Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
I.
INTRODUCTION
TECHNICAL APPROACH
A. Process Devalopment
A simplified process has been developed for enriched
hydrogen gas production from biomass using pure steam as
gasification agent and CaO as CO2 sorbent. The block
diagram of the process is shown in Fig 1. The whole process
is consists of four sections, feed treatment, steam generation,
gasification and gas cleaning section. The detail of each
section is described in next headings. The process flow
diagram (PFD) is shown in Fig 2.
(1)
B. Feed Treatment
Pretreatment of biomass for gasifier is generally
(2)
(3)
Where mi is the inlet mass (g), mo is the out mass (g) and
E is the energy flowrate (kj/h). The variation in the hydrogen
yield can be used to investigate the effect of temperature and
steam/biomass ratio on the hydrogen production from
biomass steam gasification. The definition of hydrogen yield
is defined using equation (4) [21].
=
)(4)
( )/
TABLE I.
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
100
(
(5)
Name
Char Gasification
Methanation
Boudouard
Methane Reforming
Water Gas Shift
Carbonation
Reaction
C + H2O CO + H2
C + 2H2 CH4
C+ CO2 2C
CH4 + H2O CO + 3H2
CO + H2O CO2 + H2
CO2 + CaO CaCO3
H (kj/mol)
+131.5
-74
+172
+206
-41
-178.3
E. Gas Cleaning
The product gas produced by the gasification process
contained hydrogen, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide,
methane, steam and fly ash. To get pure hydrogen as end
product, there were several steps involved in product gas
cleaning with different units like filter, scrubber and pressure
swing adsorption as shown in Fig 2. Fly ash was removed
from the system by filter. It is assumed that the product gas
contained 13% fly ash of biomass feed rate [30].
Furthermore the steam was removed by passing through
scrubber with fresh water [31]. Along with the steam there
are also some others product gases will be also absorbs in
water which was calculated by chart of solubility of gases in
water at atmospheric pressure and different temperature [32].
The scrubber is also used to cool down the product gas.
Finally pressure swing adsorption (PSA) unit applies to get
pure hydrogen (99.99%). As the advantages of PSA that it
remove the impurities at any level and produced high purity
hydrogen as product [33].
III.
Figure 7. Overall mass balance of flowsheet. Temperature: 950 K, Steam/biomass ratio: 3.0, Sorbent/biomass ratio: 1.0.
absorbs in water.
So the scrubber not only help to remove steam from the
system and to cool down the temperature, it also helps to
decrease the more amount of CO2 in the product stream.
Finally, the PSA unit separates the rest amount of CO, CO2
and CH4 from H2. The result showed 6.8659 g/hr of pure H2
(99.99 %) at the end of process.
Furthermore the effect of Temperature and
steam/biomass ratio are also on hydrogen yield is shown in
Fig 8. The figure shows that both variables are in favor for
hydrogen yield.
The Fig 8 shows that at 800 K and steam/biomass ratio of
2.0, hydrogen yield is 78.5 g/kg of biomass. Taking same
temperature but with higher amount of steam/biomass ratio
i.e. 5.0, hydrogen yield obtained 96 g/kg of biomass. It is
observed that the difference due to increase of steam/biomass
ratio at same temperature is 17.5. On the other hand, at high
temperature 1300 K and low value of steam/biomass ratio
i.e. 2.0, hydrogen yield is 88.5 g/kg of biomass. But at the
same temperature (1300 K) with high steam/biomass ratio
i.e. 5.0, hydrogen yield is obtained 97 g/kg of biomass. The
difference observed in hydrogen yield is 8.5.
Approach
Modelling
Gasification
Steam
Temperature (K)
950
Pressure (atm)
1
Steam/biomass ratio
2.0
Sorbent/biomass ratio
1.0
H2 mole fraction
0.77
Deviation error with current study
Mahishi et al.
[13]
Experimental
Steam
950
1
1.0
1.0
0.68
0.130
Florin et al.
[12]
Modelling
Steam
950
4.94
2.0
0.50
0.72
0.078
Basis
This Study
Lv et al. [36]
Approach
Modelling
Gasification
Steam
Temperature (K)
Pressure (atm)
Steam/biomass ratio
Sorbent/biomass ratio
H2 (g/kg of biomass)
950
1
3.0
1.0
95.4
Experimental
Air-Steam +
Catalyst
873
1
5.8
72
IV.
Shen et al.
[20]
Modelling
Air-Steam
1123
0.98
0.6
62
CONCLUSION
[15]
[16]
[17]
[18]
[19]
[20]
[21]
[22]
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support
from Petroleum Research Fund of PETRONAS and
Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Malaysia.
[23]
[24]
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[25]
[26]
[27]
[28]
[29]
[30]
[31]
[32]
[33]
[34]
[35]
[36]
[37]