PNL-5534

UC-61F

PNL--5534
DE86 015382

ENGINEERING ANALYSIS OF BIOMASS GASIFIER PRODUCT

GAS CLEANING TECHNOLOGY

_-

DISCLAIMER

E. G. Baker
M. D. Brown
R. H. Moore
L. K. Mudge
D. C. E l l i o t t

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States
Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their
employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or
process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately awned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark,
manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily ,constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views
and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the
United States Government or any agency thereof.

August 1986

Prepared f o r
t h e Biomass Energy Technology D i v i s i o n
U.S. Department o f Energy
under C o n t r a c t DE-AC06-76RLO 1830

P a c i f i c Northwest L a b o r a t o r y
R i c h l a n d , Washington 99352

This ducumcnt is

DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an
agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States
Government nor any agency Thereof, nor any of their employees,
makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal
liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or
usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process
disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately
owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product,
process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or
otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement,
recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any
agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein
do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States
Government or any agency thereof.

DISCLAIMER
Portions of this document may be illegible in
electronic image products. Images are produced
from the best available original document.

ABSTRACT

For biomass g a s i f i c a t i o n t o make a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e energy

p i c t u r e i n the next decade, emphasis must be placed on t h e generation o f
%

c l e a n , p o l l u t a n t - f r e e gas products.

This r e p o r t attempts t o q u a n t i f y l e v e l s

of p a r t i c u l a t e s , t a r s , oi 1 s , and various o t h e r pol 1 u t a n t s generated by biomass

gasifiers o f a l l types.

End uses for biomass gases and appropriate gas clean-

ing technologies a r e examined.

Complete systems a n a l y s i s i s used t o p r e d i c t

t h e performance of various g a s i f i e r / g a s cleanup/end use combinations.

research needs a r e i denti f i ed.

iii

Further

SUMMARY

An i n t e r p r e t i v e l i t e r a t u r e search was done t o determine p a r t i c u l a t e and

t a r emissions from various biomass g a s i f i e r s , i d e n t i f y p a r t i c u l a t e and t a r

l i m i t s f o r s p e c i f i c end uses f o r the gas, and evaluate d i f f e r e n t gas cleaning
options which meet the s p e c i f i c a t i o n s f o r d i f f e r e n t end uses.
The l i t e r a t u r e search revealed a profound lack of q u a n t i t a t i v e informat i o n in t h i s area.

In p a r t i c u l a r there i s very l i t t l e information on the

properties of t a r s and p a r t i c u l a t e s from biomass g a s i f i c a t i o n and t h e r e i s

almost no documentation on the effectiveness of gas cleaning systems f o r
biomass derived gas, p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r t a r removal.
In l i g h t of t h e lack of data available on gas cleaning with biomass
g a s i f i c a t i o n systems t h e r e s u l t s reported here a r e based heavily on informat i o n from o t h e r systems, primarily coal g a s i f i c a t i o n and biomass combustion.
Numerous c i t a t i o n s on p a r t i c l e removal, b u t only limited information on t a r
removal were found.
more d e t a i l .

As a r e s u l t t h e report addresses p a r t i c u l a t e removal in

Tars a r e , in most instances, ultimately removed as l i q u i d drop-

l e t s so much of the data on p a r t i c u l a t e removal i s applicable t o t a r removal.

However, t h e properties o f t a r s such a s t h e i r v i s c o s i t y and s t i c k i n e s s must
be considered.
A v a r i e t y of u n i t s were encountered during t h e course of t h i s study.

We

attempted t o keep t h e u n i t s consistent f o r each subject area b u t t o do so f o r

t h e e n t i r e report we f e l t was not appropriate.

Appendix A i s a nomograph

t h a t can be used t o convert d i f f e r e n t s e t s of u n i t s used in t h e t e x t .

G a s i f i e r s t h a t have been used w i t h biomass a r e fixed bed updraft, fixed
bed downdraft, f l u i d bed, and entrained bed units.

Fixed bed updraft u n i t s

3
t y p i c a l l y produce large q u a n t i t i e s of t a r s and o i l s (10-100 g/m ) . Fixed bed
V

downdraft and f l u i d bed u n i t s generally have lower t a r emissions in the range

o f 0.05-0.5

g/m

P a r t i c u l a t e emissions vary from low p a r t i c u l a t e loadings (0.1-1.0 g/m 3 )

f o r an updraft g a s i f i e r t o 10-100 g/m 3 o r g r e a t e r f o r a f l u i d o r entrained
bed unit.
The type of g a s i f i e r a l s o influences t h e physical c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f

b o t h t a r s and p a r t i c u l a t e s .

High boiling, condensed aromatic t a r s a r e gener-

ated from f l u i d beds and downdraft units.

Lower boiling, highly oxygenated

wood oils are generated from updraft and entrained f l o w pyrolysis units.
Fixed bed g a s i f i e r s emit small q u a n t i t i e s of very f i n e p a r t i c u l a t e s (mostly
ash) entrained i n t h e gas stream.

Fluid beds on t h e o t h e r hand r e l e a s e large

amounts o f very coarse p a r t i c u l a t e s w h i c h are p r i m a r i l y char and ash.

Data

on p a r t i c u l a t e and t a r production r a t e s and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i s 1 imi ted.

Further study which addresses q u a n t i t a t i v e pol 1utant 1 eve1 s f o r each type o f
gasi f i e r i s needed.
End uses f o r biomass gases include use a s a fue

f o r i n d u s t r i a1 process

b o i l e r s , dryers o r k i l n s ; a s a fuel f o r diesel and spark i g n i t i o n engines and

gas turbines; and as a synthesis gas f o r methanol, methane, hydrocarbons and
ammonia.
gas.

Each end use has s p e c i f i c requirements f o r t h e c l e a n l i n e s s of the

For example, p a r t i c u l a t e s in burner f l ue gases must meet environmental

standards which vary depending on t h e s ze and location of the f a c i l i t y .

Many s t u d i e s have been done w i t h internal combustion engines. P a r t i c u l a t e s
or t a r s above 0.05 g/m 3 a r e shown t o cause excessive engine wear or gum format i o n on t h e valves.

Additional research i s needed t o define l i m i t s f o r gas

turbines and synthesis gas applications.

Gas cleanup technologies t h a t a r e most applicable f o r biomass g a s i f i c a t i o n a r e cyclones, wet scrubbers, various f i l t e r s (including baghouses) and

vi

electrostatic precipitators.

Data on gas cleaning from operating biomass

g a s i f i e r s has not been extensively reported.

Based on data f o r coal systems and limited biomass d a t a , p a r t i c u l a t e
removal systems appear adequate f o r most biomass g a s i f i e r applications.

How-

ever, t a r removal presents problems which heretofore have not been studied i n
any d e t a i l .

Further research i s needed t o confirm the a p p l i c a b i l i t y and

e f f i c i e n c y of various gas cleanup methods coupled w i t h d i f f e r e n t g a s i f i e r

types.
Table 1 summarizes t h e r e s u l t s of t h i s study.

Areas where a v a i l a b l e

information i s adequate f o r s e l e c t i o n and design of gas treatment systems a r e

identified.

Areas where s u f f i c i e n t information i s not a v a i l a b l e and addi-

tional research and development a r e necessary a r e a l s o l i s t e d in Table 1.

This should serve as a basis f o r f u r t h e r e f f o r t s in gas cleaning f o r biomass
gasification.

v ii

TABLE 1. Summary of Gas Cleaning Technology Research Needs for

Biomass Gasifiers
Areas Where Avai 1 ab1 e Information i s Adequate for Selection and
Design of Gas Treatment Systems
Particulate production rates
Particulate and tar limits for internal combustion eng nes
Particulate limits for direct-fired equipment (boilers dryers
kilns, etc.)
Tar composition
Areas Where Additional Research and Development are Necessary
Tar production rates for all types of gasifiers -- effects of
operating conditions, type of biomass, moisture content, etc.
Composition and size distribution of particulates
Particulate and tar limits for gas turbines and synthesis gas
applications
Efficiency of tar removal devices
Effect of conditions (temperature, pressure, tar-loading) on tar
deposition in transfer pipes, burners, and other downstream
equipment
Volatility of ash components

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT

iii

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
v
INTRODUCTION
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
BIOMASS GASIFICATION GAS STREAM CONTAMINANTS . . . . . . . . 4
1.1 G a s i f i e r Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
1.2 Tars and Other Condensible Organics . . . . . . . . . 11
1.3 P a r t i c u l a t e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1.4 Other Contaminants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
1.5 Pressure E f f e c t s
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
1.6 Summary and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
1.7 References
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
END USES FOR BIOMASS GAS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
2.1 Burners ( B o i l e r s / K i l n s )
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
2.2 D i e s e l and Spark I g n i t i o n Engines . . . . . . . . . . 35
2.3 Gas Turbines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.4 S y n t h e s i s Gas/Pipeline Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
2.5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
2.6 References
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
GAS CLEANUP TECHNOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.1 D e f i n i t i o n s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
3.2 P a r t i c u l a t e Removal
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
3.3 TarRemoval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
3.4 O p e r a t i n g C o n d i t i o n s . E f f i c i e n c i e s . and Cost . . . . . . 7 1
SUMMARY

1.0
5

2.0

3.0

. . . . . .
EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
.
4.1 Systems A n a l y s i s
. . . .
4.2 E v a l u a t i o n s By End Use
. .
4.3 Recommendations . . . . .
4.4 References
. . . . . .
3.5

4.0

References

.
.
.
.
..

.
.
.
.
..

.
.
.
.
..

.
.
.
.
..

.
.
.
.
..

.
.
.
.
..

.
.
.
.
..

.
.
.
.
..

.
.
.
.
..

.
.
.
.
..

.
.
.
.
..

75

79

79

83
87
88

APPENDIX A
Nomograph f o r Conversion o f Emission Loadings

ix

. . . . . . . A.l

LIST OF FIGURES
F i g u r e 1 Gas Cleanup Technology f o r Biomass G a s i f i c a t i o n

. .

. .

. . . . . . . .
Fixed Bed Downdraft G a s i f i e r . . . . . . .

Figure 2

Schematic o f Fixed Bed U p d r a f t G a s i f i e r

Figure 3

Schematic o f

Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7

. . . . . . . .
Schematic o f a F l u i d i z e d Bed G a s i f i e r
. . . . . . .
Schematic of an E n t r a i n e d Bed G a s i f i e r . . . . . . .
T y p i c a l Tar Concentrations from Various G a s i f i e r s
. . .
T y p i c a l P a r t i c u l a t e Concentrations from Various G a s i f i e r s .
Schematic o f a C r o s s d r a f t G a s i f i e r

.
.
.
.

.
F i g u r e 9 A l l o w a b l e P a r t i c u l a t e Concentration f o r Various End Uses . .
F i g u r e 10 P a r t i c l e S i z e C l a s s i f i c a t i o n and Useful C o l l e c t i o n Equipment .
Figure 8

. . . . . . .
F i g u r e 12 Two Stage Cyclone System on a F l u i d Bed .
F i g u r e 13 Two Stage E l e c t r o s t a t i c P r e c i p i t a t o r . .
F i g u r e 14 T y p i c a l Reverse-Flow Cleaning Baghouse .
F i g u r e 15 Granular Bed F i l t e r
. . . . . . .
F i g u r e 11 Cyclone Flow P a t t e r n s

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.

. . . . . . . . . . .
Scrubber w i t h Cyclone Separator . . . . . . . .

9
10
12
16
45
50
52
53
57
60
61

F i g u r e 16 S i n t e r e d Metal F i l t e r Assembly

63

F i g u r e 17 V e n t u r i

65

. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .

F i g u r e 18 Example o f Spray Tower f o r Tar Removal

68

F i g u r e 19 T y p i c a l Gas Cleaning E f f i c i e n c i e s

73

F i g u r e 20 T o t a l I n s t a l l e d Costs f o r P a r t i c u l a t e - C o n t r o l Devices

xi

. . .

74

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9
Table 10
Table 11

Summary of Gas Cleaning Technology Research Needs f o r

Biomass Gasification

. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Properties of Biomass Tars . . . . . . . . . . .
. .
Components of Biomass Tars . . . . . . . .
P a r t i c l e Size Distribution from Various Biomass Gasifiers .
Typical Ash Compositions f o r Biomass Feedstocks . . . .
Sulfur Content of Biomass Fuels
. . . . . . . . .
Nitrogen Content o f Biomass Fuels . . . . . . . . .
Olefin Production i n Biomass Gasifiers . . . .
. .
Summary of Emissions from Biomass Gasifiers
. . . . .
Problems Encountered w i t h Biomass Gas Burner Systems
. .
Problems Caused by Particulates and Tars i n Internal
Combustion Engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
e

Table 12 Potential Methanol Synthesis Catalyst Contaminants

. viii
. 15
. 15
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

. .

. . .
. . . . . . .

18

20
21
23
25
33

36

42
43

Table 14 Properties of Synthetic Natural Gas (SNG)

44

. . . .
Summary of Gas Cleanup Removal Systems .
Predicted System P a r t i c u l a t e Emissions .
Applicable Gas Cleaning Options
. . .

Table 16 Effectiveness of Spray Towers

Table 17
Table 18
Table 19

. . .
.
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
e

19

Table 13 Other Potential Problems i n Synthesis Gas Production

Table 15 Composition of Ash from Sprucewood Compared w i t h U. S. Coals

<,

58
69

72
81

82
c

xi i

INTRODUCTION
Biomass gasification has the potential to make a significant contribution
to the future energy supply in the United States and is already finding
commercial applications primarily in the forest products industry. One area
that has not been studied in detail is gas cleaning, primarily for particulate
and tar removal.

Particulates can cause plugging and erosion of downstream

equipment and may also be an environmental problem.

Plugging of downstream

equipment i s the primary problem associated with tars.

Once they are separ-

ated from the gas, tars may be an environmental hazard and present a disposal
problem.
The objective of this study was to evaluate gas cleaning technology,
primarily for particulate and tar removal, as it applies to biomass gasification, and identify potential problem areas and gaps in the technology that
could impede development and utilization of biomass gasification.
Selection of gas cleanup equipment for biomass gasification depends
primarily on two factors:

1) the type o f gasifier used and 2) the intended

end use of the gas. The type of gasifier, and t o some extent, the feedstock,
will determine the concentration of particulates and tars in the gas.

The

end use will define the particulate and tar concentrations which can be
tolerated. This relationship is shown in Figure 1.
Phase I of this study reviewed the state-of-the art of gas cleaning
technology as it applies to biomass gasification.

The results of Phase I

which are presented here have been divided into three chapters:
Chapter 1

Biomass Gasification Gas Contaminants

Chapter 2

End Uses for Biomass Gas

Chapter 3

Gas Cleanup Technology

Gas Cleanup Technology

TvDe of Gasifier

Particulate Remova

Fixed Bed UDdraft

Cyclone
Bag House
Electrostatic Precipitator
Filters
Wet Scrubbers
Tar Remova I
Wet Scrubber
Centrifugal Extraction

End Use
Direct Fuel Use
Boiler
Dryer, Kiln
Er gine
T i rbine

S ,nthesis Gas
PiDeline Qualitv Gas

Electrostatic Precipitator
Cracking

FIGURE 1 .

Gas Cleanup Technology f o r Biomass Gasification

Phase I was based on an extensive literature survey.

This survey

revealed a profound lack on data on gas cleaning systems for biomass gasification, particularly for tar removal.

Information on gas cleaning systems

for coal gasification and biomass combustion were also studied. This provided
a sizeable base of information on particulate removal, but still litt e on
tar removal.

Because of this the results of Phase I focus most heavi y on

particulate removal.
Specific gas cleaning methods were applied to various gasifiers in Phase
11.

The primary objective was to identify gas cleaning methods which could

meet specifications for the projected end uses o f biomass gas.

Gaps in the

technology were identified and recommendations for additional research were

made.

This material is included in Chapter 4 , Evaluations and

Recommendations.

1.0

BIOMASS GASIFICATION GAS CONTAMINANTS

When carbonaceous materials a r e g a s i f i e d o r combusted, char, ash, t a r ,

and gases a r e produced.

The r e l a t i v e f r a c t i o n s of these four products will

-i

vary and depend primarily on t h e type of g a s i f i e r , g a s i f i e r operating condit i o n s , and the feedstock.
t

Char/ash p a r t i c l e s and higher hydrocarbon vapors or droplets a r e considered contaminants in a gas stream.

Gasification processes e i t h e r seek t o

minimize char and t a r production or t o maximize t h e i r removal from the gas

stream.

Other contaminants o r p o l l u t a n t s which may be present i n biomass gas

include o l e f i n s , hydrogen s u l f i d e , s u l f u r dioxide, carbonyl s u l f i d e , nitrogen

o x i d e s , and t r a c e metals.

T h i s c h a p t e r i d e n t i f i e s t h e concentrations and

properties of contaminants produced in various types o f biomass g a s i f i e r s

with emphasis primarily on p a r t i c u l a t e s and t a r s .
In the multitude of references c i t e d in t h i s r e p o r t , researchers have
given p o l l u t a n t concentrations i n a wide v a r i e t y of units.

We have attempted

t o leave t h e c i t a t i o n in i t s original form t o avoid any i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a l

errors.

For t h e readers a s s i s t a n c e Appendix A i s a nomograph f o r conversion

of contaminant loadings from one s e t of u n i t s t o another.

1.1 GASIFIER TYPES

Over the years many d i f f e r e n t types of g a s i f i e r s have been constructed

f o r experimental and commercial use.
categories.

The t h r e e main types are:

However, most f a l l i n t o t h r e e d i s t i n c t
fixed bed, f l u i d bed, and entrained

flow, r e f e r r i n g t o the motion of t h e s o l i d s i n t h e g a s i f i e r .

Each type o f

g a s i f i e r has d i f f e r e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which r e s u l t in s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t
y i e l d s of p a r t i c u l a t e s and t a r s .

'

1.'1.1

Fixed Bed Updraft

"Fixed bed" i s a broad term describing a g a s i f i e r i n which the fuel i s

fed onto a r e l a t i v e l y s t a t i o n a r y inventory of biomass already present i n the

reactor.

The fixed bed category encompasses updraft , downdraft , and cross-

d r a f t units.

Each type has d i f f e r e n t operating c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and emissions.

The term "fixed" r e f e r s t o the condition a t the extremes o f t h e bed, which do

not vary a t steady s t a t e .

Most updraft biomass g a s i f i e r s a r e operated a t

atmospheric pressure b u t commercial coal g a s i f i e r s operate up t o 30 atm.

Updraft units (Figure 2) exhibit a countercurrent flow of fuel and gas.
Solid fuel i s fed from t h e top by lock hoppers o r feeders.
i s supported by a g r a t e a t the bottom of the reactor.

The bed of fuel

The fuel flows down

t h r o u g h t h e drying zone, pyrolysis zone, reduction zone, and combustion zone.

Ash and unreacted fuel (char) e x i t through the g r a t e a t the bottom.

Reactant

gases ( a i r , oxygen, steam) a r e introduced i n t o the reactor through t h e g r a t e .

The hot gases from t h e combustion zone provide energy f o r the endothermic
processes i n t h e upper zones and e x i t a t the t o p of the g a s i f i e r saturated
w i t h pyrolysis oi 1 s and water.

E x i t temperatures range from 50-150C.

Approximately 20-25 percent of t h e carbon i n wood i s recovered as l i q u i d

products.

The condensed l i q u i d s usually are i n

two phases:

an aqueous phase

containing highly oxygenated water soluble organics (pyroligneous acids) and

a separate t a r phase (Mudge, e t a1 ., 1980).

Because of the low velocity o f

t h e gases i n t h e r e a c t o r and t h e f i l t e r i n g e f f e c t of t h e bed, t h e product gas

contains 1 i t t l e p a r t i c u l a t e matter.

Detailed descriptions of fixed-bed,

updraft biomass g a s i f i e r s a r e given by Baker (1984), Fritz (1978), Miller

(1983) , Mudge and Rohrmann (1978), Reed (1979), and Oliver (1982).

Biomass

Drying Zone
Pyrolysis

Reduction

Combustion

Air/Oxygen/Stearn

Grate

FIGURE 2.

Ash

Schematic of a Fixed Bed Updraft G a s i f i e r

Fixed Bed Downdraft

1.1.2

Production of pyrolysis o i l s i s largely eliminated i n downdraft g a s i f i e r s

(Figure 3 ) .

As in updraft units s o l i d fuel i s fed from t h e top.

However

a i r , which i s used in most downdraft u n i t s , i s introduced concurrently i n t o

the combustion zone through a d i s t r i b u t o r a s shown in Figure 3 .

Pyrolysis

o i l s and moisture from pyrolysis and drying a r e drawn down through t h e high
temperature
cracking.

55OoC.

reduction

and

combustion zones where

they

undergo

thermal

The product gases e x i t near t h e bottom of t h e r e a c t o r a t 300 t o

Ash and char leave through a g r a t e a t t h e bottom of t h e reactor.

with updrafts, most operate a t atmospheric pressure.

As

Biomass

Product Gas

Alr/Oxygen/Steam

Grate

FIGURE 3.

~ s h

Schematic of a Fixed Bed Downdraft G a s i f i e r

Low gas v e l o c i t i e s r e s u l t in low p a r t i c u l a t e loadings i n t h e same range

as updraft.

Downdraft g a s i f i e r s exhibit very low t a r y i e l d s which a r e

dependent on t h e combustion zone temperature.

A uniform combustion area i s c r i t i c a l f o r proper operation o f t h i s type

of g a s i f i e r and s c a l e up of t h e a i r d i s t r i b u t i o n system i s d i f f i c u l t .

As a

r e s u l t downdraft g a s i f i e r s a r e usually small i n diameter compared t o the

o t h e r types of g a s i f i e r s .
Kaupp and Goss (1981) provide a d e t a i l e d t r e a t i s e of small downdraft
biomass g a s i f i e r s .
Y

Additional information can be obtained from F r i t z (1978),

Groenevel d (1983) , Hodam (1978) , and Reed (1983)

1.1.3

Fixed Bed Crossdraft

Crossdraft g a s i f i e r s (Figure 4) exhibit many of t h e operating characteri s t i c s of downdraft uni.ts.

Tars and p a r t i c u l a t e s a r e both q u i t e low and

g a s i f i e r heat efficiency i s higher than a downdraft.

i

Air o r air/steam mixtures a r e introduced in the s i d e of t h e g a s i f i e r

near the bottom.

Producer gases a r e drawn off the opposite s i d e a t tempera-

t u r e s near those o f downdraft u n i t s (300-550OC).

Tars and o i l s a r e drawn

through t h e reduction zone and cracked t o l i g h t e r components.

l a t e s (most y ash) a r e entrained i n t h e product gases.

Some particu-

More d e t a i l e d informa-

t i o n on c r o s s d r a f t g a s i f i e r s can be obtained from Kaupp and Goss (1981) and

Miller (1983).
Biomass

Drying

Pyrolysis
Reduction

- Gas

Air/Oxygen/Steam
Combustion

Ash

FIGURE 4.

Schematic of a Crossdraft G a s i f i e r

Fluid Bed

1.1.4

In a f l u i d bed g a s i f i e r (Figure 5) the incoming and evolved gases maint a i n the r e a c t o r bed i n a turbulent f l u i d - l i k e s t a t e much l i k e a b o i l i n g
liquid.

The r e s u l t i s an expanded r e a c t o r bed o f char p a r t i c l e s and, in most

biomass g a s i f i e r s , an inert s o l i d such a s sand.

Because biomass i s less

dense and has less ash and fixed carbon than coal t h e inert s o l i d i s used t o
maintain proper f l u i d i z a t i o n (prevent bridging and channeling) and t o provide

addi t i onal heat capacity i n the bed.

No d i s t i n c t zones exist i n a f l u i d bed g a s i f i e r a s near isothermal operat i o n i s maintained w i t h good f l u i d i z a t i o n .

The product gas contains some

t a r s and o i l s depending on the bed temperature (600-900C), and does have a

f a i r l y l a r g e loading of p a r t i c u l a t e s (ash and char).

Operating pressures t o

Disengagement
Section

Cyclone

Ash/ Char

Fluidized Bed

r1

Ash/Char

-Biomass

Air / Oxyge n / S tea m

Ash/Char

FIGURE 5.

Schematic of a Fluidized Bed G a s i f i e r

9

20 atm a r e common in experimental units.

Depending on t h e design, ash &d

char may be removed from t h e top of the reactor with the product gases, from
the bottom of the r e a c t o r , from t h e top of the bed, o r a combination of the
three.

Datin (1981) , Flanigan (1983), Feldman (1983), Goldbach (1983) , Miller

(1983), Mudge (1983), Murphy (1984), and Oliver (1982) provide more d e t a i l s

on design and operation of fluid-bed, biomass g a s i f i e r s .

1.1.5

Entrai ned F1 ow

In an entrained flow (or transport) g a s i f i e r (Figure 6), f i n e l y sized

fuel p a r t i c l e s a r e entrained in the feed gas (usually oxygen and steam) p r i o r

t o entry i n t o t h e reactor.

Gasification takes place with t h e feed p a r t i c l e s

suspended i n the gas phase.

the reactor.

The product gas, ash and char leave t h e top of

Limited data indicate p a r t i c u l a t e and t a r loadings similar t o

Gas

Cyclone

As h / C ha r

Air/ 'Oxygen/ Stea m

FIGURE 6.

Schematic of an Entrained Bed G a s i f i e r

10

'4

o r g r e a t e r than those from fluidized bed units.

Most entrained flow units

a r e low temperature short residence-time pyrolysis units which operate about

500C a t atmospheric pressure.

A cyclonic, entrained-flow, a i r blown g a s i f i e r

feeding sawdust operated a t 800-1 ,OOOC (Cousins and Robinson

1.2

1985)

TARS AND OTHER CONDENSIBLE ORGANICS

Tar i s a generic term f o r the higher boiling ()15O0C)

constituents o f

biomass gas which a r e formed during the pyrolysis reactions.

Depending on

the degree of cracking, the t a r may range from l i g h t , oxygenated hydrocarbons

t o heavy, polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH)
1.2.1

Production Rates and Concentrations

Each type of g a s i f i e r has d i f f e r e n t reaction conditions and consequently

d i f f e r e n t t a r compositions and production r a t e s .

g a s i f i e r generates a high y i e l d of t a r

(N

An updraft fixed bed

20 w t % of the carbon i n wood feed i s

converted t o l i q u i d s ) due t o the low temperature a t which drying and pyrolysis

take place i n the g a s i f i e r .

The drying and pyrolysis zones i n an updraft

g a s i f i e r will range from 80 t o 20OoC.

A t these temperatures the t a r s a r e ,

f o r the most part, condensed droplets entrained i n the gas phase.

Reported

t a r y i e l d s range from 10-100 g/m 3 of gas (Kaupp and Goss 1981; Baker 1984;

Fritz 1978; Dravo Corp. 1976).

Downdraft g a s i f i e r s pass the pyrolysis gases

through the combustion zone which thermally cracks and oxidizes much of the
t a r a t temperatures near 1200-1600OC.
Reported t a r y i e l d s from downdraft
units range from 50-500 mg/m 3 (Kaupp and Goss 1981; Groenevald 1983; Reed
1983; Kumar 1984).

F1 uidized
isothermal.

(or entrained)

beds when

operating

properly

are

nearly

Biomass feed i s pyrolyzed e i t h e r submerged i n the bubbling bed

o r entrained i n a hot gas stream.

High temperature (600-900C) and good gas11

sol i d contacting resu t s in some cracking of pyrolysis o i l s .

The f i n a l

concentration of t a r s i s a function of the reaction temperature, pressure,

and residence time in the bed and i s t y p i c a l l y in t h e range of 2-10 g/m 3

The product gases from downdraft, f 1ui di zed bed, and e n t r a i ned bed gasi f i e r s

are hot and any t a r s t h a t are s t i l l present will be mostly in the vapor phase.
Typical t a r production r a t e s f o r each type of g a s i f i e r a r e summarized in
C

Figure 7.
1.2.2

Properties of Biomass Tars

A recently completed study o f biomass g a s i f i c a t i o n / p y r o l y s i s condensates

a t PNL ( E l l i o t t 1985) concludes t h a t there i s no typical t a r composition

which can be adequately used t o represent a l l thermally produced biomass
tars.

The t a r composition, a s well as t h e amount, i s dependent on t h e

operating conditions, p r i n c i p a l l y a tirne/temperature thermal severity-type

The p r o p e r t i e s of t h e t a r therefore appear t o vary on a continuum

function.

from "primary" oxygenated pyrolysis t a r collected a f t e r a s h o r t residence

Fixed Bed
Downdraft

Fluid Bed

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

Concentration mg/Norrnal rn3

FIGURE 7.

Typical Tar Concentrations from Various Gasifiers

12

tiie at low temperatures of around 500C to highly aromatic, deoxygenated tar

which is produced at short residence time at high temperatures of around
900C.

This continuum of tar cracking/condensation appears to argue against

any purely pyrolytic mechanisms for complete conversion of biomass to a charfree and tar-free gas. The intermediate products of such a progression would
be some grade of tar with the end product being a finite amount of coke or
graphite.
This study suggests that a spectrum of tar condensates can be recovered
from entrained-flow or fluidized-bed reactors processing wood over a temperature range from 450'-950C.

In these short residence time reactors the extent

of progression along a path of thermal decomposition is dependent on the

upper temperature limit achieved in the reactor.

These reactions are very

fast and require only short residence times on the order of fractions of
seconds. Whether there is a smooth continuum or a sharp demarcation between
the oxygenated and deoxygenated products at some intermediate temperature
around 650C is, as yet, unknown.
The location of the organic condensates from the fixed bed gasifiers
within this tar property continuum i s most affected by specific process
configurations.

wide range o f condensate properties have been measured.

In theory the organic vapors from the downdraft gasifier should be completely
combusted; practically speaking such complete combustion i s not obtained.
The extent and type of organic contamination in the downdraft condensate is
4

mainly a function of the efficiency of the combustion zone and the extent of
channeling in the bed.
In the case of updraft operation the condensates appear to be very
simi 1 ar to the we1 1 -known pyrolysis condensate which i s recovered from batch
carbonization o f wood.

The condensate has two phases with a heavy organic

13

phase containing the typical components found i n " s e t t l e d t a r " from charcdal
The l i g h t e r aqueous phase i s highly a c i d i c and c a r r i e s a large

manufacture.

amount (20 t o 25 percent by weight) of dissolved organic material much l i k e

"pyroligneous acid.

I'

The chemical compositional changes i n the t a r s suggest a general process

of deoxygenation and dehydrogenation.

These changes a r e noted by comparison

3

of elemental analyses and v o l a t i l e component i d e n t i f i c a t i o n as well a s several

forms of spectrometry.

A general pathway of

tar chemical functional degrada-

This pathway i s meant t o represent t h e nature of

t i o n i s represented below.

the t a r composition a s a function of thermal processing and can be viewed as

a spectrum of increasing temperature from low temperature (45OOC) on t h e l e f t
t o high temperature (95OOC) on the r i g h t .

- phenolic -

mixed
oxygenates

ethers

alkyl
phenol i c s

heterocyclic
ethers

(PAH)

-. l a r g e r

poly-aromatic
hydrocarbons

PAH

Table 2 summarizes t h e properties of t a r s from d i f f e r e n t g a s i f i e r s as

analyzed by E l l i o t t (1985).
fiers.

Wood was the feedstock f o r a l l of these gasi-

The p r o p e r t i e s of t a r s from fluidized bed or entrained flow g a s i f i e r s

varied widely depending on t h e temperature of operation.

The properties of

downdraft t a r s were a l s o varying indicating t h e mode of operation has a

s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on t a r s from these u n i t s .

The analysis of t h e fixed-bed

t a r from t h e Rome, Georgia g a s i f i e r i s s i m i l a r t o a previous analysis of

'C

fixed-bed t a r from PNL's fixed bed g a s i f i e r (Baker 1984).

14

TABLE 2.

Properties of Biomass Tars

Fluidized Bed/
Entrained
Flow
480'C
880C
Carbon, %
Hydrogen, %
Oxygen, %
Ash, %
PH
v i s c o s i t y , cps

84.0*

52.7*
6.2
40.5
0.6

5.7
8.7
1.6

--

--

tar

Updraft
aqueous

70.9*
7.2
21.7
0.2

--

Downdraft
tar
aqueous
67.2*-0**
5.8-0

11.3

--

7.0-0.5

---

25.0-0

0.1
2.1

2.0-0

--

7500-41 ,000
@78OC
12-13
1.16

220-1300 9800-26,800 410

@4OoC
@5loC
@4OoC
20-28
moisture, w t %
16
8
density, g/ml 1.26-1.28 1.14-1.16
1.13

1.4-0.02
3 .O-5.3

----

elemental and ash analyses f o r t a r s a r e reported on a dry b a s i s

**

downdraft g a s i f i e r s may o r may n o t produce a separate t a r phase depending

on t h e s p e c i f i c operation
Table 3 shows some of the major organic components of the two general

types of biomass t a r s , oxygenated and deoxygenated.

typical t r a c e metal analysis.

Table 2 a l s o gives

Iron and s i l i c a a r e t h e most abundant followed

by calcium, potassium, and zinc.

TABLE 3 .

Components of Biomass Tars ( E l l i o t t 1985)

Low Temperature
Oxygenated Tars

Major Organic Components

High Temperature
Deoxy ge n a t ed Tars

phenol
methylphenols
cresol s
methoxyphenols
dimethoxyphenol s
1 evogl ucosan

acenaphthal ene
naphthalene
methyl naphtha1 enes
f 1 uorene
phenanthrene
f l uoranthrene
acephenanthrylene
benzanthracenes
Trace Metals (ppm)
Fe 200 - 7850
Si <250 - 4670
Ca <20 - 3100
K
<30 - 1060
Zn 0 - 1950
15

PARTICULATES

1.3

The concentration, s i z e , and composition of p a r t i c u l a t e s in gas from

biomass g a s i f i e r s vary considerably.

The v a r i a t i o n s a r e primarily a function

of the type of g a s i f i e r and t h e feedstock.

1.3.1

Production Rates and Concentrations

The concentration o f p a r t i c u l a t e matter in t h e product gas from a biomass

g a s i f i e r depends on numerous f a c t o r s including the type of g a s i f i e r , feedstock, and g a s i f i e r operating conditions.

Operating conditions t h a t influence

p a r t i c u l a t e emissions include gas velocity i n the bed, temperature, moisture

content of t h e b l a s t , and t h e r a t e of g a s i f i c a t i o n .

The concentration o f

p a r t i c u l a t e s from various g a s i f i e r s i s summarized in Figure 8.

Fixed Bed
Updraft
Fixed Bed
Downdraft

Fluid Bed
Entrained Bed

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

Concentration mg/Normal m 3

FIGURE 8.

Typical P a r t i c u l a t e Concentrations from Various G a s i f i e r s

16

Fixed bed g a s i f i e r s , both updraft and downdraft, employ large (2.5-5 cm,
1-2 in) chunks of feedstock t h a t a r e not entrained by the gas flow; neverthel e s s , the product gas does contain a s i g n i f i c a n t quantity of p a r t i c u l a t e s ,
3
100-1000 mg/m (Finnie 1979, Hoenig and Cole 1981, Kaupp and Goss 1981, Katz
P

1983, Jacko 1983, Richey 1985, Level ton 1980).

The

lower

Val ues

t y p i c a l l y measured a f t e r the gas had been combusted i n a burner.

values a r e measured d i r e c t l y from the g a s i f i e r .

were

The higher

The values f o r downdraft

g a s i f i e r s a r e somewhat higher than updraft (Kaupp and Goss 1981) possibly

because t h e higher temperature of the product gas r e s u l t s i n higher gas
v e l o c i t i e s e x i t i n g the g a s i f i e r .
Gas v e l o c i t i e s i n fluid-bed and entrained-flow g a s i f i e r s a r e s u f f i c i e n t l y
high t o entrain considerable p a r t i c u l a t e s from the f i n e feedstock t o these
gasifiers.

Typical particul a t e concentrations f o r f l u i d bed g a s i f i e r s range

3
from 10-456 g/m (Datin 1981, Datin 1983, Murphy 1984, Moreno and Goss 1983,

Oliver 1982, Mudge 1983). The higher values a r e f o r high ash feedstocks
(cotton gin t r a s h and c a t t l e manure) o r g a s i f i e r s where conversion i s l e s s
than 100% and char i s a s i g n i f i c a n t byproduct.

For a i r blown g a s i f i e r s w i t h

a low ash wood feedstock the p a r t i c u l a t e concentration ranged from 10-30

g/m3
1.3.2

P a r t i c l e Size
The assumed mechanism f o r p a r t i c l e elution from a g a s i f i e r i s entrainment

in the gas stream.

The s i z e o f p a r t i c u l a t e s carried out w i t h the product gas

will depend primarily on gas velocity exiting the g a s i f i e r .

Only a limited

amount of data on the p a r t i c l e s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n from biomass g a s i f i e r s has

been published a s shown i n Table 4.
bed g a s i f i e r could not be found.

A p a r t i c l e s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n f o r a fixed

Jacko (1984) tested a fixed-bed g a s i f i e r

and indicated the p a r t i c l e diameters were small similar t o the downdraft data
17

TABLE 4.

P a r t i c l e Size Distribution From Var ous Biomass Gasif e r s

P a r t i c l e Size
Microns

Downdraft
IJacko 1985)

250
100
50
30
20
10
5
2
1

Downdraft
(SERI 1979)
74
50
30
18
11

99+
97
96
95
89
81

0.5

reported i n Table 3.

Fluid Bed
(Datin 1981)

99
97
87
38
17
2

The p a r t i c u l a t e s from t h e downdraft u n i t were q u i t e

small (89% l e s s than 1 micron).

I t i s surprising t o see t h e large p a r t i c l e

s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n r e p o r t e d f o r Imbert downdraft v e h i c u l a r g a s i f i e r s .

This i s

probably due t o the hot gas e x i t i n g through a small annular space which
r e s u l t s in a high gas velocity.

Other downdraft u n i t s (Hoenig and Cole,

1981) show more than 99% of t h e p a r t i c l e s being l e s s than 3 microns.

Particu-

l a t e s from a f l u i d bed were l a r g e r than those from t h e fixed bed u n i t s , p r i marily between 5 and 30 microns.
1.3.3

Composition
P a r t i c u l a t e s from t h e d i f f e r e n t g a s i f i e r types a r e comprised of the

inorganic c o n s t i t u e n t s in the feedstock, any unconverted feedstock, and d i r t .

In many systems the p a r t i c u l a t e s in t h e gas stream a r e collected as a
byproduct f u e l , generally referred t o as char because they contain a large
percentage of

carbon.

entrained-flow g a s i f i e r s .

Char i s often

a byproduct

from fluid-bed

and

Carbon content of s o l i d s from fixed-bed g a s i f i e r s

i s very low.
Published data on t h e composition of wood and a g r i c u l t u r a l residue ash
(Tab1 e 5) show considerable variation in concentrations of major constituents
18

(Ca, K , S i , Na, and A l ) .

The usual main component i n ash i s CaO, which

accounts f o r 10 t o 60 w t % of the ash and i s t y p i c a l l y present a t about 40

wt%.

Concentration of K20 can be 10 w t % or greater.

residues c o n s i s t s primarily of s i l i c a and a l k a l i .

Ash from agricultural

Feedstocks which have a

large percentage of d i r t o r other inorganics can r a i s e the s i l i c a content o f

any ash considerably.
Particulate
reported.

With

composition

from the

different

gasifier

types

is

not

f l u i d and entrained bed g a s i f i e r s entrainment of solid

p a r t i c l e s from the bed i s the l i k e l y mechanism f o r p a r t i c l e elution from a

gasifier.

P a r t i c u l a t e entrainment, therefore, increases with increased energy

output, and the inorganic content of the feedstock.

In a fixed bed g a s i f i e r a l k a l i and possibly other more v o l a t i l e components of the ash could be v o l a t i l i z e d in the combustion zone of the gasif i e r , condensed o r s o l i d i f i e d i n t o small p a r t i c l e s in the cool zones, and
entrained i n the gas stream.

Analysis of entrained p a r t i c l e s would determine

i f such a mechanism does occur.

Corrosion products from the g a s i f i e r and

o u t l e t piping may a l s o be present in the product gas a s p a r t i c u l a t e s .

TABLE 5.

wt %
-

Typical Ash Compositions f o r Biomass Feedstocks

(Kaupp and Goss 1981)
Wood
-

3'2
CaO

1-10
10-60

Fe203
K20
MgO
Na20
Si O2

0.5

Agri cul t u r a l Residues

(wheat straw, corn stover, r i c e straw)
0-2

2-14
0-2
10-26
2-3
2-13
18-78

-4

2-41

1-17
1-20

0-2

19

1.4
1.4.1

OTHER CONTAMINANTS
Sul f u r Compounds

Biomass feedstocks in general have a very low s u l f u r content.

indicates typical s u l f u r levels i n some biomass materials.

Table 6

The f a t e of the

s u l f u r in g a s i f i c a t i o n depends on the temperature and the amount of water

present.
CS2.

Low steam r a t e s and temperatures favor the formation o f COS and

A t steam f r a c t i o n s g r e a t e r than 20 mole % nearly a l l of the s u l f u r

compounds a r e converted t o H2S.

TABLE 6.

Higher temperatures a l s o favor H2S formation.

Sulfur Content of Biomass Fuels*

Biomass

% s u l f u r , dry weight basis

A l f a l f a Seed Straw

0.3

Almond Shel 1 s
Bagasse
Barley Straw
Coffee Hulls
Corn Cobs
Corn Fodder
Corn Stalks
Oat Straw
Cotton G i n Trash
F1ax Straw, Pel 1eted
Furfural Residue
Olive Pits
Manure
Peach Pits
Peanut Husk
Peat ( F i n n i sh)
Peat , General
Rice Hulls
Rice Straw
Walnut Shel 1 s
Wheat Straw
Wood, Chipped
Wood, General
Wood, Pine Bark
Wood, Green Fir
Wood, Kiln Dried
Wood, Air Dried

l e s s than 0.02
0.03-0.12
0.14
0.2
0.001-0.007
0.15
0.05
0.23
0.26-0.31
l e s s than 0.01
0.4
0.02
0.4-0.6
0.04
0.1
0.05-0.2
1.5-2.0
0.16
0.10
0.03- .09
0.17
0.08
0.02
0.1
0.06
1.0
0.08

*Adapted from Kaupp and Goss (1981)

20

Sulfur concentrations i n gas streams a r e generally low.

As a comparison,

c r o s s d r a f t g a s i f i e r s fueled w i t h a n t h r a c i t e (0.5% S) t y p i c a l l y r u n about

1 g S/m3

(Kaupp and Goss, 1981).

H2S (0.2-0.5
5;-

Baker and Brown (1984) measured 80-240 ppm

g s/m3 ) i n the gas from a continuous laboratory g a s i f i e r w i t h

bagasse a s the feedstock and 20-30 ppm w i t h wood.

No s u l f u r was detected by

Hodam & Williams (1978) from t h e i r g a s i f i e r / b o i l e r combination.

I

measured 4-6
combination.

ppm SOX

(-0.01

g s/m 3 )

Murphy (1982)

from a f l u i d bed g a s i f i e r / b o i l e r

Both of these units were wood fueled.

Nitroqen Compounds

1.4.2

Fixed nitrogen i n biomass feedstocks (Table 7) i s converted during g a s i f i c a t i on t o gaseous nitrogen compounds , primari l y ammoni a (NH3) and hydrogen

cyanide (HCN).

Most researchers agree t h a t nitrogen i n the fuel i s t h e main

contributor t o t h e s e compounds and t h a t l i t t l e o r no gaseous N2 i s converted

t o NH3 o r HCN.

TABLE 7.

Nitrogen Content o f Biomass Fuels*

Biomass Fuel s

% nitrogen dry weight b a s i s

Bagasse
Barley, Straw
Corn Cobs
Corn Fodder
Cotton G i n Trash
Corn, S t a l k s
F1 ax Straw, Pel 1eted
Manure
Oat Straw
Olive Pits
Peach Pits

0.2-0.3
0.59
0.16-0.56
0.94

1.34-2.09
1.28

1.1

2.5-3.1
0.66
0.36
1.74
0.5-3.0

Peat
Prune Pits
R i ce H u l l s , Pel 1eted

0.32
0.57

Safflower, Straw
Walnut She1 1s
Wood (General)

0.62
0 26-0.4
0.009-2.0

Adapted from Kaupp and Goss (1981)

21

After g a s i f i c a t i o n the s p e c i f i c use of the gas will a l s o c r e a t e additional nitrogen compounds.

Any NH3 o r HCN w i l l be converted t o NO,

temperature burners , boi 1e r s , o r combusti on turbines.

by high

I f the gasi f i e r i s a i r

blown then some elemental nitrogen (Np) may a l s o be converted t o NO,

i n the

combustion zone o r i n high temperature downstream equipment.

Airborne NO, releases from biomass f a c i l i t i e s have been reported in the
range of 100 ppm.

'-

Hodam & Williams (1978) r e f e r t o a downdraft g a s i f i e r /

b o i l e r combination as having 130 ppm NO, emissions.

From a cross-flow
6
gasifier/burner 0.15 lb/10 B t u
300 ppm) can be expected (Miller 1983).
(N

Fluid bed units coupled w i t h b o i l e r s may show lower NO, levels.

Murphy (1984)

found 58 ppm NO,

from a 54 MM B t u f l u i d bed g a s i f i e r / b o i l e r combination.

Battelle-Columbus

uses an air-blown

char combustor t o s u p p l y h e a t t o a

c i r c u l a t i n g bed of s o l i d material. They (Feldman e t a l . 1983) found 0.25 l b

N0,/10 6 B t u
500 ppm) was emitted from this combustor.
(N

All o f the available data suggests t h a t NO,

emissions from biomass

f a c i l i t i e s will be a t o r below those required f o r New Source Performance

Standards (NSPS), 0.6 lb/106 Btu
1.4.3

(N

1200 ppm).

Olefins
Most g a s i f i c a t i o n o r pyrolysis reactions generate some o l e f i n i c hydro-

carbons.

Ethylene and propylene a r e the most prevalent.

When the gas i s

used as a fuel o l e f i n s contribute t o the heating value of the gas; however,

i f the gas i s t o be used as a synthesis gas, o l e f i n s may be c a t a l y s t poisons.
They polymerize on the c a t a l y s t s ' surfaces and plug the pores.

This r e s t r i c t s

the number of a c t i v e s i t e s available f o r the desired reactions causing

decreased o r s i g n i f i c a n t l y a l t e r e d product yields.
Olefin production depends on the type of g a s i f i e r , the temperature and
pressure,

the gas residence time, the amount of H20 present, and/or the
22

presence of a c a t a l y s t .
Table 8.

Typical o l e f i n concentrations a r e tabulated below in

The highest concentrations a r e found in short-residence

time

pyrolysi s reactors.
TABLE 8.

ZH4

Olefin Production i n Biomass Gasifiers

Fixed Bed
Updraft

Fixed Bed
Downdraft

1-2.4%

0.2-0.4%

C3H6

Reference

1.4.4

Overend
(1979)

Johannson
(1979)

Fluid
Bed
non-catal
catalytic

0.8-2.9%

0%

0.9-2.8%

0%

F1 ani gan ,
et al.
(1983)

Mudge
e t al.
(1983)

Entrained
F1 ow

1-14%
Diebold &
Scahi 11 ,
(1983)

Condensate
Cooling and scrubbing the raw gas from biomass g a s i f i c a t i o n produces a

condensate o r wastewater stream.

El 1 i o t t (1985) analyzed condensate samples

from nine experimental g a s i f i e r s .

The pH of the water ranged from 2.1 f o r a

fixed-bed
gasifiers.

updraft t o 3.0-5.3

f o r downdrafts,

and 5.9-8.7

f o r f l u i d bed

The t o t a l organic carbon dissolved i n the water was very high f o r

the fixed bed updraft (110,000 ppm), somewhat lower f o r downdrafts (5,00071,000 ppm) and q u i t e low f o r fluidized beds (0-400 ppm).

1.5

PRESSURE EFFECTS

The data on emissions presented i n this chapter a r e based primarily on

g a s i f i e r operation a t atmospheric pressure.
a t elevated pressures.

Advanced g a s i f i e r s may operate

This may have a s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on emissions.

23

Calculations show much higher methane and higher hydrocarbons concentrat i o n s a t equilibrium f o r higher pressures (Mudge 1983).

T h i s m i g h t lead t o

higher t a r concentrations as well , although this has not been substantiated.

P a r t i c u l a t e s concentrations from f l u i d beds appear t o be g r e a t e r f o r
higher pressures.

Zenz and Othmer (1960) make reference t o work by May and

Russell i n Gohr (1956) which examined entrainment as a function of pressure

and gas velocity w i t h cracking c a t a l y s t s .

They found f o r a given gas

velocity, entrainment a t 200 psig could be over 10 times t h a t a t atmospheric

pressure.

Density and viscosity of entraining gases plays an important r o l e

in entrainment.

Increasing the pressure increases both t h e density and

v i s c o s i t y of gases and the resulting drag forces on the p a r t i c l e .

known about f i x e d bed p a r t i c u l a t e s vs. pressure.

Little i s

Most fixed bed g a s i f i e r s

a r e operated near atmospheric pressure.

Thermodynamics and reaction equi 1 i b r i a ( p a r t i a l pressures) w i 11 a1 so
e f f e c t the p a r t i c u l a r species and r e l a t i v e concentrations of s u l f u r compounds,
nitrogen compounds, and o l e f i n s , b u t experimental data involving biomass does
not appear t o e x i s t .

1.6

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Fixed-bed updraft units exhibit the highest t a r and o i l emissions b u t

the lowest p a r t i c u l a t e emissions, while f l u i d beds a r e highest in p a r t i c u l a t e

emissions b u t lower i n t a r and o i l loadings.

Table 9 summarizes available

information on contaminants from biomass g a s i f i c a t i o n systems.

Parti cul a t e characteri s t i c s a r e not we1 1 known.

Various gasi f i e r s

exhibit d i f f e r e n t p a r t i c l e s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n s and compositions.

Particulates

can be mostly char in f l u i d beds, b u t mostly ash i n fixed bed units.

24

Wood

ash has a relatively large amount o f potassium and sodium which may volatilize
Further work is needed t o evaluate alkali transport

into the gas stream.

phenomenon.
f

TABLE 9.

Summary of Emissions from Biomass Gasifiers

Product Gas Temperature,

Fixed Bed
Updraft

Fixed Bed
Downdraft

Fixed Bed
Crossdraft

F l u i d Bed

50-150

300-550

300-550

600-900

1-20

--

10-500

--

Entrained Bed
800-1,000

OC

Pressure, a t a
Part icu I ates
Loading, g/m 3

0.1-1.0

Particle size

--

1-50

10-100

2-10

ppm

--

4-6

ppm

-_

D i s t r i but ion,

Iicrons

Tar Loading, g/a 3

NO,(^),

0.1-10

58

Condensate (wastewater)
PH
TOC, PP*

2.1
110,880

3.0-5.3

5,000-71,000

a) based on combustion o f the raw gases

25

---

5.9-8.r
0-400

Tars and o i l s produced during biomass g a s i f i c a t i o n a r e a l s o not well

characterized.

Of

i s the

particular interest

constituents on the reaction conditions.

dependence

of

chemical

Other areas of i n t e r e s t include t a r

deposition i n transport l i n e s , c a t a l y t i c destruction of t a r s , and possible

recovery/recycl ing methods.

Not enough i s known about the basic g a s i f i c a t i o n processes t o predict

'-

pollutant

concentrations

reliably.

Before gas cleanup systems can be

adequately designed the anticipated loadings must be known as accurately as

possible.

1.7

REFERENCES

American Cyanamid. 1981. A Feasibility Study o f the Production and Use of

Wood-Derived Fuels i n a Large Chemical Plant, DOE/RA/50320, August 1981.
American Rice, Inc. 1981. F e a s i b i l i t y Study f o r Alternative Fuels
Production: Fluidized Bed Gasification of Rice Hulls, DOE/RA/50378, October
1981.
Baker, E. G., L. K. Mudge, and D. H. Mitchell. 1984. "Oxygen/Steam
Gasification of Wood i n a Fixed-Bed G a s i f i e r , " Ind. Enq. Chem. Proc. Des.
& 23 (4) ~725-728
Baker, E. G. and M. D. Brown, 1984. Catalytic Gasification of Bagasse f o r
the Production of Methanol, PNL-5100, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland,
Washington, a l s o i n Energy from Biomass and Wastes VIII.
Cousins, J . W. and W. H. Robinson. 1985. "Gasification of Sawdust in an
Air-Blown Cyclone Gasifier. Ind. Eng. Chem. Proc. Des. Dev. 24(4) :1281-1287.
Datin, D. L., W. A. LePori, and C. B. Parnell, J r . 1981. "Cleaning Low
Energy Gas Produced in a Fluidized Bed Gasifier" presented a t the 1981 Winter
Meeting of ASAE, Dec. 15-18, 1981. Chicago, I l l i n o i s , Paper No. 81-3592.
Datin, D. L., W. A. LePori, and C. B. Parnell, Jr. 1983. "Characteristics
of P a r t i c u l a t e s Emitted from a Biomass F1 u i d i zed Bed Gasifier" presented a t
the 1983 Winter Meeting of ASAE, Dec. 13-16, 1983. Chicago, I l l i n o i s , Paper
NO. 83-3548.
Diebold, James and John Scahill. 1983. "Ablative Entrained Flow Fast
Pyrolysis Status" i n Proceedings of the 15th Biomass Thermochemical Conversion
Contractors Meeting, CONF-830323, March 16-17, 1983 i n Atlanta, Georgia.

26

Dravo Corp. 1976. Handbook of Gasifiers and Gas Treatment Systems

FE-1772-11. Dravo Corp. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Elliott, D. C. 1985. Analysis and Comparison of Biomass Pyrolysis/
Gasification Condensates - An Interim Report, PNL-5555. Pacific Northwest
Laboratories, Richland, Washington.
-

Elliott, D. C. 1983. Analysis and Upgrading of Biomass Liquefaction

Products," Vol. 4 of a Final Report to the IEA Cooperative Project D1, Biomass
Liquefaction Test Facility Project. Battelle-Northwest, Richland, Washington.

..

Energy Resources Company. 1982. Municipal/Industrial Waste Gasification

Feasibi 1 i ty Study, DOE/CS/50319-1, August 1982.

Feldman, H. F., M. A. Paisley and H. R. Appelbaum. 1983. "Gasification o f

Forest Residues in a High Throughput Gasifier," in Proceedings of the 15th
Biomass Thermochemical Conversion Contractor's Meetinq. March 16-17, 1983 at
Atlanta, Georgia.
Finnie, G.

1979.

"Halcyon Gasification Systems."

Texas Industri a1 Wood Seminar.

Gasi fi cation , Lufki n , Texas.

Proceedings of the 10th

Technology and Economics o f Wood Residue

Flanigan, V. J . , M. E. Findley, and H. H. Sineath. 1983. "Steam Gasification

Wood in a Fluidized Bed Using Indirect Heating with Fire Tubes," in
Proceedings of the 15th Biomass Thermochemical Conversion Contractors Meeting,
CONF-830323 in Atlanta, Georgia. March 16-17, 1983.

of

Fritz, J . J . , J . J . Gordon, and V . T. Nguyen. 1978. Status Review of Wood

Biomass. ET-78-C-01-2854. Mitre Corporation.
Gohr, E. J.

1956. Fluidization, Reinhold Publishing; New York, NY.

Goldbach, G., K. Wilson, M. Trimble, and J . Prudhomme. 1983. Program to

Develop MSW Fi red F1 uidi zed Bed Boi 1 er, DOE/CS/24321-T1, June 1983.
Groeneveld, Michael J., P..E. Gellings, and J. J . Hos. 1983. "Production o f
a Tar Free Gas in An Annular Co-current Moving Bed Gasifier." Energy From
Biomass and Wastes VII, Lake Buena Vista, Florida, Jan. 24-28, 1983.
Hodam, R. H. and R. 0. Williams. 1978. "Small Scale Gasification of Biomass
to Produce a Low-Btu Gas," in Energy From Biomass and Wastes, August 14-18,
1978, Washington, D.C.
.,

Hoenig, Stuart A. and Frank L. Cole. 1981. "Cleanup of Producer and

Synthesis Gas With a Tube and Wire Electrostatic Precipitator" Solar Energy,
Vol. 27, NO. 6, pp. 579-580.
Jacko, R. B. 1983. "Contaminants from Biomass Gasification." Paper
presented at the Third Annual Solar and Biomass Workshop, Southern
Agricultural Energy Center, Atlanta, Georgia.

27

Jacko, Robert B., Mark L. Holcomb, and John R. B a r r e t t . 1984. " A l t e r n a t i i e

Energy Source Emissions - PAH, NOx, P a r t i c u l a t e s and S i z e D i s t r i b u t i o n s f r o m
Biomass G a s i f i c a t i o n , " Purdue U n i v e r s i t y , West L a f a y e t t e , I n d i a n a
Johannson, E r i c . 1979. " V e h i c l e G a s i f i e r s " i n R e t r o f i t '79
a Workshop on A i r G a s i f i c a t i o n , SERI/TP-49-183.

Proceedings of

Katz, L. J. J. R. B a r r e t t , C. B. Richey, and R. B. Jacko. 1983. "Downdraft

Channel G a s i f i e r Operation and P a r t i c u l a t e Emissions." Trans. Am. SOC. A g r i c .
Eng. 26 (2) :1614-1618.
Kaupp, A. and J. R. Goss. 1981. S t a t e o f A r t f o r Small Scale ( t o 50
Producer - Engine Systems, F i n a l Report t o t h e USDA/USFS on C o n t r a c t
#53-319R-0-141 , Uni v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a, Davis , Cal if o r n i a

kw)

Gas

Kumar, S., e t a l . 1984. "Design and Development o f a Biomass Based Small

G a s i f i e r - E n g i n e System. S u i t a b l e f o r I r r i g a t i o n Needs i n Remote Areas of
Developing Countries". Proceedings: Energy from Biomass and Wastes V I I I .
I n s t i t u t e o f Gas Technology.
M i l l e r , B. 1983. S t a t e o f t h e A r t Survey o f Wood G a s i f i c a t i o n Technology,
EPRI-AP-3101, E l e c t r i c Power Research I n s t i t u t e , Palo A l t o , C a l i f o r n i a .
Moreno, F. E. and J. R. Goss. 1983. " F l u i d i z e d Bed G a s i f i c a t i o n o f High Ash
A g r i c u l t u r a l Wastes t o Produce Process Heat and E l e c t r i c a l Power. I' Symposi um
Papers Energy from Biomass and Wastes V I I , I n s t i t u t e o f Gas Technology,
Chicago, I l l i n o i s .
Mudge, L. K,. E. G . Baker, D. H. M i t c h e l l , R. J. Robertus, and M. D. Brown,
1983. C a t a l y t i c G a s i f i c a t i o n Studies i n a Pressurized F l u i d Bed, PNL-4594,
P a c i f i c Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.
Mudge, L. K., D. G. Ham, S. L. Weber, and D. H. M i t c h e l l . 1980. Oxygen/Steam
G a s i f i c a t i o n o f Wood, PNL-3353, P a c i f i c Northwest Laboratory, Richland,
Washington.
Mudge, L e K. and C. A. Rohrmann. 1978. " G a s i f i c a t i o n o f S o l i d Waste Fuels
i n a F i x e d Bed G a s i f i e r , " ACS Symposium S e r i e s 76 S o l i d Wastes and Residues.
Murphy, Michael. 1984. "Case H i s t o r y o f t h e Design, S t a r t u p , and Operation
o f a 54 MM B t u / h r F l u i d Bed G a s i f i e r f o r Steam Production from Wood and
Biomass Residue" i n Energy from Biomass and Wastes V I I I , Jan. 30-Feb. 2,
1984, Lake Buena V i s t a , F l o r i d a .
Overend, R. 1979. " G a s i f i c a t i o n - An Overview" i n R e t r o f i t '79 - Proceedings
of a Workshop on A i r G a s i f i c a t i o n , SERI/TP-49-183.
01 i v e r , E. D. 1982. Technical E v a l u a t i o n o f Wood G a s i f i c a t i o n , EPRI-AP-2567,
S y n t h e t i c Fuels Associates, Palo A l t o , C a l i f o r n i a , August 1982.
P o t l a t c h Corporation. 1981. F e a s i b i l i t y Study f o r A l t e r n a t i v e Fuels
Production: F l u i d i z e d Bed G a s i f i c a t i o n o f Wood, DOE/RA/50303, October 1981.

28

1.

Reed, T. R., D. E. Jantzen, W. P. Corcoran and R. Witholder. 1979.

"Technology and Economics f o r R e t r o f i t t i n g Gas/Oil Combustion Units t o Biomass
Feedstock," i n R e t r o f i t ' 7 9 - Proceedings of a Workshop on Air G a s i f i c a t i o n ,
SERI/TP-49-183.
Reed, T. B. and M. Markson. 1983. "A Predictive Model f o r S t r a t i f i e d
Downdraft Gasification." Proceedings of the 15th Biomass Thermochemical
Conversion Contractors Meetinq. PNL-SA-11306. P a c i f i c Northwest Laboratory,
Ri chl and, Washington.
I

Richev. C. B., J . R. Barrett, and R. B. Jacko. 1985. "Downdraft Channel

Gasifier-Furnace f o r Biomass' Fuels" Trans. Am. SOC. Agric. Enq. 28 (2) :592598.
Synergy Systems Management Corporation, 1981.

F e a s i b i l i t y Study f o r

Alternative Fuels Production: Fluidized-Bed Gasification of Wood Wastes,

DOE/RA/50317, J u l y 1981.
Zenz, Fredrick A. and Donald F. Othmer. 1960. Fluidization and Fluid
P a r t i c l e Systems, Reinhold Publishing, New York, NY.

29

END USES FOR BIOMASS GAS

2.0

The extent of gas cleanup required will depend on the intended end use
of t h e gas.

Low-Btu gas (producer gas) from biomass has been used t o f i r e

i ndustri a1 process burners i ncl udi ng d i r e c t f i red equipment such as dryers

and k i l n s and i n d i r e c t f i r e d equipment such as b o i l e r s and o i l heaters. LowJ

B t u gas has a l s o been used a s a fuel f o r internal combustion reciprocating

engines, both gasoline and diesel , and i s being considered f o r use in gas
turbine engines.
applications.

Medium-Btu gas can be s u b s t i t u t e d f o r low-Btu gas in these

In addition i t can be used as a synthesis gas f o r making f u e l s

such a s methanol, methane (SNG), and l i q u i d hydrocarbon f u e l s such a s gasoline.

This section discusses t h e gas q u a l i t y , primarily t h e t a r and particu-

l a t e l e v e l s , t h a t a r e required f o r each of these end uses.

2.1

BURNERS (BOILERS/KILNS)
The most common use of gas from biomass t o date i s as a fuel f o r indus-

t r i a1 process burners.

Typical appl i cations incl ude di r e c t f i red process

equipment such a s dryers and kilns and i n d i r e c t f i r e d equipment such as

b o i l e r s and o i l heaters.

W i t h fixed bed g a s i f i e r s t h e gas i s usually piped d i r e c t l y t o the

used.
burner.

With a f l u i d bed g a s i f i e r a h o t cyclone i s generally used t o reduce

particulates.
L

I n these applications only minimal gas cleanup i s

The gas can a l s o be cooled and scrubbed p r i o r t o burning b u t

t h i s r e s u l t s in a s i g n i f i c a n t l o s s of efficiency.
There i s a wide v a r i e t y of burners a v a i l a b l e f o r burning gas and/or o i l .
Gas burners a r e generally of two types.
a r e mixed ahead of t h e burner ports.

In prem x burners a i r and fuel gas

Non-premixing burners use a nozzle,

31

d i f f u s e r or spider t o mix the gas and a i r a t t h e burner t i l e .

Most of ;he

burners used f o r biomass have been t h e non-premixing type.

Low-Btu

gas requires 6-10 times t h e volume of fuel delivered t o the

burner and l e s s a i r than natural gas f o r t h e same capacity.

a special burner i s required in most cases.

For this reason

One option would be t h e use of a

r e f r a c t o r y lined combustor i n place of a conventional burner.

The primary

advantages o f this method are minimal p i l o t f u e l usage, less wear and deposit i o n on t h e b o i l e r tubes, and reduced emissions.

Very l i t t l e work has been

done in t h i s area and consequently there a r e no publications in the open

l i t e r a t u r e as y e t .
Boi 1 e r and burner manufacturers general l y recommend a scrol -type burner
f o r low-Btu g a s because i t p e r m i t s passage of l a r g e volumes o f gas and a i r

w i t h minimal pressure drop (Schwieger 1979).

Scroll burners have a history

o f success on waste gases, such as blast-furnace gas, which has a heating

value of about 80 Btu/scf.

A modification commonly used f o r hot d i r t y gas i s

t h e inclusion of self-cleaning steam j e t s (McGowan and Jape, 1981).

B t u gas can usually be burned in normal natural gas burners.

on using medium-Btu gas from coal a r e available.

Medium-

Many references

L t t l e information on using

medium-Btu gas from bi.omass a s a fuel gas was found

Table 10 l i s t s some problems encountered when burning fuel gas from
biomass.

Derating and o t h e r problems associated with t h e heating value of

t h e gas a r e not included.

Tars and p a r t i c u l a t e s in the fuel gas contribute t o plugging, primarily
in t h e t r a n s f e r l i n e t o t h e burner.

In some applications a standard natural

gas burner has been used by reducing the s i z e of t h e a i r ports and derating
the burner.

In these cases plugging of the burner i t s e l f becomes more o f a

problem with the small i n l e t gas l i n e s .

32

TABLE 10.

Problems Encountered with Biomass Gas Burner Systems

Plugging due t o t a r condensation
Transfer 1 i ne (Wi 11 i ams 1984)
Burner head (Wi 11 i ams 1984; Wai bel 1979a)
Plugging due t o p a r t i c u l a t e deposition
Transfer 1 i ne (Wi 11 i ams 1984)
Burner (Moreno and Goss 1983)
Flame out due t o low heating value (excess
water in t h e wood and product gas)
(Wi 11 i ams 1984)
P a r t i c u l a t e emissions in f l u e gas (Moreno
and Goss 1983; Oliver 1982)
Erosion of furnace masonry due t o a1 kal i n i t y
of gas (Williams 1984)

Tar and p a r t i c u l a t e s have had no noted e f f e c t on combustion in the

burner.

Variations i n gas q u a l i t y due t o f l u c t u a t i o n s in water vapor content

have caused serious problems with flameouts occurring when t h e heating value
o f the gas i s reduced.

This i s usually the r e s u l t of varying moisture content

of t h e feedstock, p a r t i c u l a r l y in fixed bed units.

The I n s t i t u t e of Gas Technology has t e s t e d low- and medium-Btu coal gas

on a v a r i e t y of i n d u s t r i a l burners.

The burners were a forward-flow b a f f l e ,

k i l n , nozzle mix, high-forward momentum, flat-flame, high-excess a i r , premix

tunnel

and b o i l e r burner.

Their primary conclusions were t h a t rnediurn-Btu

gas can be r e t r o f i t on any natural gas burner and produce s t a b l e flames and
good thermal performance, b u t low-Btu fuel gas e x h i b i t s more flame s t a b i 1 it y
problems and reduced thermal performance when r e t r o f i t t o natural gas burners
(Waibel 1979 a , b ) .
IGT a l s o doped t h e gas with char and t a r t o determine t h e i r e f f e c t on

The doping r a t e s ranged from 0.4 t o 2.7 g r / s c f (1-6 g/m 3 )

char and 1.1 t o 2.3 g r / s c f (2.5-5 g/m 3) t a r . T h i s represents l e s s than 1%

burner operation.

33

carbon conversion t o char f o r a g a s i f i e r w i t h a gas production r a t e of 2

m3/kg feed.

For the most p a r t the t a r was consumed i n the burner although a

char-like residue d i d build up inside the fuel nozzle i n some of the t e s t s

when t a r was fed.

I t amounted t o 3 w t % of t o t a l t a r added i n the b a f f l e

burner and 7 w t % i n the kiln.

burners.

Data were not given f o r any of the other

Most of the char was a l s o consumed i n the burner w i t h the survival

r a t e ranging from 5 w t % a t the lower loadings t o 11 w t % a t t h e higher

1oadi ngs.
Allowable p a r t i c u l a t e

loadings f o r gasifier/burner

systems will

limited by a i r pollution regulations f o r emissions i n f l u e gases.

be

Federal

New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) require t h a t p a r t i c u l a t e s be removed

to l e v e l s o f 0.03 lb/106 Btu for utility steam generators over 250 x 106

Btu/hr

(Moore 1983, Ford 1980).

For industrial-commercial-institutional

steam generating units over 100 x 106 B t u / h r new NSPS r u l e s have been proposed
which s e t t h e p a r t i c u l a t e emission l i m i t s f o r wood f i r e d u n i t s a t 0.10 lb/106

B t u (Siege1 and Petri110 1984).

However, many gasifier/burner applications

a r e not covered by NSPS, b u t instead will be covered by various s t a t e regulat i o n s which range from about 0.1 t o 0.6 lb/106 B t u (Ford 1980).

Determining

which regulations will apply i s s p e c i f i c t o each application and beyond the

scope of this study.

A t the p a r t i c u l a t e levels specified by the various a i r

pollution regulations, p a r t i c u l a t e s do not appear t o cause any s i g n i f i c a n t

operational problems w i t h burners, so s t r i c t e r limits due t o burner limitat i o n s a r e not necessary.

Since a substantial portion o f char p a r t i c l e s a r e

consumed i n the burner, higher p a r t i c u l a t e loadings entering the burner may

be permi ssi bl e.
Allowable t a r loadings will be limited primarily by the coupling between
the g a s i f i e r and the burner.

I f they a r e close coupled and the t r a n s f e r l i n e

34

i s well insulated such systems can handle a heavily tar-laden gas such a s
produced by a fixed bed updraft g a s i f i e r .

Longer piping runs 0 2 0 m) will

cause deposition and possible obstruction.

Reduction in the t a r content of

the gas (compared t o a fixed-bed updraft) will be desirable.

L i t t l e quanti-

t a t i v e information i s available regarding the behavior of biomass t a r s and

char in o f f gas piping.

2.2

Further research in t h i s area would be b e n e f i c i a l .

DIESEL AND SPARK-IGNITION ENGINES

The heat energy o f low-Btu gas can be converted t o s h a f t work o r elec-

t r i c i t y using diesel or spark i g n i t i o n engines.

The four strokes of an O t t o

cycle (spark i g n i t i o n ) are:

1) Intake

--

t h e f u e l - a i r mixture flows with the cylinder,

--

2)

Compression

3)

Power

4)

Exhaust -- the piston pushes t h e combustion gases out o f the

cy1 inder.

--

t h e mixture i s compressed, ignited and combusted,

the high-pressure, high-temperature gases expand, and

The Diesel engine d i f f e r s from the Otto engine primarily in t h a t the

temperature a t the end of the compression stroke i s such t h a t combustion i s
i n i t i a t e d spontaneously.

The higher temperature i s obtained by continuing

the compression s t e p t o a higher pressure.

In general, t h e Otto engine has a

higher e f f i c i e n c y than t h e Diesel f o r a given compression r a t i o .

However,

t h e compression r a t i o in the Otto engine i s limited by fuel q u a l i t y (prei g n i t i o n d i f f i c u l t i e s ) so t h a t higher r a t i o s can be used i n t h e Diesel engine,
and f o r t h a t reason higher e f f i c i e n c i e s can be obtained with Diesel engines.

One measure of the fuel q u a l i t y i s the octane number.

The higher t h e octane

number of a fuel the l e s s susceptible t h e fuel i s t o auto-ignition.

High

octane f u e l s a r e required f o r Otto engines and low octane f u e l s a r e necessary

f o r diesel engines.
35

Low-Btu gas has a research octane of about 100 and can be used in a
spark-igni ted gasoline engine by replacing t h e carburetor w i t h a mixing
chamber.

Use of low-Btu gas i n a diesel engine requires t h a t 5-10 percent

diesel fuel be injected f o r ignition.

a s dual-fueling.

This type of operation i s referred t o

The engine always has the potential t o run s o l e l y on diesel

fuel w i t h minor adjustments t o the timing.

A majority of the stationary engines i n operation i n the U.S.

f o r elec-

t r i cal generation , pumps , and compressors a r e f u l l diesel engi nes.

D i esel

engines a r e more popular principally because they a r e less expensive than

spark-ignition engines and fuel c o s t s a r e somewhat l e s s (Kirkwood 1980).
I t i s usually desirable t o cool the gas before admitting i t t o e i t h e r
engine.

T h e increased d e n s i t y o f gas increases t h e horsepower compared t o

using hot gas and prevents premature ignition.

As a r e s u l t , a liquid scrubber

of some type can be used f o r p a r t i c u l a t e and t a r removal.

A combination o f a

cyclone separator and a cloth f i l t e r has been used extensively, p a r t i c u l a r l y

in vehicular applications.
Some o f the problems caused by p a r t i c u l a t e s and t a r s i n internal combustion engines a r e l i s t e d i n Table 11.

TABLE 11.

The f i r s t two items a r e related and a r e

Problems Caused by Particulates and Tars i n Internal Combustion

Engines (SERI 1979, Kaupp and Goss 1981)
Engine wear due t o mechanical abrasion
Contamination of crankcase o i l
Corrosion from organic acids
Deposition i n the gas mixer and i n l e t pipes

Gum formation on valves (from t a r )

36

t h e most serious problems.

P a r t i c u l a t e s come not only from the fuel gas b u t from

and o i l contamination.
the a i r a s well.

P a r t i c u l a t e s a r e the primary cause of engine wear

The l a s t three items in Table 11 involve v o l a t i l e material

from t h e biomass and a r e generally not as serious.

The amount of dust t h a t can be t o l e r a t e d has been the subject of much
research i n the 1930's t o 1950's.
'i

time period ranged from 5-50 mg/m

engine (SERI 1979).

Various regulations developed during t h i s

3

p a r t i c u l a t e in t h e fuel gas entering the

In a recent review Kaupp and Goss (1981) summarized the

e f f e c t o f p a r t i c u l a t e s on engine wear a s follows:

3
Up t o 10 mg/m engine wear i s of t h e same order a s observed
with gasoline.
A t loadings of 50 mg/m 3 engine wear was up t o f i v e times g r e a t e r
than observed with gasol ine.
DuVant , one of t h e l a r g e s t manufacturers of g a s i f i e r / e n g i n e systems
c u r r e n t l y recommends t h e following maximum loadings f o r t a r s and p a r t i c u l a t e s
(DuVant 1981).
Particulates

15 mg/m

Tars (condensible v o l a t i l e s )
A recent study f o r the E l e c t r i c

15 mg/m 3

Power Research , , i s t i t u t e indicated t h a t

when using low-Btu gas in engines, p a r t i c u l a t e s smaller than 5 micron should

be reduced t o l e s s than 20 ppm and tars t o l e s s than 10 ppm. This corresponds
t o 20 and 10 mg/m 3 respectively. Other possible contaminants t h a t may cause
corrosion a r e H2S (should be l e s s than 750 ppm) and aluminum, sodium, and
vanadium (no 1 imits given) (Compton 1984).

2.3

GAS TURBINES

Low o r medium-Btu gas can be used a s fuel f o r combustion gas turbines t o

produce e l e c t r i c i t y o r s h a f t work.

A basic d i r e c t - f i r e d gas turbine system

37

c o n s i s t s of a compressor, a combustion chamber, and a turbine.

Components

added t o t h e system t o improve efficiency include a regenerator t o recover

exhaust losses and preheat t h e a i r t o the combustor, an i n t e r c o o l e r between
compressor stages, and an additional reheating combustion chamber between
turbine stages.
This type of gas turbine cycle (open cycle) uses a i r a s t h e working
medium and burns r e l a t i v e l y clean f u e l s such a s natural gas and petroleum
distillates.

Burning d i r t y f u e l s such as coal, biomass, o r low-Btu gas

d i r e c t l y in a gas turbine i s s t i l l in t h e developmental stage.

A major

problem i s erosion and corrosion o f turbine blades by p a r t i c u l a t e matter and

hot gases (Pruce 1980).
The i ndi r e c t l y heated gas t u r b i n e cycl e (cl osed o r semi -closed cycl es)

has a s i g n i f i c a n t advantage i n t h a t i t can accommodate a wide v a r i e t y o f

f u e l s including biomass, low-Btu gas, coal, and l i g n i t e .

In t h e i n d i r e c t

cycle incoming a i r i s compressed, heated i n d i r e c t l y by combustion gases using

a heat exchanger and then expanded through t h e turbine.

The exhaust a i r i s

used t o combust t h e fuel outside of t h e gas turbine.

The heart of the

i n d i r e c t f i r e d cycle i s t h e heat exchanger.

Several d i f f e r e n t heat exchangers

f o r gas turbine cycles a r e under development.

Emphasis i s c u r r e n t l y on

m e t a l l i c and ceramic materials t o protect the heat exchanger from corrosion/

erosion and t o meet t h e high temperature requirements.
With both types of turbines ( d i r e c t and i n d i r e c t f i r e d ) , i t i s d e s i r a b l e
t o use the biomass fuel gas without cooling (and t a r removal) t o improve the
efficiency.

U t i l i z a t i o n of biomass gas in gas turbines without cooling and

cleaning presents many problems s i m i l a r t o those discussed with i n d u s t r i a l

38

process burners such a s plugging in the i n l e t l i n e , flameouts on poor q u a l i t y

gas (high moisture c o n t e n t ) , and p a r t i c u l a t e emissions in the exhaust gas
stream.
2.3.1

Di r e c t Fi red Turbi nes

The most severe problem w i t h d i r e c t fueled gas turbines i s l i k e l y t o be

erosion and corrosion of the turbine blades and buckets.

Erosion i s a func-

t i o n of t h e type of p a r t i c l e , s i z e of p a r t i c l e , angle of incidence r e l a t i v e

t o t h e surface on which i t impinges, velocity of impingement, p a r t i c u l a t e
content of t h e gas stream, and t h e physical properties of the surface subject
t o erosion.

Both s o l i d s and l i q u i d droplets can cause erosion although the

mechanism i s d i f f e r e n t .

Erosion i s inversely proportional t o p a r t i c l e s i z e

f o r t h e same weight loading.

Erosion i s a power function of velocity and can

be reduced by reducing the turbine blade t i p speed.

Corrosion of gas turbine blades i s r e l a t e d t o erosion and deposition.
Erosion may abrade protective oxide films and a c c e l e r a t e corrosion.

Deposits

of a l k a l i metal s u l f a t e s and vanadates may react with t h e metal in t h e blades

to

produce

sulfidation

and

corrosion.

Corrosion

is

more

severe

as

temperatures exceed 70OoC.

. Extensive experience w i t h gas turbines operating not only on coal b u t

a l s o with dusty i n l e t a i r and w i t h d i r t y fuel gases such a s b l a s t furnace gas

and petroleum c a t a l y t i c cracker off-gas indicates t h a t t h e p a r t i c u l a t e content
o f t h e hot gases fed t o t h e turbine must be kept t o l e s s than approximately 1

ppm t o keep turbine bucket erosion t o an acceptable level f o r turbine i n l e t

temperatures of 150OoF (815OC) o r more.

DOE has adopted 0.001 g r / s c f

( N

0.3

ppm) a s a goal f o r i t s high temperature gas turbine program (Moore 1983).

Dropping the turbine i n l e t temperature below llOOF (593OC) makes i t possible
t o obtain turbine bucket l i v e s of around 3 years with about 100 ppm o f
39

p a r t i c u l a t e s i f a number of compromises a r e made in turbine design (Lackey

1979)

The maximum a1 1owabl e p a r t i cul a t e 1oadi ng speci f i ed f o r h i g h temper-

a t u r e gas turbines i n the COGAS process i s 0.8 lb/106 scf ( ~ 1 0ppm).

l i m i t f o r condensible hydrocarbons was s e t a t 0.5 lb/106 scf

The
3

(N

8 mg/m )

(Robson 1974).
Corrosion of turbine blades by coal derived gas streams i s apparently
caused by a l k a l i s u l f a t e s (Moore 1983; Lackey 1979).

Wood contains about the

same quantity of a l k a l i as bituminous coal, about 0.1 t o 0.2 lb/106 B t u ;

however, wood has much l e s s s u l f u r which may r e s u l t in reduced corrosion.

Other s t u d i e s i n an i n d i r e c t f i r e d gas turbine using gas from biomass found

corrosion i n the hot zone o f the heat exchanger apparently caused by a l k a l i
s u l f a t e s (see page 41).
The U. S. DOE Fossil Energy Gas Stream Contaminant Control Program has
established a goal of 0.02 t o 0.04 ppm a l k a l i i n coal gas t o prevent corrosion
in high temperature gas turbines (Moore 1983).
Gas turbine experience most relevant t o biomass gases i s t h a t of Brown

Boveri Turbomachinery Inc. who have i n s t a l l e d more than 20 units in the l a s t

25 years t o b u r n blast-furnace gas.

These machines a r e characterized by low

pressure r a t i o s (about 4.5) and turbine-inlet temperatures o f about 140OoF

(76OOC).

They range i n s i z e from 2-14 MW.

After extensive t e s t i n g of hot-gas

cleanup equipment, i t was found best t o cool t h i s gas and clean i t with a
two-stage wet scrubber and/or an e l e c t r o s t a t i c p r e c i p i t a t o r p r i o r t o burning
i t i n a combustion chamber ahead of the turbine (Lackey 1979, Pfenniger 1964).
The same approach and requirement have been imposed on the low-Btu gas
supplied from Lurgi coal g a s i f i e r s t o the gas turbine of the combined-cycle
plant in Lunen, Germany (Lackey 1979).

40

2.3.2

I n d i r e c t Fired Turbines
Use of an i n d i r e c t l y heated gas turbine i s one means of avoiding erosion

and corrosion of the turbine blades.

This cycle depends on a high temperature

heat exchanger t o t r a n s f e r heat from the hot d i r t y combustion gases t o a clean

gas, t y p i c a l l y a i r which passes through the turbine.
. .,

There i s very l i t t l e

data a v a i l a b l e f o r these systems as they a r e in t h e e a r l y stages of development; however, biomass gas has been used in an i n d i r e c t l y heated gas turbine
cycle.
Gas from f l u i d i z e d bed g a s i f i c a t i o n of high ash a g r i c u l t u r a l wastes was
used t o r u n a small (30 kw) i n d i r e c t l y f i r e d gas turbine in t e s t s by Advanced
Energy Applications, Inc.

The major d i f f i c u l t i e s encountered were corrosion

in t h e hot zone (160OOF) o f the heat exchanger due t o a l k a l i s u l f a t e s and

fouling in t h e hot zone from ash deposits (Moreno and Goss 1983).

No infor-

mation was given on the type of gas cleaning t h a t was done, b u t t h e conclusion
was t h a t development of new high temperature f i l t e r would be necessary t o
prevent ash fouling.

2.4

Corrosion could be reduced by material changes.

SYNTHESIS GAS/PIPELINE GAS

A p o t e n t i a l l y major use f o r biomass medium-Btu gas in t h e long term i s

as a synthesis gas for methanol, hydrocarbons, o r methane (SNG).

In these

applications t h e gas goes through several processing s t e p s between t h e gasif i e r and the c a t a l y t i c synthesis unit.

These include:

P a r t i c u l a t e and Tar Removal

S h i f t Conversion
Acid Gas Removal
Compression
Trace Gas Removal
41

The downstream processing streams and the synthesis c a t a l y s t s used f o r

these process a r e a l l q u i t e similar so they will be considered together.
Methane t o be transported by pipeline will have t o meet additional specificat i o n s f o r the f i n a l product gas.
Potential contaminants f o r methanol synthesis c a t a l y s t s a r e shown in
Table 12.

For some contaminants such as t a r s and o i l s the contaminant l i m i t s

a r e not well defined.

on natural

To date most commercial synthesis gas plants a r e based

gas and many of these contaminants have not been a problem.

Catalysts f o r hydrocarbon synthesis (Fi scher-Tropsch) and methanation (SNG)

a r e q u i t e s i m i l a r t o methanol c a t a l y s t s so the contaminant problems should be
simi 1a r .
Some p o t e n t i a l problems o t h e r t h a n c a t a l y s t poisoning o r fouling t h a t

can be envisioned a r e l i s t e d i n Table 13.

TABLE 12.

Potential Methanol Synthesis Catalyst Contaminants

(White 1983, Bennett 1980, Connor 1982)

Synthesis Gas Component

Contamination Level and Potential

C2H2

Potential Catalyst Poison @ 3 ppm

C2H4, Higher Olefin

Presently Unknown b u t Possible Catalyst

Poisonous a t Higher Concentration

CH4, Higher Paraffin

Inert

Sulfur (H2S, COS, CS2)

Poison @ 0.03 t o 0.2 ppm f o r

Cu based c a t a l y s t
Poison @ 10 ppm f o r Zn based c a t a l y s t

Chlorides

Poison @ 0.03 t o 0.2 ppm f o r C u

based c a t a l y s t

NH3, HCN

Possible Catalyst Poi son a t Modest

Concentration

Parti cul a t e

Possible Poison and Affect Catalyst

Life Due t o Bed P l u g g i n g

Oil Mist

Possible Catalyst Poi son a t Modest

Amount
42

.
TABLE 13.

Other Potential Prob ems i n Synthes s Gas Production

Parti cul a t e s
Plugging of CO s h i f t converter
Contamination of acid gas scrubbing liquor
Erosion of compressor blades
Deposits i n process
Tars o r Oil Mist
Fouling o r poisoning of s h i f t c a t a l y s t

The most serious of these problems i s l i k e l y t o be erosion of compressor

blades by p a r t i c u l a t e s .

Operating data from a Koppers-Totzek coal g a s i f i e r

i n Kutahya, Turkey indicate t h a t s o l i d p a r t i c u l a t e s i n raw gas a r e reduced

from 12 gr/scf down t o 0.002 gr/scf i n venturi scrubbers and f u r t h e r cleaned

t o 0.0001 gr/scf i n an e l e c t r o s t a t i c p r e c i p i t a t o r i f the gas i s t o be compressed t o high pressure f o r chemical synthesis o r f o r t h e production o f
high-Btu gas (Farnsworth 1974).

These numbers seem very low i n l i g h t of

other information obtained f o r gas turbines (see previous section).

In an

engineering evaluation of a l i g n i t e t o methanol p l a n t , Davy McKee International specified t h a t the raw product gas be cleaned to. 0.01 gr/scf p r i o r
t o compression (Goyen 1980).

I n t h e case of methane which will be transported by pipeline,

additional l i m i t s a r e placed on the f i n a l gas quality.

some

The Office o f Coal

Research issued the following guideline objectives f o r development o f processes t o make high B t u gases from coal.

The gas should be deliverable a t

1000 psig and have the properties shown i n Table 14.

43

TABLE 14. Properties of Synthetic Natural Gas (SNG) (Strakey 1975)

Heating Value

co
H2S
Total S

> 900 Btu/scf (HHV)

< 0.1%
< 0.25 gr/100 scf
< 10 gr/100 scf
< 5%

Inerts

2.5

< 3%
Water < 716/106 scf
co2

SpGr 0.59

0.62

Hydrocarbon <4OoF at 1000 psig

Dew Point
No poisonous compounds or
gum formers

CONCLUSIONS
The allowable particulate and tar loadings in biomass gas varies signifi-

cantly depending on the end use.

particulates.

Figure 9 summarizes the requirements for

If the gas is used in a burner t o supply energy, particulate

removal will be governed primarily by air pollution regulations for particulates. The allowable loadings in the combustion flue gas range from 0.03 to
0.6 lb/106 Btu depending on the size and location of the facility.

The

specific allowable limit will be site specific.

For internal combustion engines, particulates must be removed down to
10-50 mg/m 3 t o prevent excessive engine wear.

Requirements are even more

strict to prevent erosion and corrosion o f gas turbine blades; particulates

must be reduced to 0.001 to 0.01 gr/scf depending on turbine speed and
operating temperature.
Less information is available for gases to be used for synthesis of
chemicals, SNG, or gasoline.

In general the requirements will be similar to

specifications for gas turbine applications and will be dictated by erosion

of compressor blades in the compressors used to compress the gas to high
pressures required for synthesis.

44

I /
-

Unacceptable

II

Regulations

.1

0 . l L 1001

L L

E
n

0
v)

rn
A

FIGURE 9. Allowable Particulate Loadings f o r Various End Uses

Specifications f o r t a r s i n the product gas a r e not well defined.

Tars

will be consumed i n any burner (including gas turbine combustors) and increase
the heating value o f the gas.
g a s i f i e r and the burner.

However, t h i s requires close-coupling t h e

Separation of the g a s i f i e r and the burner by any

d i stance can cause si gni f i cant problems due t o t a r condensation and preci pi tation.

Tar removal should be considered i n this case.

In diesel and spark ignition engines t a r s must be reduced t o 10-50 mg/m

t o prevent deposition i n the gas mixer and i n l e t valves and gum formation on
the valves.

The l i m i t on condensible hydrocarbons entering the high tempera-

t u r e gas turbine have been set a s low a s 0.5 lb/106 scf

( N

no reasons have been given f o r the limitation (Robson 1974).

45

3
8 mg/m ) although

Tars a r e known t o be poisons f o r various synthesis c a t a l y s t s , however,

t h e i r e f f e c t i s not well understood, nor have l i m i t s been s e t .

For synthetic

natural gas entering a pipeline a hydrocarbon dew point of <4OoF a t 1000 p s i g

(- 100 mg/m7) has been specified.

In addition no gum formers a r e allowed.

Tars would probably be c l a s s i f i e d a s gum formers.

2.6

REFERENCES

Bennett, R. 1980. "Gas Conditioning." In A Survey o f Biomass Gasification

SERI/TR-33-239, Vol. 111. Solar Energy Research I n s t i t u t e , Golden, Colorado.
Compton, L. E.

1984.

Development of a Data Base on Biomass Diesel-Electric

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Cal ifornia.

Generation. EPRI AP-3549.

Connor, M. A. 1982, "The Gasification Step i n Plants Producing Methanol

from Biomass." Presented a t the Fifth International Alcohol Fuel Technology
Symposium, Auckland, New Zealand, May 13-18.
Duvant, Moteurs. 1981.
Residues. EUR 7565 EN.

Gas Generation of Low-Btu Fuel Gas from Agricultural

Moteurs Duvant , Val enci ennes , France.

Farnsworth, J. F., D. M. Mitsak, and J. F. Kamody. "Clean Environment w i t h

Koppers-Totzek Process." Symposium Proceedings: Environmental Aspects of
Fuel Conversion Technology. EPA-650/2-74-118.
Research Triangle I n s t i t u t e .
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Ford, G. C., e t a l . 1980.
1980, pp. 5-1 t o 5-20.

"Controlling P a r t i c u l a t e Emissions."

Power June,

Goyen, S., E. Baily, J. Mawar, and R. Arai. 1980. Lignite-to-Methanol:

An
Engineering Evaluation of Winkler Gasification and IC1 Methanol Synthesis
Route. EPRI AP-1592. DM International , Inc., Houston, TX.
Kaupp, A. and J . Goss. 1981. S t a t e of the Art f o r Small Scale Gas Producer
- Engine Systems. Prepared f o r the USDA Forest Service by University of
California, Davis, California.
Kirkwood, B. J . 1981. Survey of Diesel Generation by Small U.S. U t i l i t i e s .
EPRI AP-2113. A. C. Kirkwood and Associates, Kansas City, Missouri.

McGowan, T. F. and A. D. Jape. 1981. Gas Burners f o r Low-Btu Producer Gas.

Georgia I n s t i t u t e of Technology Engineering Experiment Station, Atlanta,
Georgia.
46

Moore, W. E. 1983. "Overview t o DOE/Fossil Energy's Gas Stream Contaminant

Control Program." Third Annual Contaminant Control in Hot Coal Derived Gas
Streams Contractor's Meeting Proceedings. DOE/METC/84-6. Morgantown Energy

Technology Center, Morgantown, West V i r g i n i a .

Moreno, F. E. and J . R. Goss. 1983. "Fluidized Bed Gasification of High Ash

Agricultural Wastes t o Produce Process Heat and Electrical Power.
Symposi urn
Papers Energy from Biomass and Wastes VII, I n s t i t u t e o f Gas Technology,
C h i cago , I1 1 i noi s
'I

Oliver, E. D. 1982. Technical Evaluation of Wood Gasification, EPRI-AP-2567.

Synthetic Fuel Associates, Palo Alto, California.
Pfenninger, H. 1964. "Operating Results w i t h Gas Turbines o f Large O u t p u t " .
Journal of Engineering f o r Power, January 1964, pp. 29-49.
Pruce, L. M. 1980. "Need f o r Greater Fuel F l e x i b i l i t y Spurs Gas-Turbine
Developments." Power, June 1980, pp. 82-83.
Robson, F. L. and A. J. Giramonti. 1974. "The Environmental Impact of Coal
Based Advanced Power Generating Systems." Symposium Proceedings:
Envi ronmental Aspects of Fuel Conversion Techno1ogy
Schwieger, R. G.
pp. S-1 t o S-23.

1979.

"Burning Tomorrow's Fuels".

Power, February 1979,

SERI. 1979. Generator Gas -- The Swedish Experience from 1939-1945.

Solar Energy Research I n s t i t u t e , Golden, Colorado.
SERI/SP-33-140.

Siegel, R. D. and J . P e t r i l l o . 1984. "New Source Performance Standards f o r

IC1 Steam Generators." Chem. Eng. Proqress, September, pp. 17-19.
Strakey, J . D., A. J . Forney, and W. P. Haynes. 1975. "Methanation i n Coal
Gasi f i cation Processes.
Paper presented a t 2nd Annual Symposi urn Coal
Gasification, University of Pittsburgh, August 5-7, 1975.
'I

Waibel, R. T., E. S. Fleming, and D. H. Larson. 1979a. "Pollutant Emissions

from 'Dirty' Low- and Medium-Btu Gases." Proceedings o f the Third Stationary
Source Combustion Symposi um, Vol 111. EPA-600/7-79-050 Industrial Research
Laboratory , Research Triangle Park, North Carol ina.

Waibel, R. T. 1979b. " R e t r o f i t t i n g Industrial Furnaces t o Use Low- and

Medi um-Btu Gases.
Symposi um Papers New Fuel s and Advances i n Combustion
Technology. I n s t i t u t e of Gas Technology, Chicago, I l l i n o i s .
I'

White, H. M. 1983, A Surve of Current Biomass Gasification Processes f o r

Methanol Production.
Cal i forni a.

1
,

Williams, P. 1984. "Canadian Mill Shuts Down Airblown Wood Gasifier."

Bioenergy Bulletin, February 15, pp. 1-2.

47

3.0

GAS CLEANUP TECHNOLOGY

Fuel gases derived from biomass g a s i f i c a t i o n resemble gases derived from

coal g a s i f i c a t i o n with respect t o major fuel c o n s t i t u e n t s , b u t d i f f e r with
respect t o major impurities.

Because coals a r e generally much higher in

s u l f u r and ash, these constituents tend t o be higher i n coal gas than i n

biomass gas.

The spectrum of t r a c e elements derived from coals may also be

d i f f e r e n t from t h a t derived from biomass f u e l s .

Finally, the d e t a i l e d chemi-

cal makeup of t a r s and o i l s derived from coals will d i f f e r s i g n i f i c a n t l y from

those derived from biomass g a s i f i c a t i o n .

There has been a vast amount of

work done on t h e problem o f cleaning coal derived gases and with proper a t t e n t i o n t o t h e differences imposed by g a s i f i c a t i o n of biomass f u e l s much of t h i s
technology can be applied.
Various gas cleanup systems e x i s t f o r removal of both p a r t i c u l a t e s and
t a r s from gases produced by biomass g a s i f i c a t i o n .

Often these overlap,

p a r t i c u l a r l y when t a r s a r e present as l i q u i d droplets.

Well-documented data

with these systems on biomass gas i s limited; however, some actual operating
data with biomass i s included.

Much of the information presented here i s

based on r e l a t e d experience w i t h coal conversion.

3.1

DEFINITIONS
The primary contaminants of concern in t h i s report a r e p a r t i c u l a t e s and

tars.

P a r t i c u l a t e i s used t o r e f e r t o s o l i d p a r t i c l e s of char and ash.

These materials a r e a l s o commonly referred t o a s d u s t .

Tar r e f e r s t o hydro-

carbons and oxygenated hydrocarbons which a r e normally l i q u i d a t atmospheric

pressure and ambient temperature.

In t h e g a s i f i c a t i o n process t h e t a r s may

be present as e i t h e r vapor o r a s l i q u i d droplets.

Liquid dispersions i n a

gaseous medium a r e sometimes referred t o as sprays or mist.

49

Small s o l i d

p a r t i c l e s and liquid droplets suspended i n a gas are o f t e n

collectively

referred t o as aerosols.
Figure 10 shows a range of p a r t i c l e and droplet s i z e s and the type o f
Although t a r s are often

collection mechanism appropriate f o r various s i z e s .

present a s vapor they a r e removed from the gas as liquid droplets following
condensation.

In addition t o p a r t i c l e s i z e , separation may be effected by

other properties of
resistivity,

the s o l i d p a r t i c l e o r droplets such as e l e c t r i c a l

stickiness,

combustibility,

corrosiveness,

and

toxicity

(Razgai t i s 1977).

Particle Diameter, microns

0.001

0.01

0.1

10

100

1,000

-&I!

-Fib&

-Spray-

Mist

E,

10,000

--E

Mist Eiiminators
Elkctrostah
Precipitators

Impingement
Separators

FIGURE 10.

P a r t i c l e Size Classification and Useful Collection Equipment

50

3.2

PARTICULATE REMOVAL
Solid p a r t i c u l a t e

feedstock).

generally f l y ash o r char

is

The c l a s s of separators most widely used f o r removal of particu-

l a t e s a r e t h e centrifugal type units (cyclone).

electrostatic precipitators,
available.

( p a r t i a l l y burned

For more rigorous removal

and other f i 1t e r i ng methods a r e

baghouses,

These separators a r e generally operated above t h e dewpoint of any

t a r s , o i l s or water t h a t might be present t o avoid any s t i c k y combination of

t a r s and char.

Depending on the physical properties o f the contaminants t h i s

may be from 15OoC t o 50OoC.

3.2.1

Cyclones
Cyclones, o r i n e r t i a l separators, operate by imparting centrifugal force

t o t h e p a r t i c l e s t o be removed from t h e gas stream.

This i s done by d i r e c t i n g

t h e gas flow in a c i r c u l a r path (Fig. l l ) , which due t o t h e i r i n e r t i a , the

p a r t i c l e s cannot fol low.

Design procedures f o r cyclones with predictable

performance a r e based on theory and supplemented by empi r i c a l techniques

accumulated from operating experience (Stone

& Webster 1974, Zenz 1982).

For

t h i s p r e d i c t i o n , t h e nature of t h e p a r t i c l e s and especially t h e p a r t i c l e s i z e

d i s t r i b u t i o n must be well defined.
Razgaitis (1977) a s s e r t s , on the other hand, t h a t prediction of performance c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of cyclones i s not straightforward.

He provides an

elegant and well annotated discussion of t h e problem and of the l i m i t a t i o n s

(as well a s successes) of t h e various quasi-empirical c o r r e l a t i o n s which have
been developed t o predict t h e efficiency of cyclones.

Detailed descriptions

of conventional and advanced a u x i l i a r y i n j e c t i o n cyclones a r e given in t h i s

reference with ample l i t e r a t u r e c i t a t i o n .

For example, t h e most widely

appl i ed new-techno1 ogy cyclone described by Razgai t i s i s t h a t devel oped by

System Siemens and which i s available in the U.S. by l i c e n s e t o Aerodyne
51

Clean Gas
Outlet

f
Dust-Laden
Gas Inlet

Eddy Currents

Main Vortex

Vortex Core

Dust Outlet

FIGURE 11.

Development Corporation.

Cyclone Flow Patterns

These a r e d i r e c t flow cyclones with vane axial

i n j e c t i o n and which employ a u x i l i a r y a i r (gas) i n j e c t i o n f o r p a r t i c u l a t e

removal.

They can be operated a t temperatures up t o 900C and 30 atm. and

have exhibited c o l l e c t i o n e f f i c i e n c i e s of 90% f o r 1 micron p a r t i c l e s a t

pressure drops of only 1.5 cm Hg.

For comparison, conventional cyclones

designed f o r a 2 t o 3 micron cut off (50% c o l l e c t i o n efficiency @ t h i s s i z e

range) would c o l l e c t no more than 20% of 1 micron p a r t i c l e s (Stone and Webster
1974).

Clearly, f o r c o l l e c t i o n of sub-micron p a r t i c l e s , cyclones will be

v i r t u a l l y useless.

For c o l l e c t i o n of p a r t i c l e s
52

>2

micron in diameter they

a r e an e x c e l l e n t choice.

Cyclones are manufactured in almost any s i z e , from

miniclones a t l e s s than 1 / 2 " diameter t o large capacity u n i t s up t o and over

10 f e e t .

Capacity of l a r g e r u n i t s can be hundreds of thousands of cubic f e e t

per minute.

S e r i e s cyclones a r e q u i t e common and as many a s three o r four

u n i t s can be coupled (Fig. 12).

Design and operating data a r e available f o r a two-stage cyclone p a r t i c l e
removal system f o r cleaning low BTU gas derived from f l u i d bed g a s i f i c a t i o n
of cotton gin t r a s h (Parnell 1981).

d u s t discharge were designed.

Cyclones w i t h tangential i n l e t and axial

The two cyclones ,were connected in s e r i e s .

The primary cyclone was designed t o be l e s s e f f i c i e n t than t h e secondary

cyclone b u t would s t i l l c o l l e c t most o f the p a r t i c u l a t e .

The secondary

Outlet

FIGURE 12.

Two Stage Cyclone System in a Fluid Bed

53

cyclone was designed f o r higher efficiency and f o r c o l l e c t i o n of smaller

particles.

With t h i s arrangement t h e smaller diameter (secondary) cyclone i s

l e s s subject t o plugging.
Operating with an i n l e t p a r t i c l e burden of 162 g/m

t h e primary cyclone
operated t o remove 93.1% and t o y i e l d an e f f l u e n t containing 11.1 g/m 3 The

secondary cyclone operating a t 98.7% efficiency produced an e f f l u e n t contain3

ing 0.14 g/m

Omnifuel i n s t a l l e d a 12-foot diameter fluidized bed g a s i f i e r a t Hearst,

Ontario.

The gas passed through a s i n g l e cyclone and was burned in four o i l

heaters.

In one t e s t approximately 92 w t % of the p a r t i c u l a t e s in t h e fuel

P a r t i c u l a t e loadings were reduced from

gas were removed by the cyclone.
3 ( 8 g/m 3) i n t h e product g a s l e a v i n g t h e g a s i f i e r t o
approximately 3.5 g r / f t
0.15 g r / f t 3 (0.4 g/m 3) in the combustion f l u e gas (Oliver 1982). The 92%
efficiency i s obtained by dividing the p a r t i c u l a t e s removed i n the cyclone by
the sum of the cyclone p a r t i c u l a t e s and the p a r t i c u l a t e s in t h e f l u e gas.
Because a s i g n i f i c a n t portion of the carbon p a r t i c l e s c a r r i e d over t o the
burners a r e consumed t h e r e and a r e not accounted f o r by t h i s measurement, the
92% efficiency probably overestimates the cyclone efficiency.
PNL has t e s t e d several

gas cleaning systems with t h e i r 1 tonlday

fluidized bed g a s i f i e r .

The g a s i f i e r generates a raw gas containing a typical

3
3
p a r t i c u l a t e burden of 32 g r / f t (70 mg/m ).
A s i n g l e cyclone generally
removed 60-85 w t % of the p a r t i c u l a t e s (Mudge 1983).
In t e s t s with a fixed bed g a s i f i e r on a diesel t r a c t o r a s i n g l e cyclone
removed 53-67 w t % o f the p a r t i c u l a t e s .

The low efficiency i s due primarily

t o t h e low i n l e t velocity which occurred a t low engine loads (Kaupp and Goss
1981).

54

Most wood f i r e d b o i l e r s use multiple small cyclones in p a r a l l e l ( m u l t i clones) f o r primary p a r t i c u l a t e control.

In the past t h i s was enough t o meet

a i r pol 1 ution regulations; however, secondary p a r t i c u l a t e removal systems,

usually wet scrubbers, a r e now necessary f o r most systems (Brady and Jenkins
1980, Russell 1978, Brown 1978).

For example, combustion gas from a wood

f i r e d , 60,000 l b / h r , Babcox & Wilcox, stationary g r a t e b o i l e r , was cleaned t o

3
3
3
0.38 g r / f t (0.8 g/m ) in a multiclone and f u r t h e r cleaned t o 0.007 g r l f t
3
(.15 mg/m ) i n a wet scrubber (Scott 1980). Another combination wood (80% o f
heat i n p u t ) and o i l f i r e d b o i l e r uses two high efficiency cyclones in s e r i e s
f o r p a r t i c u l a t e removal.

The overall efficiency of the two c o l l e c t o r s was

94% and the concentration o f the p a r t i c u l a t e s averaged 0.18 g/m 3 (Ananth
1981).

Zenz (1982) a l s o makes reference t o a "bark b o i l e r " w i t h cyclones

only 58% e f f i c i e n t .
In general

, h i g h efficiency cyclones (rnulticlones) have collection

e f f i c i e n c i e s of 60-85 w t % f o r hogfuel flyash.

High efficiency cyclones in

s e r i e s can increase collection efficiency t o over 90 w t % .

Two large cyclones in s e r i e s have been used t o remove p a r t i c u l a t e s f o r
wood combustion gas p r i o r t o f i r i n g the gas i n a 375 kw gas turbine.
the f i n a l

cyclone the gas contained 8-12 ppm p a r t i c u l a t e s

(.11

After
mg/m 3 ) .

Operation on one t u r b i n e f o r 210 hours and a second f o r 270 hours w i t h no

detectable erosion.

A s i m i l a r 3000 kw turbine u n i t i s under construction

(Hamrick 1983).
a

There a r e a large number of cases where a cyclone has been employed as a

primary p a r t i cul a t e remover t o be f o l l owed by more s t r i n g e n t cl eani ng devi ces
such a s f i l t e r s , venturi scrubbers o r ESP's.

55

3.2.2

E l e c t r o s t a t i c Precipitators

Alone among methods of p a r t i c l e c o l l e c t i o n , the e l e c t r o s t a t i c precipitat o r (ESP) a c t s solely on the p a r t i c l e s t o be collected and not on t h e e n t i r e
gas stream (Manhattan College 1978).

The pressure drop i n an ESP i s about

the same a s in an equivalent length of pipe.

The process of e l e c t r o s t a t i c precipitation c o n s i s t s of corona formation
around a high tension wire w i t h p a r t i c l e charging by ionized gas molecules.
ESP's operate by using a h i g h voltage, d i r e c t current t o c r e a t e gas ions t h a t
impart an e l e c t r i c a l charge t o p a r t i c l e s by bombardment.

The charged p a r t i -

c l e s a r e collected by exposing them t o an e l e c t r i c f i e l d which causes them t o

migrate and deposit on electrodes of opposite p o l a r i t y (see Figure 13).
T h e electrode cleaning system i s dependent on the t y p e o f p r e c i p i t a t o r .

Dry type p r e c i p i t a t o r s , which can operate up t o 54OoC, remove p a r t i c l e s by

mechanical shaking and rapping.

Wet type p r e c i p i t a t o r s c o l l e c t and remove

the p a r t i c l e s w i t h a t h i n continuous flowing film of water.

They generally

operate a t 1 ess than 6 5 O C (Kennedy 1979).

The usual approach taken t o design (size) ESP's f o r p a r t i c l e collection
(Manhattan Col lege 1978, Schwei t z e r 1979) makes use of the Deutch-Anderson
equation :

= 1

exp(- wA/Q).

The term w represents the e f f e c t i v e migration velocity o r p r e c i p i t a t i o n r a t e

parameter which i s selected on the basis of experience w i t h various types of
particulate.

Values range from 0.13-0.67

f t / s e c w i t h values of 0.33-0.44

f t / s e c often found on p r e c i p i t a t o r s collecting f l y ash from f i r i n g pulverized

coal.

Since the desired collection efficiency (n) and gas flow r a t e (Q) are

usually specified, the required collection area (A) can be determined once an
appropriate p r e c i p i t a t i o n r a t e parameter (w) has been selected.
56

In general

Ionizer
Stage

Dust
Particle
Path

(-1

.;: 3

..-:

Collector
Stage

(-1
(+)

%
A-l@(-)

Gas
Flow

Receiver
Electrode

Emitter Wires

(-)

Emitter Plates (+)

Grounded Collector Plat

Dust

Emitter
Wire (+)

Gas

\y. .
.J'

Flow

FIGURE 13.

Two Stage E l e c t r o s t a t i c P r e c i p i t a t o r

the p r e c i p i t a t i o n r a t e parameter decreases with increasing ash r e s i s t i v i t y ,

and increases with increasing s u l f u r content of t h e fuel , and corona power
density.
I t i s well known t h a t ESP's perform poorly on ash derived from low s u l f u r
coals (SO3 i n j e c t i o n may be required).

Changing from coal w i t h 2% S t o a

sub-bituminous coal with 0.5% S can r e s u l t in an efficiency loss from 99.5%

t o 90% o r l e s s (Manhattan College 1978).
57

Many sub-bituminous c o a l s , on the

a r e h i g h i n sodium (as Na20) and t h i s lowers t h e r e s i s t i v i t y

o t h e r hand,

r e s u l t i n g i n b e t t e r removal e f f i c i e n c y .
Ash d e r i v e d from wood c o n s i s t s o f oxides o f Ca, K,

Na, Mg, and S i .

Table 15 g i v e s t h e composition range f o r wood ash and coal ash.

TABLE 15.

Composition o f Ash from Wood (Kaupp and Goss, 1981)

Compared w i t h U.S. Coals (Lowry 1963)
Ash A n a l y s i s , %
U.S. Coals

Component

A' 23'

1-10

10

S i O2

0-2

20

CaO

10-60

MgO
Na20

1-17

0.3

K20

2-4
0.5-4

35
60
20

1-20

1-4
Fe203

35

These d i f f e r e n c e s can be h i g h l y s i g n i f i c a n t t o t h e design o f ESP's as

w e l l as o t h e r s e p a r a t i v e devices.

For example, t h e wood ash may be much more

conductive than c o a l ash due t o i t s h i g h a l k a l i c o n t e n t , which o f course i s

extremely d e l e t e r i o u s t o t u r b i n e end usage.
E l e c t r o s t a t i c p r e c i p i t a t o r s (ESP) a r e seldom used on b o i l e r s f i r i n g o n l y
hog f u e l due t o problems w i t h t h e r e s i s t i v i t y o f hog f u e l f l y a s h (Brady and
Jenkins 1980).

ESP's have been used on an MSW f i r e d m u n i c i p a l i n c i n e r a t o r .

Gas from two 39,000 l b / h r Riley Stoker b o i l e r s pass through s i n g l e f i e l d ESP

2
w i t h 413 m o f c o l l e c t i o n area.

The ESP has a design c o l l e c t i o n e f f i c i e n c y

of 93% and reduced p a r t i c u l a t e s t o 0.074 from 0.55 g r / f t

58

3
(1.2 g/m ) .

Wood wastes a r e burned in a b o i l e r a t the Kettle F a l l s (Washington)

Generating Station t o produce 42.5 mw of e l e c t r i c i t y .

Pollution control here

i s accomplished with roughing cyclones followed by an ESP. This system i s

3
3
designed f o r an emission level o f l e s s than 0.02 g r / f t (40 mg/m ) (Henriques
1983).
Gas from a PuroxTM fixed bed g a s i f i e r feeding MSW were cleaned i n a wet
scrubber followed by an ESP.
Following treatment the gas contained 0.0023
0.005 g r / f t 3 (10 mg/m ) of p a r t i c u l a t e s (Ananth 1981). Hoenig and Cole (1981)
indicate 98.7% of the "dust t a r s " from a Pegasus downdraft u n i t were removed
by an ESP.

No indication o f the properties of the p a r t i c u l a t e s o r t a r s was

given.

PNL's 1 ton/day process development u n i t f l u i d bed g a s i f i e r o r i g i n a l l y

used a cyclone followed by a venturi scrubber t h a t was l a t e r replaced by an
e l e c t r o s t a t i c p r e c i p i t a t o r (ESP).

Both the venturi and the ESP experienced

plugging problems caused by a sticky combination of char and t a r (Mudge 1983).

E S P ' s a r e used f o r f i n a l p a r t i c u l a t e removal from a commercial Koppers-

Totzek coal g a s i f i e r .

Gases a r e f i r s t cooled and scrubbed i n a venturi u n i t

p r i o r t o entering the ESP.

The ESP reduces p a r t i c u l a t e s from 0.002-0.003

g r / f t 3 (4-6 mg/m3) t o 0.0001 g r / f t 3 (0.2 mg/m3) (Farnsworth 1974).

3.2.3

Baghouses
Baghouse f i l t e r s a r e one of the o l d e s t and most widely used techniques

f o r removing p a r t i c l e s from gas streams.

The primary advantage of bag f i l t e r s

i s t h e i r very high efficiency i n d u s t removal.

Other advantages include low

energy use and pressure drop and collection of p a r t i c l e s i n a dry form which
s i m p l i f i e s disposal.

Disadvantages include the large s i z e and high cost.

addition temperatures are limited t o about 290C (Kennedy 1979).

reverse-flow cleaning baghouse i s shown i n Figure 14.
59

In

A typical

Dust Laden

Clean Gas Out

Valve S h o w n
Valve in
Back-Wash Position

Fi I teri ng Posit ion

Back-Wash Gas In
Spreader Rings
This compartment
is Being Back-Washed

This Compartment

Filter Tubes

FIGURE 14.

Typical Reverse-Flow Cleaning Baghouse

The mechanism of the filtering process is complex.

Small particles are

initially retained on the fibers of the filter material by interception,

impingement, diffusion and settling, and electrostatic attraction.

After a

filter cake accumulates, further collection is by sieving, which is primarily

responsible for the high collection efficiency attainable.

Bag filters

typically allow collection of <2 micron particles with 99.9% efficiency (Stone
and Webster 1974).

Maximum pressure differential is approximately 6 inches

of water prior to cleaning. Typical capacities are 1.9-2.8

Col 1 ege 1978)

.
60

ft3 /ft2 (Manhattan

Baghouses a r e becoming more common in large u t i l i t y industry i n s t a l l a t i o n s with low s u l f u r coal where the effectiveness of ESP's i s reduced and
they would tend t o become very large (and expensive).

No biomass g a s i f i e r s

a r e known t o employ bag f i l t e r s and they have not been used much f o r wood and
c

bark f i r e d b o i l e r s . One problem i s t h e i r s u s c e p t i b i l i t y t o f i r e s caused by

glowing char in t h e f l u e gas (Ford 1980).

rn

3.2.4

Granular Bed F i l t e r s
Granular bed f i l t e r s employ a stagnant fixed bed of sand o r other media

t o t r a p p a r t i c u l a t e s by impaction.
house) i s shown in Figure 15.

A typical granular bed f i l t e r (Westing-

Fluidizing gas i s introduced once a specified

Fluidizing Gas Out

a-

Cleaning Cycle

61

pressure di f f e r e n t i a1 (1-3 p s i ) i s reached t o clean t h e captured p a r t i c u l a t e

from the much l a r g e r f i l t e r media.

Typical media s i z e s a r e around 15-30 mesh

and bed depths a r e 2-4 inches (Zenz 1982).

Commercial uses of granular bed f i l t r a t i o n a r e limited although Zenz
4

(1982) r e f e r s t o a down-flowing pebble bed f i l t e r 75% t o 97% e f f i c i e n t on

e f f l u e n t from a hog mill waste combustor.

The bed was an annulus 8.5 f t OD x

6 f t ID, 16 f t t a l l with gravel 1/8 in t o 1/4 in in diameter.

Pressure drop

across t h e bed was about 12 inches of water and the u n i t was operated a t
I

300-350F.

I t appears t h a t t h e p a r t i c u l a t e was removed from t h e bulk material

by sieving w i t h t h e pebbles being recycled t o t h e top of t h e bed.

These devices have been characterized a s highly e f f i c i e n t though complex
( R a z g a i t i s 1977).

I n p r i n c i p l e a p e b b l e bed f i l t e r can be b u i l t v e r y l a r g e

so t h e f i l t e r area i s extensive and s u f f i c i e n t t o achieve any desired

efficiency,

The trouble i s , sooner o r l a t e r i t has t o be regenerated.

This

can prove q u i t e troublesome, especially with s t i c k y p a r t i c l e s .

Granular bed f i 1 t e r s currently under development include t h e Ducon
f l u dizable bed f i l t e r , Panel Bed (fixed backflush) f i l t e r , Rex gravel bed

( s t rred backflush) and various proposed f i l t e r s under study a t Westinghouse,

Consolidation Coal Co., Dorfman, Carnegie-Mellon, and Lurgi, M.B.

All involve

s i m i l a r p r i n c i p l e s o f c o l l e c t i o n and regeneration.
A p a r t i c u l a r advantage of t h i s f i l t e r i n g concept i s t h a t t h e f i l t e r media

can a l s o serve as a chemisorbant f o r a l k a l i when operated a t high temperat u r e s , 160OoF (870OC) (Mulik 1983).

The use of alumina or aluminosilicates

allows e f f i c i e n t a l k a l i removal a s well as p a r t i c l e collection.

Using 2 mrn

a1 umi na spheres and operati ng a t 160OoF Combusti on Power obtai ned 99.5%
p a r t i c u l a t e c o l l e c t i o n efficiency on i n l e t gas loading of 0.5 t o 3.5 g r / f t 3
3
(1.1-8.0 g/m ) with median p a r t i c l e s i z e of 5-10 microns (Lee 1983).
62

3.2.5

Other Barrier F i l t e r s
Additional b a r r i e r f i l t r a t on methods a r e available (Henry, Saxena, and

Podolski, 1983) b u t a r e not w dely used due t o t h e i r cost o r complexity.

Porous metal f i l t e r elements (Fig. 16) have been used f o r years in c a t a l y s t
recovery, nuclear waste calcination, and other s i t u a t i o n s where p a r t i c u l a t e
removal i s desired from hot gas o r liquid streams. With proper design and
materials (Inconel TM ) these f i l t e r s may be operated a t 815-925'C (1500170OOF). Nominal pore s i z e s range from 0.5 t o 100 microns.

Typical removal

e f f i c i e n c i e s a r e 99.999% f o r p a r t i c l e s g r e a t e r than 0.05 microns properly

designed f i 1 t e r e lements.

The inherent h i g h c o s t , slow s i n t e ring a t high

Clean
Gas

Compressed
Air

Open & I

Clord

Dusty Gas

Filter Element

Dust Out

FIGURE 16.

Sintered Metal F i l t e r Assembly

63

temperatures, plugging, and possib e f a i l u r e due t o thermal shock may make

these

units

uneconomical

other

than

for

research

scale

or

special

appl i cations.
In t e s t s a t PNL's f l u i d bed g a s i f i e r high temperature s i n t e r e d s t a i n l e s s
steel

f i l t e r s were placed

p a r t i c u l a t e removal.

immediately a f t e r t h e cyclone f o r additional

These f i l t e r s had a pore s i z e of 10 micron and were

.#

operated above t h e dewpoint of t h e t a r .

After t h e f i l t e r s t h e gas was cooled

and the t a r s separated with t h e condensate i n a demister column.

operated without d i f f i c u l t y (Mudge e t a1

This system

. 1983).

Similar f i l t e r s a r e now being constructed based on porous ceramic

b a r r i e r s (Ci 1b e r t i 1983).

These f i 1t e r s a r e designed t o withstand higher

temperatures and c o l l e c t very f i n e p a r t i c l e s with maximum e f f i c i e n c i e s .

They

s u f f e r from many o f the problems of s i n t e r e d metal u n i t s and a r e as y e t

unproven.

Despite t h e l i m i t a t i o n s of these f i l t e r systems t h e potential

economic advantages of a high temperature/high pressure p a r t i c u l a t e removal

system i s enough t o j u s t i f y continuing development f o r use with commercial
coal g a s i f i c a t i o n systems (Rubow 1984).
3.2.6

Wet Scrubbers
Gas scrubbing,

p a r t i c l e removal.

using various l i q u i d s , can be highly e f f e c t i v e f o r

Water i s the most common scrubbing l i q u i d although other

l i q u i d s have been investigated.

Wet scrubbers have been used extensively on

wood and bark f i r e d b o i l e r s in the wood products industry (Scott 1980).

Wet

scrubbers have also been used in coal-fired p l a n t s b u t on a l a r g e s c a l e ,

economics generally favor ESPs o r baghouses (Ford 1980).
There a r e a wide v a r i e t y of wet scrubbers, b u t f o r p a r t i c u l a t e control
in b o i l e r f l u e gas, venturi scrubbers (Fig. 17) a r e by f a r the most common.

64

Gas Outlet

Gas inlet

inlet

Separator

Drain

FIGURE 17.

Venturi Scrubber w i t h Cyclone Separator

Water contacts t h e d u s t laden gas i n a r e s t r i c t e d area ( t h r o a t ) .

Gas veloci-

t i e s a r e t y p i c a l l y 200-400 f t / s e c i n this t h r o a t area (Manhattan College

1978).

P a r t i c l e s a r e collected by c o l l i s i o n w i t h water d r o p l e t s .

The l i q u i d

i s entrained i n the gas stream and must be de-entrained i n a mist eliminator.

f

Variable t h r o a t scrubbers permit close control of pressure drop and e f f i ciency.

Efficiencies a r e proportional t o t h e design pressure drop.

For

p a r t i c l e s over 10 pm t h e design pressure drop i s t y p i c a l l y around 1 inch of

water (.25

kPa).

For p a r t i c l e s l e s s than 10 pm pressure drops of 10-100

65

inches of water (2.5-25

kPa) have been used (Kennedy 1979).

Typical e f f i -

c i e n c i e s a r e 99.9% f o r 2 pm p a r t i c l e s and 9 5 9 9 % f o r 1 pm p a r t i c l e s .

An i r r i g a t e d packed column containing an open type packing such as rings

or saddles i s a l s o an e f f i c i e n t c o l l e c t o r of p a r t i c l e s .

Collection e f f i -

ciencies of 50% f o r 1 pm p a r t i c l e s have been demonstrated a t laboratory scale

(Jackson and Calvert 1966).

With counter current i r r i g a t i o n of the packing

w i t h a working f l u i d , t h e collected p a r t i c l e s can be continuously flushed

from t h e packing.

Here the primary collection mechanism f o r p a r t i c l e s above

0.5 pm i s i n e r t i a l impaction.

Due t o t h e i r i n e r t i a t h e p a r t i c l e s cannot

follow t h e gas flow around the packing.

Continuous i r r i g a t i o n of t h e packing

should e f f e c t i v e l y prevent re-entrainment o f agglomerated p a r t i c l e s .

Wet scrubbers and cloth f i l t e r s were used extensively w i t h downdraft
vehicular g a s i f i e r s i n Sweden.

Baff1,e p l a t e wet scrubbers generally removed

p a r t i c u l a t e s down t o about 50 mg/m 3 , which corresponded t o 95-99% c o l l e c t i o n
e f f i c i ency (SERI 1979)

A venturi scrubber i s used t o cool and clean a t a r - f r e e gas from a

commercial Koppers-Totzek coal g a s i f i e r .

P a r t i c u l a t e s were reduced from 12

g r / s c f t o 0.002 g r / s c f which corresponds t o 99.98% e f f i c i e n c y (Farnsworth

1974).
A wet scrubber i s used w i t h a Halcyon commercial fixed-bed g a s i f i e r t o

remove p a r t i c u l a t e s and condensed t a r s .

Removal e f f i c i e n c i e s of 96% f o r a l l

p a r t i c l e s over 5 micron and 98% f o r a l l p a r t i c l e s over 10 microns were

obtained (Fi n n i e 1979)

3.3

TAR REMOVAL
Tar removal lowers the heating value of t h e gas produced by a biomass

gasifier.

I t may become necessary, however, because of the e f f e c t of t a r s in

66

plugging l i n e s and instrument ports rendering operation of downstream equipment d i f f i c u l t .

Tars may be present in two forms.

In a fixed updraft gasi-

f i e r where t h e gas e x i t temperature i s low, t a r s will be present primarily as

l i q u i d d r o p l e t s entrained in the gas.
e

In downdraft and f l u i d bed g a s i f i e r s

where t h e product gas i s h o t , t a r s may a l s o be present i n t h e vapor form.

Only a t high temperatures can p a r t i c u l a t e and t a r removal be separated.

At

temperatures where t a r s and o i l s condense t o l i q u i d s , removal of t a r s and

o i l s cannot be divorced from the p a r t i c u l a t e removal problem ( a l l c o l l e c t
together).
3.3.1

Wet Scrubbers
Wet scrubbers a r e widely used t o cool t h e gas and remove the precipi-

t a t i n g t a r s and o i l s and a l s o can be used f o r s o l i d p a r t i c u l a t e s as previously

discussed.
The primary c o l l e c t i o n mechanism i s impingement of t h e p a r t i c l e s on
l i q u i d (usually water) droplets.

There a r e a wide v a r i e t y of wet scrubbers

varying primarily in the method of l i q u i d contacting.

are

spray

towers,

packed

bed

scrubbers,

plate

scrubbers, b a f f l e scrubbers, and venturi scrubbers.

The most common types

scrubbers,

impingement

The design and construc-

t i o n of wet scrubbers i s covered in d e t a i l by Calvert (1972), Lucas (1973) ,

and Kaupp and Goss (1981).

Practices in the coke-oven and byproducts indus-

t r i e s a r e widely used f o r t a r removal in a l l gas manufacturing processes

(Parekh 1982).

In a typical spray tower most o f the t a r i s condensed by contact with

water sprays.

In addition t o cooling t h e gas and condensing t a r t h e l i q u i d

washes condensed t a r droplets from t h e gas (together with p a r t i c l e s ) .

The

t a r and l i q u i d flow t o a decanter where t a r (and p a r t i c l e s ) s e t t l e and

separate from t h e bulk of t h e liquid (Figure 18).
67

Clean
Gas Out

. ..,: . * . , .* ..:

. . e .

-. . * . .,.. ... . '. .*.

.. .
.
.
.
.
..
- .' . .. . .. . .... ... . . .' . ;...
.. .' -.. ... . . - .: -.
, . ..:
:
*
, - ..
I.,

,.e:

. I

- e . ,

4;.*

. - , e .

;\*

* I

.a'.

. - . .
*

Dirty Gas

In

FIGURE 18.

Example o f Spray Tower f o r Tar Removal

Another type o f t a r scrubber used with many e a r l y gas producers was the

Lymn washer.

I t consisted o f a s e r i e s of cones and disks through which the

gas and water passed counter-currently.

Other scrubbers t h a t have been used

with producer gas a r e rotoclones and Chevron vane separators.

(4

Table 16 shows t h e pressure drop and t h e e f f i c i e n c y of various wet

scrubbers.

Spray towers a r e the simplest and l e a s t expensive and have the

lowest efficiency.

Venturi scrubbers (described in 3.2.6 and Fig.16) a r e the

most complex and most e f f i c i e n t .

(a) Information provided by Mr. Kerry L. Rock, Davy McKee, Tulsa, Oklahoma
68

TABLE 16.

Effectiveness of Spray Towers (Lucas 1979; Buonicore 1980)

Pressure Drop
inches water

Spray Tower
Impingement
Packed Bed
Venturi

P a r t i c l e Size, ym
f o r 80% collection

0.5-1.5
2-50
2-50
5-100

10

1-5
1-10
0.2-0.8

Wet scrubbers a l l produce a liquid stream which usually requires f u r t h e r

treatment f o r t a r recovery prior t o disposal.
formation a r e not uncommon.

Problems w i t h s t a b l e emulsion

Oils from biomass g a s i f i e r s a r e q u i t e l i k e l y t o

contai n an appreci ab1 e f r a c t i o n of aqueous sol ubl e carboxyl i c acids , a1 dehydes, ketones, and substituted phenols such a s have been reported i n products
derived from " f l a s h pyrolysis" and "entrained flow pyrolysis" of wood ( E l l i o t t
In addition, the o i l s which can be decanted a r e l i k e l y t o s t i l l

1985).

contain appreciable amounts o f water which lower t h e i r heating value and

reduce t h e i r viscosity.
Wastewater samples from t h e f l u i d bed, a i r blown steam g a s i f i e r a t Texas
Tech University have been analyzed a t PNL (Petty 1981).

Testing confirms the

presence of a c e t i c and propionic acids w h i c h accounts f o r pH l e v e l s as low as

2.3.

Chemical oxygen demand (COD)

ranged from 30,800 mg/l t o 67,900 mg/l.

Nitrogen l e v e l s were generally low, b u t two samples contained i n excess of

5400 mg/l

( r e f l e c t e d by higher pH (5.5-7.4)

presence of NH3.

which was probably due t o the

Significantly lower COD has been reported f o r a downd a f t

g a s i f i e r , about 30 mg/l (Reed 1982).

A recent analysis of condensate from nine experimental biomass gasif e r s

showed the pH ranged from 2.1 t o 5.3 f o r fixed bed g a s i f i e r s and 5.9 t o 8.7
f o r f l u i d bed g a s i f i e r s .

Total organic carbon soluble i n the water ranged

from 10 w t % f o r the fixed bed g a s i f i e r s and was generally l e s s than 0.1% f o r

the fixed bed g a s i f i e r s ( E l l i o t t 1985).
69

3.3.2

Centri fuga1 Extraction

Cyclonic devices a r e more applicable f o r sol id p a r t i c u l a t e s (as described

i n Section 3.2.1),
g r e a t e r than 5p.

b u t have some application w i t h t a r o r water droplets

No data on efficiency was found on using centrifugal devices

f o r biomass t a r removal although they have been used (Oliver 1982; Miller
1983).

Prater e t a l . (1984) use a humidifier/cyclone combination t o remove

50-90% of the coal t a r s from a pressurized 1 ton/day fixed bed updraft coal

gasifier.

More viscous t a r s may require t h a t the u n i t ' s walls be heated t o

avoid plugging.
3.3.3

E l e c t r o s t a t i c Precipitators (ESP's)
E l e c t r o s t a t i c p r e c i p i t a t o r s e f f i c i e n t l y charge and c o l l e c t o i l mists and

t a r droplets together w i t h p a r t i c l e s .

I n t h i s operation the collecting plates

a r e washed continuously w i t h water t o remove collected material.

temperatures f o r t a r removal a r e generally near 150F (76OC).

Operating

Other opera-

tional c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a r e e s s e n t i a l l y the same a s w i t h p a r t i c u l a t e s (Section

3.2.2).
3.3.4

Catalytic (Thermal) Cracking

Fluidized bed g a s i f i e r s y i e l d a gas containing t a r s and o i l s i n vapor

form which adds s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o the heating value of the gas.

i n the U.S.

Researchers

(Mudge e t a l . 1981, 1983) and Sweden (Ekstrom, Lindman, and

Pettersson 1982) a r e studying the use of c a t a l y s t s t o convert t a r s t o gases.

Catalysts have been used in the g a s i f i e r and d i r e c t l y downstream i n a
secondary vessel.

Maintaining c a t a l y s t a c t i v i t y appears t o be the primary

problem w i t h this method (Baker and Mudge 1984).

70

3.4

OPERATING CONDITIONSI EFFICIENCIES, AND COST

The main features of commercial

and developing p a r t i c u l a t e and t a r

removal systems a r e summarized in Table 1 7 .

Cyclones can operate a t the

highest temperatures followed by d r y e l e c t r o s t a t i c p r e c i p i t a t o r s (ESP's) and

granular bed f i l t e r s .
they u t i l i z e .

Baghouses are limited t o about 290C by the f a b r i c s

Liquid scrubbers a r e limited by t h e vapor pressure o f the

scrubbing l i q u i d , usually water.

F i l t e r systems capable of operating a t

higher temperatures a r e under development.

The e f f e c t s of operating a t

pressure a r e documented f o r cyclones, e l e c t r o s t a t i c p r e c i p i t a t o r s , b a r r i e r

f i l t e r s , and o t h e r hot gas cleaning methods (Henry, Saxena, and Podolski 1982,
Gilbert 1978).

Generally, pressurized operation reduces t h e s i z e of gas

cleaning equipment.

Wet scrubbers, however, a r e generally used only on

atmospheric pressure g a s i f i e r s and consequently have not been researched

extensively.

Research in t h i s area would be b e n e f i c i a l .

Typical e f f i c i e n c i e s f o r several of the most common gas cleaning systems

a s a function of p a r t i c l e s i z e a r e shown in Figure 19.
are the least efficient.

Cyclone separators

Wet scrubbers a r e somewhat more e f f i c i e n t and

baghouses ( f a b r i c f i l t e r s ) and ESP's a r e the most e f f i c i e n t p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r

submicron p a r t i c l e s .
Figure 20 shows typical i n s t a l l e d c a p i t a l c o s t s f o r these same systems.

In general t h e c o s t of t h e gas cleanup equipment i s d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d t o i t s

e f f i c i ency

71

TABLE 17.

Commerci a1
Systems

Cyclones

Summary o f Gas Cleanup Systems (Stone and Webs,er 1974)

Maxi mum
Operating Conditions
Operated
Projected
OFIPSIG

OF/PSIG

1700/ h i gh

>2000/ h i gh

Inlet or
Face

Typical
Pressure
Dro

4000

4 - 6

Yes

Col1 e c t s
Condensed
Tars

Electrostatic
Precipitators

900/15

1700/300

200 t o 300

15

35

Yes

Bag Houses

550/15

---

5 t o 10

15

30

No

>900/high

>2000/300+

100

12

No

175/15

--

12

Yes

1700/500

--

13

Yes

1500/high

100

--

No

---

Granular Bed
F i 1t e r s
Liquid Scrubbers

Aerodyne Tornado

900/500

Devel oping
Systems
Fiber Fi 1 t e r s

-800/15

>1500/hi gh

2 to 5

Ceramic

3450115

---

2 to 5

Liquid
Scrubbers

1400/15

1400/100

Panel Bed

1OOO/ 15

>ZOO0/ h ig h

Ducon

600/15

>1500/high

Pebble Bed

250/15

1500/high

Porous Metal

-30 30 30 -

72

No

No

--

Yes

45

--

No

90

---

100

No
No

9.99

99.9

99

95
>
u

90

a
'0
80
.-

5
5

.-

c.l

-a0
Z

70
60
50

40
30
20
10

0.1
0.02

I I 1 1

0.1

I I I I J

Particle Diameter, Microns

FIGURE 19.

Typical Gas Cleaning Efficiencies

73

10

10.00 I

8.00

4.00

E 3.00

6.00 5.00 cc

Electrostatic
Precipitator

-0"

2
2.00

1.50

1.00

0.60

=mal
+d

v)

-C

0.80 -

-. - -

, - <

- 0 9 -

0.50
0.40 1

'

I
4

8 1 0

15

20

30

40

50 60

~apacity(10~c.f.m.)

FIGURE 20.

Total Instal led Costs for Particulate-Control Devices

(Perry 1973)

74

80 100

3.5

REFERENCES

Ananth, K. P., M. A. Golembiewski, and H. M. Freeman. 1981. "Environmental

Assessment of Waste-to-Energy Conversion Systems."
Fuel s from Biomass and
Waste. Ann Arbor Science Pub1 ishers, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Baker, E. G. and L. K. Mudge.

1984. Catalysis i n Biomass Gasification,
PNL-5030. Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.
Battelle-Columbus.
1983.
Proceedings:
EPRI/TVA Workshop on the Use o f
Biomass f o r the Generation of Electric Power. EPRI AP-3678/

Beck, S. R., e t a l . , "Application of SGFM Technology t o Alternate Feedstocks."

Proceedings - 14th Biomass Thermochemical Conversion Contractors Meeting,
June 23-24, 1982, CONF-820685, PNL-SA-10646.
Pacific Northwest Laboratory,
R i ch 1 and , Was h i ngton

Boubel, R. W.
1978.
Control of Particulate Emissions from Wood Fired
Boilers. Stationary Enforcement Series, EPA 340/1-77-026.
Brady, J. D. and H. N. Jenkins.
1980.
"Wood Energy Emissions Control
Technologies."
Proceedings-Energy Generation and Cogeneration from Wood.
Forest Products Research Society, Madison, Wisconsin.
Brown, 0. D.

1978.

"Energy Generation from Wood-Waste."

Wood Energy.

Ann

Arbor Science Publishers, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Buonicore, A. J .
91-101.

1980.

"Air Pollution Control."

Chem. Eng., June 30, p p .

Calvert, S., e t a l . 1972. Wet Scrubber System Study, Volume I :

Handbook, U.S. Department of Commerce, NTIS PB-213016.

Scrubber

Cil b e r t i , D. F. , e t a1
1983. "Hot Gas Cleanup Using Porous Ceramic Cross
Flow F i l t e r s , " Proceedings Third Annual contaminant Control i n Hot Coal
Derived Gas Streams Contractors Meeting.
DOE/METC/84-6 (CONF-8305112)
Morgantown Energy Research Center, Morgantown, West V i rgi ni a.

Ekstrom, C.,

N. Lindman, and R. Pettersson.

1982.

"Catalytic Conversion of

Tars, Carbon Black, and Methane from P.yrolysis/Gasification of Biomass.

presented a t The Fundamentals of Thermochemical Biomass Conversion Conference,

I'

Oct. 19-22, 1982, Estes Park, Colorado.

E l l i o t t , D. C.
1985.
Analysis and Comparison of Biomass Pyrolysis/
Gasification Condensates - An Interim Report, PNL-5555, Pacific Northwest
Laboratory, Richland, Washington.
Farnsworth, J . F., D. M. Mitsak and J. F. Kamody. 1974. "Clean Environment
w i t h Koppers-Totzek Process."
Proceedings:
Environmental Aspects of Fuel
Conversion Technology.
EPA-650/2-74-118.
Research Triangle I n s t i t u t e ,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

75

Finnie, G. 1979. "Halcyon Gasification Systems." Proceedings o f 1 0 t h Texas

Industrial Wood Seminar:
Technology and Economics of Wood Residue
Gasification. Lufkin, Texas.
Ford, G. C., e t a l . 1980. "Controlling Particulate Emissions from U t i l i t y
and Industrial Boilers." Power, June 1980, pp. S-1 t o S-20.
G i 1 b e r t Commonwealth. 1978. Particulate Control f o r Pressurized F1 uidized
Bed Combustion, HCP/T2220-16, May 1978.

Hamrick, J . T.
1983. "Development o f Wood a s an Alternative Fuel f o r Gas
Turbines.
Proceedings - 15th Biomass Thermochemical Conversion Contractors
Meeting, PNL-SA-11306. Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.
I'

Henry, R. F., S. C. Saxena, and W. F. Podolski. 1983. P a r t i c u l a t e Removal

from High-Temperature, High-pressure Combustion Gases, ANL/FE-82-11. Argonne
National Laboratory, Chicago, I l l i n o i s .
Hoenig, S t u a r t L. and Frank L. Cole.
1981.
"Cleanup of Producer and
Synthesis Gas W i t h a Tube and Wire E l e c t r o s t a t i c Precipitator." Solar Energy
(27) :6 pp. 579-580
Howelett, K. and A. Garnache. 1977. Forest and Mill Residues a s Potential
Sources o f Biomass,
MITRE Technical Rep. No. 7347, Vol. VI, MITRE
Corporati on.
Jackson, S. and Seymour Calvert, (1966).

A I C h E Journal 12, (6):1075.

Kaupp, A. and J. R. Goss.

1981.
S t a t e of the Art f o r Small Scale Gas
Producer - Engine Systems.
Report t o USDA Forest Service.
University o f
California, Davis, California.
Kennedy, D. M., L. B r e i t s t e i n , and C. Chen. 1979. "Control Technologies f o r
Parti cul a t e and Tar Emi s s i ons from Coal Converters.
Proceedings
Environmental Aspects o f Fuel Conversion Technol ogy.
EPA-600/7-79-217.
Research Triangle I n s t i t u t e Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
'I

Lee, S. H. D., K. M. Myles, and A. A. Jonke. 1983 "Control o f Alkali Vapors

by a Granular-Bed F i 1 t e r , Proceedings Third Annual Contaminant Control in
Hot Coal Derived Gas Streams Contractors Meeting.
DOE/METC/84-6 ,
(CONF-DE84000216) , Morgantown Energy Technol ogy Center, Morgantown , West
Virginia.
'I

Lowry, H. H.
& Sons,

Chemistry of Coal U t i l i z a t i o n , Supplementary Volume, John Wiley

New ork, N Y , 1963.

Lucas, R. L. 1973. "Gas-Solid Systems". Chemical Engineers Handbook, R. H.

Perry and C. H. Chilton, ed, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Manhattan Co 1 ege.
ANL/ECT-5.

1978.

Control Technology f o r Fine Particulate Emissions.

76

Maxham, J. V.
1981.
"Treatment of Biomass Gasification Wastewater"
Proceedings - 12th Biomass Thermochemical Conversion Contractor's Meeting.
Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.
Miller, 6. 1983. State-of-the-Art Survey of Wood Gasification Technology.
EPRI AP-3101. Fred C. Hart Associates, Washington, 0. C.

Moore, R. H., C. H. Allen, G. F. Schiefelbein, and R. F. Maness. 1974. A

Process for Cleaning and Removal o f Sulfur Compounds from Low BTU Gases,
Interim Report Oct. '72 - Aug. '74, Contract No. 14-32-0001-1519 to the Office
of Coal Research, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.
Moore, R. H., G. E. Stegen, D. H. Mitchell, and 0. G. Ham. 1979. A Process
for Cleaning and Removal o f Sulfur Compounds From Hot Low BTU Fuel Gas,
PNL-2841, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.
Mudge, L. K., et al. 1983. Catalytic Gasification Studies in a Pressurized
Fluid Bed Unit, PNL-4594, July 1983.
Mudge, L. K., et al. 1981. Investigations on Catalyzed Steam Gasification
of Biomass, PNL-3695, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.
Mulik, P. R., M. A. Alvin, and D. M. Bachouchin. 1983. "High Temperature
Removal of Alkali Vapors in Hot Gas Cleaning Systems," Proceedings Third
Annual Contaminant Control in Hot Coal Derived Gas Streams Contractors
Meeting
DOE/METC/84-6 (CONF-DE84000216) , Morgantown Energy Techno1ogy
Center, Morgantown, West Virginia.

Oliver, E. D. 1982. Technical Evaluation of Wood Gasification, EPRI AP-2567.

Synthetic Fuels Associates, Palo Alto, California.
1982. Handbook of Gasifiers and Gas Treatment Systems,
Parekh, Raj D.
DOE/ET/10159-T24 (DE83004846)

Parnell, C. B., Jr., et al. 1981. "Cleaning Low Energy Gas Produced in a
Fluidized Bed Gasifier." Paper Presented at the Winter Meeting of Am. SOC.
Agricultural Engineers, Dec. 15-18, 1981.
Perry, Robert H. and Cecil H. Chilton.
5th Ed., McGraw Hill Book Co., New York.

1973.

Chemical Engineers Handbook

Petty, S. E., N. E. Bell, and C. J. English, Jr., "Treatment of Biomass

Gasification Wastewaters Using Wet Air Oxidation, Solvent Extraction, and
Reverse Osmosis," Proceedings - 13th Biomass Thermochemical Conversion
Pacific
Contractors Meeting, CONF-8110115 (PNL-SA-10093) , October 1981.
Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.
Prater, K., Jr., L. Headley, J. Kovach, and D. Stopek. 1984. Fixed Bed
Gasifier and Cleanup System Engineering Summary Report Through Test Run No.
100, DOE/METC/84-19 (DE 84009282) June 1984.
Razgaitis, R.
1977.
An Analysis of the High-Temperature Particulate
Collection Problem, ANL-77-14, Argonne National Laboratory, Chicago, Ilinois.
77

1982. "International Harvester Bui I d s Methanol Units Around SERI

Reed , T.
Gasi f er." Biomass Digest, November, pp. 4-5.
Rubow

L. N. and R. Zaharchuk.

1984.

"Technical and Economic Evaluation of

Ten I igh-Temperature High-pressure Particulate Cleanup Systems f o r PFBC."

Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Contractors Meeting on Contaminant Control
i n Hot Coal -Derived Gas Streams DOE/METC-85/3. Morgantown Energy Technology
Center, Morgantown, West Virginia.
Russel 1 , B. 1978. "Wood Fired Steam Plant."
Publishers, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Wood Enerqy, Ann Arbor Science

Schwei t z e r , Phil1 i p A. 1979. Handbook o f Separation Techniques f o r Chemical

Engineers, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York.
Scott, J . W.
1980. "A Textile Firm Converts t o Wood Fuel
Proceedings Energy Generati on and Cogenerati on from Wood.
Forest Products Research
Society, Madison, Wisconsin.
.I'

SERI.
1979. Generator Gas -- The Swedish Experience from 1939 t o 1945.
SERI/SP-33-140. Solar Energy Research I n s t i t u t e , Golden, Colorado.

Stone and Webster Engineering Corp.

o r Heavy O i l , EPRI-243-1.

Purification o f Hot Fuel Gases from Coal

Verma, A. and G. A. Weisgerber.

1979.
"Wood Gasification f o r Power
Generation" i n Thermal Conversion of Solid Waste and Biomass, Am. Chem. SOC.
Publication No. 29.
1982.
State-of-the-Art Review and Report on C r i t i c a l
Zenz, Fredrick A.
Aspects and Scale-up Considerations i n the Design of Fluidized-Bed Reactors Final Report on Phase 1, DOE/MC/14141-1158.

78

4.0

4.1

EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

SYSTEMS ANALYSIS
There a r e a multituLe of equipment combinations available f o r clean ng

gases produced by biomass g a s i f i c a t i o n .

Each type of g a s i f i e r has cleanup

options which a r e best suited t o t h a t p a r t i c u l a r g a s i f i e r .

V

This chapter

combines g a s i f i e r pollutant l e v e l s , gas cleanup e f f i c i e n c i e s , and end use

requi rements t o eval uate t o t a l gas cl eanup systems which a r e appl i cab1 e.
Recommendations

on

areas

for

additional

research

and

development

are

i denti f i ed.
4.1 1 Methodology
Each type of g a s i f i e r was described i n Chapter 1.

Generic p a r t i c u l a t e

and t a r loadings ( F i g . 7 and 8) were derived which enables complete systems

ana yses t o be done.

Various gas cleanup methods and t h e i r e f f i c i e n c i e s were

compi 1ed i n Chapter 3.

Figure 19 summari zes re1 a t i ve p a r t i cul a t e removal

e f f i c i e n c i e s f o r some of the more common devices.

No detailed information on

t a r removal e f f i c i e n c i e s was found in the l i t e r a t u r e .

Calculations of system efficiency and end use a p p l i c a b i l i t y consider a l l
o f these:

pollutant concentrations,

gas cleanup devices, and end uses.

Because no information on t a r removal e f f i c i e n c i e s was found several assurnpt i o n s had t o be made t o complete the calculations:

1) p a r t i c u l a t e s and t a r

could not be removed i n the same s t e p due t o the sludge t h a t would r e s u l t and
2) when t a r removal was necessary, wet scrubbing t o condense and remove t a r s

would be required (no other removal techniques were considered applicable t o

t a r remova )

This method i s used f o r t a r removal i n commercial fixed-bed

coal gasif e r s (Kennedy 1979).

While these assumptions may not be s t r i c t l y

t r u e , they represent the current state-of-the-art as we see i t .

79

A typical calculation involves t h e following s t e p s :

Obtain g a s i f i e r o u t l e t p a r t i c u l a t e loading and s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n .

Get e f f i c i e n c i e s from Figure 19 f o r each cleaning device.
Calculate o u t l e t concentrations f o r each combination of gas cleaning
devices.
Compare calculated concentrations with performance standards f o r
each end use.
4.1.2

Results
Tab1 e 18 tabu1 a t e s the various p a r t i c u l a t e emission 1 eve1 s calculated

f o r each type of g a s i f i e r and applicable cleaning technology.

For fixed-bed

g a s i f i e r s several technologies were considered not applicable -because they

would remove p a r t i c u l a t e s and t a r together.

For f l u i d bed and entrained bed

g a s i f i e r s wet scrubbers a s a f i r s t cleanup s t e p was considered not applicable

as a t a r and p a r t i c u l a t e s would both be removed.

This also results i n a

s i g n i f i c a n t energy penalty f o r these high-temperature g a s i f i e r s .

Table 19 shows t h e gas cleanup combinations t h a t achieve p a r t i c u l a t e
performance standards f o r the various end uses.
required

Where t a r removal was

i t was assumed t h e wet scrubbing would meet t h e t a r removal

requirements.
The r e s u l t s , shown in Table 19 show t h a t , in general, p a r t i c l e scrubbing
appears t o be adequate t o deal with biomass gas i f simultaneous removal of
t a r i s not required.

However additional engineering data i s necessary t o

properly design gas cleaning systems t o assure t h a t the system operates

re1 iably and t h a t environmental r e s t r i c t i o n s a r e met.

These include the s i z e

and composition of p a r t i c u l a t e s emitted and t h e e f f e c t o f g a s i f i e r operating

vari ab1 e s on emi ssions
Tars and aqueous soluble organics present a problem with aspects not
previously encountered.

In some applications they can be used as a fuel

80

TABLE 18.

Predicted Particulate Emission Levels

Type of Gasifier
Fixed Bed
Downdraft(c)
Fluid/Entrained Bed

Fixed Bed
Updraft
i

c
1

P a r t i c y l a t e Burden
mg/m
P a r t i c l e Size Distribution(a)
microns

High

Low

High

Low

1 ,000

100

6,000

100

3%

a l l >IO

>lo
1-10

>lo 3%

High

Low

100,000 10,000

>lo
1-10
<1

61%
38%
1%

<1

8%
89%

S i ngl e Cyclone

NA

NA

240

11 ,500

1,100

Series Cyclone

NA

NA

10

2,300

230

Cyclone & F i l t e r

NA

NA

3.2

.4

39

Cyclone & ESP (b)

NA

NA

3.2

.8

77

Cyclone & Wet Scrubber

NA

NA

3.2

1.6

150

15

ESP(b)

NA

NA

60

10

2,060

206

Wet Scrubber

450

45

60

20

NA

NA

Wet Scrubber & F i l t e r

18

.6

NA

NA

Wet Scrubber & ESP (b)

45

.06

NA

NA

1-10 8%
(1 89%

Gas Cleaning Technology

a) Same p a r t i c l e s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n was used f o r both the h i g h and low case

b) ESP

electrostatic precipitator

c) For downdraft large p a r t i c l e s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n was used f o r high loading

and small p a r t i c l e s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n was used f o r low loading

81

TABLE 19.

Appl icab1 e Gas C1 eani ng Options

CLOSE-COUPLED
BOILER
Performance Standards

DIESE OR SPARK-IGNITION
ENGINE

200-1500 mg/m3

10-50 mg/la3

WS

None (1)

Fixed Bed Updraft (2)

GAS
TURBINE

1-80 mg/lp3

SYN GAS OR SNG

1-80 mg/m3

F
3

Fixed Bed Downdraft

None (1)
C

c + WS(1)
C * F
C
ESP(6)

C+F
+ WS(1)
C + ESP(1,6)

F l u i d i z e d Bed

+ WS(1)
C + F
C + ESP(6)

(5)
Entrained Bed

S i m i l a r t o F l u i d i z e d Bed

LEGEND

C
Cyclone
2C Two Cyclones i n s e r i e s

Fabric F i l t e r (baghouse)

WS - Wet Scrubber
ESP - E l e c t r o s t a t i c
Precipitator

(5)

FOOTNOTES

(1) Lower level o f contaminants i s acceptable higher level would exceed l i m i t s

(2) Cyclone n o t e f f e c t i v e due t o smaller p a r t i c l e s i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n and t a r
d r o p l e t s use wet scrubber t o remove t a r s f i r s t i f any cleanup i s required.
Assumes
50% o f p a r t i c u l a t e i s char and 90% burns i n burner.
(3)
Cyclones
are e f f e c t i v e f o r t h i s a p p l i c a t i o n but wet scrubbers are o f t e n used
(4)
instead because gas c o o l i n g i s also required. Also cyclone e f f i c i e n c y i s
affected by large turndown r a t i o required i n some engine applications.
Pressurized operation may r e s t r i c t t h e s i z e o r appl icabi I i t y o f gas cleanup
equipment ( p a r t i c u l a r l y baghouses and ESPs).
ESP i s not as e f f e c t i v e on p a r t i c u l a t e s w i t h high carbon content and may not
be applicable.

d i r e c t l y (no removal required) such a s in a b o i l e r , but o f t e n they condense

and cause plugging problems i n t r a n s f e r l i n e s and o t h e r downstream equipment.
Tars may be present a s vapor o r a s an aerosol (small l i q u i d d r o p l e t s ) .

There

i s no basic understanding of how variables such a s temperature, t a r loading,

t a r composition, and v e l o c i t y a f f e c t t a r deposition.
82

In addition there i s no information on t a r removal in the l i t e r a t u r e .

We assumed the wet scrubbing i s e f f e c t i v e f o r biomass t a r removal, b u t t h i s
has not been confirmed i n large scale equipment.
tages t o wet scrubbing.

There a r e several disadvan-

The sensible heat of the gas i s l o s t as i s the

heating value of water soluble compounds.

Wet scrubbing generates a waste-

water stream which may present environmental

problems.

Separation and

recovery of biomass t a r s from wastewater has not y e t been proven on a

commerci a1 scal e.

4.2

EVALUATION BY END USE

The r e s u l t s presented i n Table 19 indicate there a r e a variety of gas

cleaning technologies t h a t have the potential t o meet contaminant removal

requirements f o r biomass g a s i f i c a t on.

A q u a l i t a t ve discussion of these

r e s u l t s by end use follows.

4.2.1

Close-Coupled Boiler o r Kiln

In this application t a r s in the gas will burn i f they do not condense

out i n the t r a n s f e r l i n e o r burner head.

Particulates must be reduced t o a

level t h a t will meet emission standards from the b o i l e r stack. This ranges
from 100-1000 mg/m 3 depending on the location and s i z e of the plant.
Gas from a fixed bed updraft g a s i f i e r can, i n most cases, be used d i r e c t l y without cleanup.

This i s done commercially; however, in some applications

a 1 i q u i d knockout pot t o col 1 e c t condensed t a r s has been i n s t a l 1 ed between

the g a s i f i e r and the burner t o prevent plugging (Miller 1983).

83

&

I t i s marginal whether gas from a downdraft g a s i f i e r can meet p a r t i c u l a t e

emission standards.

Use of a s i n g l e cyclone would assure t h a t t h e standards

could be met.
With fluid-bed g a s i f i e r s s i n g l e cyclones may be adequate f o r p a r t i c u l a t e
removal

i n some applications.

However, o u r data on f l u i d bed g a s i f i e r

emissions i n d i c a t e t h a t in most cases two cyclones in s e r i e s o r a cyclone

f

followed by a wet scrubber or a baghouse f i l t e r will be required.

Two commer-

c i a l f l u i d i z e d bed biomass g a s i f i e r s use two o r more cyclones in s e r i e s

(Murphy 1984; Miller 1983).

An e l e c t r o s t a t i c p r e c i p i t a t o r (ESP) might a l s o

meet p a r t i c u l a t e removal standards.

However, there i s no data on e f f e c t i v e -

ness o f ESP with high carbon p a r t i c u l a t e s such as would be in f l u i d g a s i f i e r

gas.
4.2.2

The e f f e c t of t a r s on f a b r i c f i l t e r s and ESP i s not well understood.

Diesel and Spark-Ignition Engines
These machines a r e very susceptible t o erosion and plugging from particu-

l a t e s and some form of p a r t i c u l a t e removal will be required f o r a l l types of

gasifiers.

Limits on p a r t i c u l a t e s and t a r f o r t h i s application a r e in the

range of 10-50 mg/m3.

In addition, the gas i s usually cooled t o provide more

horsepower (1 e s s d e r a t i n g ) .
With a fixed-bed g a s i f i e r t a r removal will be required so wet scrubbing
i s t h e most logical choice.

An additional high efficiency p a r t i c u l a t e removal

s t e p such as a f a b r i c f i l t e r might a l s o be required.

Downdraft g a s i f i e r s may meet t a r l i m i t s f o r diesel and spark-ignition
engines b u t p a r t i c u l a t e removal will be required.

A cyclone or a cyclone/

f a b r i c f i l t e r combination have been used with some success on many vehicular

g a s i f i e r s (Kaupp and Goss 1981).

For s t a t i o n a r y engine applications wet

scrubbing has been used (Self Sustained Duel-fuel

Combi nes Engine and Gasi f i e r 1984).
84

Power System 1980; KHD

Because of the high p a r t i c u l a t e burden and the f a c t t h a t sensible heat of

the gas i s l o s t in engine applications, f l u i d bed g a s i f i e r s a r e l e s s than
ideal f o r t h i s application.

I t does appear from the t a b l e s t h a t a combination

of cyclone and a f a b r i c f i l t e r or a wet scrubber o r an ESP could meet the

p a r t i c u l a t e standards f o r engines.

Tar removal will a l s o be required so a

cyclone/wet scrubber combination i s most appropriate.

Despite t h e f a c t t h a t much operating experience was obtained with diesel
and spark-ignition engines using gas from fixed-bed g a s i f i e r s during the
1930's and 1940's t h e r e i s s t i l l doubt about t h e long-term e f f e c t s of particu-

l a t e s on engine l i f e , p a r t i c u l a r l y in u t i l i t y applications (Kohan 1984).

Long-term t e s t s on a well-instrumented engine studying various gas cleanup
options could lead t o wider use of t h i s technology.
Gas Turbines

4.2.3

The most serious problem in d i r e c t - f i r e d (open-cycle) gas turbines due t o

gas stream contaminants i s erosion o r corrosion of turbine blades by s o l i d
p a r t i c u l a t e s . P a r t i c u l a t e l i m i t s range from 1-80 mg/m 3 depending on t h e type
of turbine.
coupled.

Tar will be combusted in the turbine i f t h e u n i t i s close

Tar removal may be required t o prevent plugging in long t r a n s f e r

lines.

P a r t i c u l a t e removal will be required even with a fixed-bed updraft

gasifier.

Cyclones cannot be used because of the large loading o f t a r drop-

l e t s so wet scrubbing will be required.

This reduces t h e e f f i c i e n c y of a

fixed-bed updraft g a s i f i e r f o r t h i s application and generates a wastewater

stream.

As a r e s u l t , fixed-bed updraft g a s i f i e r s a r e l e s s than ideal f o r gas

t u r b ne applications.
With a downdraft g a s i f i e r , a cyclone o r two cyclones i n s e r i e s could meet
p a r t cul a t e removal requi rements in some cases.
85

However , if t h e p a r t i cul a t e

l e v e l s required f o r gas turbines a r e indeed on the low end of the range (1-10
mg/m 3) a cyclone p l u s a f i l t e r o r ESP will be required t o meet these l e v e l s .

The high p a r t i c u l a t e burden of fluidized bed g a s i f i e r s makes i t d i f f i c u l t

t o reach t h e very low l e v e l s of 1-10 mg/m
scrubber o r ESP can

reduce p a r t i c u l a t e s

A cyclone plus a f i l t e r , or wet

to

mg/mj which may be

10-50

acceptable.
-+

With i n d i r e c t f i red (closed-cycl e) turbines gas cleanup requirements

would be s i m i l a r t o a close-coupled b o i l e r (see Section 2.1).
4.2.4

Synthesis Gas o r SNG

For synthesis gas applications (methanol, methane, hydrocarbons, ammonia,

etc.)

p a r t i c u l a t e removal and most l i k e l y t a r removal will be required.

P a r t i c u l a t e l i m i t s a r e s i m i l a r t o gas turbine applications, 1-80 mg/m 3
Tar

l i m i t s a r e not known b u t thought t o be small, <lo0 mg/m

(see Section 2.4).

With a fixed-bed g a s i f i e r a wet scrubber may be s u f f i c i e n t f o r synthesis

gas applications.

Depending on the exact p a r t i c u l a t e burden i n t h e gas and

t h e removal requirements an addition removal s t e p such as a f a b r i c f i l t e r o r

ESP may be necessary.

Gas cleanup requirements f o r a downdraft g a s i f i e r used f o r synthesis gas

production will be t h e same as discussed f o r the gas turbine (see Section 2.3)
unless t a r removal i s necessary.
wet scrubber could be used.

I f t a r removal i s necessary a cyclone plus

A t low loadings a wet scrubber alone might meet

the p a r t i c u l a t e l i m i t s f o r synthesis gas applications.

A fluid-bed g a s i f i e r will require both p a r t i c u l a t e and t a r removal so a

cyclone/wet scrubber combination i s probably t h e best choice.

I t i s marginal

as t o whether this combination can meet the p a r t i c u l a t e l i m i t s .

f i l t e r (baghouse) may be required in addition.

86

A fabric

.
4.3 RECOMMENDATIONS

Tars and particulates have been identified as the two most significant
contaminants in fuel gas from biomass gasifiers.

Recommendations for

additional research and development on particulate and tar removal have been
identified.
4.3.1

Particulate Removal
As indicated

in Section 3 parti cul ate removal techno1 ogy appears adequate

to deal with biomass gas, especially when simultaneous tar removal i s not
requi red. However, more detai 1 ed data on parti cul ate 1 oadi ngs , parti cl e size
and particle composition from different type gasifiers and different types of
feedstocks and more definite limits for various end uses is needed for
engineering design o f large-scale commercial gas cleanup systems.
There is a fair range of particulate limits given for engine and turbine
applications and this leads to some uncertainty in design of gas cleanup
systems.

In addition there is concern about the long-term (10-20 years)

effects of particulates on engine and turbine life.

Synthesis gas applica-

tions are not far enough advanced for this to have become a critical item,
but there will undoubtedly be similar concerns over the gas compressors in
the synthesis plants.

Long-term tests on a we1 1 -instrumented engine o r

turbine could resolve many of these questions and lead to wider use of biomass
derived fuel gas in these applications.

The test work done by Aerospace

Research Corporation on wood-fired gas turbines may provide data that i s also
applicable to turbines, fueled by gas from biomass gasifiers (Hamrick 1984).
The U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy i s developing
high-temperature, high-pressure gas stream cleanup systems for coal fired
advanced power-generating systems.

The results of this effort should be

monitored closely for their applicability to biomass systems.

87

4.3.2

<

Tar Removal
Removal of t a r from gas streams presents a problem with aspects not

previously encountered.

Tars from fixed-bed biomass g a s i f i e r s a r e most l i k e l y

present primarily as very small l i q u i d droplets although no information on

p a r t i c l e s i z e was found in t h e l i t e r a t u r e .
A study of the mechanism of t a r formation including t h e e f f e c t of gas

velocity, temperature, and wood moisture content on t a r loadings and l i q u i d

p a r t i c l e diameters would aid s i g n i f i c a n t l y not only in gas stream cleanup
In conjunction with t h i s , research on the

design b u t in g a s i f i e r design.

efficiency of various wet scrubbing techniques f o r t a r removal i s needed f o r

design of wet scrubbing systems.
Tars

from

downdraft

and

fluid

bed

gasifiers

a r e probably

primarily a s vapors although t h i s has n o t been confirmed.

require cooling and water scrubbing.

present

Tar removal will

The s i z e of d r o p l e t s formed by quenching

and the e f f e c t of the method of quenching on t h e e f f i c ency of t a r removal

needs t o be studied.
Water scrubbing produces a wastewater stream conta ning t a r s and water

sol ubl e organics which may present an environmental problem.

Research on

separation of t a r s from . t h e aqueous l a y e r and methods of treatment and

disposal of t h e water i s needed.

Thermal o r c a t a l y t i c cracking of t a r s t o

convert them t o gas and char should be considered as an a l t e r n a t i v e t o water

scrubbing.

This has been investigated f o r both biomass gas (Baker and Mudge

1984) and coal gas streams (Baker and Mudge 1985).

c.

88

4.4 REFERENCES

Baker, E. G. and
K. Mudge. 1985. Study of Tar Removal in Hot Coal Gas
Desulfurization Process. Technical Progress Report, Jan-Mar 1985. Prepared
by Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories for Morgantown Energy Technology
Center.
Baker, E. G. and L. K. Mudge. 1984. Catalysis in Biomass Gasification.
PNL-5030. Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.
?

Hamrick, J . T. 1984. "Development of Wood as an Alternative Fuel for Gas

Turbine Systems." Proceedings of the 16th Biomass Thermochemical Conversion
Contractors Meeting. PNL-SA-12403. Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland,
Washington.

"KHD Combines Engine & Gasifier in Biogas Application.'' Diesel & Gas Turbine
Worldwide, March 1984.
Kaupp, A. and J. R. Goss. 1981. State-of-the-Art for Small Scale (to 50 kw)
Gas Producer-Engine Systems. Final Report to USDA/FS on Contract
#53-319R-0-141, University of California, Davis, California.
Kennedy, D. M., L. Breitstein, and C. Chen. 1979. "Control Technologies for
Parti cul ate and Tar Emi ssions from Coal Converters. Symposi um Proceedings:
Environmental Aspects o f Fuel Conversion Technology IV. EPA-600/7-79. U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.
I'

Miller, B. 1983. State-of-the-Art Survey of Wood Gasification Technology.

EPRI-AP-3101. Fred C. Hart Associates, Inc. Washington, D.C.
Murphy, M. L. 1984. "Fluidized Bed Gasification: A Case History of a 55M
Btu/Hour System. Energy Progress 4(4) :196-201.
I'

"Self -Sustained Dual -Fuel Power System.

April 1980.

'I

Di esel

89

& Gas Turbine Worldwide ,

APPENDIX A

Nomograph for Conversion

o f Particulate Loadings

Particulate Loading Nomograph

.o 1
L

100000

.00001

.ooooo 1

.0000001

lb/ft3

gr/ft3

g/m3

mg/m3

A. 1

ppm

lb/106BTU

PNL-5534
UC-61F
' i

DISTRIBUTION

No. of
Copies

No. of
Copies

OFFSITE

ONSITE

B. J. Berger

DOE Richland Operations Office

Department of Energy
Biomass Energy Techno1ogy
Di vi si on
Forrestal Bui 1 ding (DE-321)
1000 Independence Avenue
Washington, DC 20545
U.S.

30

D. K. Jones/D.

36

Pacific Northwest Laboratory

E. G. Baker
M. D. Brown

Simon Friedrich
U.S. Department o f Energy
Biomass Energy Technology
Division
Forrestal Bui 1 ding (DE-321)
1000 Independence Avenue
Washington, DC 20545
DOE Technical Information Center
Mr. Thomas R. Miles
Consulting Design Engineer
5475 SW Arrow Wood Lane
Portland, OR 97225

Mr. Kerry L. Rock

Davy McKee
P.O. Box 2968
Tulsa, OK 74101
Dr. Thomas A. Milne
Solar Energy Research Institute
1617 Cole Boulevard
Golden, CO 80401

D i str-1

R, Segna

(10)
(5)

D. C. Elliott
M. A. Berger
J. N. Hartley
R. H. Moore
L. K. Mudge (5)
G. F. Schiefelbein
L. J. Sealock, Jr.
D. J. Stevens
J. L. Straalsund
P. C. Walkup
Pub1 i shing Coordination (2)
Technical Information (5)