmholtzPlatz 1, D-76344 Eggenstein-Leolpoldshafen
The properties of syngas from biogenic feedstocks are strongly influenced by the gasifiers type and the gasification parameters. Besides the main syngas components and the H to CO ratio the content of particulates, tar, S- and Cl-species, alkali and heavy metals can vary strongly. The target levels of these trace contaminants with respect to syngas utilization technologies differ within magnitudes. The lowest levels have to be achieved for synthesis applications. At present syngas cleaning in atmospheric and pressurized systems is mostly performed by scrubbing preferably with physical sorbents, where the sorption capacity is proportional to the system pressure. The most important state-of-the-art gas cleaning technologies are the RECTISOL process, a cryogenic scrubbing process with methanol and the SELEXOL process, which uses dimethylethers of polyethylene glycol slightly above room temperature. In any case quenching/cooling before syngas cleaning and reheating afterwards to synthesis temperature is mandatory. Exergetic efficiency is poor and total gas conditioning is expensive. Thus High-Temperature (HT) or High-Temperature-High-Pressure (HTHP) gas cleaning will be optimum, either at gasifier outlet conditions or slightly above the temperature of the syngas utilization. An innovative dry HT/HP syngas cleaning which combines HT/HP particle filtration, dry HT/HP sorption with mineral sorbents and a catalyst for the relevant trace contaminants is being developed at Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe. Operating at a uniform process temperature up to 800 C the process line for a dry HTHP gas cleaning is based on a recleanable ceramic filter, which is combined with the dry sorption of sulfur and chlorine components. Minor contaminants, mainly NH and tar are to be treated in a catalyst bed afterwards. Syngas quality required for synthesis catalysts in only combined stages is achieved. The basic design and the adaptation to different gasification and syngas utilization processes will be outlined and the setup of a dry HT gas cleaning line, which is run in pilot scale at the outlet of a 0 kW entrained flow gasifier will be presented. Major investigations focus on the HT sorption of HCl and HS in biogenic syngas by sodium and calcium carbonates and the conversion of tar at temperatures below 00 C in lab-scale and in pilot scale. Results from sorption tests at 00 and 800 C will be presented. The influence of the sorption material, the temperature and the raw gas concentration on the trace contaminant level achievable in the syngas are addressed. The data measured for the sorption of HCl and HS on the minerals Trona and chalk reveal clean gas levels much below mg/m levels even at 800 C which confirmed equilibria calculations for typical syngas compositions. Based on SEM analysis of spent sorption materials the reaction type and process options are discussed. Concerning tar catalysis the development and performance of a Pt based catalysts for the tar conversion at temperatures below 00 C is presented. The conversion of Naphthalene as model tar is evaluated with the parameters catalyst support, preparation procedure, pellet size and desactivation by carbon formation. The influence of temperature and space velocity are adressed. Finally preliminary results from the transfer to a honey comb support are presented.
9
IIo5 NOVEL BIO-SyNGAS CLEANUP PROCESS Leppin d, Basu A, Wangerow J, Slimane R B GTI Syngas from gasification of woody biomass contains tars, sulfur compounds, alkali metals and ammonia. When it is desired to use this gas for chemicals synthesis such as Fischer Tropsch, methanol, DME and similar, quite severe restrictions are imposed in order to prevent the necessary catalysts in such processes from being poisoned. As this can add significantly to the cost of producing BTL, it is important to devise cleanup processes that are efficient and effective. Minimizing steps requiring cooling and then subsequent heating of the main stream are critical to this objective, and this process succeeds in that regard. GTI has developed a novel approach using monolith tar reforming catalysts, sour shift, sulfur and trace metal removal via novel filter reactors, and acid gas cleanup, in this case CO removal only (optionally using a new solvent formulation developed by Uhde GmbH and GTI). The approach will be described in detail and mechanical design of a slipstream test system for approx. 500 SCFH ( Nm per hour) will be presented. Approx. cost of a scaled up system for 00 and 500 tons of biomass gasification per day will be presented.
0
IIo6 CATALyTIC CERAMIC FILTER CANdLES INTEGRATEd IN A FLUIdIzEd BEd BIOMASS GASIFIER Rapagn S 1, Gallucci K 2, di Marcello M 1, Nacken M 3, Heidenreich S 3, Foscolo P U 2 Dipartimento di Scienze degli Alimenti, Universit degli Studi di Teramo, Via Carlo Lerici 1, 64023 Mosciano S.Angelo, Teramo (Italy) 1 Dipartimento di Chimica, Ingegneria Chimica e Materiali, Universit degli Studi dellAquila, Monteluco di Roio, 67040 LAquila (Italy) 2 Pall Filtersystems GmbH, Werk Schumacher Crailsheim, D-74564 Crailsheim (Germany) 3
Keywords. Biomass Gasification, Ni catalyst, Ceramic Filter Candles, Fluidized Bed, Tar Analysis
Biomass could be successfully used in gasification considering the great potential as a renewable and CO neutral feedstock for producing modern energy carriers. Gasification is a thermal conversion process in where solid fuels are converted into combustible gases. The synthesis gas conditioned and upgraded may be used either to produce electricity by means of internal combustion engines and fuel cells, or to develop synthetic biofuels. However, process simplification could play a very important role to a real breakthrough in the use of biomass in general and specifically of gasification plants. Gas cleaning is normally done by filtration and scrubbing of the producer gas to drastically reduce particulate and tar content. For a better exploitation of the thermal and chemical energy of the produced gas, hot gas cleaning and conditioning systems (abatement of particulate content and tar conversion at a temperature close to the gasification temperature) should be developed and implemented. A bench-scale plant operating at atmospheric pressure is utilized in this work to check innovative, catalytic gas cleaning processes and plant arrangements. It is mainly composed of a fluidized bed gasifier with an internal diameter of 0. m. Olivine bed inventory is used. As it is extensively reported in the literature, this naturally occurring mineral has demonstrated tar conversion activity similar to that of calcined dolomite. Moreover, olivine is a much more robust material and has been applied as a primary catalyst to reduce the tar levels in the syngas. In order to increase the tar abatement efficiency, a catalytic filter candle consisting of a commercial hot gas filter candle with an integrated Ni catalyst was inserted into the freeboard of the gasifier. Some studies have also shown that nickel catalyzes the reverse reaction of the ammonia synthesis reaction from the elements thus reducing the amount of NH in the gasification product gas. Housing the whole gas conditioning system in the gasifier reduces thermal losses and allows for a very compact unit. The continuous catalytic gasification runs have been performed in a temperature range of 800 900C and the volume composition of the product gas is analyzed by means of IR, UV and TCD facilities for the online detection of CO, CO, CH, H, NH and HS. Results of gasification tests performed at different operating conditions will be presented and discussed in this conference presentation.

III
Gas Utilization

IIIo1 ALLOTHERMAL GASIFICATION OF BIOMASS INTO CHEMICALS ANd SECONdARy ENERGy CARRIERS zwart R W R, Van der drift A Energy research Centre of the Netherlands Biomass is heading for a great future as renewable energy source. It not only is available in large quantities but it also is the only renewable energy source that is suitable for the sustainable production of (generally carbon containing) transportation fuels and chemicals. Due to the very wide application framework for biomass, the biomass demand in the future is expected to be enormous, which will result in increased raw biomass costs. The biomass available, therefore, has to be converted with high efficiency into a variety of products, maximizing overall process economics, and minimizing the overall negative ecological side effects. A promising option to achieve this is to convert it on a large-scale via gasification and subsequently to co-produce a variety of marketable products from biomass. The main objective of the work described in this paper is to determine the feasibility of a system which targets to an efficient co-generation of chemicals, transportation fuels and secondary energy carriers from biomass via allothermal gasification. After clean-up, conditioning, and CO-removal, the allothermal gasifier product gas can be used to synthesize a variety of marketable biomass based products: Chemicals (methanol, BTX, olefins, phenols, naphthalene, cresylic acid, fertilizers, ) Transportation fuels (FT-diesel, mixed alcohols, H, ) Gaseous energy carriers (SNG, H) Power and/or heat Several of these products can also already be obtained as intermediate co-products during the clean-up stages, for example in the tar removal step. In this paper the benefits of a biorefinery concept are described by comparing a base case production process of Substitute Natural Gas (SNG) to different co-production process options. As the base case of SNG production on which the development of a variety of process alternatives will rely, allothermal gasification step (850oC) of the biomass is chosen. For SNG production the product gas is subjected to a series of cleaning steps for impurities removal and as a result the clean gas rich in CO and H is routed to a methanation step for the catalytic production of SNG. Taking into consideration the base case, two process routes are further developed. One including the separation of value-added chemicals, such as ethylene, acetylene, benzene, toluene, xylene, tars, incorporated in the product gas and subsequent catalytic production of SNG from the rich in CO and H product gas. The second option differentiates from the former one on two aspects.

The first aspect concerns the production of SNG, which can be achieved either through catalytic production or by separation of CH from the product gas. The second aspect refers to the additional catalytic step towards production of transportation fuels or chemicals from CO and H. The process options developed are compared on an economic basis. More specifically, economic margins are determined for the different process options. This economic margin should enable compensation for additional capital expenditure as well as operation and maintenance of the process. The main conclusions that can be drawn is that the separation of chemicals seems to be an economically more attractive option compared to the base case production of SNG. During the conference this economic advantage will be clarified, however will also be emphasised which developments in this thermochemical biorefinery production concept of SNG will still have to be made.
5
IIIo2 FROM SyNGAS TO FUELS MICROREACTOR TECHNOLOGy IN FISCHERTROPSCH (FT) SyNTHESIS Lukas M 1, Tekautz G 2, Kirschneck d 2, Boechzelt H 1 JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbH, Graz, Austria 1 Microinnova Engineering GmbH, Graz, Austria 2 Micro-engineering FT-reaction technology as a pretty new strategy for the generation of fuels from SynGas (gasified wood), also suitable for small and medium sized plants. A microreactor based FT-process was developed for the optimization of fuel production from SynGas to provide a future tool, also for the local generation of FT-fuels. The FT-synthesis provides huge exothermal heat, which makes the process difficult to control within conventional plant equipment. One promising advantage of the micro-technology is that some of the common problems in FT-synthesis, such as hot spots and heat transfer, are circumvented by the implication of a microstructured reactor. Second one is small size of the microstructured equipment which makes it easy to handle, compared to conventional equipment being used for the same throughput. The used research-plant set up allows high flexibility in changing different important reaction parameters like temperature, pressure, gas composition, residence times and catalyst. The reactor, which is about xx.5 cm in size, consists of a stack of catalyst-coated plates. The flow rate of the research-plant is adjustable from 00 ml to 000 ml / hr. The catalyst is adjusted on the plates by using a modified wash coat technique. Analysis of the achieved liquid products and the gas phase is done by GC/MS and micro GC. Results demonstrate the suitability of the research-plant setup to generate a wide range of fuel fractions (kerosene 0%, diesel 80% to lightpetrol 0%, kerosene 0%), according to the adjusted reaction-parameters. We would like to thank the Austrian Research Promotion Agency (FFG) for funding this project.

IIIo3 BIO-SNG FROM BIOMASS - FIRST RESULTS OF A dEMONSTRATION PLANT Rehling B, Hofbauer H, Rauch R, Prll T TU Wien
The energy demand - especially in industrialized countries - is determined by a steady increase. As fossil fuels are running out, we have to face a leak in energy supply. Moreover, fuels are even nowadays reasons for several crises like war in the Middle East. Furthermore it is misused for political strategies as it could be seen when some well known president capped the supply of Russian natural gas. This reasons show the high importance of independence of energy supply. Austria owns a lot of energy, captured in a biological storage named wood. While every year more wood grows than can be used, this is an ideal resource for power generation and gives the possibility to get independent of fossil fuels. Besides, fuels produced from wood are carbon dioxide neutral and therefore a measure to keep money, which would have to be paid for green certificates that are obligate, when using fossil fuels for energy production. Using a resource that is situated all over Austria offers several advantages. On the one hand it strengthens regions economically by keeping money in the region and on the other hand socially by creating new jobs. To convert wood in a transportable form of energy - in this case in a gaseous form - the methanisation process is the ideal option. Gasification in an allothermal biomass power plant represents the first step of the process of thermal conversion of biomass into a synthetic natural gas. The result of this process is a nearly nitrogen-free and therefore high calorific product gas. To convert this product gas into Bio-SNG, sudden purification steps are necessary. The following methanisation process is based on a catalytic reaction. The result of this reaction is a raw-SNG with a methane content of about fourtysix percent. After purifying the raw-SNG further the gas quality is nearly similar to natural gas and can be fed into the natural gas grid or delivered to a fuel station. A demonstration plant for the methanisation process has been built up in Gssing in the years 00 008. The first Bio-SNG was produced in December 008. Referring to the quality of gas composition, similar results compared to these of laboratory scale could be reached with the demonstration plant. The plant has been operated successfully at a size of MW power from methane. The Bio-SNG was delivered to a fuel station and tests with cars driven by Bio-SNG have been done. The high quality of Bio-SNG enables the injection of the synthetic natural gas into the natural gas grid. The natural gas grid is well structured and reaches nearly every edge of Austria. Therefore its a logical step to convert wood to a synthetic natural gas Bio-SNG. Promising results led to interest of other countries and further projects are planed. On the basis of modelling work options for optimization of the process could be found, which will be taken into account when building up the next methanisation plant at a size of 0 MW.

IIIo4 TESTS ON METHANATION WITH TAR ANd SULPHUR LOAdEd SyNGAS Kienberger T, Karl J Institute for Thermal Engineering, Graz University of Technology, Austria The production of Second Generation Fuel out of woody biomass is one of the key technologies for the future energy supply. Concerning polygeneration, in addition to Second Generation Fuel, heat, e.g. for district heating systems and electricity can be produced. Particularly interesting is substitute natural gas (SNG). Producing SNG from woody biomass, requires conversion of biomass into a so-called syngas. Therefore allothermal gasification systems are necessary. For the investigation of the influence the gasifiers gas quality has on the production of second generation fuels, a lab-scale gasifier for continuous operation with a thermal input of 5kW was developed, which produces syngas with a gas composition comparable the syngas of existing allothermal gasification systems. Compared to common lab-test, where a syngas mixed together out of bottled gas is used, the gas from the small-scale gasifier contains sulphur components, condensable alkalis, nano-particles and condensable higher hydrocarbons (tars). Furthermore this device allows to vary the syngas composition in order to meet published gas compositions of operating allothermal gasifiers. This is possible due to the use of electrically operated tube furnace, which provides the heat for the reforming of the biomass and a electrically heated steam generator. The heat, transferred from the electric furnace to the reformer, regulates the gasification temperature; the applied steam massflow determines the stoichiometric steam ratio. Both parameters, because of Le Chateliers principle, influence the product gas composition and thermodynamical equilibrium. Higher gasification temperatures are shifting the product gas composition to the educts, e.g. lead to higher hydrogen and carbon monoxide concentrations. An increased stoichometric steam ratio will, if the vapour-content in the productgas is fully condensed, cause high hydrogen concentrations. The reactor vessel is carried out as a stationary fluidised bed; due to the good heat and material transfer in such systems a very compact gasifier design is reached. For particle removal a two-stage system that works on a temperature level of 500C is installed. In the first stage coarse particles are removed by means of a cyclone separator, the second stage filters fine-particles by means of a sintermetal filter cartridge. Due to the pressurized operation, there are no additional compressors necessary for gas transportation. Overcoming the pressure drop of aggregates eventually used downstream is easily possible. Furthermore the lab-scale gasifier is equipped with intelligent systems for measurement and control, so the remote access to the plant can be reached with standard cell phones. One of the main challenges dealing with SNG production out of biogenous syngases is the field of gas conditioning. Tars, generated while gasification as well as sulphur compounds resulting from the used biomass, lead to a deactivation of the catalyst used to convert the productgas into a methane-rich gas. This step of conversion is called methanation.
8
Present allothermal gasification systems are using a gas cleaning system, based on a precoated filter cartridge combined with a rapeseed oil methyl ester (RME) scrubber. In the EUproject BioCellus a hot gas cleaning system was developed which is used to absorb sulphur compounds as well as to reform tars catalytically. Both concepts have the disadvantage, that for the gas cleaning high a technical effort is necessary, that results in high specific investment costs. How far the methanation of an uncleaned, particlefree productgas influences the catalysts lifetime e.g. the methane yield is unknown. Due to the reduced specific investment costs, there is, with expectable catalyst lifetime, an economic plant operation, even with a periodic catalyst change, achievable. To study the effect of the catalyst poisons mentioned above, a methanation test rig, with a plant capacity adapted, to the gasifier was designed. The catalyst used for methanation is hereby arranged in a horizontal fixed bed reactor, whereas the direction of the flow is bottom up. To get better comparable measurements, is has to be assured that there are isothermal conditions in the reactor. Because of the fact that the process of methanation is strongly exothermic, it is a challenge to heat on the one hand the zones of the reactor where no methanation occurs and, on the other hand, to cool zones where heat has to be removed. To get rid of this effect, the test rig is equipped with an electric tube furnace that is separated in two independent heating zones and, for cooling, with a gap between the outer wall of the reactor and the inner wall of the furnace that is rinsed with air. The paper proposed will show measurement data of the various operation modes of the TUGraz lab-scale gasifier. It will further present results of the methanation tests with tar, and sulphur containing productgas.
9
IIIo5 LOW LIFE CyCLE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ENABLEd By MICROCHANNEL TECHNOLOGy Mcdaniel J, Kilanowski d, Litt R Velocys, Inc.
Studies have indicated that producing fuel from lignocellulosic biomass offers the best opportunity for reducing life cycle greenhouse emissions. Furthermore, the most efficient route today to convert biomass is gasification and Fischer-Tropsch (FT) synthesis; resulting in approximately 90% less life cycle greenhouse gas emissions than petroleum derived fuel. Producing synthetic fuels from biomass presents a number of new challenges, including the need to economically reduce the size of facilities to match the quantity of biomass that can logistically gathered in one location. The concept of producing synthetic fuels in compact units hinges on the ability to scale-down reaction hardware while maintaining sufficient capacity. Systems based on microchannel process technology have been shown to greatly reduce the size of chemical hardware. In 00, Toyota commissioned a life cycle analysis of alternative fuels. This well-to-wheel study compared petroleum derived fuels with a wide range of alternatives ranging from traditional biodiesel (FAME) to ethanol to FT synthetics derived from biomass, coal and natural gas. The two fuels that performed best in this study were ethanol from sugarcane and FT synthetic diesel from biomass. Both of these fuels were shown to result in a 90% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to gasoline derived from oil. The core technology for synthetic fuel production, FT synthesis, has been practiced for decades; however, this has occurred in world-scale gas-to-liquids (GTL) or coal-to-liquid (CTL) plants. In these facilities, the slurry and fixed bed reactors are much larger than the sizes needed for biofuel facilities and are limited by heat or mass transport performance. Microchannel reactors, which have thousands of parallel arrays of process channels in the 0.5 mm to 5 mm range, overcome these limitations and increase reactor productivity by 0 to 5 fold over commercialized FT reactor technologies. Capital costs, operating costs and size are all reduced. A pilot scale microchannel FT reactor, utilizing an advanced catalyst supplied by Oxford Catalyst of Abingdon, UK, recently passed ,000 hours time on stream. Single pass conversion of carbon monoxide (CO) at commercial conditions was over 0%, and selectivity to methane was well under 0%. The pilot reactor produced over 8 liters per day of high quality distillate and waxes from a pressurized stream of synthesis gas, with a CO to H ratio of at :. These results provide a high level of confidence as final preparations are made for a small commercial scale demonstration that is to be conducted in conjunction with the U.S. Air Force, which has a goal of replacing half of its petroleum based fuel with synthetic fuels by 0.
0
IIIo6 PROdUCTION OF dME FROM WOOd Mevissen N, Schulzke T, Unger C A Fraunhofer Institute for Environmental, Safety and Energy Technology UMSICHT, Osterfelder Strasse 3, 46047 Oberhausen, Germany
Biomass-derived Dimethyl Ether is a promising second-generation biofuel. However, the complete process chain for the production of DME from synthesis gas obtained by wood gasification has not been investigated sufficiently, especially at a large scale. To evaluate possibilities of DME in the future biofuels market, it is necessary to tackle this knowledge gap. This is the aim of our present modelling work. Two different large-scale production concepts were developed. These concepts are based around wood gasifiers and single-pass DME synthesis reactor. For efficiency purposes, a gas turbine is incorporated to produce electricity from unconverted synthesis gas. The main differences between the two concepts are the two gasifiers adopted. Specifically one uses a steam blown atmospheric circulating fluidised bed (CFB) gasifier in comparison to a pressurised (CFB) gasifier utilising a mixture of steam and oxygen as gasifying agents used in the other. The atmospheric gasifier (concept ) has been developed by Taylor Biomass Energy, the pressurised (concept ) is the so called Vrnamo-Gasifier, but already incorporating all modifications planned by the Chrisgas-Project. These gasifiers were chosen to look at the influence of different H/CO-Ratios. For comparability purposes a capacity of 0 MW fuel input was defined for both gasifier concepts. The process chain for synthesis gas cleaning comprises of a catalytic tar reformer, followed by a metallic filter, a sulphur guard bed with ZnO as adsorbent and an amine scrubber for CO-Separation. The synthesis gas then needs to be compressed to meet the synthesis pressure of approximately 50 bar. The H/CO-Ratio of the syngas fed to the DME slurry reactor was about ,5 for concept and nearly for concept . However, the specific quantity of gas produced was seen for the Vrnamo-Gasifier as being greater due to the different gasification technique employed. The results of our simulation showed, that 00 kg/h (equivalent to .9 MW) or 00 kg/h (equivalent to 8. MW) DME could be produced from concept and concept respectively from 0 kg/h of Woodchips (5% moisture content), which is equal to 0 MW. Concept requires additional input of . MW of electric energy, while concept only requires 5. MW electricity. However, the reduced DME output is compensated in terms of efficiency by the production of additional electricity (.5 MW for concept and . MW for concept ). Overall, this results in a high efficiency of biomass utilisation ( % and %, resp.) without trying to maximise DME yield. Finally, economics of these two concepts were investigated. The investment costs for concept were considerably higher than for concept , which can be accounted to higher costs of pressurised gasification. This disadvantage of concept ultimately leads to better overall profitability of concept . *Corresponding author: Mail: [email protected] Phone: +9-08-8598-55 Fax: +9-08-8598-

IV
Life Cycle Analysis, Simulation and Techno Economic Studies

IVo2 LIFE CyCLE ASSESSMENT OF THE POLyGENERATION OF FT-FUELS, SNG, ELECTRICITy ANd HEAT VIA GASIFICATION OF WOOd ANd STRAW EXAMPLES FROM AUSTRIA Jungmeier G, Lingitz A, Canella L, Pucker J, Hausberger S Graz University of Technology The main aims of energy politics are the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the reduction of local pollutants (e.g. PM0), the reduction of fossil energy use and the increase of energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy. The polygeneration of transportation fuels (e.g. FT-fuels, SNG) in combination with electricity and heat via the gasification of wood offers the possibility to meet these goals at the same time. High energy efficiencies of more than 80% from biomass to useful energy can only be reached by polygeneration. Based on the detailed techno-economic layout of polygeneration plants integrated in existing infrastructure in Austria life cycle assessments were made to identify the environmental benefits and impacts from polygeneration plants compared to conventional fossil energy systems and gasification systems for transportation fuels only (single product systems). The life cycle assessment (LCA) includes all processes, which influence emissions and energy consumption from cradle to grave. It starts with the raw material production (e.g. collection of forest residues, cultivation of energy crops) and ends with the supply of useful energy at the consumer site (e.g. transportation service, space heating, electricity) including all transportation and conversion processes. The biomass fuel input of the investigated plants ranges between 0 MW (mini), 50 MW (small), 00 MW (medium) and 500 MW (large). Different raw materials (feedstocks) were considered e.g. forest residues, straw, short rotation forestry. In total 0 different polygeneration systems were analysed, which were compared to fossil and biomass based energy systems e.g. natural gas, gasoline, biodiesel, biogas, bioethanol. The following five environmental impacts were quantified: fossil primary energy consumption, greenhouse effect (CO, CH, NO), acidification (SO, NOx), eutrophication, ozone formation (NOx, NMVOV, CH, CO) and particle emissions. As an example the results for the FT-fuel production of 00,000 t/a in two different plant types: a central plant with 500 MW thermal capacity fuel input (single product system) and five decentralised plants with 00 MW thermal capacity fuel input per plant (polygeneration system) in comparison to gasoline and diesel. For this case the LCA results show, that FT-fuels, a mixture of gasoline and diesel, compared to fossil transportation systems reduce green house gas emissions and primary energy consumption. The contribution to acidification, to ozone formation at ground level, to particle emissions and

to the material consumption is higher for FT-fuels than for fossil fuels. FT-fuels have smaller green house gas emissions and smaller fossil primary energy consumption compared to the biofuels (e.g. biodiesel, bioethanol, biogas). The results in detail for greenhouse gas emissions per passenger car km for systems with EURO passenger car with internal combustion engine are: Diesel 9 g CO-eq/ km, FTdiesel 0 - g CO-eq/km, biodiesel from rape seed 5 g CO-eq/ km, petrol g COeq/ km, FT-gasoline - g CO-eq/km, bioethanol from wheat 0 g CO-eq/ km, biogas from corn silage g CO-eq/km. The basic work for this paper was done in projects funded by the State of Styria, Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology (BMVIT), OMV and sterreichische Bundesforste. The project partners were JOANNEUM RESEARCH, Graz University of Technology, Vienna University of Technology and the Austrian Bioenergy Centre.

IVo3 GASIFICATION ANd GREEN GAS dEVELOPMENT IN THE NETHERLANdS van Asselt W A SenterNovem, agency of the Dutch Ministery of Economical Affairs Overview of development of the production of greengas in The Netherlands and the status of gasification. Contents . Dutch ambitions on renewable energy . The Dutch energy system . Approach Green Gas discussion . Stimulation programms and actual situation on Green Gas including gassification of biomass 5. The future? 1. Dutch ambitions on renewable energy: policy target up to 00 0% renewable energy 0% emission reduction of green house gases (reference 990) % energy saving yearly Total GHG emission in 00: 50 Mton CO-eq Governemental plan: Schoon en Zuinig published sept. 8th; 00 2. The Dutch energy system Natural gas since 95 Yearly Energy consumption Natural Gas 500 PJ Qualities: -- Groningen gas (L-gas) -- H gas Transport: HTL- bar Regional: RTL- 0 bar Local : 8 bar 5.000 km pipe line, 9% of houses connected to gas grid and International grid connections
5
3. Approach Green Gas discussion Short term target:Replacement of natural gas by upgraded biogas -% Midterm target: 8-% replacement of natural gas in 00 ( billion Nm/y), inclusive SNG production from biomass Long term: Upscaling to 50% replacement of natural gas by green gas in het gasgrid 4. Stimulation programms -Actual situation on Green Gas including gassification of biomass 0 years of experience with upgrading landfillgasproduction with grid injection Two new upgradingsplants as pilotplant since 00-008 - Beverwijk (sewage sludge; 80 Nm/h natural gas quality) - De Marke (pilot 5 Nm/h) About 0 plants in direct preparation and in planning (009): capacity range: 0 Nm/h-00 Nm/h 0-0 in capacity range: 00 Nm/h 000 Nm/h Research and results on gas quality and injection in local (8 bar) and regional (0 bar) gasgrid Development of certification system for greengas (greencertificates) 5. The future? Big potential for SNG production Import of biomass will be necessary with increasing number of natural gas replacement (harbors locations preferend locations) Focus on SNG as an flexibel fuel (powergeneration / storage in old gasfields) Not only need for SNG but partly Syngasquality is required for industrial purposes

IVo4 BIOMASS VERSUS BIO-OIL GASIFICATION FOR SyNGAS PROdUCTION FOR BTL Bridgwater A V, dimitriou I Aston University Bioenergy Research Group, Birmingham B4 7ET, UK Many claims and possibilities have been promoted for Biomass To Liquids BTL concepts. Conventional thinking is that BTL plants need to be very large to be economic with a minimum economic size of 5000 bbls per day or . million t/y hydrocarbon fuels. This would require between 5 and million t/y biomass on a dry basis. The logistics of financing, building and operating such a biomass based plant are very considerable. In order to address these concerns, a number of alternatives are being considered including downscaling, de-severitising process conditions, higher energy density gasification feedstocks, and integration into a conventional refinery. This paper focusses on the pretreatment of biomass by fast pyrolysis to give a higher energy density liquid that can be transported, handled and gasified more easily than solid biomass, but with a performance and cost penalty associated with the fast pyrolysis pretreatment step. The advantages and disadvantages of solid and liquefied biomass for gasification feedstock for BTL are discussed and overall process performance and cost analyses presented.

IVo5 SMALL-SCALE GENERATION OF SUBSTITUTE NATURAL GAS Karl J 1, Gallmetzer G 2, Hochleitner T 2, Kienberger T 1, Schweiger A 2, Krner M 3 Institute for Thermal Engineering, Graz University of Technology, Austria 1 Agnion Highterm Research GmbH, Germany/Austria 2 Agnion Technologies GmbH, Germany 3 Dezentralized Generation of Substitute Natural Gas allows an exceptionally efficient conversion of biogenious feedstock. In particular local use of the processes waste heat increases the total efficiency of the polygeneration. Exceptionally favourable is the combination of pressurized steam gasification in combination with hot gas conditioning and methanation. Pressurized gasification enables condensation of the syngas steam content at high temperatures. Similar to condensing boilers the heat-of-condensation increases the total process efficiency significantly. The paper will present the Agnion Methanation and Polygeneration concept. The concept bases on the Agnion Heatpipe Reformer Technology and comprises pressurized steam gasification at 5 bars in combination with an integrated gas conditioning and methanation. The paper will present the Agnion technology and operational results of Agnions the first 500kW pilot plant in Pfaffenhofen, Germany. It will present applications, efficiencies and economics of the technology for decentralized applications in the thermal range below MW.
8
IVo6 BIO-SNG CONCEPT dEVELOPMENT WITH FOCUS ON ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS Roensch S, Schmersahl R, zeymer M, Majer S, Klemm M German Biomass Research Centre (DBFZ); Leipzig (Germany) Worldwide many countries are motivated to explore alternative energy sources due to strongly varying prices for fossil fuel energy, energy supply security and environmental consciousness (especially related to climate change). Against this background the interest in biofuels has increased significantly over the past years in industrialised as well as in developing countries. Due to high overall efficiencies, especially the thermo-chemical conversion of solid biofuels into the natural gas substitute Bio-SNG (Synthetic Natural Gas) seems to be a promising way for the energetic use of solid biofuels. However, this conversion process consisting of i.) biomass pretreatment, ii.) biomass gasification, iii.) raw gas cleaning, iv.) methanation and v.) raw Bio-SNG upgrading is currently at pilot/demonstration stage and therewith still characterised by optimisation potential regarding the choice of process components. Within this context especially the specific greenhouse gas emissions related to different plant components are of particular interest. To give advises for a reasonable Bio-SNG plant design (assuring high overall efficiencies as well as low greenhouse gas emissions), different Bio-SNG plant components have been analysed and compared from a technical and environmental point of view under uniform frame conditions. Calculations concerning the CO-equivalent emissions based on process modelling with regard to mass- and energy-balances form the main part of the analysis. Thereby, influencing factors as methane losses, heat consumption as well as electrical power consumption are included and specific CO-equivalent emissions are assigned. Against this background especially the gas cleaning components have been identified to be of major influence on the CO-equivalent emissions released throughout the overall BioSNG provision life cycle: Depending on the gas cleaning system the specific greenhouse gas emissions of Bio-SNG provision vary in a range of approximately - 9 kg CO-Eq per GJ Bio-SNG.
9
IVo7 BIOMASS GASIFICATION FOR AMMONIA PROdUCTION Gilbert P 1, Thornley P 1, Alexander S 2, Brammer J 2 Tyndall Centre, Department of Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil Engineering, University of Manchester, M60 1QD, UK 1 Bioenergy Research Group, Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry, School of Engineering and Applied Science, Aston University, Birmingham, B4 7ET, UK 2 09 million tonnes of ammonia is produced globally each year, 85% of this is synthesised from combining H, produced from steam reforming of natural gas, and nitrogen separated from air. The process is very energy intensive and releases 08 million tonnes of CO. Production of ammonia from renewable resources, such as biomass, could substantially reduce this. One option is to gasify biomass to produce a hydrogen rich syngas for ammonia production. This paper reviews currently available gasification technologies to assess the viability of ammonia production using this method, and identifies those most suitable for further analysis. The gasifier selection is based on the following criteria: syngas composition, efficiency, operating conditions, scale and biomass track record. Potential process schemes are presented with preliminary mass/energy and greenhouse gas balances to estimate the potential value of developing such a system. Critical issues in the overall system from biomass cultivation to ammonia production, which need to be evaluated further via economic and life cycle assessment techniques, are identified.
0
V
Small and middle scale Gasifiers - from experiment to Practice

Vo1 EXPERIENCES ANd RESULTS dERIVEd FROM THE GASIFIER AT THE TUV Pfeifer C Institute of Chemical Engineering, Getreidemarkt 9/166, A-1060 Vienna, Austria
Gasification is an upgrading process for solid biomass to produce a valuable gas which can be used for a large variety of applications. Steam gasification leads to a nitrogen free producer gas with a low tar content and a high hydrogen content. Fluidized bed technology is well known for high fuel flexibility and can therefore used for a lot of different biogenous fuels. By choosing a dual fluidized bed configuration an air separation unit could be avoided which is normally necessary for a nitrogen free gas. This leads to an interesting technology also for medium sized gasification plants and therefore most suitable for biomass. The steam blown dual fluidized bed gasification process has been developed during the last fifteen years using cold flow models, laboratory units, and mathematical modelling and simulation. A lot of knowledge could be obtained from these research and development tools in order to be able to scale up this gasification process. This led to a demonstration plant with a fuel capacity of 8 MW located at the city of Guessing, Austria. This plant is dedicated for combined heat and power production using a gas engine with an electricity generator. However, the steam blown gasification process offers a wide variety of applications which are currently investigated at Vienna University of Technology. Besides heat and power production via gas engines, gas turbines or fuel cells also gaseous and liquid fuels can be produced. Biofuels are worldwide of increasing importance as certain amounts are politically required. Such biofuels can be produced by generating a synthesis gas via biomass steam gasification and further synthesis to biofuels. Biomass to liquids can be obtained by Fischer-Tropsch synthesis (BioFiT) and gaseous biofuels (BioSNG) by methanation reaction. Finally, the production of a hydrogen rich gas and even of pure hydrogen from biomass is a future option. Such future applications need increased fuel flexibility. Thus, different methods for increasing the feedstock basis and to improve the gasifier performance were studied using a 00kWth process development unit. Several fuels (wood chips and pellets, straw, sewage sludge, lignite, coal etc.) have been tested and the influence on tar content, tar composition as well as gas composition was measured and compared among themselves. Moreover, different bed materials (olivine, calcite, silica sand etc.) have been applied and their influences on the gas quality have been determined. As further development the bed material is replaced by a reactive CO absorbent material (lime) and the gasification temperature is reduced to temperatures below 00 C in order to enable CO chemisorption. By this in situ measure, the product gas quality is improved and its composition can be adjusted according to subsequent product gas applications (combustion, synthesis gas, H production, etc.). Summarizing, the dual fluidized bed system offers an excellent fuel flexibility to be used in advanced power cycles as well as in future liquid/gaseous fuels production systems.

Vo2 dESIGN, CONSTRUCTION ANd OPERATIONAL EXPERIENCES WITH A 3 MW TORBEd WOOd GASIFIER IN THE NETHERLANdS Poldervaart J, van doorn J Polow Energy Systems A Dutch SME company dries residues from the food industry (e.g. production waste from bakeries, out of date products) for fodder applications and was facing difficulties in answering to the regulations concerning smell and emissions of hydrocarbons from their natural gasfired dryer. Polow Energy Systems designed, constructed and tested a wood-fuelled gasifier integrated into the existing drying process and the newly installed incinerator. By using the wood gasifier as a substitute for the existing natural gas burner the client did solve his regulation problems with the authorities and achieved a considerable reduction on the use of natural gas. Natural gas is now only used as back-up system. The fuel gas from the wood gasifier is used to fire the incinerator, to abate the smell of the clients drying operation, and produces at the same time the heat for the drying process, using an air-to-air heat exchanger to transfer the energy from the exhaust of the incinerator to the drying air. The gasifier is based on the Torbed technology, which consists basically of a cylindrical reactor in which the process air with recirculation gases are thoroughly mixed together with the wood fuel, thus producing a syngas which than is used as fuel in the incinerator. The turbulent, rotating movement created by air respectively recirculated syngas inside the reaction chamber creates a very intense contact between process air, syngas and the feed material, which yields a highly efficient and quick heat and mass transfer. This feature allows for the system to handle a wide variety of biomass products (e.g. forest- and agricultural waste) and to efficiently and expeditiously transition to a variety of renewable products. The following are the advantages of the technology: Rapid combustion and gasification capabilities No residential bed necessary, the biomass forms the bed High controllability, turn down ratios virtual infinite No moving parts inside the reactor and therefore very low maintenance cost Simple up scaling Compact installation Relatively low investment needed

Table with design and operational data on the gasification process: Drying capacity of rotary killn in kg/h water evaporation:.500 kg/h Operational hours: .000 h.p.a. Fuel quantity (wood chips): ~ 800 kg/h Moisture content fuel average: ~ wt % Dimensions for fuel (desired): max. 0 x 0 mm Drying temperature at begin of killn: max. 500 C Fuel gas composition: CO, H, CxHy, CO balance N: //,5/ vol % Total tar content according to measurements ECN: < g/m Stack temperature: ca. 80 C Investment in wood gasifier, excl. wood preparation: 1,2 Mio Savings on natural gas: 00 m/h The gasification plant was taken into operation late in 00 and after a number of modifications is now operating satisfactorily. An overview of the operational data and experiences will be described. Several new gasification projects are in preparation.

Vo3 PRELIMINARy RESULTS WITH A 450 KWTH BUBBLING FLUIdISEd BEd GASIFIER Bay B 1, Cetin y 1, Caglayan E 1, Unlu A 1, Karatas H 1, yazar A 1, Ozdogan S 2 A pilot scale biomass gasifier to produce heat and electrical energy has been designed and operated within the frame of a nationally funded project led by TUBITAK Energy Institute and supported by Turkish universities. The system consists of two bubbling bed reactors; the bigger one for gasification, the smaller one for combustion. The latter is necessary to supply the heat needed for endothermic gasification reactions to achieve allothermal operation conditions. The gasifier can be run with or without the combustor. In the latter case, the necessary reaction heat is supplied by gas burners. The gasification is capable to be run on air, oxygen and steam. Allothermal operation is chosen for steam gasification. The capacity of the gasifier is 50 kWthermal. Bubbling fluidised bed gasification regime is chosen. The bed diameter is 50 mm and the bed height above the distributor plate is 000 mm. The combustor height is 5500 mm and has a square cross section (0 mm). The design feeding capacities are 0 kg/h and 50 kg/h for gasifier and combustor, respectively. The bubbling fluidised bed gasifier has three feeding ports above the distributor plate. Hence, it can be fed with different feedstocks such as biomass, coal, additives, etc. Feedstocks are carried pneumatically. Each feeding point consists of one silo and two interconnected screws, the first one to adjust the flow rate, and the second one to achieve homogeneous feeding to the gasifier. The average particulate size is - mm; the design allows runs with particulate sizes up to 5 mm. The gas cleaning system consists of a cyclone for particulate removal, a heat exchanger for cooling of the product gas, a scrubber for tar removal and a wet electrostatic precipitator and fabric filter for final clean-up. Different scrubbing solvents will be tested. The clean product gas is to be fed to a gas motor at 50 kWe capacity. This study presents the preliminary gasification results with hazelnut shells. In this study, the product gas is not fed to the gas motor; it has been analysed with on-line gas analyser and GC, and burnt in a flare. Preliminary test have been done at different equivalence ratios and bed temperatures. Temperature has been monitored along the whole gasifier height along with pressure. It can be concluded that the designed bubbling fluidised bed gasifier system can be run with hazelnut shells without any problems, and produced a gas of acceptable composition. The next step will be to connect it with the gas clean-up unit. *Author for correspondence
5
Vo4 ANKUR BIOMASS GASIFICATION TECHNOLOGy - FIELd EXPERIENCES dr. B.C. Jain Managing director Ankur Scientific Energy Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Ankur Scientific from India has been in the business of Biomass Gasification for almost two decades now. Over the years, the company has been developing and fine tuning the technology of Biomass Gasification for a variety of applications, using a wide range of feedstock. The company has also installed the largest number of small and medium rating Biomass Gasifier Systems in the world with total number of installations adding up to over 900 systems. The applications have included thermal energy as well as electricity generation - in both dual-fuel and 00% gas mode. The systems currently on offer commercially cover the range of 5 kg / hr to ,000 kg / hr of biomass being processed in a single gasifier unit with power outputs of 5 kW to ,000 kWe and oil replacement capability of upto 00 ltrs / hr. The paper describes the basic technology developed at Ankur Scientific which is driven by the guiding principles of simplicity and cost-effectiveness. A variety of applications as well as specific system installations are covered including the following: Rural / Island Electrification through dual-fuel and 00% gas systems with output ratings of kWe to ,000 kWe. Captive power for industry, again in both dual-fuel mode as well as in 00% gas mode with the company having over 50 installations using rice husk as feedstocks. Biomass Gasification Systems in grid-fed mode, including those in Europe. A wide range of thermal applications with institutions and industry. The paper goes on to describe the active and sustained R&D culture of the company including substantial efforts to ensure use of a wide range of feedstocks in a given gasifier design. An effort is made to bring out experiences from the field, both positive and negative, with a view to plan strategies that could lead to wider acceptance of the technology. Potential major growth areas are then identified along with the barriers in achieving the vast potential that this technology promises.

VI
Poster Session

VIp1 A PRELIMINARy STUdy OF SINGLE TUBE FISCHER-TROPSCH REACTOR Rafiq H 1, Owrang F 1, Guitard F 1, Hustad J 1, Grnli M 1, Olsson J 2, Pedersen J 2 Department of Energy and Process Engineering, NTNU 1 Arealia AB, Sweden 2
A very effective method of utilizing landfill biogas is to convert its methane to a second generation biofuel via Fischer-Tropsch synthesis. Air reforming is a cheap way to produce syngas but it may lead to formation of syngas diluted with a large amount of CO and N. However, the stability of the FischerTropsch reactor run by such a diluted syngas can be questioned. Literature studies conducted on the Fischer-Tropsch synthesis with N and/or CO diluted syngas are scarce. Laboratory Fischer-Tropsch synthesis with different syngas compositions and/or catalysts is normally performed in relatively small electrically heated fixed bed reactors. A drawback with these reactors is that the heat produced in the tube may not be effectively removed. Limited studies on relatively larger oil-cooled tube reactors have also been performed with the aim of modeling the chemical reactions. The aim of this work is to study the Fischer-Tropsch synthesis of a N/CO diluted syngas supposed to be produced by reforming of landfill biogas in a GlidArc-assisted POX reformer using air as oxidant over a commercial Co-based catalyst on AlO. The laboratory Fischer-Tropsch reactor is a doublemantled single-tube reactor where the temperature is regulated by high-pressure saturated water/steam. Besides the thermal stability, the advantage of this reactor is that it is possible to develop commercial catalysts in an environment which resembles a real FT-reactor in future. In this way, the catalyst and the reactor can be optimized in a combined fashion. The special emphasis was put on the stability of the reactor, continuous conversion of CO and production of liquid hydrocarbons. The cobalt catalyst was activated in-situ using pure H at bars. The linear gas velocity was relatively high to remove the HO produced during the process. HO has been regarded as an important factor which sinters the cobalt catalyst in a Fischer-Tropsch reactor. Thermodynamic parameters such as temperature, volume flow rate of syngas (but not the pressure), were kept constant. The temperatures in the bulk of the cooling medium and on the outer part of the reactor wall were measured accurately. The reactor was also tested at low pressures because a plasmaassisted GlidArc reformer produces syngas at max bars. In spite of the fact that the current thermodynamic parameters are not optimal for the reactor, the results clearly show that it is possible to convert a CO and N diluted syngas to liquid hydrocarbons. The GC/ MS chromatograms indicate the production of a wide range of hydrocarbons (C5-C) that encompasses diesel fuel fractions. The high CO conversion in the Fischer-Tropsch reactor indicates that the feedstock recycle can be avoided. In order to scale up this single tube research reactor to a multitubular reactor, future works should be focused on the detailed measurement of heat transferred from the reactor tube into the cooling media.
8
VIp2 AIR GASIFICATION OF NATURAL ANd WASTE BIOMASS IN A PILOT SCALE BUBBLING FLUIdIzEd BEd REACTOR Arena U 1, 2, zaccariello L 1, Mastellone M L 1, 2 Department of Environmental Sciences - Second University of Naples - Via Antonio Vivaldi, 43 81100 Caserta, ITALY AMRA s.c. a r.l. - Via Nuova Agnano, 11 80125 Napoli, ITALY 2 Three commercially-available biomass fuels, made of natural and waste wood, were fed in a pilot plant bubbling fluidized bed gasifier, having an internal diameter of 0.8m and a maximum feeding capacity of 00kg/h. The experimental runs were carried out at about 850C and under values of the equivalence ratio between 0.0 and 0.0. The fluidized bed was generally made of natural olivine even though some runs utilized beds of dolomite or quartz sand. The results indicate that the air gasification process is technically feasible with all the biomass tested. The role of olivine as tar removal bed catalyst provides different results with waste and natural biomass fuels.
9
VIp4 BIOMASS GASIFICATION IN ATMOSPHERIC FLUIdISEd BEd: IRON CATALyST FOR TAR REMOVAL ANd SUBSTITUTE NATURAL GAS (SNG) PROdUCTION Nemanova V, Sjstrm K Department of Chemical Engineering and Technology, KTH Royal Institute Teknikringen 42, 10044 Stockholm, Sweden Introduction Green methane gas, also called Substitute Natural Gas (SNG), can be used for all applications that are already known for natural gas. The producer gas contains tars, which cause serious problems downstream the gasification process, e.g. corrosion in equipment and blockage of pipes. The double aim of the study is to reform tar without breakdown of existing methane and to produce as much methane as possible. Several gasification experiments have been performed in the KTH atmospheric fluidised bed gasifier. The aim was to explore the performance of different kinds of metallic iron catalysts. In previous works at KTH it has been established that metallic iron has a pronounced ability to decompose tars that originates from the gasification process. The decomposed tars normally enhance the gas yield and the concentration of permanent gases as CO, CO, H are increased. The reason why metallic iron is of interest in this study is because it has been observed that the methane concentration is more or less unaffected during the passage throw the catalyst bed. Consequently it may be possible to employ a metallic iron catalyst to increase the permanent gas yield and at the same time keep or perhaps increase the methane concentration. The results from this study confirm the trend as for keeping the methane concentration unaffected and to some extent the tar decomposition result in an increased gas evolution. Three different commercial iron-based catalysts were tested for tar removal in a produce gas from an atmospheric fluidized bed biomass gasifier. The catalysts were provided by Hgans AB. All catalysts provide a similar activity. Materials and Methods The gasification experiment was performed in a fluidised bed gasification system. Its major components are: a fluidized bed reactor, a biomass feeder, a ceramic filter and a catalytic bed reactor. The cool, dry, clean gas product was measured with a gas chromatograph (Model Shimadzu, Japan), equipped with a flame ionization detector (FID) and a thermal conductivity detector (TCD). The tar sampling and analysis was accomplished using the solid phase adsorption (SPA) method. The fuel, Swedish birch with a particle size of -,5 mm, was fed into the hot bed with a screw feeder that operates continuously at 0, kg/ hour. The bed, consisted of silica, was heated to a temperature of 850 C in all experiments.
50
The temperature in the catalytic bed reactor was varied between 00 and 850 C. Free types of iron (A, B, C, D and E) from Hgans AB (right now the information is confidential) were introduced as catalysts for tar cracking. The catalysts used have been described and characterized (BET surface area and concentration of C, N, O and S). Results and Discussion Several gasification experiments have been performed. The tar content and the gas composition have been monitored. The results confirm to some extent the expectations. The most effective catalysts under prevailing conditions is the A and C type. This is also in accordance with theory since these two types has the largest surface area. Although the differences between the five types of catalysts tested are in the region of 0 %.
5
VIp5 BIOMASS SELECTION FOR THE TEST CAMPAIGN AT THE UNIQUE PILOT PLANT Valerio V, Villone A, Nanna F, Barisano d ENEA (Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and the Environment), Biomass Laboratory A MWth pilot plant for efficient CHP and power production via biomass steam gasification is under development within the European project UNIQUE. The project is funded under the th Framework Programme and is intended to the production of a high purity syngas by integrating the gasification fluidised bed and the hot gas cleaning & conditioning system in a single reactor vessel. To the aim of identify the more interesting biomass to be used during the test campaign, feedstocks of different origin were taken into account. A preliminary selection was made on the base of the potential availability of biomass on a large scale. A total of 8 samples, some of which provided by partners, were then considered for their further characterisation with respect to: ultimate and proximate analysis, heating value, major and minor elements. On the basis of the experimental data collected, all samples were compared and a reduced number of materials were delimited. As regards this aspect, particularly useful were found the data on sulphur, chlorine and heavy metals. Biomass such as: poplar, oak, almond shells and pine seed shells were finally identified as the feedstock more interesting to be used at the pilot plat. An overview of the overall data and procedure adopted for the biomass selection is reported in this paper.
5
VIp6 BIOMASS/RdF GASIFICATION IN AN UPdRAFT REACTOR: MOdELLING ANd ANALySIS OF THE THERMOCHEMICAL PROCESS Cerone N, Contuzzi L, Barisano d, Braccio G ENEA In an updraft gasifier the feedstock is fed from the top, while the gasification agent is introduced from the bottom, so that the gaseous stream flowing upward, in the counter-current direction. The biomass particles travels downwards progressively trough zones of drying, pyrolysis, reduction and combustion. Thanks to the excellent energy exchange within the fixed bed which allows the gaseous stream to exit the gasifier at a low temperature, the gasification process is characterised by a high thermal efficiencies. The product gas mainly consist of gaseous fuels such as: carbon monoxide, hydrogen, methane and light hydrocarbons, but also gases such as: carbon dioxide and nitrogen are typically present in significant amount. Because of the counter-current configuration, the product gas is also characterised by a high tar content, char and fly ash particles. All components (gas, tar and particles) are together present in the stream at the exit of the gasifier; their relative abundance depend on the gasification agent and the operating conditions. The objective of the present work has been the development of a complete model, as simplified, useful to design and implement a small scale pilot plant, and able to describe the overall updraft gasification process. The plant to which the model is intended, is based on an updraft gasifier and is supposed to be fed with 50 kg/h of a biomass/RDF mix. To the construction of the most useful model, both literature and experimental data have been considered. A flexible model have been set up by using the commercial software ChemCad (Chemstations, Inc). The expected performance of the updraft gasifier have then been simulated and evaluated with respect to gas composition and thermal efficiency. By a sensitivity study it has been possible to evaluate how the gas composition changes by varying the operating conditions. Effect of the changing on biomass/RDF and Air/steam ratios on the gas composition has been simulated. It has been calculated that, at the highest biomass/ RDF ratio by using air as a gasification medium, the composition of CO and H at the exit of the gasifier is expected to be 5 and 5 % vol, respectively. However, by using a steam/air mix, the expected composition of CO and H is 0 and % vol, respectively. The gas cleaning section of the plant is a biodiesel scrubber and two coalescer filters in series, therefore concerning the evaluation on the thermal efficiency of the plant, by including the performance of the two equipments into the model, a thermal efficiency of 80% and a thermal output of 50 00 kW have been calculated.
5
VIp8 CATALyTIC CONVERSION OF VEGETABLE OILS TO HydROCARBONS IN A CONTINUOUS FCC-PILOT PLANT Reichhold A, Schnberger C, Schablitzky H, Bielansky P Institute of Chemical Engineering, Vienna University of Technology Fluid Catalytic Cracking (FCC) is one of the most important processes to produce gasoline. The main objective of the presented investigation was to add vegetable oils to vacuum gas oil (VGO, the standard FCC feed) in order to contribute to a reduction of CO production from fossil fuels. The experimental test program was conducted in a fully continuously operated FCC pilot plant with internal CFB-design at Vienna University of Technology. Vegetable oils with the highest global production (rapeseed oil, soy bean oil and palm oil) were mixed in steps of 0 percent (m/m) with the common feedstock. Its influence on the cracking process as well as the obtained products was investigated. During the experimental work it was accomplished to conduct test runs with pure vegetable oil as feedstock. Vegetable oils are composed of triglycerides (esters) with oxygen in the oxycarbonyl-group between the glycerine-molecule and the fatty acid, while VGO is a mixture of different hydrocarbons like paraffins, naphthenes and aromatic hydrocarbons. It could be shown, that the addition of vegetable oil to the feedstock has no significant influence on the routine operation of the FCC-plant but it does result in a slightly modified product spectrum: The oxygen embedded in the ester group was mainly converted into water, and no oxygen compounds were detected in the liquid products. Higher ratios of vegetable oils in the feedstock lead to a decrease of the main product gasoline while the amount of gaseous hydrocarbons stays constant. For the by-products coke and heavy residues (light cycle oil) a small increase was observed. Using vegetable oils as a feedstock for fluid catalytic cracking an overall conversion into gasoline and gaseous hydrocarbons of about 5 percent mass can be achieved. The gasoline fraction of the product contains high amounts of aromatics at octane numbers of approximately 99 RON and 8 MON. Fluid catalytic cracking of vegetable oils is a new way which is hardly known today for producing high quality gasoline, gaseous hydrocarbons (e.g. propene, ethene) and consequently plastics out of biological sources. Future work will concentrate on testing new feedstocks like pure fatty acids, pyrolysis-oils and FT-waxes as well as on optimizing the FCC technology for renewable sources.
5
VIp9 CO2 CAPTURE By dOLOMITE PARTICLES IN A GAS FLUIdIzEd BEd di Felice L, Foscolo P U, Gibilaro L G Department of Chemical Engineering, University of LAquila, Monteluco di Roio, 67040 LAquila, Italy Carbon dioxide capture is widely studied with a view to its implementation in energy generation systems as a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions; solid sorbents, capable of being regenerated, provide a promising means for effecting this operation. When CO capture is combined with steam gasification of biomass or coal, and/or steam reforming of methane or higher molecular weight hydrocarbons, the resulting fuel-gas quality is markedly improved, hydrogen yield being substantially increased and reduced operating temperatures become permissible. Cyclic CO capture and CaCO regeneration characteristics were investigated experimentally in a laboratory-scale fluidized-bed reactor containing dolomite sorbents. Dynamic, stepresponse tests were carried out to determine CaO conversion rates as a function of time for dolomite particles of various sizes included in the bed - the total dolomite content being a small fraction of the overall bed inventory, so that the behaviour could be related to that of a single particle exposed to the CO containing gas stream. On-line measurement of CO concentration in the outlet stream provided the response curves from which the take-up rate of CO on the dolomite could be calculated as a function of time, and the kinetic parameter k of a simple flow and reaction model for the process could be evaluated. Five dolomite particle sizes were investigated in the range 0.0 .55 mm, CO capture at a temperature of 50C revealing a clear dependence on particle size of the CO take-up rate. This is attributable to intra-particle diffusional resistance phenomena, quantifiable in terms of the model parameter k, which was found to decrease progressively with increasing dolomite particle size. The effect of cyclic, sorption/regeneration, operation was also studied. Following a sorption run, the bed temperature was increased to 850C and the CO content of the flow stream reduced to zero, thereby initiating the recalcination of the dolomite, liberating the reacted CO. This enabled any deactivation of the dolomite to be identified and measured in terms of its reduction in sorption capacity with progressive cycles - twelve of which were carried out for selected dolomite particle sizes. Deactivation effects were found in general to be small and to increase somewhat with increasing particle size.
55
VIp10 COMPARISON BETWEEN OLIVINE ANd M/OLIVINE (M=FE, NI) FOR TAR REMOVAL ANd AddITIONAL HydROGEN PROdUCTION By WATER GAS SHIFT REACTION. Mirella Virginie, Claire Courson, Alain Kiennemann Laboratoire Matriaux, Surfaces, Procds pour la catalyse ECPM ULP UMR CNRS 7515 Biomass gasification is a thermochemical process carried out at high temperatures in order to optimize the gas production. In presence of steam, a quite clean synthesis gas is formed: syngas (H and CO) along with CO and CH. However the main drawback in gasification technologies is the formation of solid residues consisting of char, ash, volatile alkali metals and organics vapours known as tar which is necessary to remove from the syngas before further applications. Tar contains significant amount of energy and can be converted by steam reforming in H, CO and CO gases that improve gas production. Previous works have revealed that olivine (which is an iron and magnesium orthosilicate mineral available in nature) has a good performance in terms of tar reduction []. It has been shown that the iron state into the mineral is essential for its reaction efficiency []. Moreover a Ni/olivine catalyst has been developed for the methane [] and tar [] steam reforming presenting high activity for both reactions. However nickel compounds are toxic and the utilisation of such catalysts is a potential environmental problem. That why we developed a Fe/olivine catalyst. Iron is cheap, largely available, less toxic, well known to break C-C bonds and to have a real efficiency in water gas shift reaction (WGS). In the gasifier, the Fe/ olivine catalyst, in presence of HO and CO will be of great interest for additional hydrogen production through WGS and is expected to be efficient in tar steam reforming. Toluene was selected as a tar model compound [, 5]. We have compared performances of olivine, Ni/olivine and Fe/olivine (with different percentage of iron) in toluene steam reforming and in water gas shift reaction. The operating conditions have been studied to optimize the catalysts activity (reaction temperature between 50C and 850C; oxidant-reductive conditions: H/steam ratio). The concentration of H in the gas flow was found to be the key of the Fe/olivine efficiency and stability in toluene steam reforming. After 0 hours of reactivity, the Fe/olivine and the Ni/olivine revealed the same stable activity (about 90% of conversion and 0% of hydrogen yield at 85C). Both metals favoured the water gas shift reaction (CO/CO2 = 1.6 for Ni/olivine and CO/CO2 = 1.4 for Fe/ olivine at 85C) and exhibited similar hydrogen production (.%vol for Ni/olivine, .8%vol for Fe/olivine in the gas flow). Olivine alone showed less activity. However, a part of the hydrogen produced with the Fe/olivine and olivine alone is mobilized in order to form a small quantity of methane. Reactivity results will be explained through several characterization techniques (XRD, Mssbauer, TPR, XPS) performed before and after reaction.
5
Finally, we concluded that the Fe/olivine catalyst reveals to be of interest for tar reforming and WGS reaction, moreover it is a better choice than Ni/olivine catalyst taking account environmental and economical reasons. [] S. Rapagna, N. Jand, A. Kiennemann, P.U. Foscolo, Biomass and Bioenergy 9 (000) 8-9 [] R. Rauch, C. Pfeifer, K. Bosch, H. Hofbauer, D. wierczyski, C. Courson, A. Kiennemann - Science in Thermal and Chemical Biomass Conversion, A.V. Bridgwater and D.G.B. Boocock (Eds.), CPL Press, 00, vol. , pp. 99-809. [] C. Courson, C. Petit, A. Kiennemann, P. U. Foscolo, S. Rapagn, M. Matera - European Patent No. PCT/FR0/05, 8 mai 00. [] C. Courson, L. Udron, D. wierczyski, C. Petit and A. Kiennemann Catalysis Today, (00) 5-8. [5] D. Swierczynski, S. Libs, C. Courson, A. Kiennemann, Appl. Catal. B: Environ. (00) -.
5
VIp11 CONVERSION OF LOW GRAdE BIO-OILS TO BIOSyNGAS USING GLIdARCASSISTEd POX REFORMER Owrang F 1, Guitard F 1, Rafiq H 1, Hustad J 1, Grnli M 1, Czernichowski A 2, Olsson J 3, Pedersen J 3 Department of Energy and Process Engineering, NTNU 1 ECP, France 2 Arealia AB, Sweden 3
Low grade bio-oils such as deep-frying fat have been regarded as an alternative fuel for diesel engines. These oils are normally very low in cost and therefore attractive for diesel engines. However, due to their low quality properties, they can cause serious engine problems such as formation of combustion chamber deposits and/or injector deposits. An alternative method is converting these oils to biosyngas. The biosyngas can be used as fuel itself or it can be converted to biodiesel via Fischer-Tropsch synthesis. An economical way to produce syngas from low grade bio-oils is the low cost gliding arc plasma reforming. In a gliding arc reformer, the reforming is driven by high-voltage discharges that catalytically assist the exothermic partial oxidation process. The unique oxidant source is air. An important question is the injection method of oil into the GlidArc, which is also very important for the stability of the reformer. Direct injection of preheated oil in the reaction zone of the GlidArc can affect the stability of the electrical discharge, disturb the temperature and produce soot. A better method is to use a small amount of propane to maintain a stable temperature in the reformer. In this way, the chemical reactions do not only depend on the injected oil and the oil can be injected directly into the reaction zone of the reformer without any pre-heating procedure. A 0 kW GlidArc containing Ni-based catalyst on AlO support was used to produce syngas from liquid oil. Propane was used as the stabilizing fuel and the working pressure was atmospheric. In order to change the H/CO ratio in the syngas, water blended with oil was injected directly into the reformer chamber without any pre-heating procedure and without use of any vaporizer or nozzle. The working temperature inside the catalyst bed was about 000 C. Detailed mass and energy balance with and without water has been performed. The exhaust syngas was cooled to almost room temperature. No organic deposits were observed on the surface of the catalyst. Because, the syngas will be compressed to at least 0 bars in a Fischer-Tropsch reactor, special emphasis have been put on monitoring the amount of oxygen in the syngas. The energy used for production of suitable syngas (suitable for production of liquid hydrocarbons via FT synthesis) from different bio-oils using the reformer has been further evaluated. The future work should focus on the detailed chemical analysis of the catalyst material and high temperature corrosion analysis of the steel material after a long run.
58
VIp12 dEMONSTRATION OF THE PROdUCTION ANd UTILIzATION OF SyNTHETIC NATURAL GAS FROM SOLId BIOFUELS - PRESENTATION OF THE EUROPEAN PROJECT BIO-SNG Seiffert M, Rnsch S, Majer S The thermo-chemical gasification and the complete conversion from ligno-cellulosic biomass to methane that can be distributed through the existing gas grid and utilised in the stationary and mobile sector is an interesting and promising alternative. In comparison to e.g. liquid synthetic biofuels is synthetic natural gas (SNG) characterised through several advantages especially with regard to the high technical potential and the high overall efficiency. Despite these advantages, the methane production is still under development although many efforts have been carried out in the field of gas production and subsequent methanation. Against that background, the research project Bio-SNG started in the year 00, which demonstrates the production of biomethane via thermo-chemical gasification and utilization within the energy system. The objective of the Bio-SNG project is it to demonstrate the SNG production from woody biomass in the MW-range using steam gasification, advanced gas cleaning, methanation and gas upgrading as a part of an innovative 8 MW biomass CHP gasification plant, and to integrate this Bio-SNG into the existing energy infrastructure (i.e. fuel station for vehicles). To meet the specifications required for the gas-utilization in vehicles or the gas-feed-in into an existing natural gas grid, the produced SNG has to be upgraded. With this upgraded renewable gaseous fuel cars will be operated to demonstrate the application within the transportation sector. The entire provision chain of SNG was assessed on (i) technical (e.g. overall efficiencies), (ii) economic (e.g. cost efficiency) and (iii) environmental (e.g. overall primary energy demand, GHG emissions) parameters. Out of these conclusions it can be drawn, whether the SNG production is competitive to other synthetic biofuel pathways and when a market mature technology will be available. The assessment of the overall Bio-SNG provision chain shows, that the production of biomethane via thermo-chemical conversion, is characterised in comparison to other synthetic biofuels (e.g. FT-diesel) by outstanding energy efficiency and lower production costs. With regard to the environmental criteria, Bio-SNG contributes to the CO-mitigation.
59
VIp13 dESIGN ANd PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF SEWGS PROCESS BASEd ON WGS CATALyST ANd CO2 ABSORBENT REACTIVITIES Ryu H J, Jo S H, Park y C, yi C K As a next generation hydrogen production technology from coal with inherent CO capture, SEWGS (Sorption Enhanced Water Gas Shift) process has been developed. In this study, conceptual design and sensitivity analysis of operating variables have been investigated based on a design program of two-interconnected fluidized bed and reactivity data for WGS catalyst and CO absorbent. Based on the conceptual design results, the optimum configuration for SEWGS was considered. Among three configurations (transport-bubbling, transportbubbling-bubbling, bubbling-bubbling) the bubbling-bubbling system was selected as the best configuration. Process design results indicate that the SEWGS system is compact and feasible. Based on the selected operating conditions, the effects of variables such as pressure, CO capture capacity, solid inventory, and CO capture efficiency have been investigated as well.
0
VIp14 EFFECTS OF HydROGEN ANd LEVOGLUCOSAN ON THE CHAR REACTIVITy IN THE BIOMASS GASIFICATION Fushimi C, Wada T, Tsutsumi A It is known that in coal gasification when volatiles produced in pyrolysis contact with char, steam gasification of char is inhibited by volatiles. Thus, there is a possibility that similar inhibition occurs in biomass gasification. In this study, the inhibition of the gasification rate of biomass char by volatiles was investigated. The effects of H and levoglucosan, which is a major pyrolysate derived from cellulose, on char reactivity were measured. At first, the reaction rate of char in steam gasification was measured using a thermobalance fixed bed reactor by changing H concentrations. It was found that the presence of H in the gas phase decelerated the steam gasification rate. The inhibition of reaction rate of char by levoglucosan was measured with a newly developed drop-tube/fixed bed thermobalance reactor. In the result, it was found that levoglucosan and its pyrolysates also inhibit the gasification of char substantially. When the feed rate of levoglucosan is 50 mg/min, the gasification reaction is terminated by levoglucosan and/or its derivatives.

VIp16 EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS ON HydROGEN PROdUCTION FROM BIOMASS APPLyING THE ABSORPTION ENHANCEd REFORMING (AER) PROCESS IN A 20KWTH dUAL FLUIdIzEd BEd Poboss N, Schuster A, Scheffknecht G Institute of Process Engineering and Power Plant Technology, University of Stuttgart, D70569 Stuttgart, Germany Phone: +49-711-685-68939; Fax: +49-711-685-63491 The European Project AER-II focuses on the development of a low cost-gasification process with integrated in situ gas cleaning for conversion of biomass into a product gas with high hydrogen concentration, high heating value and low tar concentration in one process step. This paper presents the results obtained from an experimental investigation on the hydrogen production using the Absorption Enhanced Reforming (AER) of biomass in a 0 kWth Dual Fluidised Bed (DFB) system. The AER process involves two coupled fluidized beds: a gasifier and a regenerator (calciner). The in-situ absorption of carbon dioxide by a sorbent (i.e. CaO) during steam gasification in the gasifier provides the heat necessary for the endothermic gasification reactions. Due to CO absorption, the equilibrium of the water-gas-shift reaction is shifted to the hydrogen product. As a result of the in-situ CO capture the hydrogen concentration is higher than 0%vol,db in the AER product gas. The carbonated sorbent is then transferred to the regeneration reactor where the CaCO is calcined and recycled back to the gasifier. The experiments were carried out with wood and straw pellets and two different limestones in a 0 kWth DFB system. A special feature of the DFB facility is the possibility of circulation rate control between the gasifier and the regenerator. In the regenerator, the CaCO will be regenerated to CaO and returned to the gasifier thereby allowing continuous operation of the AER-reforming process. In this paper the influence of different process parameters, e.g. gasifier temperature and circulation rate on the gas composition, especially the hydrogen concentration, during the absorption enhanced reforming is shown. To get information about the influence of different process parameters on the gas composition an online gas analyzer is installed. An additional online tar measurement system was used to get more information about tar concentration and product gas quality. Hereby, the hydrocarbon levels are measured by a flame ionization detector.

VIp18 FAST PyROLySIS FOR BIOSyNCRUdE PREPARATION AS A VERSATILE INTERMEdIATE FOR BIOMASS GASIFICATION dahmen N, Stahl R , Weirich F, dinjus E Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe, Institut fr Technische Chemie, CPV The biosyncrude gasification concept bioliq has been developed to use biomass as a renewable carbon resource for the co-production of synthetic biofuels, organic chemicals, heat and electricity. Potential feedstocks comprise residual wood, straw or even organic residues with higher ash content. The solid biomass is first converted by fast pyrolysis in a number of regionally distributed pre-treatment plants to yield pyrolysis oils and char. From the condensed pyrolysis products, the liquid like biosyncrude is produced, exhibiting a volumetric energy density considerably higher than that of the original biomass. Therefore, this biosyncrude can be transported economically to a large central plant for the generation and use of synthesis gas as required by economy of scale considerations. Within this biosyncrude gasification concept the suitability of the twin screw mixer reactor for fast pyrolysis (FP) of lignocellulosic biomass has been proved for pre-treatment of biomass prior to gasification. In lab scale and process development units (PDU) a broad variety of biomass feed stocks have been tested successfully. Yields for the solid, liquid and gaseous FP products have been determined and compare to results of the bubbling or circulating fluidised bed reactors and other FP reactor types. The main twin screw reactor features are mechanical fluidization by transport along the screw axis and efficient radial mixing of dry biomass particles with a surplus of hot heat carrier particles. Sand as well as other small sized heat carriers have been used as heat transfer media and assessed for use in large scale facilities. The twin-screw concept has finally been chosen because of the technical experience from earlier applications e.g. for town gas production from coal in the 90ies. This experience is activated to accelerating the scale-up of biomass FP reactors to commercial scale. At present, a 0.5 t/h FP-pilot facility has being build-up in cooperation with Lurgi AG on site of the Forschungszentrum. It is part of a complete bioliq-process pilot line from straw bale to fuel station and consists of biomass pre-treatment (cutting, milling), the fast pyrolysis plant with pneumatically driven heat carrier loop, and a section for bio-syncrude preparation. Lab and PDU scale results are presented and the first results of the pilot plant operation will be reported in the contribution.

VIp19 FEASIBILITy ANALySIS OF A GASIFICATION PLANT FOR POWER PROdUCTION FROM PAPER INdUSTRy REJECTS Fiorenza G 1, di Gennaro F 2, Reale F 2, Braccio G 1 ENEA Research Centre of Trisaia, Department of Energy Technologies, Efficiency and Renewable Sources, S.S. 106 Ionica km 419+500, 75026 Rotondella (MT), Italy 1 University of Naples Federico II, Department of Energetics, Thermofluidodynamics and Environmental Control, Piazzale Tecchio 80, 80125 Naples, Italy 2 The management of rejects from the pulping of waste paper and cardboard is a central issue for industries using recovered paper as raw material. These rejects are usually burned in large scale centralised incineration plants with low energy efficiency and high disposal and transportation costs. These problems along with the high energy requirements by paper industries encourage the research and development of advanced cost-effective solutions. The main objective of the present paper is to provide a preliminary assessment of the feasibility of pulping rejects gasification and its potential advantages in comparison with conventional technologies for its conversion into electricity. The work is based upon the experimental data obtained at the ENEA Trisaia Research Centre laboratories on rejects samples provided by a local paper industry, which is assumed as case study. According to the results of the characterisation tests, this fuel is mainly composed of plastics and, in a lesser extent, paper and has a valuable lower heating value (LHV) of almost 8 MJ/kg on dry basis. Furthermore both ashes and pollutants content is comparable to that of an untreated biomass, with the exception of chlorine which is significantly higher (more than wt.% dry). On the other hand the presence of heavy metals and solvents must be carefully considered. On the whole the pulping waste appears to be a potential fuel for the gasification process. Preliminary pyrolysis and gasification tests, using either air or steam as gasification agent, were performed on an appositely designed and constructed laboratory scale reactor having a fuel capacity of around .5 kW. The producer gas quality appears to be suitable, since its LHV ranges from more than MJ/Nm for air gasification to nearly 0 MJ/Nm for pyrolysis, mainly due to the high propane concentration in the gas. Basing upon these preliminary results, the feasibility of a medium scale gasification plant was analysed. The system size was chosen according to the case study annual production of pulping rejects. Similarly both energy needs and waste disposal charges of the case study were considered in order to achieve a preliminary cost analysis. In conclusion gasification of rejects from the pulping of waste paper and cardboard appears to be a suitable, cost-effective and environmentally sustainable solution for medium to large capacity paper industries using recycled paper as raw material. However a pilot scale investigation is necessary in order to identify the most appropriate gasification technology for this application and to optimise the main operational parameters. Furthermore specific solutions could be required for the fuel feeding system and the producer gas cleaning.

VIp20 FEASIBILITy ANALySIS OF A TRIGENERATION PLANT USING MOLTEN CARBONATE FUEL CELLS (MCFCS) Molino A 1, 2, Alvino E 1, Petrone M 1, Giordano G 2, Braccio G 1, Mannarino V 1, Blasi A 1, 2 ENEA Research Centre of Trisaia, Department of Energy Technologies, Efficiency and Renewable Sources 1 University of Calabria, Department of Chemical Engineering & Materials 2 In recent years the energy market is rapidly changing because of important and decisive technical, ecological, and political actions such as the liberalization of the energy market, the imperative need to reduce environmental pollution, and the security of energy supply. In this picture, the development of innovative systems, with high performance and low environmental impact, opens an attractive upcoming scenario. Hence, a new approach to the electricity and thermal energy production is proposed in this work with the aim to meet the new target of the energy market beyond the traditional concepts of combustion and dynamic machines. Precisely, the technical feasibility of a trigeneration plant fueled with syngas product of the biomass gasification and using Molten Carbonate Fuel Cells (MCFCs) for the combined production of electricity, heat and cooling is assessed. The plant joins fuel cells with gas turbines giving out a very powerful and promising technology. Fuel cells have already reached a R&S leading position in the field of production of electric energy as well as gas turbines and adsorption heat pumps for electricity and thermal energy production. The obtained technology allows to recover a share of thermal energy, otherwise lost in conventional power plants, almost equal to / of the total. Moreover, it allows to get yields higher of the /5 of primary energy associated with syngas and convert it into usable energy with enormous financial and economic benefits. Finally, through trigeneration it is also possible to use the waste heat (/5 of the total) to produce cooling through absorption cycles resulting in the so-called final process CHCP (Cogeneration of Heat, Cooling and Power) or generate heat for winter heating. Main advantages regarding trigeneration are the reliability and flexibility related to the energy production because of the proportions in which the three different types of energy can be varied to suit the needs of the final users. Furthermore, from a socio-economic point of view, trigeneration is excellent for promoting the decentralization of the energy production and, consequently, the liberalization of the energy market. An additional advantage is represented by the low environmental impact, as the emissions are strictly reduced compared to traditional systems. On this basis, the use of hydrogen(syngas) as fuel for trigeneration can provide energy for many applications with low environmental impact.
5
VIp21 FIXEd BEd GASIFICATION OF WOOd CHAR: THERMAL, CHEMICAL ANd MECHANICAL CHARACTERISATION Texeira G 1, Van de steene L 2, Salvador S 2, Martin E 1 CIRAD 1 EMAC 2 Fixed bed gasification is one of the most promising technologies in the area of biomass gasification to be introduced into the market of low and medium power ranges due to the higher electricity output expected compared to combustion. Moreover, downdraft or twostage gasifiers are known to produce low tar content in fuel gas. Objectives In this work, we focused on the step of the char bed gasification in fixed bed or two-stage gasification processes. We propose here a fine characterisation of the char bed during its gasification by HO and CO. The global objective is to provide key information to improve both the char conversion in char bed reactor and the control of fixed bed gasifiers, which remain today a brake to industrial development. Approach The characterisation of char bed gasification has been carried out thanks to the Continuous Fixed Bed reactor (CFiB) at Cirad. This reactor replicates the gasification zone apart from the rest of the fixed bed process. It is specifically instrumented to allow the measurement of thermal and chemical profiles all along the bed. Indeed, measurements of temperature, pressure and gas composition each 0 cm in the bed are performed. The non condensable gases are on-line analysed by gas-chromatography analysis. The condensable products (water + residual tar) are collected to be analysed in the lab by Karl Fisher, gas- and liquid- chromatography analyses. At the reactor outlet, ash removed is continuously weighed and gases are quantified to establish a precise mass balance of each experiment. Scientific innovation and relevance This CFiB reactor is an innovative tool to study wood char gasification in continuous fixed beds.

The accuracy of the measurements carried out inside the bed is a step forward in the understanding of fixed bed gasification processes. Such profiles of temperature, gas composition, char conversion, and bed morphology provide original and relevant data to localise the zones where char oxidation by O and char gasification by HO and CO effectively occur. Results In this paper, full characterisation of the fixed bed is presented, including axial and radial profiles inside the 00 mm height bed. Influence of steam partial pressure (from 0, to 0, atm) and initial oxygen content ( to 5 %) on char gasification has also been investigated with the proposed methodology.

VIp22 FLUIdIzEd BEd GASIFICATION OF MEAT ANd BONE MEAL POWdER Pugsley T 1, Gerspacher R 1, Wang z 2, Fonstad T 3, Campbell W 3, dalai A 1 Department of Chemical Engineering, The University of Saskatchewan 1 Bioprocessing Division, Saskatchewan Research Council 2 Department of Agricultural & Bioresources Engineering, The Univeristy of Saskatchewan 3 Due to concerns over the spread of Bovine Spongiform Encephalitis (BSE), feeding animals with the meat and bone meal powder (MBM) left over from the cattle rendering process will be severely restricted or even banned entirely. Large stockpiles of MBM will be created unless alternative disposal methods can be developed. One option is to exploit the MBM for it fuel value (approximately 0 MJ/kg) through the use of high-temperature gasification. This process will allow the energy value of the fuel to be recovered while the elevated temperature treatment will destroy the proteins responsible for BSE, thus eliminating them from the food chain. While the incineration, combustion, and pyrolysis of MBM have been studied, gasification of the MBM powder has received comparatively less attention. The present paper will present results on the gasification of MBM in a pilot-scale fluidized gasifier at temperatures ranging from 50 to 850 C, with both air and steam as the fluidizing medium. The gasifier is 0 cm ID by m tall and is designed to process up to 00 kg/day. Recovery of the MBM energy value through gasification presents an interesting opportunity for polygeneration. The product gas can be cleaned and used in a gas turbine to generate electricity or simply burned (with less gas cleanup) to generate steam for thermal energy. In either case, use of the producer gas will displace reliance on natural gas or electricity, thus reducing operating costs for the rendering plant. There is also the potential for higher value chemical production, which would open up the possibility of an additional revenue stream for the traditional cattle rendering businesses.
8
VIp25 GASIFICATION OF BIOOIL TO GET HydROGEN RICH PROdUCER GAS Singaravelu M 1, Vos J 2, Prins W 3
DEPT. OF BIOENERGY, AGRIL. ENGINEERING COLLEGE & RESEARCH INSTITUTE, TAMIL NADU AGRIL. UNIVERSITY, COIMBATORE 641003. TN, INDIA 1 BIOMASS TECHNOLOGY GROUP, BIOMASS TECHNOLOGY GROUP, C/O UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE 3 UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE, 7500 AE ENSCHEDE,The NETHERLANDS 3
In order to find the better use of bio-oil produced from saw dust, an experimental set-up for gasification of bio-oil was set up at BTG, The Netherlands. It consists of 5 mm inner dia MS pipe placed in an electric oven of 1800 W capacity which can heat up to 1200 C with thermostat control to maintain any desired temperature. The temperature of the experiment was varied from 1000, 1050 to 1150 C. A liquid pump pumps the oil at different mass flow rates through a nozzle of dia mm inside the MS pipe. The air flow meter was calibrated at bar and bars for different positions from 0 to 50 using a wet type gas flow meter. The pressure of the air can be varied using the air pressure valve arrangement and the volume flow rate of air can be varied using the air flow meter. The mass of the oil at definite time interval was observed to calculate the mass flow rate of oil during the gasification experiments. The outlet of the gasification pipe was connected to the gas outlet pipe. The gas from the outlet pipe was drawn periodically and analysed for its composition in a Gas-Chromatograph. The results indicate that the air pressure of bars give better results than bar with respect to better heat content of the gas. As the air flow rate increases, the quality of gas increases up to 58 L/h and then it decreases. Hence the air flow rate of 58 L/h is found to yield the best results at the air pressure of bars. The temperature of 050 0C is optimized to give the best results for the air pressure of bars. It is observed that use of catalyst increases the gas quality. The heat content of the gas is in the range of to 5 MJ/Nm. It is suggested that a large scale/ pilot plant can be constructed for gasification of bio-oil and tested for its performance.
9
VIp26 GASIFICATION TAR REdUCTION By SPARGING IN A MOLTEN SALT REACTOR GIROdS P 1, CASTAGNO F 2, LELAIT L 2, ROGAUME y LERMAB, Nancy-Universit, UMR 1093, INRA, ENGREF, UHP 1 European Institute For Energy Research (EIFER) 2 Gasification is one of the most promising conversion process for the use of biomass. This thermo chemical process biomass leads to the production of a low-heating-value fuel gas (08MJ/m) mainly composed of CO and H. The biosyngas produced offers a wide range of applications for energetic purposes: boilers, engines, gas turbines or fuel cells among others. Nevertheless, the industrial development of such a process is slowed down by technical problems. Indeed, some unwanted compounds like particulates and tars are the results of complex chemical reaction occurring inside the gasifier. These can cause operating problems, especially condensation in transfer lines as heat exchanger surfaces, fouling of pipes, plugging of valves, deactivation of catalyst and may also present environmental problems. Tar reduction is thus a key point for the development of such processes. Different methods have been developed involving catalytic and thermal system but economic feasibility of these alternatives are not demonstrated. An innovative concept has been developed and patented (n0080-00) in EIFER to answer the problematic of tars formation. The method proposed in this work consists in sparging gasification products into a bath of molten salts at temperature in range of 00C to 000C. From the point of view of energy utilization and heat transfer enhancement, inorganic molten salts present a promising option as a medium for destruction, conversion, and/or reduction of tars for the gas clean-up process. Experiments have been performed at a lab-scale device. In order to distinguish and to understand mechanisms of tar reduction, tests have been performed on a gas model produced by mixing heated nitrogen (00C) with benzene. Benzene has been chosen as tar model since it is one of the major and more stable aromatic compounds in gasification products. The produced gas model containing g/Nm of benzene is continuously injected in an inox bubble chamber filled with a mix of sodium and potassium carbonate (50 / 50 in mass) which temperature varies between 00C and 000C. Resulting gases are then analysed at the outlet of the reactor by FTIR spectrometry for permanent gases (CO, CO, CH) and by the SPA method for tars. The method developed in this laboratory allows a qualitative and quantitative analysis of about twenty aromatic compounds. The efficiency of the molten salts bath system is given by comparison of the tar content before and after the system. Tests are also preformed without salts to distinguish the thermal effect of the molten salts bath effect.
0
First results show the feasibility of the reduction of the tar content into gasification products by sparging in a molten salts bath. Indeed, higher benzene conversion rate are observed with molten salts in the range of 50C to 950C. Conversion rates at 00C (around 0 %) and at 000C (around 95 %) are quite similar with and without molten salts. The temperature where the shift between the two experiments is the most important is around 900C; the conversion rate is, in these conditions, 5 % without molten salts against 85 % with molten salts. It has been shown that conversion of benzene into aromatic compounds of higher molar weight is limited and that the major part of benzene is converted to gases participating in the increase of the heating value of the resulting gas.

VIp27 HIGH PRESSURE ANd HIGH TEMPERATURE WATER GAS SHIFT REACTION IN MICROSTRUCTUREd REACTORS Piermartini P 1, Pfeifer P 1, Schaub G 2 Institute for Micro Process Engineering (IMVT), Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH, 76344 Karlsruhe, Germany 1 Engler-Bunte-Institut, Universitt Karlsruhe (TH), 76128 Karlsruhe, Germany 2 For the production of liquid synfuels from biomass feedstocks, a water gas shift reaction step carried out at high pressure and temperature may be advantageous in terms of minimizing energy losses. Since biomass gasification yields insufficient H/CO ratio for fuel synthesis and high pressure may be applied, subsequent gas cleaning and water gas shift should be carried out at elevated pressure and above the temperature level of synthesis. Due to their excellent heat and mass transfer conditions, microstructured reactors potentially offer advantages for process design and control. For example, variations in synthesis feed gas composition may be compensated by temperature adjustment, thus ensuring constant outlet gas composition. In addition, temperature profiles along the catalytic reactor may be set to achieve optimum conditions with respect to chemical equilibrium and reaction kinetics. Thus, by a decreasing temperature profile with increasing conversion, local reaction rates can be maximized and catalyst demand minimized. However, catalyst preparation for microstructured reactors, reaction kinetics, catalyst stability against biomass-specific poisoning and potential byproduct formation at high pressure conditions have to be investigated. In the present contribution, these issues will be discussed in more detail. Moreover, first experimental results obtained with a new, lab-scale microstructured reactor will be presented. Microstructured foils coated with Pt/CeO/AlO and a commercial iron-chromium catalyst in a micro fixed bed foil design will be tested with variation in reaction pressure up to 50 bars and temperature between 00 and 500C.

VIp28 HIGH-TEMPERATURE PyROLySIS OF LOW-GRAdE AGRICULTURAL WASTES Adinberg R, zvegilsky d, Epstein M Solar Energy Research Facilities, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, 76100, Israel This research project is aimed at developing of a waste-to-energy technology suitable for power generation from various low-grade agricultural by-products, e.g. rice husk, cereal straw, corncob, olive husk, etc. The research is currently focused on rice husk, which is possibly the most under-utilized biomass feedstock in many countries cultivating rice. Due to its high mineral content (mainly silica), the efficiency of husk utilization as fuel in the conventional high-temperature combustion and gasification systems is low, around 50%, and results in large amounts of ash and unconverted carbon. The present study on energy recovery from rice husk is based on conducting the simultaneous pyrolysis-gasification reactions of biomass in a molten carbonate salts medium under high temperature. This concept of thermochemical conversion of biomass to syngas was developed at the Weizmann Institute of Science and demonstrated using cellulose particles. It was shown that the thermal and reacting conditions in a molten salt reactor are favorable for the production of syngas with minimal tar and solid residue. Syngas is a clean, energy-valuable fuel to be utilized in high efficient conversion systems such as gas turbines or fuel cells for electricity production. The investigation of rice husk pyrolysis in a molten medium of Na-K carbonate salts has been conducted at temperatures of 800-900C using a lab-scale, electrically heated reactor. The rice husk feed is made in the form of g tablets produced by compression of the pre-milled stuff. As follows from the experimental results, about 8-90% wt of the initial biomass could be converted to syngas at 900C versus about -55% wt obtained at the same temperature in the reactor without molten salt. The syngas was primarily comprised of H, CO, CO and CH, about 98% vol. in total, with a fraction of hydrogen -% vol. It is suggested, based on chemical thermodynamics that silica contained in rice husk could be reacting with the molten salt of sodium carbonate. Therefore, the completion of rice husk gasification obtained is much higher than that observed in conventional gas-oxidizing processes.

VIp29 INdICATIONS OF BIO-SyNTHETIC NATURAL GAS PROdUCTION ANd UTILISATION ON GLOBAL CLIMATE RESULTS FROM THE EU FP6 PROJECT BIO-SNG Majer S, Oehmichen K, Mller-Langer F, Rnsch S German Biomass Research Centre, Torgauer Str. 116, 04347 Leipzig/Germany Driven by growing concerns about global warming and resource depletion, the setting of the political frame conditions led to a significant increase in the use of biofuels within Germany as well as within the European Union throughout the recent years. However, the expected positive environmental impact of this strategy especially concerning the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions is strongly and very controversial discussed nowadays. Looking for alternative fuels with an advantageous environmental performance, especially the production of so-called Bio-Synthetic Natural Gas (Bio-SNG) from ligno-cellulose biomass could be a promising option. Within the European research project Bio-SNG the production and utilization of synthetic natural gas is analysed. Practical data and operational experiences are derived from a demonstration plant in Gssing (Austria). The project also included the environmental assessment of different Bio-SNG concepts for different time horizons and under uniform frame conditions. For this assessment, the methodology of Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) was used to calculate the overall greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the consumption of finite energy resources for the considered Bio-SNG pathways. Furthermore, the GHG mitigation potential in comparison to fossil fuel was calculated according to the methodology of the European Renewable Energy Directive proposal. The system boundaries of the environmental assessment covered all basic elements of the Bio-SNG production and utilisation, i.e. biomass provision, the conversion process, the Bio-SNG distribution and the use of the Bio-SNG in the transportation sector. The results of this assessment will be presented including a comprehensive comparison to the potential environmental aspects of other promising first and second generation biofuel pathways (e.g. Bioethanol from sugar cane, BtL, etc.). Furthermore, the conclusions can be used to identify areas for a further process optimization regarding environmental aspects as well as areas requiring further research.

VIp30 LOW TEMPERATURE PyROLySIS OF AGRICULTURAL RESIdUES IS USEd TO SUBSTITUTE FOSSIL FUELS IN A THERMAL POWER PLANT Halwachs M, Hofbauer H Institute of Chemical Engineering, Vienna University of Technology A. PURPOSE OF WORK Pyrolysis is a process to convert biomass directly into solid, liquid and gaseous products by thermal decomposition in absence of oxygen. Pyrolysis is a very complex process; many different reactions take place and can be influenced by numerous factors. Aim of this work is to obtain fundamentals for an advanced pyrolysis model approach by the results of the pilot plant. B. APPROACH A MW pyrolysis pilot plant is presently being investigated using agricultural residues (straw as the primary feedstock). This externally heated rotary kiln pyrolysis reactor is used as a new process technology for the conversion of biomass into useful primary energy products. Several analytical methods are applied to provide an insight into the complex process of pyrolysis (e.g. gravimetric determination, GC-MS determination, IC determination and fuel analysis). C. SCIENTIFIC INNOVATION AND RELEVANCE The design fuel power is about MW; the pyrolysis gas capacity is about .5 MW. Approximately 0. t/h straw can be processed in the rotary kiln. The externally heated rotary kiln pyrolysis reactor in Drnrohr is an innovative process technology which can also be used for high capacities. The process is operated at low temperatures (50 to 0 C) to prevent an entry of corrosive ash elements (K, Cl, S, etc.) and additional emissions in the steam boiler of the coal fired power plant. An energetic use of the pyrolysis-charcoal (approximately 0-50% of the original heating value) occurs separately in a fluidized bed reactor. Several analytical methods are used to get more insight about the behavior during pyrolysis. First test runs were carried out at pyrolysis gas temperatures ranging from 50 to 0 C. D. RESULTS Organic liquids can be classified due to the viscosity. Thereby liquids differ in low viscous pyrolysis oils and high viscous tar. The components are a mixture of alcohols, furans, aldehydes, esters, phenols, organic acids and oligomer carbohydrate and lignin products. The composition depends on the raw material and the pyrolysis process.
5
The pyrolysis gas mainly contains H, CO, CO, CH, trace amounts of larger gaseous organics compounds and water vapor. The water content results from the biomass humidity, about 0 %, and from the reaction water. To control the water content, the water content of the used biomass should be lower than 0 wt. %. The charcoal consists of carbon, volatile components, ash and partly tar. The content of carbon is one of the most important parameter for the quality of the charcoal, as well as the water content, ash content, elemental analysis, particle size, and energy density. All of the quality characteristics depend on the used biomass and the pyrolysis process as well as the purpose of use. The paper will show the enrichment of potassium, chlorine, sulphur, sodium and nitrogen in the pyrolysis char, the relationship between pyrolysis gas temperature and tar content, and the results of different feed stock variations. Furthermore an advanced pyrolysis model will be introduced. E. CONCLUSION The findings of the pilot plant will deliver fundamentals for the development of an advanced pyrolysis model. Furthermore, the results will be the basis for a scale up to a 0 MW capacity. For an improved description of this highly complex process further test runs are in progress.

VIp32 MOdEL VALIdATION ANd SIMULATION OF A BIOMASS GASIFIER INTEGRATEd IN A 6 MWE ENGINE COGENERATION PLANT OF AN ALCOHOL dISTILLERy Puig-Arnavat M, Bruno J. C, Coronas A Department of Mechanical Engineering, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Avda Pasos Catalans 26 - 43007 - Tarragona (Spain) The potential for biomass to supply much larger amounts of useful energy with reduced environmental impacts compared to fossil fuels has stimulated substantial research and development. The increasing dependence on imported oil as well as the urgency to reduce greenhouse emissions abounds in justifying an energy policy that carefully considers the role of renewable sources as energy carrier. Among the renewable energies, biomass is expected to be one of the most important in the near future. Gasification is one of the most efficient ways to convert the energy embedded in the biomass and it is becoming one of the best alternatives for waste solids reuse. This paper presents a modelling of the biomass gasification process and more particularly the wood gasification. The proposed gasification model can be used as a predictive tool at the optimisation stage. The model, based on the minimisation of the Gibbs free energy, is developed for an atmospheric fluidised bed gasifier using the ASPEN PLUS simulator. The ASPEN PLUS software simulator has been used successfully by different investigators to simulate biomass gasification and it is chosen as a simulation tool because of its capability on the solids handling. This model aims to be able to predict gasification output mixture composition when changing the type or the characteristics of the biomass used. Validation of this model will be carried out using the commercial gasification plant located in Campo de Criptana (Spain), built by EQTEC Iberia at the alcohol distillery of the company Mostos, Vinos y Alcoholes S.A. (Movialsa). This plant has an electrical output of 5.9 MW and produces 500kg/h of saturated steam at bar(g) and 59 m/h of hot water at 90C, which are used by the alcohol factory. The plant gasifies 000 kg/h of waste bagasse from the alcohol factory and allows total elimination of the bagasse liquid and effluent of the factory. Three Jenbacher 0 synthesis gas engines are used for electricity generation. Different sets of operating conditions for the gasifier will be used to validate the developed gasifier model. In a near future, the model will also be applied to a commercial gasification plant to be built in Cerdanyola del Valls (Spain) in the framework of the European project Polycity. This plant will have an electrical output of about MWe and will gasify 000 kg/h of wood waste. The heat recovery system will be coupled with an absorption chiller to produce chilled water at C.

VIp33 MOdELLING OF AN ABSORPTION TOWER FOR THE REMOVAL OF SULPHUR IN PROdUCER GAS FROM BIOMASS GASIFICATION BLASI A 1, 2, MOLINO A 1, 2, FIORENzA G 1, BRACCIO G 1, GIORdANO G 2 ENEA Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and the Environment, Department of Energy Technologies, Efficiency and Renewable Sources, Research Centre Trisaia, S.S. 106 km 419,5, 75026 Rotondella (MT) Italy 1 Chemical Engineering & Materials Department, University of Calabria, via P. Bucci, I87030 Rende (CS), Italy 2
Gas cleaning is the key step in biomass gasification in order to exploit the producer gas for power generation, especially if advanced conversion devices, such like gas turbines or fuel cells, are used. Actually these machines are extremely sensitive to pollutants concentration. On the other hand gas cleaning becomes even more critical if producer gas is used as feed stream for either FischerTropsch or methanol synthesis in order to produce liquid bio-fuels. Sulphur components are amongst the main contaminants to be removed from producer gas. In effect, HS must be limited to 0. ppm for a trouble-free use of producer gas in gas turbines or molten carbonate fuel cells. Furthermore this compound reacts with oxygen, at hot temperature, and forms SO and SO, which are the main factors of acid rain, thus requiring an accurate cleaning of flue gas downstream of the conversion device. In addition, it must be observed that the current world energy scenario is characterised by a growing interest in the use of coal, in particular in biomass/coal cofiring power plants. Being this primary energy source rich in sulphur, it can be deduced how sulphur removal systems optimisation is going to be a core target of scientific research in the field of polygeneration technologies. Two biomass gasification plants are currently operating at the ENEA Research Centre Trisaia in Rotondella (Italy), based upon different gasification concepts: a dual fluidised bed steam gasifier and a downdraft fixed bed air gasifier. Two more pilot plants, which are now under construction, will be started soon: a bubbling fluidised bed oxygen/steam gasifier and an updraft fixed bed air/ steam gasifier. All of these plants are going to be combined with different producer gas conversion devices, such like, an internal combustion gas engine (already working), a molten carbonate fuel cell, a methanol synthesis reactor. The aim of this work is to compare the sulphur reduction by means of an ammine scrubber for the different producer gases from these gasification pilot plants. Both experimental and simulated data are used to define the design producer gas composition for the different gasifiers. Furthermore an apposite model is developed by the authors in order to evaluate the performance of an ammine absorption tower in the various cases under investigation. Literature data are then used in order to validate the model and finally the results obtained with the proposed technology are compared to those relevant to a hot sulphur removal technology, such like metallic oxide adsorption.
8
VIp35 OPERATION OF A SOLId OXIdE FUEL CELL (SOFC) WITH PROdUCT GAS (THERMAL GASIFICATION) Martini S, Werber R, Kleinhappl M, Hofbauer H Bioenergy 2020+ GmbH, Area II Biomass Gasification Inffeldgasse 21b; A-8010 GRAZ Steam gasification of biomass delivers product gas of high hydrogen content and high volumetric energy density because of low nitrogen fraction. Together with carbon monoxide and methane this gas is expected to be an almost perfect fuel for high-temperature-fuel cells, such as SOFC (Solid Oxide Fuel Cell). By the conversion of these fuel components the fuel cell technology can be a future perspective technology for energetic conversion of product gas. High overall efficiencies combined with extremely low emissions can be expected. In a running project Bioenergy 00+ (former Austrian Bioenergy Centre) is doing R&D since 00. Prior work focused on the high temperature gas cleaning. Now Bioenergy 00+ can also present operational test of micro scale SOFC-reactor units. For successful operation of SOFC- units the characteristics of the (fuel-) product gas and the operational behaviour of the fuel cell unit should be brought together. In detail this means, that the quality of the product gas after clean up and the handling of the fuel cell application are in focus. This paper shows the coupling of a micro scale SOFC-unit with the gas treatment and the operational results, demonstrated at the Gssing Biomass Gasification Plant. In the first task gas treatment - the most relevant impurities of the gas, such as dust, tars and sulphur derivates are detailed, because they can reduce the capacity of the fuel cells or even damage the cells (=clean gas consumer technology). In the second task the technology of the test rig and operational setting of the FC unit is shown. The test set up is designed to be coupled on the gas treatment unit. The tubular unit of the SOFC consist of cell arrangements of to 9 single cells. Until now the majority of tests were performed with -cell units. The nominal power of such settings is in the range of 00 to .000 mW. The cells are single contacted and no voltage pump via serial junction is made. The gas treatment can process about 5 m/h (standard state) product gas. A used side stream of 0 to 500 l/h can be extracted, measured in flow and supplied to the test SOFC-unit. For variation of the test conditions the gas can be treated additionally with solid reactants and reheated at freely controllable temperature. The stack unit can be operated directly or via a prereformer unit. The stack unit is enclosed into a heated casing, with free adjustable temperature, by means of the surrounding surface and the applied flow of air conducted at the cathode section. The flow of cathode air is directed in defined way to the stack unit. The electrical conditions are defined with fixed resistive load, switchable with discrete steps. During the operational start a special procedure of temperature-gas-load-conditions must be conducted, as well in cool down procedure. All the reported conditions are relevant to document the test conditions during the field tests.
9
Additional all relevant quality parameter of the applied product gas sampled and analysed. The first operational tests with single cells units have been performed 005 and have shown deactivation of early cell generations after a few hours. A shift in performance compared to pure hydrogen and the deactivation from low sulphur concentrations was detected. The evolution to better cell concepts, improved ceramic structure and coatings has delivered the cell generation .0. The actual tests with product gas have shown successful operation with product gas during and more hours. Actually all operational data from the process conditions of the product gas and the operational condition of the cell unit are available. Compared to expected values (proposed) the specific performance of the cell units is lower than single-cell-tests at pure hydrogen, the long time operation shows more stable trend. Based on the overview of technological approach of FC-units the further demand in development must be declared in stack design and material upscale, because a number of different defects is located there. The operation with the product gas itself is showing successful performance at stable conditions.A long time performance test under field-lab-conditions has been started, and will be performed within the next six months at the Gssing Biomass Gasification Plant. Summary of current results: Starting in 005 with single cell tess Bioenergy 00+ has performed the first test series at the Gssing Biomass Gasification Plant. A special test rig combined with the existing gas treatment unit has been developed. Successful operation of a micro scale FC unit has been performed until now. Further demand in development of stack design & technology has been evaluated. A long term test run of micro and midi scale FCunits has been started. In six months actual new results will be presented.
80
VIp36 OPTIBTLGAS - STEAM REFORMING OF PROdUCT GAS FROM BIOMASS STEAM GASIFICATION Potetz A, Rauch R, Hofbauer H Institute of Chemical Engineering; Vienna University of Technology Biomass gasification is a possibility to produce from a solid fuel a synthesis gas, which can be used for many different applications as production of chemicals like ammonia, production of heat and electricity, production of nd generation biofuels like FT diesel. In this project the upgrading of the raw product gas to synthesis gas is investigated. The biomass CHP Gssing uses the allothermal steam dual fluidised bed gasifier and produces a high grade product gas, which is used at the moment for the CHP in a gas engine. As there is no nitrogen in the product gas and high hydrogen content, this gas can be also used as synthesis gas. At the biomass CHP Gssing there are about 0vol% of methane in the product gas, which means, that about / of the chemical energy is bound in the methane and cannot be utilised in synthesis gas reactions, like Fischer Tropsch. The aim is to convert this methane over a steam reforming step to hydrogen and carbon monoxide to increase the conversion efficiency from biomass to FT fuels in this way. The product gas from the biomass CHP Gssing has normally a H:CO ratio of .8:. By reforming of the hydrocarbons a H:CO ratio of .: is adjusted. The steam reformer is integrated into the existing FT synthesis and is used as first upgrading step without previous sulphur removal. In the first experiment it was shown, that the reactor itself has no catalytic effects and the gas composition does not change over the reactor. It was also recognised, that there is soot formation, if the steam carbon ratio is too low. In the first experiments a methane steam reforming catalyst was used. It was shown, that the higher hydrocarbons are reformed almost completely, but the methane conversion was not as high as expected. Also a deactivation of the catalyst by carbon formation occurred. A catalyst for reforming aromatics was used in further experiments. It showed higher methane conversion rates than the previous catalyst due to the suppression of soot formation by the catalyst itself. At the moment the parameter variation is going on, to optimise the steam reformer. First different catalysts are used and afterwards a parameter variation (temperature, steam carbon ratio) is done to find the optimal operation conditions for the steam reformer.
8
VIp37 POLLUTANTS REMOVAL IN WOOd LAMINATEd FLOORING By LOW TEMPERATURE PyROLySIS LEMONON J, GIROdS P, ROGAUME y, PERRIN d, zOULALIAN A LERMAB, Nancy-Universit, UMR 1093, INRA, ENGREEF, UHP Increase of the greenhouse effects, climate warming, decrease of the fossil resources and perpetual increase of the population on the surface of the planet and thus of the energy needs how to deal with this problem? Gasification undoubtedly constitutes a considerable brief reply in the near future. This field has obviously been studied in the past but it is nowadays braked by the high costs of wood and biomass. The idea is currently to substitute this natural feedstock by wastes from wood such as wood laminated floorings. This kind of waste is relatively interesting in so far as it appears in the 80s (in the Scandinavian countries) and it has known a very large development and success due to their easy fabrication and conditioning (for the transport), their easy and fast installation (without the need of a professional) and above all, their very attractive costs. A lot of these wood laminated floorings are today at the end of their life and are waiting for a treatment or are simply burning without any consideration of the pollutants inside. This pool is very interesting for the development of the gasification process because of the so low or even negative costs they present. Nevertheless, this type of waste contains huge amount of nitrogen coming from ureaformaldehyde and melamineformaldehyde resins associated with wood and which are responsible for the production of nitrogen species (ammonia, isocyanic acid, hydrogen cyanide, NOx) during classical thermochemical conversion (combustion, pyrolysis, gasification). A two steps process of thermochemical conversion has been setting up: a first low temperature pyrolysis step which aims to remove nitrogen and a second step to produce combustible gases for different applications (combustion, cogeneration, biooil). The aim of this work is to study the first stage of this multi-steps process (removing nitrogen) with several parameters combinations in saving the maximum of energy in the combustible. Experiments are achieved in a quartz tubular furnace and the gases produced are analysed by FTIR spectrometry. The quantities of removed nitrogen are obtained by comparison of the ultimate analysis of initial and treated samples whereas the quantity of recovered energy is determined by tests in calorimetric bomb. Results show that high quantity of nitrogen can be removed by this low temperature pyrolysis step. It has been shown that treatments temperature has an influence on the necessary time to eliminate nitrogen and on the available quantity of energy.
8
VIp38 PROdUCTION OF HydROGEN By CATALyTIC STEAM REFORMING OF THE AQUEOUS FRACTION OF BIOMASS FAST-PyROLySIS OIL (BIO-OIL) Feifei C Catalytic steam reforming of the aqueous fraction of biomass fast-pyrolysis oil (bio-oil) was studied as a strategy for producing hydrogen. The process combines the merits of renewable feedstock and convenient transportation. In this paper, a fixed-bed reactor was employed to investigate the performance of Ni/CeO-ZrO catalysts for hydrogen production from biooil. Effects of steam to bio-oil ratios, reaction temperatures, and Ni and CeO content on the catalytic performance of Ni/CeO-ZrO catalysts were examined and the catalysts were characterized by means of XRD and BET. Obtained results were compared with commercial nickel-based catalysts(Z).
8
VIp39 PyROLISyS OF WOOdy BIOMASS ANd WASTE PLASTICS Murakami K, Ota M Tokyo Metropolitan University A newly experimental set-up was developed for gasification of biomass shown in Figure . This experimental set-up can control temperature up to 00 K and gasify sample under vacuum or up to 00 kPa. Generated gases are analyzed the composition by using a gas chromatography. In this study, woody biomass and waste plastics were gasified under no oxygen and analyzed its generated gas. It is clearly that the different temperature region makes different generated gases. That is, low temperature under 50 C make carbon oxide mainly. Hydrogen or gases containing hydrogen atom like methane are generated over 00 C. Hydrogen gas is generated around 00 C mainly and 000 C too. Thermogravimetry/differential thermal analysis (TG/DTA) under nitrogen gas has done too. About 0 mg of sample was analyzed by pyrolysis mass-spectrometry. In case of woody biomass, about % mass was decreased under 00 C and this is almost moisture. About 0 % mass was decreased up to 00 C, and almost generated gases are carbon oxides. Around 00 C, rapid decreasing of mass is confirmed, and generated gases are gases containing hydrogen atom mainly.
8
VIp40 SITING A dEMONSTRATION SyNGAS FACILITy IN CALIFORNIA USING GIS Krantz T Biomassekraftwerk Guessing (the Guessing Group) and the University of Redlands and ESRI, Inc., both of Redlands, California (the Redlands Group), are working together to site the first mixed waste stream polygeneration demonstration project in Southern California. The site criteria for the project will be analyzed using a geographic information system (GIS) model. Input data to the model include waste stream component analysis, transportation and delivery, parcel size, land use compatibility, etc. The GIS model has broad application for evaluation of optimum site locations for polygeneration facilities with a variety of biomass resources.
85
VIp41 STEAM/OXyGEN GASIFICATION IN A FLUIdIzEd BEd GASIFIER ANd BIOdIESEL/WATER SCRUBBER ANALySES FOR POWER GENERATION Fanelli E, Freda C, Nanna F, Villone A, Canneto G, Barisano d Heat and power can be produced from biomass via thermochemical technology such as combustion, gasification or pyrolysis. Biomass gasification allows the conversion of different biomass to a more convenient energy gaseous carrier. Compared to the direct combustion of biomass, the production of fuel gas can be exploited more efficiently in various application such as: internal combustion engine (efficiency of 0-5%), and advanced systems gas turbine based (BIG/ GT or IGCC, efficiency of 0-5%). In the latter use, the syngas from the gasification section, after cleaning is fed and burned into a gas turbine (GT). Since the exhaust gas from the GT is generated at about 580C, by recovering heat from the flue gas additional power can be produced via a steam turbine unit (electrical efficiency up to 5-50%). Higher efficiency can be obtained with a DHP configuration, where the residual heat of the gaseous stream is further recovered for district heating. Despite the great potential of BIG/GT or IGCC systems, because of some technical problems these system are still at the experimental stage. To the full technology development of the power production from biomass gasification via atmospheric GT based systems, two kinds of drawbacks can be identify as the major obstacles. The first one concern the need to cool and pressurise the syngas before injecting it in the gas turbine. This need can cause tars condensation upstream the gas combustion section and consequently give rise to problems of system operation. The second one is correlated to the presence in the syngas of alkali halides, which can damage the turbine blades by hot corrosion phenomena. Therefore before being fed to the GT system, the syngas has to be deeply cleaned. At the research centre of Enea Trisaia (Italy) is under development an innovative gasification plant which main objective is the production of a high purity, hydrogen rich, syngas to be used in advanced applications such as gas turbine and fuel cell. The plant is based on a MWth fluidized bed gasifier and uses steam/oxygen mixture as gasification medium. For alkali halide vapour and tars removal the cleaning section is equipped with an hot ceramic filtering system and a bio-oil scrubber. In the present study results from the experimental activity curried out at a 0 KWth bench-scale facility are presented. The plant was operated to assess the overall performance. To this aim a tests campaign was performed in autothermal mode, at temperature of 850 C and pressure of atm. Different steam/biomass ratio (0.5-) were explored. Gas composition and cleaning efficiency at different operating condition were evaluated. The syngas yield was found to be of about Nm/kg(daf biomass). The hydrogen and carbon monoxide content was of about -0%v and -%v, respectively. A low heating value (LHV) of about - MJ/Nm was calculated.
8
VIp42 SyNGAS UTILIzISATION IN A 100KW MICROGASTURBINE WITH MOdIFIEd COMBUSTION CHAMBER Stemann M, Martin U h s energieanalgen gmbh, Freising, Germany Utilization of syngas in a gas turbine instead of a gasengine leads to several advantages: In order to achieve sufficient power input with a gasengine, the gas has to be cooled down, which subsequently leads to condensation of the tars. With utilization of a gasturbine, the gas can be supplied above condensation temperature of the tars. Sensible heat and tars remain in the syngas resulting in an efficiency increase of the process. Furthermore, pressurized gasification allows the elimination of the fuel gas compressor but requires fuel input against pressure into the gasifier on the other hand. The poster presentation will explain the process sceme of allothermal steam gasification with Heatpipe-Reformer technology and the utilization of a modified Microgasturbine Turbec T00. Main topic will be the results of research and development regarding modification of the combustion chamber and the fuel distribution system (FDS): . Implementation of syngas-piping with reference to higher mass flow, higher temperatures up to 00C and new control system of pilot- and premix gas. . Replacement of original Turbec burner with an hse premix burner (using ALSTOMtechnology). The design of the burner considers the influence of the flame velocity, mainly triggered by the hydrogen content up to 0%vol. Furthermore, the chosen design reduces risk against flash-back, since syngas and air will not be mixed before they are injected into the combustor. . The standard natural gas compressor has been eliminated, which leads to an increase of power output of about 0%.
8
VIp43 TAR COMPOSITION IN THERMO-CHEMICAL BIOMASS CONVERSION PROCESSES Aigner I, Wolfesberger U, Hofbauer H Vienna University of Technology (TUV), Institute of Chemical Engineering Getreidemarkt 9/166, A-1060 Vienna, Austria The global warming, the increasing CO emission, the combustion of and dependency on fossil fuels, as well as the high-energy price have resulted in an increasing demand in renewable energy source. Biomass, as a renewable energy source, has the potential to contribute to the future energy mix in various ways. In thermo-chemical biomass conversion processes, especially gasification and pyrolysis, the tar content and composition is a major subject. Due to the various processes examined at TUV, this work picks up the opportunity to compare the different tar amounts and its composition at different temperatures and process parameters. The steam gasification tar contents of straw and wood producer gas as well as slow straw pyrolysis tar yields are compared in the following work. Pyrolysis experiments were conducted in a rotary kiln reactor at a temperature range from 00 C to 0 C. Gasification experiments were carried out in a 00 kW dual fluidized bed gasifier at a temperature variety of 800 C to 80 C. For better understanding of the tar transformation during thermo-chemical conversion of biomass the tar was analyzed with a gas chromatography/mass spectrometer to gain its composition. Main observation was at higher temperatures the tar composition is shifted to higher molecular tars as poly aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH). Key tar components at lower temperatures (pyrolysis) are phenols. A comparison of these two thermo-chemical processes, in particular because of the separate performance of pyrolysis and gasification, leads to a better understanding of tar transformation during biomass conversion. Therefore for the future an optimization of both processes should be easier to accomplish. For gasification that means lower tar content in the producer gas and for pyrolysis achievement of required pyrolysis oil yield.
88
VIp44 THE EFFECTS OF INLET POSITION ON THE FLOW dISTRIBUTION dURING THE PULSE-JET CLEANING OF A CERAMIC FILTER VESSEL Joo-Hong Choi, Jin-Hyung Kim, Chang-Hyun Park Dept. of Chemical and Biological, Gyeoung National University, Jinju, 660-701 Korea Particulates of high concentration in the gas stream are accumulated on the surface of the filter element as the gas passes through it and forms a dust cake. The dust cake should be removed periodically to reduce the pressure drop. Pulse-jet injection is one of the effective methods to clean the filter element by applying the high pressure into the filter cavity. An instance momentum of the over pressure is formed in the filter cavity during the injection of the pulse gas. The over pressure is the main driving force to overcome the binding force between cakes and filter medium and remove the dust accumulates on the surface of the candle filter. So it is better as high as possible. The particles detached after the pulse cleaning should be well removed by the settling force of themselves into the bottom area connected to the dust outlet facility. It is sure that the flow dynamics should be influenced by the inlet position of the dust gas into the filter vessel. We are roughly understood that the inlet at upper position will help for the settling of the detached-dust owing to the development of under gas flow in the filter vessel. Otherwise, the inlet at bottom position will inhibit the settling moment of the dust cake. Several studies on the gas flow and dispersion and particle deposition in a filter vessel are reported by several authors. Especially, Park and Park [] recently reported in their computational work that the middle position inlet shows uniform distribution of particle deposition on the filter surface as well as the lowest particle concentration among the upper, middle, and bottom positions. However, their results are not proven in an actual operation unit. The gas flow patterns and the particle attainments in the filter vessel are investigated in this study. The profiles of the transient pressure and temperature in the filter cavity as well as the outside of filter element during the pulse cleaning were carefully measured to estimate the effect of the inlet positions. REFERENCES [] Goodarz Ahmadi and Duane H. Smith, Powder Technology, 8 (00) -0. [] Ali R. Mazaheri and Goodarz Ahmadi, Adv. Powder Technol., (), -9 (00). [] Seak J. Park and Young O. Park, Korean Chem. Eng. Res., () (00) 5-58.
89
VIp45 THERMO CHEMICAL MOdELING OF THE UNIQUE PROCESS Stemmler M, Mller M J Forschungszentrum Jlich, Institut fr Energieforschung, IEF-2 In recent years, the importance of alternative energy sources using renewable raw materials has increased. Biomass gasification is one of the most efficient technologies for biomass energy conversion. It offers the advantage of product flexibility, e.g. heat, power or synthesis gas for production of synthetic fuels. The UNIQUE project aims at the development of a compact version of a gasifier for syngas production with specifications required for the use in fuel cells. Thereby, several technical processes like the fluidized bed gasification, the hot gas cleaning and the gas conditioning system are all integrated (unified) into one reactor vessel. The bed material consists of a catalytically active mineral substance to reach a primary tar reforming and is mixed with sorbent material to reduce the detrimental trace elements. Further, a bundle of ceramic candle filters is placed in the freeboard of the gasifier. The operation temperature of the gasifier and the filter is 800-850C. With this gasifier design the thermal efficiency is kept high, as no cooling step is included. Further particle entrainment in the product gas is avoided. The hub of this project is the Gssing Gasifier in Austria and the use of the biomass-fuelled IGCC as pilot plant. Aim of the present work was to proof the feasibility of chemical hot gas cleaning in the UNIQUE gasifier in a first step via thermo chemical modeling using the software package SimuSage (GTT-Technologies). As syngas derived from biomass treated in a fluidized-bed gasifier suffers from contaminants released during thermal conversion, which can harm downstream equipment, e.g. by fouling, filter plugging and poisoning of catalysts, the modeling is focused on detrimental inorganic contaminants. The most important detrimental inorganic contaminants are alkalis, with other contaminants including HCl, sulphur compounds and particulates. By using the design of the thermo chemical model shown in figure the release of detrimental inorganic contaminants during gasification of biomass used in the UNIQUE project and the retention potential of sorbents can be calculated. Metal oxides like CaO and CuO were chosen as sulphur sorbents and alumino silicates as alkali sorbents. The paper will present the results of the thermo chemical calculations. The results clearly indicate that sorbents like alumino silicates are suitable to sufficiently remove alkali species for woody biomasses. In addition, sulphur can be limited to values compatible with reforming catalysts. Keywords: synthesis gas, biomass gasification, chemical hot gas cleaning, thermo chemical modeling
90
VIp46 TURBO MACHINE SET ABOUT 75 KWE OUTPUT THRU GASIFICATION OF BIOMAS ANd SOLId WASTE Buryan P 1, Skoblia S 1, ddek K 2, Jelnek M 2, Schustr P Institute of Chemical Technology, Prague 1 ATEKO, a.s., Hradec Kralove 2 Build-up and experimental plant tested pilot equipment on gasification sorted waste and biomass for combination production electric equipment and heat energy by the help of turbine-generator unit powered by hot air Solving project presents proposal and production pilot conceptual quite new combined heat and power unit. Consists in utilization single shaft turbine-generator unit, wheres copmressor pressure air in exchanger, constitutive combustor energy gas heated beyond temperature 900 C and subsequently expanded graphite in two stage expansionary turbine. From turbine way out air wih temperatura c. 50 C is used for gasification and burning. Energy gas in this case doesnt need to in face of combustor cool down nor purify from tar dust. Supposed electric ouput in this system will 5 kWe or x 5 kWe.
9
VII
Gasification Guide
9
GUIdELINE FOR SAFE ANd ECO-FRIENdLy BIOMASS GASIFICATION

Harrie A.M. Knoef and John Vos BTG biomass technology group B.V. Colosseum , 5 PV, Enschede, The Netherlands Tel: + 5 8 8, Fax + 5 8 80, Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT: Biomass gasification is considered a promising technology that can contribute significantly to renewable energy generation. The technology is close to commercialisation but large-scale implementation is hampered by the poor awareness and lack of understanding of Health, Safety and Environment issues; authorities tend to impose unrealistic and costly requirements on gasification plants. A broadly accepted HSE guideline would effectively tackle this barrier. The main objective is to accelerate the market uptake of biomass gasification technology by developing a guideline that is accepted by relevant target groups and key market actors. The HSE project will result in a Guideline and a Software Tool for easy and systematic assessment of HSE hazards in biomass gasification plants. This can be used in designing more safe and eco-friendly equipment, in the construction of plants, and in the operation and maintenance procedures. The Guideline and Software Tool will be developed in close co-operation with existing thermal biomass conversion networks to gain optimal benefit and feedback of these platforms into the HSE project. The draft Guideline and software tool are available through the website www.gasification-guide.eu. This paper describes the status of the Guideline and software tool. Keywords: biomass, conversion, gasification, barriers, legal aspects
BACKGROUND Pilot and prototype biomass gasifiers often operate under temporary (trial) environmental licenses for which emission limits are usually somewhat relaxed. For gasifiers intended for commercial operation permitting authorities have a tendency to impose unreasonably strict emission limits and safety measures due to their lack of familiarity with and understanding of the technology. For permitting authorities and other key market actors it appears difficult to properly appreciate Health, Safety and Environmental (HSE) risks. This lack of knowledge and poor appreciation of HSE hazards was identified by leading experts from the gasification networks GasNet (later: ThermalNet) and IEA Bioenergy Agreement Task as an important barrier for the implementation of gasification technology. It has been on their agenda since the early 000s. Non-technical barriers as identified in these networks include: Lack of knowledge and awareness on potential HSE risks associated with the construction, operation and maintenance of gasification plants;
Lack of separate emission legislation (in most cases the Waste Incineration Directive has to be fulfilled); The general negative public perception on bio-energy as a clean energy source; Lack of knowledge at permitting authorities; Lack of standards and certification. Lacking the financial resources the mentioned gasification networks were not able to actively tackle the problem. Stimulated by both networks a separate project was formulated and approved by the European IEE programme. Funding for a three-year project was secured in 00, and the project started in January 00. The development of a practical biomass gasification guideline in close consultation with a leading HSE authority and based on realised and planned biomass gasification plants will help to ensure that in future permitting authorities draw up reasonable and fair HSE requirements, and that the identified barriers to the market uptake of the technology will be removed.
9
OBJECTIVES The aim of the project is to accelerate the process of market introduction and commercialisation of gasification by developing an accepted guideline and associated software tool for relevant target groups and market actors on potential HSE hazards of biomass gasifiers up to about 5 MWe. In this context, accepted means acknowledged and used by manufacturers and authorities. Specific objectives include: To remove an important non-technical barrier for wide-spread market introduction of biomass gasifiers, i.e. awareness on HSE hazards, by: Identifying all possible HSE hazards associated with construction and operation and maintenance of biomass gasifier plants (BGPs), and of recommendations to reduce these hazards; Raising awareness of communities, (potential) customers and public authorities on the HSE hazards in such way that fewer objections are raised and procedures are shortened and simplified; Guiding manufacturers and technology developers in the development of safe designs and safe operation & maintenance of the plants; Disseminating the guideline and spin-off results to the target groups; and Simplifying and shortening of procedures, in particular for permitting; To decrease financial risks of investors to stimulate the market implementation; To remove associated non-technical problems like the negative public perception of biomass gasification; To benchmark the legal frame for plant permission and operation; To recommend a better fit of the EU legal framework to biomass gasification, in particularly regarding emission levels; To create a framework for the further development of the guideline to an international accepted technical standard, which can be used for commissioning, guarantee, acceptance testing and certification.
PROJECT PARTNERS AND CONTRIBUTORS Seven full partners and two sub-contractors are directly involved in the preparation of the guideline (see Table ). Table 1: project partners and sub-contractors Participant name BTG biomass technology group Technical University Graz Fraunhofer Umsicht Technical University Vienna Health & Safety Executive COWI A/S Technical University Sofia Umwelt+Energie Frdergesellschaft Erneuerbare Energien e.V (FEE) Country Netherlands Austria Germany Austria United Kingdom Denmark Bulgaria Switzerland Germany
Various other groups indirectly contribute(d) to development of the guideline, including: A project Advisory Board, consisting of some 0 experts, manufacturers, authorities and other stakeholders from around the world; The biomass gasification expert networks ThermalNet and IEA Bioenergy Agreement Task ; Manufacturers and owners of gasifiers plants that were the subject of case studies, and helped with the validation of the guideline and the software tool; The FEE-led Arbeitsgruppe Biomassavergasung (Working Group Biomass Gasification). WORKPLAN AND APPROACH Preparation of the guideline is executed in the following systematic way: Benchmarking the legal framework for plant authorisation and operation. Gasification plants have to be planned, built and operated according to several European and national directives, guidelines, laws, standards etc. This means there is a need for a legal basis for manufacturers, operators, permitting authorities etc. for placing technologies on the market as well as the development of a guideline and a software tool to simplify and shorten procedures, in particularly for permitting;
9
Systematic description and classification of gasification plants. The description includes main unit operations, typical process parameters, possible plant process configurations, critical process requirements, etc. An example of a process chain is presented in Figure . HSE risk assessment study covering the consequences of possible accidents, spillages, emissions, toxicity, etc. A risk assessment study is the bases for safe plant design and needed to obtain the necessary permits for plant construction and operation. The main potential hazards are illustrated in Figure . Determination of technical possibilities to avoid or minimise the HSE risks and their consequences, economic impact, Best Available Technology solutions;
Preparation of a Guideline for safe and eco-friendly biomass gasification; Collecting information from gasifier manufacturers and plant owners through site visits and interviews on practical experiences with the authorisation of existing and planned biomass gasification plants. Information is collected on e.g. How HSE issues were taken into consideration during engineering, planning and construction, How HSE issues were taken into consideration when formulating operating and maintenance procedures, Which Standards and Directives were considered, How legislation and permitting procedures influenced the plant design or concept, Which procedures and safety measures need to be considered in future. The experience is presented systematically in case studies, which help guiding the preparation and validation of the Guideline and the Software Tool. Development of a Software Tool for assessing the Health and Safety risks and determining environmental impacts; Testing and validation of the Software Tool in co-operation with gasifier manufacturers and plant owners;
Figure 1: Typical process chain (simplified) of a biomass gasification plant for combined heat & power generation
Exchange and dissemination of project results through promotional and awareness raising activities including targeted stakeholder workshops. The workshops serve as a platform to present and discuss the Guideline and to receive feedback to update and validate the Guideline. 5 PROGRESS AND INITIAL RESULTS The progress to date can be summarised as follows: Legal framework: Planning, building, commissioning, and operation of biomass gasification plants are activities that are subject to European and national regulations. In order to determine the relevant legal framework for small and medium biomass gasification plants, it is useful to draw a rough distinction between those requirements applying to the design and manufacturing of BGPs (as products that are to be placed on the European market) and those applying to ownership and operation in simple terms, to distinguish between the manufacturers and the operators duties.
Figure 2: Potential Heath & Safety aspects of a biomass gasification plant
95
The underlying legal background is different for the two parties. While the legal framework with regard to the safety of products placed on the market is rather homogeneous throughout Europe, the legal framework for plant operation displays many variations across the European Member States. The project provided a general overview of the legal areas that apply to biomass gasification plants, both from the manufacturers and from the operators point of view. The focus is on legal requirements towards health, safety and environment (HSE). Hazard identification and risk assessment are among those legal HSE requirements that have to be met both by the manufacturer and by the operator. Risk Assessment: The technology of biomass gasification differs from other energy conversion technologies based on renewable energy sources (e.g. biomass combustion) because it inherently involves the production, treatment and utilisation of flammable and toxic gas mixtures, plant media and utilities. Therefore an adequate risk assessment is strongly recommended and is often a legal requirement for placing the plant into the market and running it. A risk assessment is aimed at protecting the workers and the plant itself. It consists of a careful examination of what could cause harm to the people and environment in the plant, and the adoption of reasonable control measures. The manufacturers/operators have to produce a complete and well-documented assessment of the risk relative to: Health e.g. hazards to human health, dangers from toxic gases, etc; Safety e.g. explosion hazards, fire hazards, etc; Environment e.g. plant emissions, loss of containment relating to toxic substances, etc. A risk assessment has to be carried out during the planning phase (for manufacturers) in order to improve the plants conceptual design. In existing plants, a risk assessment allows the reduction of the remaining risks by continual updating of the original risk assessment (for manufacturers and operators). Different methods for risk assessment are available but procedures for risk assessment are not generally standardised for biomass gasification plants. The project recommends using a risk assessment methodology based on functional analysis of the plant.
It follows principally the Hazard and Operability Studies (HAZOP) and Failure Modes Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMEA) methods, as well as recommendations given by an expert commission. An example is illustrated in Figure .
Figure 3: Example of a Risk Assessment procedure Case Studies: Practical information was collected as input for drafting the Guideline. An elaborate questionnaire, focusing on plant design and constructional aspects, was sent to plant owners and manufacturers. This was followed-up by a site visit. The collected information gave valuable input to drafting the Guideline. In a second round of case studies the target groups in particularly permitting authorities are interviewed to give their feedback after using the draft guideline in order to validate the usefulness of the draft guideline and identify room for improvement. HSE Guideline: A first draft Guideline was produced in early 008 and a second draft in early 009. The guideline is intended to be a training tool and a resource for workers and employers to safely design, fabricate, construct, operate and maintain small scale biomass gasification facilities (about up to MWe). The use of contaminated biomass and/or the application by larger companies is beyond the scope of this Guideline. In the Guideline less emphasis is placed on gas engines, as these are commercially available and already come with a CE mark and Declaration of Conformity.
9
In the formulation of this HSE Guideline, the following process steps and system components have been considered: Fuel storage and handling on site Fuel conveyance and feeding Gasification reactor Gas conditioning (cleaning and cooling) Gas utilization (gas engine) Automation and control Auxiliaries and utilities
Definition of parts Risk assessment Countermeasures Summary
At the end of the full risk assessment a report can be generated that can be used as documentation. Checklist: The Guideline includes a checklist, intended for use by the main target groups (manufacturers and permitting authorities), for easy assessment of the risks, the consequences and the countermeasures. The checklist follows the general layout of a gasification plant starting at the biomass storage facility up to the gas utilisation device, in most cases a gas engine. Manufacturers can use the checklist as a reference whether all risks have been considered and the permitting authorities can use the checklist to validate whether all countermeasures are in place. Stakeholder Involvement: The project puts a lot of emphasis on outreach to stakeholders. The preferred method is the organisation of stakeholder workshops. To date, the following workshops have been organised: The first European workshop was held on April 008 in Vienna. It was organised in cooperation with the ThermalNet project and the IEA Task on biomass gasification. Almost 0 persons attended the workshop. The first draft of the HSE Guideline was presented, and a panel discussion was held in which attendees from Europe and North America discussed safety issues from their own practice. German subcontractor FEE organised various meetings on the topic, including one that was formally part of the project. The first FEE event were the Guideline was discussed was a meeting of the (German) Biomass Gasification Working Group, held in Rosenheim (Germany) in August 008. Many German and Swiss manufacturers of small and medium biomass gasifiers attended this meeting. The second FEE event were the Guideline was discussed was a public workshop held in Stuttgart in January 009 in conjunction with the rd International Conference on Application of Biomass Gasification (ICABG). The workshop aimed to an in-depth intensive exchange of knowledge and experiences between concerned parties. The organisers wanted to: Provide a platform to technology and market pioneers to pave the path into the European market, Discuss the draft Guideline, the software tool and checklists with experts, manufacturers, operators, experienced in permission planning engineers and
The Guideline contains the performance levels and measures that are generally considered to be achievable in new facilities by existing technology at reasonable costs. Application of the Guideline to existing facilities may involve the establishment of site-specific targets, with an appropriate timetable for achieving them. The applicability of the HSE Guideline should be tailored to the hazards and risks established for each project on the basis of the results of an environmental assessment in which site-specific variables are taken into account. The applicability of specific technical recommendations should be based on the professional opinion of qualified and experienced persons. The HSE Guideline is intended to be a living document at its inception. Given the broad applicability and use of the Guideline as reference documents, it must continue to meet internationally-accepted standards on pollution prevention and control, as well as occupational and community health and safety. Initial response to the draft Guideline, prepared in 008 and distributed electronically to more than 00 stakeholders, is very positive. More than 80 interested companies and institutes from 0 countries actively requested a copy through the project website. Among the interested organisations are several authorities charged with a permit application for a biomass gasification plant. Software Tool: A software tool (called RISK ANALYSER) was developed to facilitate the implementation of the risk assessment proposed in the HSE guideline. In the software, a recommended risk assessment procedure is implemented which is practicable and sufficient for the application in small-scale biomass gasification plants. The risk assessment procedure with the software follows eight steps: Definition of plant basic data Definition of process units Definition of functions Definition of the operation modes
9
representatives from permitting authorities from several countries. Offer operators - who are ready to take the early risk - opportunities for exchange of know-how, Give potential investors security and to convince them, time to act has come, now, Stipulate authorities to improve permitting practice, Reach a consensus on all controversial items in the draft Guideline and the feedback from the audience on these aspects, which could be a useful tool to get those issues clarified.
CONCLUSIONS Preliminary conclusions include: In most European countries there are no specific regulations for biomass gasification plants (BGPs). Gasification is often treated similarly to other thermal processing technologies such as combustion or incineration, which hampers the market penetration of small to medium scale BGPs. Leading European BGP manufacturers that respect client demands for safe equipment, CE marking and risk assessment are close to full commercialisation of small to medium scale biomass gasification technology. Streamlining of BGP permitting procedures and harmonization of existing BGP regulations within the European Community is considered crucial for the accelerated deployment of biomass gasification plants. There is significant interest from the target groups in the Guideline. This is concluded from the fact that workshops organised to date are well attended and that more than 80 requests were received to obtain the Guideline. INVITATION
Figure 4: Public Workshop in Stuttgart, January 009 In the second half of 009, the following additional workshops will be held: The second European workshop will be held on September 009 in Vienna, in conjunction with the International Conference on Poly-generation Strategies (www.icps09.org). A regional workshop for stakeholders from the new EU Member States will be held in the autumn of 009, probably in Bulgaria. A regional workshop for stakeholders from Nordic Countries will also be held in the autumn of 009, probably in Denmark. Finally, the Guideline will be a key topic at the next meeting of the German Biomass Gasification Working Group (Herstellertreffen fr Biomasse-Vergasungs-BHKW), organised by FEE on and 5 August 009 in Berlin.
The active involvement of stakeholders strengthens both the quality and relevance of the Guideline and the Software Tool. Manufacturers, owners, permitting authorities and other interested parties are warmly invited to share their views on, and experience with, biomass gasifiers permitting and the use of the Guideline and Software Tool. They are likewise invited to participate in and contribute to the project as object for a case study or for software testing. Information can be found on the website www.gasification-guide.eu or please contact the coordinator at [email protected]. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The three-year project Guideline for safe and ecofriendly biomass gasification (acronym: Gasification Guide) is financially supported by the Intelligent Energy Europe (IEE) programme of the European Commission.
98
VIII Index of Authors
99
Adinberg R Aigner I Alexander S Alvino E Anker D J Arena U
VIp8 VIp IVo VIp0 Io VIp
Czernichowski A Dahmen N Dalai A VIp Defoort D Di Felice L Di Gennaro F Di Marcello M Ddek K Dimitriou I Dinjus E Epstein M Fanelli E Feifei CVIp8 Fiorenza G Fonstad T Guitard F Foscolo P U Freda C VIp Fuchs M Fushimi C VIp8 Io5 VIp9 VIp9 IIo VIp IVo VIp8 VIp8 VIp
IIo, VIp
Bala H VIp Barisano D VIp5, VIp, VIp, VIp Basu A IIo5 Bay B Vo Bielansky P VIp8 Blasi A VIp0, VIp Boechzelt H IIIo Braccio G VIp, VIp, VIp9, VIp0, VIp Brammer J IVo Bridgwater A V IVo Bruno J. C VIp Bull D R Io Buryan P VIp Caglayan E Campbell W Campoy M Canella L Canneto G Castagno F Cerone N Cetin Y Vo Choi J H Choi Y C Contuzzi L Coronas A Courson C Cruz J L Vo VIp VIp5 IVo VIp VIp VIp, VIp VIp Io VIp, VIp VIp VIp0 VIp5
VIp9, VIp VIp IIo, VIp, VIp IIo, VIp9 VIp VIp
Gallmetzer G IVo5 Gallucci K IIo Gerspacher R VIp Gibilaro L G VIp9 Gilbert P IVo Gilmour I A Io Giordano G VIp0, VIp Girods P VIp, VIp Gomez-Barea AVIp5 Goo J H Io Grnli M IIo, VIp, VIp Guillaudeau J Io5 Gutierrez F J VIp5
00
Halwachs M VIp0 Hansen J B IIo Harasek M VIp Hausberger S IVo Heidenreich S IIo Henrich E Io Hochleitner T IVo5 Hofbauer H Io8, IIo, IIIo, VIp0, VIp5, VIp, VIp Hjlund-Nielsen P E IIo Hornbachner D VIp Hustad J IIo, VIp, VIp Jain B C Vo Jelnek M VIp Jo S H VIp Jungmeier G IVo Karatas H Vo Karl J IIIo, IVo5 Ke Q Io Kienberger T IIIo, IVo5 Kiennemann A VIp0 Kilanowski D IIIo5 Kim S D Io Kirschneck D IIIo Kleinhappl M IIo, VIp5 Klemm M IVo Koch M Io8 Kohl H VIp Krantz T VIp0 Krner M IVo5 Kryvoruchko V VIp, VIp Lee S H Leibold H Io IIo
Lelait L VIp Lemonon J Leppin D Linek A Lingitz A Litt R IIIo5 Lukas M Lundtorp K
VIp IIo5 IIo IVo IIIo VIp
Mai R IIo Majer S IVo, VIp, VIp9 Mannarino V VIp0 Marquard-Mllenstedt T Io8 Martin E VIp Martin U VIp Martini S IIo, VIp5 Mastellone M L VIp McDaniel J IIIo5 Mevissen N IIIo Molino A VIp0 Molino A VIp Mortensen L K VIp Mller M J VIp5 Mller-Langer F VIp9 Murakami K VIp9 Nacken M Nanna F Nemanova V Oehmichen K Ollero P Olsson J Omidvar H Ota M VIp9 Owrang F Ozdogan S IIo VIp5, VIp VIp VIp9 VIp5 IIo, VIp, VIp VIp IIo, VIp, VIp Vo
0
Pang S Io Park Y C VIp Pedersen J IIo, VIp, VIp Perrin D VIp Peter A J Io Petrone M VIp0 Pfeifer C Io8VoVIp Piermartini P VIp Poboss N VIp Poldervaart J Vo Potetz A VIp Prins WVIp Prll T IIIo Pucker J IVo Pugsley T VIp Puig-Arnavat MVIp Raffelt K Io Rafiq H IIo, VIp, VIp Rapagn S IIo Rauch R Io8, IIIo, VIp, VIp Ravel S Io5 Reale F VIp9 Rehling B IIIo Reichhold A VIp8 Rodrguez P VIp5 Roensch S IVo Rogaume Y VIp, VIp Rnsch S VIp, VIp9 Ryu H J VIp Salvador S VIp Schablitzky H VIp8 Schaub G VIp Scheffknecht G VIp
Schmersahl R IVo Schnberger C VIp8 Schulzke T IIIo Schuster A VIp Schustr P VIp Schweiger A IVo5 Seemann M C Io Seifert H IIo Seiffert M VIp Seo M W Io Singaravelu M VIp Sjstrm K VIp Skoblia S VIp Slimane R B IIo5 Specht M Io8 Stahl R Io, VIp8 Stemann M VIp Stemmler M VIp5 Stoehr JIIo Tekautz G Texeira G Thornley P Thunman H Tsutsumi A Unger C A Unlu A Vo IIIo VIp IVo Io VIp IIIo
Valerio V VIp5 Valin S Io5 van Asselt W A IVo Van de steene L VIp Van der Drift A IIIo van Doorn J Vo Vicente-Enamorado J VIp5 Villone A VIp5, VIp
0
Virginie M VIp0 Vos J VIp Wada T VIp Wang ZVIp Wangerow J IIo5 Weigang L Io Weirich F VIp8 Werber R VIp5 Williamson C Io Wolfesberger U VIp, VIp Yazar A Vo Yi C K VIp Zaccariello L Zeymer M Zoulalian A Zuberbhler U Zvegilsky D Zwart R W R Zweiler R VIp IVo VIp Io8 VIp8 IIIo VIp
0
Imprint
Vienna, August 009 st International Conference on Polygeneration Strategies, Book of Abstracts Editors: A.G. Kopchinskiy, M. Fuchs, H. Hofbauer Publisher: Vienna University of Technology Institute of Chemical Engineering Research Division Chemical Process Engineering and Fluidization www.vt.tuwien.ac.at Getreidemarkt 9/ 00 Vienna Printed: Manz Crossmedia 05 Vienna Printed in Austria
0

D20b - European Workshop Sept 2009

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

D20b - European Workshop Sept 2009

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

D20b - European Workshop Sept 2009

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Grant agreement no. EIE/06/078/SI2.

Deliverable D 20b Report on the second European Workshop

On the way to safe and eco-friendly biomass gasification

The project is co-funded by the European Commission.

EIE/06/078/SI2.447511 - Gasification Guide

History - the 1st European workshop

The Organization of the 2nd European workshop

D20b 2nd European Workshop - Report - Page 2 of 10

EIE/06/078/SI2.447511 - Gasification Guide

Workshop program structure and number of attendees

D20b 2nd European Workshop - Report - Page 3 of 10

EIE/06/078/SI2.447511 - Gasification Guide

D20b 2nd European Workshop - Report - Page 4 of 10

EIE/06/078/SI2.447511 - Gasification Guide

Promotional material Annex O.1 - General Flyer Gasification Guide

D20b 2nd European Workshop - Report - Page 5 of 10

Bringing Safe and Eco-friendly Biomass Gasification into practice

gasification plants and regulating health, safety and environment issues.

owners, financiers, investors, researchers and others interested in biomass gasification.

BTG biomass technology group BV +31-53-4861186 +31-53-4861180

P.O. Box 217 7500 AE Enschede The Netherlands

EIE/06/078/SI2.447511 - Gasification Guide

D20b 2nd European Workshop - Report - Page 6 of 10

"On the way to safe and ecofriendly biomass gasification"

International Conference on Polygeneration Strategies

charges Regular: Students: 450,- 300,--

September | 1st-4th | 2009 Vienna | Austria

International Conference on Polygeneration Strategies

The Gasification Guide Project is funded by the European Union

International Conference on Polygeneration Strategies

International Conference on Polygeneration Strategies

Tuesday 01. 09. 2009 Conference

Wednesday 02. 09. 2009 Conference

Thursday 03. 09. 2009 Workshop and Conference Closure

Friday 04. 09. 2009 Excursion

Registration Barbecue Dinner Dinner

The ICPS`09 is organized as an abstract reviewed conference

EIE/06/078/SI2.447511 - Gasification Guide

Program Annex A - Program

D20b 2nd European Workshop - Report - Page 7 of 10

September | 1st-4th | 2009 Vienna | Austria

International Conference on Polygeneration Strategies

International Conference on Polygeneration Strategies

chArges Regular: Students: 450,- 350,--

International Conference on Polygeneration Strategies

Adress vienna University of technology Karlsplatz 13 1040 Wien

tUesdAy, 1st of September 2009

WednesdAy, 2nd of September 2009

thUrsdAy, 3rd of September 2009

fridAy, 4th of September 2009

International Conference on Polygeneration Strategies

excUrsion Friday the 4th of September 2009

The new Bioenergy 2020+ competence center

The CHP Gssing and the BioSNG plant nearby

The CHP Gssing in front of the history castle

International Conference on Polygeneration Strategies

chArges Regular: Students: 450,- 350,--

The Gasification Guide Project is funded by the European Union

EIE/06/078/SI2.447511 - Gasification Guide

Objective evidence (milestone) Annex B - List of attendees